Question? Would you restrict the beam turrets to specific class ships, maybe excluding escorts?
I ask because if such a weapon is introduced, escorts with 5 tac consoles and expanded tac BOFFs will be the strongest beam build ships. Sure a ship with 4/4 fore/aft weapons would have an extra beam turret on target, but I doubt that would offset the extra DPS offered by a 5th Tac console and extra BOFF attacks.
I too like the idea but I'm sure there some balance issues that would need to be considered and addressed.
Question? Would you restrict the beam turrets to specific class ships, maybe excluding escorts?
I ask because if such a weapon is introduced, escorts with 5 tac consoles and expanded tac BOFFs will be the strongest beam build ships. Sure a ship with 4/4 fore/aft weapons would have an extra beam turret on target, but I doubt that would offset the extra DPS offered by a 5th Tac console and extra BOFF attacks.
I too like the idea but I'm sure there some balance issues that would need to be considered and addressed.
No, I wouldn't restrict it because I, personally, think arbitrary restrictions are stupid and serve no purpose other than to annoy players. If the reason for something is nothing more than "um...because" it needs to go away. As for balance, how is it any different from those Escorts already equipping turrets aft? We're not asking for a brand new weapon. Just a beam version of turrets that synergize with DBB and FAW. Escorts are always going to be the strongest ships anyway because somebody on the Dev team has a serious hard on for Ace Combat (not that there's anything wrong with Ace Combat, but this is Star Trek, not Ace Combat). This request has nothing to do with Escorts vs Cruisers vs Science. This is about asking for a beam version of turrets. Nothing more. Nothing less.
I'd restrict it to one per ship, and keep the numbers the same as an array. I still say that's fair.
We don't want a single 360 degree beam array. We want a beam version of turrets. Why should we be restricted to one? You're not restricted to only one cannon turret, why would you be restricted to only one beam turret?
Yes, the beam turret would be the lowest of the three, just as turrets are the lowest of all cannon weapons. Damage heirarchy looks like this right now:
Dual Heavy Cannons
Dual Cannons
Dual Beam Banks
Single Cannons
Beam Arrays
Turrets
Beam Turrets would sit parallel to cannon turrets because they're the SAME THING, just in BEAM form. Why are so many people having such a hard time grasping this?
Yes, the beam turret would be the lowest of the three, just as turrets are the lowest of all cannon weapons. Damage heirarchy looks like this right now:
Dual Heavy Cannons
Dual Cannons
Dual Beam Banks
Single Cannons
Beam Arrays
Turrets
Beam Turrets would sit parallel to cannon turrets because they're the SAME THING, just in BEAM form. Why are so many people having such a hard time grasping this?
People are asking because it's a crazy idea. If they are PARALLEL to turrets in dps, they could just have turrets react to fire at will, overload, target subsystems, basically change turrets from cannon to universal energy weapon.
NOW you're getting it...except you're not. That's all we want, a turret to synergize with BEAM weapons and BEAM skills. A BEAM turret. Just like you cannon users have your turrets, us beam users want our own. It's only fair, and it hurts NOBODY.
NOW you're getting it...except you're not. That's all we want, a turret to synergize with BEAM weapons and BEAM skills. A BEAM turret. Just like you cannon users have your turrets, us beam users want our own. It's only fair, and it hurts NOBODY.
Whatever you want to say man, this isn't getting implemented anyway.
It may. That's why I'm keeping it on Page 1, in hopes that the Devs look at it and decide to implement it. There seems to be plenty of support for it, aside from those detractors who want to keep the status quo.
I wouldn't mind knowing if the people against this are all DHC tac escorts.
Do they think it will hurt them in pvp somehow? (as pve, nothing anyone else does effects anyone else).
I really don't see how there is ANY negative feedback on this.
Maybe they have DHC on the exchange for 100's of millions, and think this will eat into their profit?
Its really mindboggling how helping someone else is a bad thing for them.
I don't get where people think single beams are underpowered. I do better with single beams than most people could ever achieve with dhcs and turrets.
(tt1 + ts1+ faw3 + apb3 + aux2bat1/2 + 3 purple techs = everything goes boom)
Having beam turrets would mean I could drastically increase my dps by replacing 3 single beams with DBB's, while keeping my forward torp always on target. This would also have the effect of not making me want the 180 torp from the regent so much.
there would be really no reason to fly an escort again, or use anything other than dbb's and beam turrets.
I don't get where people think single beams are underpowered. I do better with single beams than most people could ever achieve with dhcs and turrets.
(tt1 + ts1+ faw3 + apb3 + aux2bat1/2 + 3 purple techs = everything goes boom)
Having beam turrets would mean I could drastically increase my dps by replacing 3 single beams with DBB's, while keeping my forward torp always on target. This would also have the effect of not making me want the 180 torp from the regent so much.
there would be really no reason to fly an escort again, or use anything other than dbb's and beam turrets.
Sorry for perhaps missing something, but it sounds like you fly cruisers, so I am curious. How do you get FAW3 and APB3? Unluss its a kdf cruiser, or I suppose even an oddy? My guess is an oddy, is that correct?
Aside from that, I don't really know what you are arguing for. Are you saying beam turrets would make escorts obsolete? I don't see how.
Honestly, I think the people against this are either Escort/DHC jocks who hate anything that disrupts the status quo of their dominance or the 5% of Cruiser pilots who manage to actually do amazing damage with their ships through Rank 3 skills, Purple DOFFs, and millions of EC spent.
Beam Arrays are still the second-weakest weapon in the game, second only to turrets. If you manage to do well with them...GOOD FOR YOU. We're not asking for any changes to Beam Arrays. This is more about Dual Beam Banks, which have no weapon synergy currently and thus no purpose beyond a Beam Overload delivery system. That's why most ships only fit ONE. Also, it's an aesthetics thing. Plenty of Escort jocks here have said they're rather use beams because they prefer how they look, but the only viable loadouts currently are DHCs/Turrets or Beam Array broadsides. NOTHING GOES WITH DBBs! If you add Beam Turrets, suddenly DBBs become viable as a standard weapon fitting.
Sorry for perhaps missing something, but it sounds like you fly cruisers, so I am curious. How do you get FAW3 and APB3? Unluss its a kdf cruiser, or I suppose even an oddy? My guess is an oddy, is that correct?
Aside from that, I don't really know what you are arguing for. Are you saying beam turrets would make escorts obsolete? I don't see how.
FAW3 is lt.com, APB3 is comm.
edit: just noticed you mentioned cruisers. ^ this is my escort setup. for cruisers, I'd use apb1. still bloody devastating.
purple tech doffs are available through lt ferra and free through assignment chains. I did not pay EC for any of them.
'
I use beams almost exclusively, on both escorts and cruisers, and trust me when I say this is not a good idea *as is*, and it will result in cruisers and escorts that have 2 lt or higher eng slots be the only worthwhile ships in the game.
Plenty of Escort jocks here have said they're rather use beams because they prefer how they look, but the only viable loadouts currently are DHCs/Turrets or Beam Array broadsides.
If you want to see your cannon build get schooled by a beam boat, find me in game.
Honestly, I think the people against this are either Escort/DHC jocks who hate anything that disrupts the status quo of their dominance or the 5% of Cruiser pilots who manage to actually do amazing damage with their ships through Rank 3 skills, Purple DOFFs, and millions of EC spent.
Beam Arrays are still the second-weakest weapon in the game, second only to turrets. If you manage to do well with them...GOOD FOR YOU. We're not asking for any changes to Beam Arrays. This is more about Dual Beam Banks, which have no weapon synergy currently and thus no purpose beyond a Beam Overload delivery system. That's why most ships only fit ONE. Also, it's an aesthetics thing. Plenty of Escort jocks here have said they're rather use beams because they prefer how they look, but the only viable loadouts currently are DHCs/Turrets or Beam Array broadsides. NOTHING GOES WITH DBBs! If you add Beam Turrets, suddenly DBBs become viable as a standard weapon fitting.
And I think that those posters desiring this beam turret just want to turn their cruisers into some sort of cru'scort where all damage is directed forward instead of providing damage split between forward and aft.
I do like to use cannons on my small, quick, maneuverable ships. On my big slow, lumbering ships I like to use beam arrays, usually 6 to make for a nice broadside and a laser light show when FAW is kicked off.
Small, quick, maneuverable ships provide for a perfect platform for using cannons and turrets as it allows for all damage to be directed forward.
Big, slow, lumbering ships need to be able to provide as much damage towards the rear as they do towards the front mainly because they can't turn quick enough to bring all guns to bear on a target.
Now we have this "want" for a beam turret able to fire 360 degrees but at less power and damage than a full sized beam array.
Now take the big slow lumbering ships and mount your dual beam banks up front increasing the damage output over a smaller arc than a beam array. Now you want to further increase the damage output forward by removing the aft limited arc beam arrays that normally can't fire forward and replace them with beam turrets that can. You've just created your cru'scort where all damage is optimally projected forward, even thru the hull of the ship, towards the target.
This will be nice for an alpha strike for any hull, but the second an enemy gets behind your big slow lumbering ship because you can't turn very quickly, you've cut your damage output to the sides and rear of your ship considerably and you get your TRIBBLE handed to you readily. Queue the "crying for more turn for cruisers crowd"...
OH, but wait, we have these new fancy engineering consoles coming from Fleet Dil Mines that boost resistances while also boosting turn OR boosting turn while also boosting resistances! You just got an increase to the turn rate for your big slow lumbering cruiser. But you're still limited in the damage you can output towards any quarter around the ship. We know! Give us some beam turrets that fire 360 degrees then we can use them with the DBBs and shoot everything in front of us while ignoring everything to the side and rear until we get turned around! Our DPS will go thru the roof and we can compete with the real escorts that used to use just cannons!
Ya know what, I'm not going to keep arguing against those wanting to finish turning STO into Escorts Online. Go fer it.
Again man, I have no idea what you are talking about. DBB's can do exactly what you describe RIGHT NOW. DBBs x4, Turrets x4, vs DBBs x4 Beam Turrets x4. Same damage as turrets, what exactly are you having difficulty understanding about this?
Let me be clear, I am not really all that on board with the idea of beam turrets but for valid reasons. I don't want them to interfere with my BO. But I still do not understand why you are against it. You are arguing that people will mount DBBs and 4 beat turrets and it will destroy the game. THEY CAN DO THAT NOW, so I don't see your reasons being valid.
And I think that those posters desiring this beam turret just want to turn their cruisers into some sort of cru'scort where all damage is directed forward instead of providing damage split between forward and aft.
Damage split between forward and aft doesn't work when you want to put ALL possible damage on your target. That's why DBB kinda suck right now, because the only thing you can equip to compliment them are...cannon turrets, which don't utilize beam skills. Fail. And not everybody likes broadsiding. This isn't the Age of Sail. Also, it's been said several times this isn't just for cruisers. Escort pilots want beam turrets as well. This is nothing but a COSMETIC and utility change. Why are you so hostile to this?
I do like to use cannons on my small, quick, maneuverable ships. On my big slow, lumbering ships I like to use beam arrays, usually 6 to make for a nice broadside and a laser light show when FAW is kicked off.
Nothing is stopping you from using beam arrays on your big, slow, lumbering ships. Implementing beam turrets won't stop you either. Your forward DPS will be lower, but your broadside is still just as strong and you have more firepower to bring to bear on your flanks and rear. Nothing is stopping you and neither is our request. Why are you so hostile to this?
Small, quick, maneuverable ships provide for a perfect platform for using cannons and turrets as it allows for all damage to be directed forward.
So, any small, quick, maneuverable ships HAVE to use cannons to allow all damage forward. Why? What if they want to use beams? Oops, too bad, nothing goes with DBBs...unless beam turrets are implemented, then they have a CHOICE to use what they WANT. More choices are good for EVERYBODY. Why are you so hostile to this?
Now we have this "want" for a beam turret able to fire 360 degrees but at less power and damage than a full sized beam array.
Uh...yeah. They're called turrets and they already exist in-game for cannons. Why can't beam-users have their own version? And the 360-degree beam arrays already exist for shuttles/fighters and they do about the same damage as turrets anyway, so why can't we just fit them on our bigger ships? No harm in that. Why are you so hostile to this?
Now take the big slow lumbering ships and mount your dual beam banks up front increasing the damage output over a smaller arc than a beam array. Now you want to further increase the damage output forward by removing the aft limited arc beam arrays that normally can't fire forward and replace them with beam turrets that can. You've just created your cru'scort where all damage is optimally projected forward, even thru the hull of the ship, towards the target.
Yeah, so? This is hardly unprescedented, as the Vesta has it's dual cannons, all KDF cruisers can fit forward-heavy weapons, and so can all the Romulan warbirds. Granted, the D'Deridex and Ha'apax kinda suck at it because their turn rate is so horrific, but they CAN if they CHOOSE and many players make it work for them because that's what they WANT to do. People have more fun when they can do something they WANT to do and make it work for them, whether it's optimal or not. Let's take a Vor'cha for example. They already fit DHCs/Turrets instead of broadsiding. Who's to say somebody might want to have similar DPS and playstyle, but prefers the look of beam weapons? Well, if you have YOUR way, they're screwed because of arbitrary restrictions and "You can't have!" DBB give up some of DHC's damage for a slightly wider firing arc, a fair trade, and the beam turrets would have the same damage as cannon turrets, just visually match beams and can utilize FAW and that awesome laser light show we all love, but nothing is taken away from DHC/Turret jockeys. More choices for all. Why are you so hostile to this?
This will be nice for an alpha strike for any hull, but the second an enemy gets behind your big slow lumbering ship because you can't turn very quickly, you've cut your damage output to the sides and rear of your ship considerably and you get your TRIBBLE handed to you readily. Queue the "crying for more turn for cruisers crowd"...
See previous mention of KDF cruisers and Romulan Warbirds. It's already here. Implementing beam turrets changes NOTHING. Your argument does not apply here. Why are you so hostile to this?
OH, but wait, we have these new fancy engineering consoles coming from Fleet Dil Mines that boost resistances while also boosting turn OR boosting turn while also boosting resistances! You just got an increase to the turn rate for your big slow lumbering cruiser. But you're still limited in the damage you can output towards any quarter around the ship. We know! Give us some beam turrets that fire 360 degrees then we can use them with the DBBs and shoot everything in front of us while ignoring everything to the side and rear until we get turned around! Our DPS will go thru the roof and we can compete with the real escorts that used to use just cannons!
Yeah, God forbid anything be allowed to compete with escorts, right? Or doesn't conform to your "Cruisers MUST broadside or GTFO" mentality? Seriously, how does implementing beam turrets change ANYTHING for the worse? Honestly, think about it for a moment. We already have cruisers that CAN mount DHC but lack the turn rate to use them well, but players still make them work because they WANT to. DBBs, right now, are pretty crappy because fitting more than one (for Beam Overload spike) means you either leave your aft weapons sitting IDLE while you fire them, or you split your weapons between beams/turrets, which is a bad idea. Beam turrets open up more options for ALL players and make DBBs a viable weapon, rather than just a Beam Overload delivery system. More options are good, as it makes for more variety, and variety is good. Why are you so hostile to this?
Ya know what, I'm not going to keep arguing against those wanting to finish turning STO into Escorts Online. Go fer it.
This game is already Escorts Online. This game has more in common currently with Ace Combat than with Star Trek. Cannons and missiles are the name of the game. I'm asking for a BEAM equivalent, something very "Star Trek"...and you say this is making it MORE into Escorts Online? Um.....ok.....
Personally, my main reasons for wants beam turrets are as follows:
1. They're canon. (The "Phase Cannons" on the NX-01 fired beams, not bolts, and they were turret mounted.) (Also, "Cannon" in their usage referred to the fact they had to be physically aimed. They didn't have an semi-omnidirectional emitter like what is used in array strips.)
2. It'd make my Fleet Nova not look stupid anymore. Currently I have 2xDBB and 2xcannon turrets on it. (Plus a torp fore and aft) And let me tell you, it just plain looks wrong with those cannon turrets.
3. It'd make my Fleet Galaxy even better. Right now, I'm running a "Cannon Cruiser" setup on it. (Single cannons and cannon turrets) In separation mode, yeah, looks kinda cool. But having beams would make it look even more cool, and more canon.
4. I really want to do a beam setup on one of my escorts. (Actually, I'd love to do a beam setup on that Corvette. It'd look really nice.) Using cannons on all of them, well, makes them all play the same. There is really no difference between any of their playstyles. Why bother buying another escort from the Z-Store, when it'll just play the same as your others?
This is nothing but a COSMETIC and utility change.
This is the part where you are wrong. First, adding 360 degree aft beams that are affected by various beams skills - or even just FAW, is more than a cosmetic change. second, and more importantly, turrets damage decreases with range - beams do not.
Cruisers are slow turning for a reason. They are nigh impossible to kill in the hands of a skilled pilot, and trade burst damage for sustained dps. Not having to turn to keep a proper beam firing arc in a cruiser would mean I would always be doing max damage while sitting at just under 10k facing the target and firing beams and torps directly ahead. no skill involved.
In an escort, this would mean that range is no longer an issue, and I could fly it the same way as a cruiser with beam turrets - parked at just under 10k firing beams and torps ad naseum. Wait - I think this is what many people already do with escorts in the public queues - could you imagine what would happen if that became the optimal way to do it? FFS, nobody would ever use their engines again!
I do use DBB's in some builds (I love the temporal set on my mobius!), but there is a trade-off for doing so - and for good reason.
It's a cool idea, even if just for the cosmetic purposes, but simply pasting cannon turret stats onto a 360 beam as proposed it would definitelyunbalance things.
Actually, I'm fairly sure beam damage DOES degrade over distance, it just has a longer "optimal range" than cannons do. Cannons are, what? 3km? I think beams are 5km.
Also, the burst vs sustained DPS argument is a joke. Ask any PvPer. Sustained DPS = zero DPS.
Actually, I'm fairly sure beam damage DOES degrade over distance, it just has a longer "optimal range" than cannons do. Cannons are, what? 3km? I think beams are 5km.
Also, the burst vs sustained DPS argument is a joke. Ask any PvPer. Sustained DPS = zero DPS.
when you can sustain over 12k dps in a cruiser with beams it's no joke
I think you drastically underestimate how powerful beams can be if you use them effectively. so much so that if you can use dual a2b on an escort, beams are generally better there too, as it reduces all boff cooldowns to global each time you cycle a2b, and FAW3+APB3 on global CD is much more powerful than you seem to think.
I may be wrong about the range - I can't find anything to corroborate either side, but even if it's less of a drop off, that still proves my point that it would not simply be a cosmetic change as you stated.
and again, my cruiser could still stay pointed in one direction, firing 3 DBB's, 3 beam turrets, a cutting beam and a torp, cycling FAW3 and APB1 at global cooldowns, without sacrificing anything. If you think that's not overpowered, I challenge you to try destroying my d'kora now, even without beam turrets.
really, I think beam turrets are a cool idea, this is why I'm pointing out where they would still need work from your initial proposal. Even if you don't play like I do, and therefore feel you would not see an advantage from these beam turrets, I certainly would gain a huge advantage from them, and others would too. This is something the devs have to consider when implementing new things.
when you can sustain over 12k dps in a cruiser with beams it's no joke
12k DPS in pvp means nothing if you don't have burst, which is what he was getting at.
I can get 10k DPS without using A2B or romulan plasma. I suspect going with romulan plasma would put me quite a bit above that.
However, it means NOTHING in pvp whatsoever. Zero, nada.
Back on topic though, yes allowing you to use subsystem targeting and what not with the turrets would be handy, but hardly game breaking. Most cruisers would have to sacrifice something in their all too few and far between tactical slots in order to do it. And escorts, well It still really wouldn't bother me much if they could throw a subsystem attack in there. Most have a BO1 or FAW1 in there anyway because they have nothing else to put.
A low level target shields or engine would be acceptable because it really is almost impossible to bring down a competent cruiser pilot. I should know, I am one of em
Ok, so beam turrets might need to have SLIGHTLY lower damage to compensate for their longer optimal range. Even if they didn't, though, cannon users would still use cannon turrets because they synergize with their cannon BOFF abilities which, let's be honest, are better than the beam BOFF abilities.
I'm aware of what A2B does, as I run a 7-beam/KCB dual A2B build on my Fleet Ha'apax (pretty much the only way to run cruisers), but FAW3 and APB3 are skills not available to most Cruisers. Only specialized Tac cruisers like the Excelsior (which I still think is retardedly powerful for a ship that belongs in a museum) can fit both of those skills, or the Tal Shiar Battlecruiser if you opt to use the Universal Cmdr seat for a Tac BOFF.
Comments
I ask because if such a weapon is introduced, escorts with 5 tac consoles and expanded tac BOFFs will be the strongest beam build ships. Sure a ship with 4/4 fore/aft weapons would have an extra beam turret on target, but I doubt that would offset the extra DPS offered by a 5th Tac console and extra BOFF attacks.
I too like the idea but I'm sure there some balance issues that would need to be considered and addressed.
Aid in leading the Romulan Star Empire back to its former greatness.
Join the Romulan Praetorian Guard and teach those epohh loving hippies what it means to be a true Romulan!
No, I wouldn't restrict it because I, personally, think arbitrary restrictions are stupid and serve no purpose other than to annoy players. If the reason for something is nothing more than "um...because" it needs to go away. As for balance, how is it any different from those Escorts already equipping turrets aft? We're not asking for a brand new weapon. Just a beam version of turrets that synergize with DBB and FAW. Escorts are always going to be the strongest ships anyway because somebody on the Dev team has a serious hard on for Ace Combat (not that there's anything wrong with Ace Combat, but this is Star Trek, not Ace Combat). This request has nothing to do with Escorts vs Cruisers vs Science. This is about asking for a beam version of turrets. Nothing more. Nothing less.
But that's beside the point, restricting a ship to having only one beam turret makes no sense and doesn't solve the synergy problem....
We don't want a single 360 degree beam array. We want a beam version of turrets. Why should we be restricted to one? You're not restricted to only one cannon turret, why would you be restricted to only one beam turret?
Dual Heavy Cannons
Dual Cannons
Dual Beam Banks
Single Cannons
Beam Arrays
Turrets
Beam Turrets would sit parallel to cannon turrets because they're the SAME THING, just in BEAM form. Why are so many people having such a hard time grasping this?
People are asking because it's a crazy idea. If they are PARALLEL to turrets in dps, they could just have turrets react to fire at will, overload, target subsystems, basically change turrets from cannon to universal energy weapon.
Whatever you want to say man, this isn't getting implemented anyway.
Do they think it will hurt them in pvp somehow? (as pve, nothing anyone else does effects anyone else).
I really don't see how there is ANY negative feedback on this.
Maybe they have DHC on the exchange for 100's of millions, and think this will eat into their profit?
Its really mindboggling how helping someone else is a bad thing for them.
(tt1 + ts1+ faw3 + apb3 + aux2bat1/2 + 3 purple techs = everything goes boom)
Having beam turrets would mean I could drastically increase my dps by replacing 3 single beams with DBB's, while keeping my forward torp always on target. This would also have the effect of not making me want the 180 torp from the regent so much.
there would be really no reason to fly an escort again, or use anything other than dbb's and beam turrets.
Sorry for perhaps missing something, but it sounds like you fly cruisers, so I am curious. How do you get FAW3 and APB3? Unluss its a kdf cruiser, or I suppose even an oddy? My guess is an oddy, is that correct?
Aside from that, I don't really know what you are arguing for. Are you saying beam turrets would make escorts obsolete? I don't see how.
Beam Arrays are still the second-weakest weapon in the game, second only to turrets. If you manage to do well with them...GOOD FOR YOU. We're not asking for any changes to Beam Arrays. This is more about Dual Beam Banks, which have no weapon synergy currently and thus no purpose beyond a Beam Overload delivery system. That's why most ships only fit ONE. Also, it's an aesthetics thing. Plenty of Escort jocks here have said they're rather use beams because they prefer how they look, but the only viable loadouts currently are DHCs/Turrets or Beam Array broadsides. NOTHING GOES WITH DBBs! If you add Beam Turrets, suddenly DBBs become viable as a standard weapon fitting.
FAW3 is lt.com, APB3 is comm.
edit: just noticed you mentioned cruisers. ^ this is my escort setup. for cruisers, I'd use apb1. still bloody devastating.
purple tech doffs are available through lt ferra and free through assignment chains. I did not pay EC for any of them.
'
I use beams almost exclusively, on both escorts and cruisers, and trust me when I say this is not a good idea *as is*, and it will result in cruisers and escorts that have 2 lt or higher eng slots be the only worthwhile ships in the game.
If you want to see your cannon build get schooled by a beam boat, find me in game.
sciships target subsystem and for the slowturn carriers and their target subsystem. would generally allow more freedom in weaponchoices.
And I think that those posters desiring this beam turret just want to turn their cruisers into some sort of cru'scort where all damage is directed forward instead of providing damage split between forward and aft.
I do like to use cannons on my small, quick, maneuverable ships. On my big slow, lumbering ships I like to use beam arrays, usually 6 to make for a nice broadside and a laser light show when FAW is kicked off.
Small, quick, maneuverable ships provide for a perfect platform for using cannons and turrets as it allows for all damage to be directed forward.
Big, slow, lumbering ships need to be able to provide as much damage towards the rear as they do towards the front mainly because they can't turn quick enough to bring all guns to bear on a target.
Now we have this "want" for a beam turret able to fire 360 degrees but at less power and damage than a full sized beam array.
Now take the big slow lumbering ships and mount your dual beam banks up front increasing the damage output over a smaller arc than a beam array. Now you want to further increase the damage output forward by removing the aft limited arc beam arrays that normally can't fire forward and replace them with beam turrets that can. You've just created your cru'scort where all damage is optimally projected forward, even thru the hull of the ship, towards the target.
This will be nice for an alpha strike for any hull, but the second an enemy gets behind your big slow lumbering ship because you can't turn very quickly, you've cut your damage output to the sides and rear of your ship considerably and you get your TRIBBLE handed to you readily. Queue the "crying for more turn for cruisers crowd"...
OH, but wait, we have these new fancy engineering consoles coming from Fleet Dil Mines that boost resistances while also boosting turn OR boosting turn while also boosting resistances! You just got an increase to the turn rate for your big slow lumbering cruiser. But you're still limited in the damage you can output towards any quarter around the ship. We know! Give us some beam turrets that fire 360 degrees then we can use them with the DBBs and shoot everything in front of us while ignoring everything to the side and rear until we get turned around! Our DPS will go thru the roof and we can compete with the real escorts that used to use just cannons!
Ya know what, I'm not going to keep arguing against those wanting to finish turning STO into Escorts Online. Go fer it.
Let me be clear, I am not really all that on board with the idea of beam turrets but for valid reasons. I don't want them to interfere with my BO. But I still do not understand why you are against it. You are arguing that people will mount DBBs and 4 beat turrets and it will destroy the game. THEY CAN DO THAT NOW, so I don't see your reasons being valid.
Damage split between forward and aft doesn't work when you want to put ALL possible damage on your target. That's why DBB kinda suck right now, because the only thing you can equip to compliment them are...cannon turrets, which don't utilize beam skills. Fail. And not everybody likes broadsiding. This isn't the Age of Sail. Also, it's been said several times this isn't just for cruisers. Escort pilots want beam turrets as well. This is nothing but a COSMETIC and utility change. Why are you so hostile to this?
Nothing is stopping you from using beam arrays on your big, slow, lumbering ships. Implementing beam turrets won't stop you either. Your forward DPS will be lower, but your broadside is still just as strong and you have more firepower to bring to bear on your flanks and rear. Nothing is stopping you and neither is our request. Why are you so hostile to this?
So, any small, quick, maneuverable ships HAVE to use cannons to allow all damage forward. Why? What if they want to use beams? Oops, too bad, nothing goes with DBBs...unless beam turrets are implemented, then they have a CHOICE to use what they WANT. More choices are good for EVERYBODY. Why are you so hostile to this?
Uh...yeah. They're called turrets and they already exist in-game for cannons. Why can't beam-users have their own version? And the 360-degree beam arrays already exist for shuttles/fighters and they do about the same damage as turrets anyway, so why can't we just fit them on our bigger ships? No harm in that. Why are you so hostile to this?
Yeah, so? This is hardly unprescedented, as the Vesta has it's dual cannons, all KDF cruisers can fit forward-heavy weapons, and so can all the Romulan warbirds. Granted, the D'Deridex and Ha'apax kinda suck at it because their turn rate is so horrific, but they CAN if they CHOOSE and many players make it work for them because that's what they WANT to do. People have more fun when they can do something they WANT to do and make it work for them, whether it's optimal or not. Let's take a Vor'cha for example. They already fit DHCs/Turrets instead of broadsiding. Who's to say somebody might want to have similar DPS and playstyle, but prefers the look of beam weapons? Well, if you have YOUR way, they're screwed because of arbitrary restrictions and "You can't have!" DBB give up some of DHC's damage for a slightly wider firing arc, a fair trade, and the beam turrets would have the same damage as cannon turrets, just visually match beams and can utilize FAW and that awesome laser light show we all love, but nothing is taken away from DHC/Turret jockeys. More choices for all. Why are you so hostile to this?
See previous mention of KDF cruisers and Romulan Warbirds. It's already here. Implementing beam turrets changes NOTHING. Your argument does not apply here. Why are you so hostile to this?
Yeah, God forbid anything be allowed to compete with escorts, right? Or doesn't conform to your "Cruisers MUST broadside or GTFO" mentality? Seriously, how does implementing beam turrets change ANYTHING for the worse? Honestly, think about it for a moment. We already have cruisers that CAN mount DHC but lack the turn rate to use them well, but players still make them work because they WANT to. DBBs, right now, are pretty crappy because fitting more than one (for Beam Overload spike) means you either leave your aft weapons sitting IDLE while you fire them, or you split your weapons between beams/turrets, which is a bad idea. Beam turrets open up more options for ALL players and make DBBs a viable weapon, rather than just a Beam Overload delivery system. More options are good, as it makes for more variety, and variety is good. Why are you so hostile to this?
This game is already Escorts Online. This game has more in common currently with Ace Combat than with Star Trek. Cannons and missiles are the name of the game. I'm asking for a BEAM equivalent, something very "Star Trek"...and you say this is making it MORE into Escorts Online? Um.....ok.....
1. They're canon. (The "Phase Cannons" on the NX-01 fired beams, not bolts, and they were turret mounted.) (Also, "Cannon" in their usage referred to the fact they had to be physically aimed. They didn't have an semi-omnidirectional emitter like what is used in array strips.)
2. It'd make my Fleet Nova not look stupid anymore. Currently I have 2xDBB and 2xcannon turrets on it. (Plus a torp fore and aft) And let me tell you, it just plain looks wrong with those cannon turrets.
3. It'd make my Fleet Galaxy even better. Right now, I'm running a "Cannon Cruiser" setup on it. (Single cannons and cannon turrets) In separation mode, yeah, looks kinda cool. But having beams would make it look even more cool, and more canon.
4. I really want to do a beam setup on one of my escorts. (Actually, I'd love to do a beam setup on that Corvette. It'd look really nice.) Using cannons on all of them, well, makes them all play the same. There is really no difference between any of their playstyles. Why bother buying another escort from the Z-Store, when it'll just play the same as your others?
This is the part where you are wrong. First, adding 360 degree aft beams that are affected by various beams skills - or even just FAW, is more than a cosmetic change. second, and more importantly, turrets damage decreases with range - beams do not.
Cruisers are slow turning for a reason. They are nigh impossible to kill in the hands of a skilled pilot, and trade burst damage for sustained dps. Not having to turn to keep a proper beam firing arc in a cruiser would mean I would always be doing max damage while sitting at just under 10k facing the target and firing beams and torps directly ahead. no skill involved.
In an escort, this would mean that range is no longer an issue, and I could fly it the same way as a cruiser with beam turrets - parked at just under 10k firing beams and torps ad naseum. Wait - I think this is what many people already do with escorts in the public queues - could you imagine what would happen if that became the optimal way to do it? FFS, nobody would ever use their engines again!
I do use DBB's in some builds (I love the temporal set on my mobius!), but there is a trade-off for doing so - and for good reason.
It's a cool idea, even if just for the cosmetic purposes, but simply pasting cannon turret stats onto a 360 beam as proposed it would definitely unbalance things.
Also, the burst vs sustained DPS argument is a joke. Ask any PvPer. Sustained DPS = zero DPS.
when you can sustain over 12k dps in a cruiser with beams it's no joke
I think you drastically underestimate how powerful beams can be if you use them effectively. so much so that if you can use dual a2b on an escort, beams are generally better there too, as it reduces all boff cooldowns to global each time you cycle a2b, and FAW3+APB3 on global CD is much more powerful than you seem to think.
I may be wrong about the range - I can't find anything to corroborate either side, but even if it's less of a drop off, that still proves my point that it would not simply be a cosmetic change as you stated.
and again, my cruiser could still stay pointed in one direction, firing 3 DBB's, 3 beam turrets, a cutting beam and a torp, cycling FAW3 and APB1 at global cooldowns, without sacrificing anything. If you think that's not overpowered, I challenge you to try destroying my d'kora now, even without beam turrets.
really, I think beam turrets are a cool idea, this is why I'm pointing out where they would still need work from your initial proposal. Even if you don't play like I do, and therefore feel you would not see an advantage from these beam turrets, I certainly would gain a huge advantage from them, and others would too. This is something the devs have to consider when implementing new things.
12k DPS in pvp means nothing if you don't have burst, which is what he was getting at.
I can get 10k DPS without using A2B or romulan plasma. I suspect going with romulan plasma would put me quite a bit above that.
However, it means NOTHING in pvp whatsoever. Zero, nada.
Back on topic though, yes allowing you to use subsystem targeting and what not with the turrets would be handy, but hardly game breaking. Most cruisers would have to sacrifice something in their all too few and far between tactical slots in order to do it. And escorts, well It still really wouldn't bother me much if they could throw a subsystem attack in there. Most have a BO1 or FAW1 in there anyway because they have nothing else to put.
A low level target shields or engine would be acceptable because it really is almost impossible to bring down a competent cruiser pilot. I should know, I am one of em
I'm aware of what A2B does, as I run a 7-beam/KCB dual A2B build on my Fleet Ha'apax (pretty much the only way to run cruisers), but FAW3 and APB3 are skills not available to most Cruisers. Only specialized Tac cruisers like the Excelsior (which I still think is retardedly powerful for a ship that belongs in a museum) can fit both of those skills, or the Tal Shiar Battlecruiser if you opt to use the Universal Cmdr seat for a Tac BOFF.