What if each ship had it's own unique weapon layout?

compositearmour

Would it work? Probably not. But still, it's fun to speculate, so let's begin.

So as it stands now, most ships just have X number of fore and aft weapons, no matter the type and with no respect to whatever the actual ship has.
Even if your ship was plated in phaser banks and you decide to derp around with 8 tri-cobalt launchers, those phaser banks are a decoration.

But what if that wasn't the case?
Let me use the Oddy as an example of my idea.

It would have 8 Beam weapon slots, each tied to a specific bank.

It would have two fore and one aft torpedo launcher.

The phaser banks on the top of the saucer can't shoot below and the phaser banks on top can't shoot above.

Likewise the port phasers can't shoot starboard and the starboard can't shoot port.

No more 4 beams shooting out of a single bank and torpedoes make a comeback as being part of every ships inventory.

stf65

If you leave things in the players hands they will always choose the path of least resistance. That is why so many currently use escorts. You would simply end up with everyone using the exact same ship and layout because someone discovered the sweetspot and passed that information on to everyone else.

assimilatedktar

stf65 wrote: »

If you leave things in the players hands they will always choose the path of least resistance. That is why so many currently use escorts. You would simply end up with everyone using the exact same ship and layout because someone discovered the sweetspot and passed that information on to everyone else.

Sad but true. Way too many min-maxers in this game who would only care about a fun Star Trek-like build if it would give them a higher weapon power cap.

elessym

Star Fleet Battles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Fleet_Battles

ursusmorologus

compositearmour wrote: »

So as it stands now, most ships just have X number of fore and aft weapons, no matter the type and with no respect to whatever the actual ship has.
Even if your ship was plated in phaser banks and you decide to derp around with 8 tri-cobalt launchers, those phaser banks are a decoration.

But what if that wasn't the case?
Let me use the Oddy as an example of my idea.

It would have 8 Beam weapon slots, each tied to a specific bank.

It would have two fore and one aft torpedo launcher.

The phaser banks on the top of the saucer can't shoot below and the phaser banks on top can't shoot above.

Likewise the port phasers can't shoot starboard and the starboard can't shoot port.

No more 4 beams shooting out of a single bank and torpedoes make a comeback as being part of every ships inventory.

Yes I would like to see more of a mechwarrior combat model. Give the weapon types more distinction in behavior characteristics, things like heavy cannons for short-range body blows, beams for long-range accuracy, more types of missiles and long-range heavy weapons (or just make the ones we already have more available and not c-store exclusives). Then couple that with more diversity between ship types that have more loadout options, things like escort class has 3 cannon mounts and 2 beam mounts, cruiser has 4 beam mounts and 2 torpedo mounts.

Game play would need more strategy than it has now though, right now its point and shoot or orbit and shoot.

mll623

I would like for the ability to customize the location of weapon hardpoints. If I want a Raptor with all weapons front, I should be able to do it. The fact that I have a **** ton of energy drain might not make it worth it to use 8 cannons, but if I want to go all in then I should have the option. The fact that any beam cruiser with a grav well or a tractor beam has me royally screwed is a balanced drawback to this pattern.

If I want to put 4 beam banks and 4 arrays on front of a cruiser, giving me 8 weapons forward, 4 to each side and none to the rear, I should be able to do it.

There might need to be slight changes to power systems, but this extra customizability would increase the number of viable builds and allow for each player to fly in their own fashion.

szerontzur

It's something I've suggested before and would like to see. While it it would diversify the ship roster, there are two major problems I forsee.

Weapon drain mechanics heavily discourage mixed weapons(even among same weapon types). Until this issue is resolved, there really isn't much point to individualized weapon hardpoints.

Also related to that issue is that they would make a lot of ships more or less desirable. How many people would still fly a fleet defiant if it had slightly-more-canon a beam hardpoint, two cannon hardpoints, and a torpedo hardpoint up front(rather than the far more optimal layout of 4xDHC)?

shar487a

I think hard point positions should also affect turn rate. For example, if you decide to mount all weapons forward or aft, that would make the ship nose or rear heavy, thereby decreasing turn rate. However, distributing hard points location more evenly (4 forward, 4 aft) would incur no such penalty.

johnnymo1

The idea of ships having their own unique weapon load outs is great, I have wanted this for a long time. This is very iconic and fits well with the historical ships. Just look at the different ships named Enterprise for this. Archer's ship had for and aft cannons that could swivel to cover most angles from the ship and forward and aft torpedo slots. Kirk's Enterprise had hard point phasers and torpedo slots fore, aft, as well as port and starboard. The Enterprise B had what appears to be 4 forward torpedo tubes, 1 aft torpedo tube, Phasers still were in phaser bank lay outs, allowing coverage around the ship, but still in pairs designated for areas of the ship. The Enterprise C saw the first phaser arrays, where long strips of phaser banks allowed for more fire power over areas of the ship. The Enterprise D saw a massive pair of phaser arrays on the saucer section. All of this should more effect the firing arcs of the weapons on the ship more than anything. Galaxy class ships can bring more fire power to bear on a single target than any previous ship simply because the beam arrays are larger, allowing for a wider arc of fire. I have always thought that torpedo and energy based weapons should be given separate slots. This change alone will allow for ships to be given specific weapon load outs alone. Take the Excelsior class, and Defiant class ships as examples. The Excelsior class seems to have 4 forward and 1 aft torpedo, and phaser banks in the fore and aft of the ship. According to memory alpha the defiant class has "4 phaser cannons, at least 3 phaser emitters, at least 4 forward torpedo (photon and quantum torpedo) launchers, at least 2 aft torpedo launchers". Different ships would be greatly helped by adding additional weapon hard points, but they should match the abilities of the ship.

dracounguis

I like the idea but as others have said, once the 'optimal' layout was found the others wouldn't get used.

As for the D, I never really saw it fire more than 1 phaser at a time. Probably due to FX limits and storytelling needs, but it'd be cool if the D just had 1 phaser bank per facing, but it was a jumbo one! Long fire duration and big hitting.:D

phoenicius

like some said, it would force everyone to use have a single build, i would rather cryptic fix torpedos and added "torpedo(with choice for mines too for aft) tubes" only slots.

like cruisers would have 2 foward, 2 aft, escorts would have 2 foward, sci would have 2 foward, 1 back.

sparhawk

While not an bad idea (it would be more true to canon), this would require Cryptic to completely redo their ship systems implementation (IMO an redesign/overhaul is long overdue anyway). Therefore it is unfortunately unlikely to happen anytime soon (if ever).

johnnymo1

I think that it could be fixed relatively easily, have a second set of weapon slots fore and aft for projectile weapons only. Increase the amount of damage done by projectiles, then add extra tac console slots that only either universal or projectile based tac consoles can fit into. That alone will help the players who complain about not having enough places for all the universal rep based, lock box based, and zen store based console slots. The amount of projectile console slots could be based off the number of torpedo tubes on the ship, divided by half. As a result the fleet excelsior class ship would have the current number of tac console slots and an additional 2 projectile/universal tactical console slots. The ship would still have its 4 fore and aft weapon slots, but now add one aft torpedo launcher slot, and 2 forward torpedo launcher slots. This can be done for all ships in the game and easily bulk up the dps of all ships. The little NX class starter ship with 2 forward weapon slots, 1 forward torpedo slot, 1 aft weapon and 1 aft torpedo slot. 1 projectile tactical slot and 1 energy weapon tactical slot.

orangeitis

compositearmour wrote: »

Would it work? Probably not.

It would if the min/maxers don't complain enough to have it reverted back. I think it would be best for STO. We'd still have modular weapons so we could switch energy types, but each slot would require a specific weapon. I like it.

shar487a

Another suggestion: Instead of a player specifying a weapon hard-point location, why not just specify its central firing direction? The weapon's firing arc rules would still apply, but now it gets to face any direction, not just forward or aft.

This would simplify ship weapon code handling since all it does is replace the forward vs. aft weapon mounting with a single directional firing angle offset. It would also allow for some unique customizations like side-mounted DHC's or torpedoes for real battle-ship style broadsides.

Alternate weapon firing angles would allow STO to replicate the Constitution class refit exactly with 3 phaser DBB's, one facing forward, one port, one starboard. No, the old Connie never had beam arrays.

age03

compositearmour wrote: »

Would it work? Probably not. But still, it's fun to speculate, so let's begin.

So as it stands now, most ships just have X number of fore and aft weapons, no matter the type and with no respect to whatever the actual ship has.
Even if your ship was plated in phaser banks and you decide to derp around with 8 tri-cobalt launchers, those phaser banks are a decoration.

But what if that wasn't the case?
Let me use the Oddy as an example of my idea.

It would have 8 Beam weapon slots, each tied to a specific bank.

It would have two fore and one aft torpedo launcher.

The phaser banks on the top of the saucer can't shoot below and the phaser banks on top can't shoot above.

Likewise the port phasers can't shoot starboard and the starboard can't shoot port.

No more 4 beams shooting out of a single bank and torpedoes make a comeback as being part of every ships inventory.

Go look at any Navy ship and see if it is this No I guess not so why come up with this bad idea.