test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

FAW, FAW, and more FAW.

2456

Comments

  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Personally, I would like to see the next wave of 'Pilot' ships being escort only with considerable bonuses to cannons. I think this would help not only bring Cannons back up to Par, but would also create more variety in ship types as right now the Escorts are all but dead. I think it would be cool if 'Pilot ships' were agile Escorts and Destroyers only, Cruisers have enough as it is. Focus their abilities toward speed and on Cannon and Turret weapons.

    As it is right now, I even go Beams on my Escort because Cannons just aren't worth it. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing Cannons get some attention in the near future along with the more maneuverable 'hit and run' style game play.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • jorantomalakjorantomalak Member Posts: 7,133 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    FAWing is probably how you got her preggo in the first place. I suggest next time resorting to a well timed Beam Overload or Target (subsystem).

    In this case, you're better off with FAP than FAW.

    ROFL!!!

    I was my beam overload that got that crazy orion girl preggo :D

    I was looking for a way to get out of it so in STO the answer is always FAW :D

    And the iconian mistress?....yeah i was trying to set tovan up on a date ...she gave him back :o
    and then tried to seduce me instead :eek:
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    it's only 1/3 uptime...10 sec duration, 20 sec dublicate cooldown.

    let's be honest, some of the gameplay design decission that cryptic made from day 1 of developement are beyond questionable anyway.

    tac team...removes certain debuffs, buffs all your weapons and rotates shields. WIthin the first 5 seconds of testing it should have been obvious that this is too much for an ensign ability. and it has a potential 100% uptime.
    AP Omega...basically 4 abilities in 1. Not that the TAC Boff department needed another OP ability.

    For DEM to be close to the usefullnes of Omega it would need to have the marion doff already build in.


    STO is an excellent Star Trek game, but it is not an excellent game.
    Go pro or go home
  • nickcastletonnickcastleton Member Posts: 1,212 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Technically fire at will is a Cannon ability, think how many times its said in the series.

    im glad its a little better as it beam being cannon head like me i can use phaser beams and still be viable for dps.
    0bzJyzP.gif





    "It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    paxdawn wrote: »
    I dont think they need to buff anything at all.

    Its time that people stop whining and start adapting.

    If you do buff one or all or make another weapon more powerful than the rest, then people will just go back to the whining cycle.

    For examples purposes, If the devs made Mines the most powerful in space both in ease of use and dps, players will just transfer to that and players like you will just post another thread like this trying to make Mines look bad and buff all other weapons. Hence, the whining cycle.

    Adapt? Adapt to what?

    That doesn't even make any sense. It's not as if NPCs are using FAW against you.

    The idea here is to make more things viable, so there are more choices instead of just defaulting to FAW, since it's the best choice for both AoE and single target.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    baudl wrote: »
    it's only 1/3 uptime...10 sec duration, 20 sec dublicate cooldown.

    That's 10s up, 10s down...1/2 uptime...running 2 copies or 1 copy with some form of CD reduction.
    baudl wrote: »
    let's be honest, some of the gameplay design decission that cryptic made from day 1 of developement are beyond questionable anyway.

    tac team...removes certain debuffs, buffs all your weapons and rotates shields. WIthin the first 5 seconds of testing it should have been obvious that this is too much for an ensign ability. and it has a potential 100% uptime.

    Tac Team didn't start with shield distribution...it was added. Wheeeee! Meh...
    baudl wrote: »
    AP Omega...basically 4 abilities in 1. Not that the TAC Boff department needed another OP ability.

    Much like Eng BOFFs, Tac BOFFs could use some other abilities. But yeah, as much as one might start the /facepalm over APO...consider APA, eh? At least Eng/Sci can run the APO, yeah?
    baudl wrote: »
    For DEM to be close to the usefullnes of Omega it would need to have the marion doff already build in.

    As long as one hasn't been having a bad day, there's a comment from Geko in a somewhat recent podcast talking about the balance and variety of BOFF abilities that's good for a great laugh.
    baudl wrote: »
    STO is an excellent Star Trek game, but it is not an excellent game.

    That first bit is going to run into folks seeing Star Trek as different things...and potentially agreeing or disagreeing. To me, it's a half-assed DS9 game where they've been adding some half-assed VOY elements. So not very Star Trek at all to me...
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Adapt? Adapt to what?

    That doesn't even make any sense. It's not as if NPCs are using FAW against you.

    The idea here is to make more things viable, so there are more choices instead of just defaulting to FAW, since it's the best choice for both AoE and single target.

    At first, I was all lolwut to his comment because of wanting some balanced viable choices for the players - then I was all lolwut at what I was thinking, remembering the game I'm playing. There are no balanced viable choices...it's been an endless chain of over the top nerfs and buffs creating FotM arguments over the years - Cryptic doesn't just tweak down or tweak up, they break out the nerf jackhammer or the steroid buff cocktail. It's all so heavy handed...meh.
  • hunteralpha84hunteralpha84 Member Posts: 524 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Anyone else tired of The Reign of FAW?

    Yep.

    I've been playing my Klingon bird of prey a lot more lately. Its the flanking damage that does it for me. It means your position in space actually means something and battle cloak is the icing on the cake.

    Shame there's no real starfleet equivalent but I like that the KDF has its own thing.

    I still use beams on my fed cruiser but I've dropped faw for torpedo spread. My DPS has taken quite a hit but at least I feel like I'm flying a starship and not a mobile heavy weapons platform.
  • kintishokintisho Member Posts: 1,040 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons, like it used to be and oh yea Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons, and more Canons, was that better or are you just complaining to complain? STOP use your Canons,Canons,Canons, Ill use beams and thats that.
  • jarvisandalfredjarvisandalfred Member Posts: 1,549 Bug Hunter
    edited April 2015
    kintisho wrote: »
    Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons, like it used to be and oh yea Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons,Canons, and more Canons, was that better or are you just complaining to complain? STOP use your Canons,Canons,Canons, Ill use beams and thats that.

    This is why I don't care. There will be a meta. Now that it requires serious investment, I'd rather it doesn't shift for arbitrary reasons.
    SCM - Crystal C. (S) - [00:12] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 8.63M(713.16K) - Fed Sci

    SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci

    Tacs are overrated.

    Game's best wiki

    Build questions? Look here!
  • edited April 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I'm just a little surprised that its an AOE ability that keeps full normal effectiveness on top. Most games the AOE powers either do less damage or have shorter range or something to make them situational. Here you get AOE plus a damage bonus with 2/3 uptime. Its an odd design decision.

    Isn't it the same with Cannon Scatter Volley? With higher uptime, iirc. Of course, the imbalance comes from CSV taking up a higher ranked seat.

    On the other hand, FAW uncontrollably pisses off everything around you by tickling them with beams, so if you can't handle the heat you'll get roasted.
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    This is why I don't care. There will be a meta. Now that it requires serious investment, I'd rather it doesn't shift for arbitrary reasons.

    No one is saying that Beams should be invalidated.

    But they have literally every advantage; range drop off, overcapping, BOff tier, weapon arcs, even special consoles like the Nukara Particle Converter (unless I'm mistaken).

    Why not throw Cannons a bone so that they're just as easy to use? Or, maybe some non traditional builds, like torps or Drains?
  • edited April 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    patrickngo wrote: »
    for a while, BFAW didn't crit. as in "NO critical hits".

    It also drained power-you NEEDED overcapping.

    About the middle of 2014, then-developer AdjudicatorHawk was tasked with repairing BFAW for the umpteenth time.

    He raised an issue regarding power-creep with Lead Developer CaptainGeko, whose reaction was that allowing any balancing factors on BFAW, would make the game "not fun to play".

    This was during the same period they were reworking Beam Overload to eliminate the 'double stack" BFAW trick used by BoP Vapers. (The way the double-stack worked, was you activated two copies in an overlapping fashion for a single strike-it required timing and absolutely DRAINED your weapon power.)

    The result of those reworks, was that BFAW no longer drains weapons power, each individual shot has a normal chance to crit, and it fires five times faster than NON-BFAW weapons fire directed at a single target.

    Ninety percent of your DPS racers wouldn't hit 10K on their builds without that change, mcuh less getting close to or clearing 100K.

    The "Difficulty increase" that shows us assimilated BoPs in Cure Advanced with hulls that make a Negh'var look flimsy, was a reaction to Geko's decision not to balance (or leave balanced) Beam Fire At Will.

    It's the driver, it's why you have borg probes with Dreadnought hitpoints, it's why they instituted "insta-fail" timers on missions.

    Everything you don't like about how "Difficulty increase" was handled boils down to that decision. "It won't be fun" is why BFAW is so powerful.

    Keep in mind, folks, Geko is a Cruisers guy.

    I like this. Detailed and gives a lot of background.

    The current HP issue us ridiculous, and I think, not very sustainable in the long term. The game just isn't friendly to the very same casual players it claims to appeal to.
  • dareaudareau Member Posts: 2,390 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    The current HP issue us ridiculous, and I think, not very sustainable in the long term. The game just isn't friendly to the very same casual players it claims to appeal to.

    I don't know about "casual friendly" being lost.

    My Pathfinder (T6 Science) with BFaW II & AP-B I pumping out lots of Polaron DBB, Array, KCB & Polaron Omni-array fire has met with an 8k+ "average" DPS and me posting an easy 11k with a Recluse on the board.

    Compared to my Vesta that averages in the 6k range with the Aux Cannons and CSV taking advantage of targets being sucked into GW IIIs...

    Yeah, BFaW is the "casual player skill" of the month...
    Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...

    To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    dareau wrote: »
    I don't know about "casual friendly" being lost.

    My Pathfinder (T6 Science) with BFaW II & AP-B I pumping out lots of Polaron DBB, Array, KCB & Polaron Omni-array fire has met with an 8k+ "average" DPS and me posting an easy 11k with a Recluse on the board.

    Compared to my Vesta that averages in the 6k range with the Aux Cannons and CSV taking advantage of targets being sucked into GW IIIs...

    Yeah, BFaW is the "casual player skill" of the month...

    I'm speaking more in regards to the unnecessarily high NPC HP.

    The average player is sub-10k. Some being well below even what a Photonic Fleet gets you. How are they supposed to complete the missions with absurdly high enemy health with fail conditions?
  • nadiezjanadiezja Member Posts: 629 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Well, at least the fail conditions are going away...

    Yeah. The current state of the Advanced queues is, for a casual, awful. There needs to be a queue lever harder than Normal that gives the rare mats and rep items and teaches how to do harder tiers instwad of just failing people out without a chance to learn.
  • reginamala78reginamala78 Member Posts: 4,593 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    Isn't it the same with Cannon Scatter Volley? With higher uptime, iirc. Of course, the imbalance comes from CSV taking up a higher ranked seat.

    On the other hand, FAW uncontrollably pisses off everything around you by tickling them with beams, so if you can't handle the heat you'll get roasted.

    And its a problem with CSV too and could use some tuning, though to a lesser extend since CSV requires some positioning and piloting to use well and has a much smaller AOE. I'm just of the school that says that any power in general should have a time when it absolutely rocks and a time when nothing-at-all would be a better choice. There should always be a cost. I think of like JRPGs where using a spell as AOE ~halves the damage, or FPSes where the AOE weapons usually have awful range or really limited ammo or something.

    Here its just the one-stop solution for everything. Right now there's no real cost, you don't need to worry about positioning as much, you get full damage (and then some) per target, there's a dozen ways to neutralize the energy drain, the downtime is only 10 seconds, and even the 'aggros everything' doesn't really matter when the whole team is doing so. Its really just perfect from a mechanical point of view, which to crazy people like me at least is the best reason to not use it. Just wishing the game had more variety than anything being hands-down no-contest superior to everything else.
  • frontline2042frontline2042 Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    I'm speaking more in regards to the unnecessarily high NPC HP.

    The average player is sub-10k. Some being well below even what a Photonic Fleet gets you. How are they supposed to complete the missions with absurdly high enemy health with fail conditions?

    Honest answer, from someone who DESPISES the FAW fapping: tactics and teamwork. Sure, a guy with a stick as thick as an oak branch can kill a man, but so can a bundle of twigs.
    Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
    Let the stupid suffer
  • rekurzionrekurzion Member Posts: 697 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    e30ernest wrote: »
    Solution: Give NPCs FBP, then watch the fireworks display. :D

    Seriously, NPCs need more skills to keep players on their toes. Right now they are just damage-soaking targets. The wild (bugged) Borg shield drains were a(n accidental) step in the right direction IMO.

    NPC's have abilities. The problem is they don't use them intelligently. In some instances they take so long to use them most players never know because of how quickly they die. We need adaptive AI which learns your tactics and makes the appropriate adjustments. just like a battle should be.

    If you destroy the first volley of ships a certain way, they relay that information to the next group so they can provide a counter. When that next comes in they know your attack style and viola, you are forced to change it up.

    that simple twist would vastly change the game without making any additional nerf/buff changes.
  • rakija879rakija879 Member Posts: 646 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I thought faw spam was IN pre-DR. Followed by neutronic torpedo and SS.
    And now, I don't know maybe FBP particle and have crtdx4 everything era.:rolleyes:
  • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I'm just of the school that says that any power in general should have a time when it absolutely rocks and a time when nothing-at-all would be a better choice.

    I literally cannot disagree strongly enough.

    Attack abilities should at worst result in a minor increase in performance when used improperly. They should never reduce performance like the old Beam Overload, which was why it was avoided like the plague for all but extremely specific circumstances.
  • erei1erei1 Member Posts: 4,081 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    patrickngo wrote: »
    for a while, BFAW didn't crit. as in "NO critical hits".

    It also drained power-you NEEDED overcapping.

    About the middle of 2014, then-developer AdjudicatorHawk was tasked with repairing BFAW for the umpteenth time.

    He raised an issue regarding power-creep with Lead Developer CaptainGeko, whose reaction was that allowing any balancing factors on BFAW, would make the game "not fun to play".

    This was during the same period they were reworking Beam Overload to eliminate the 'double stack" BFAW trick used by BoP Vapers. (The way the double-stack worked, was you activated two copies in an overlapping fashion for a single strike-it required timing and absolutely DRAINED your weapon power.)

    The result of those reworks, was that BFAW no longer drains weapons power, each individual shot has a normal chance to crit, and it fires five times faster than NON-BFAW weapons fire directed at a single target.

    Ninety percent of your DPS racers wouldn't hit 10K on their builds without that change, mcuh less getting close to or clearing 100K.

    The "Difficulty increase" that shows us assimilated BoPs in Cure Advanced with hulls that make a Negh'var look flimsy, was a reaction to Geko's decision not to balance (or leave balanced) Beam Fire At Will.

    It's the driver, it's why you have borg probes with Dreadnought hitpoints, it's why they instituted "insta-fail" timers on missions.

    Everything you don't like about how "Difficulty increase" was handled boils down to that decision. "It won't be fun" is why BFAW is so powerful.

    Keep in mind, folks, Geko is a Cruisers guy.
    To be honest with you, I did 40K dps with a scimi BFAW back them, and I still do that. In fact, the last time I did a parser, I did 30k, so, less.
    I can't provide the parser, my old log are bugged, and the parser can't read them anymore.

    BFAW was already broken. Before it was "fixed". I mean, we have a 360° AOE, with few falloff, that allow you to fire and move at the same time, in a content with AOE heavy situation, and that ask you to move and shoot. Plus, you have numerous beam advantages like overcapping, pedal to metal and all that.

    It's kind of obvious it's going to rule. The only time cannons were useful was with CSV in no win.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    No one is saying that Beams should be invalidated.

    But they have literally every advantage; range drop off

    Beams do not have a "range drop off advantage" compared to DHCs or DCs, because the latter make up for it with higher base damage. DHC/DCs will do more damage than BAs unless you are further than 9.5km away, and will do more damage than DBBs unless you are further than 6 km away. (Source)

    You shouldn't be that far away regardless, so it's not really an issue.

    Cannons are ignored because who gives a flying rodant hiney about cannons? :D
  • frontline2042frontline2042 Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    Beams do not have a "range drop off advantage" compared to DHCs or DCs, because the latter make up for it with higher base damage. DHC/DCs will do more damage than BAs unless you are further than 9.5km away, and will do more damage than DBBs unless you are further than 6 km away. (Source)

    You shouldn't be that far away regardless, so it's not really an issue.

    Cannons are ignored because who gives a flying rodant hiney about cannons? :D

    ...you just linked an article that was UPDATED in 2010... dude, it's 2015 and even then in the drop off section the guy warns that it's theorycraft and not hard data.
    Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
    Let the stupid suffer
  • jarvisandalfredjarvisandalfred Member Posts: 1,549 Bug Hunter
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    Beams do not have a "range drop off advantage" compared to DHCs or DCs, because the latter make up for it with higher base damage. DHC/DCs will do more damage than BAs unless you are further than 9.5km away, and will do more damage than DBBs unless you are further than 6 km away. (Source)

    You shouldn't be that far away regardless, so it's not really an issue.

    Cannons are ignored because who gives a flying rodant hiney about cannons? :D

    They do, from the perspective that they suffer less from dropoff than cannons.
    SCM - Crystal C. (S) - [00:12] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 8.63M(713.16K) - Fed Sci

    SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci

    Tacs are overrated.

    Game's best wiki

    Build questions? Look here!
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    Beams do not have a "range drop off advantage" compared to DHCs or DCs, because the latter make up for it with higher base damage. DHC/DCs will do more damage than BAs unless you are further than 9.5km away, and will do more damage than DBBs unless you are further than 6 km away. (Source)

    You shouldn't be that far away regardless, so it's not really an issue.

    Cannons are ignored because who gives a flying rodant hiney about cannons? :D

    The DPS numbers for that are wrong, btw. That's based off of the DPS over a cycle and not continued firing. There's a 0.5s activation delay that needs to be added to each.

    DHC DPV is 174, but the DPS is 99.4 and not 116.
    DBB DPV is 130, but the DPS is 94.5 and not 104.

    Sticking with Base numbers for those, do 5x and add in 3x Turrets and an OD, KCB, Ancient, eh?

    Cannons: 497 + 154.3 = 651.3
    Beams: 472.5 + 218.2 = 690.7

    Right off the back before getting into range or any abilities...the Beam build's going to outperform the Cannon build.

    CSV2 will outperform FAW3 as long as there are three targets to about the 6km range (CSV2 hitting 3 targets vs. FAW3 hitting 2 targets)...but before you hit 8km, FAW3 against two targets will be outperforming CSV2 against three targets. And FAW3 vs. CSV2 and one target is never a contest...

    * * * * *

    That being said, FAW is bugged for certain weapons and they're underperforming - heh. Seriously, with some weapons FAW ignores the Rarity, ignores [Dmg] mods, or even ignores both. Like those VR10 [CrtD][CrtH][Dmg] Disruptor Arrays the Derpy Recruits get...for FAW, they might as well be Common Mk X weapons without the Very Rare and [Dmg] - cause FAW doesn't include either in the calculations. Can't recall off-hand all the weapons that are one or the other or both as well as those that work fine.
  • alejogalejog Member Posts: 135 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Another thing to have into account in this debate (My memory might be incorrect so any of the DPS people or anyone else that has data can correct me) is the fact that activating any other ability affects and interrupts the firing cycle of cannons causing a loss of DPS - be they a normal cannon cycle, CV or RF. Mind you, shield redistribution is included in the "abilities" that disrupts a cannon cycle. And as far as I know - and this is where I might be mistaken - such interruption does not affect beams, even while using faw, or does not affect them quite as hard.

    This cycle interruption is yet another reason, adding to the ones already stated that the current meta far benefits beams over cannons.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]-32nd Vipers- PvP Team

    Nothing is impossible to him who would try.... except getting cryptic to care about pvp.
  • xapocalypseponyxxapocalypseponyx Member Posts: 577 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    BFaWs biggest problem (IMHO), it is boring. At least on my cannon builds I can slot a torpedo and still be effective. Not much, but it's something. My cruisers? All beams, BFaW. BORING, but that's where the deeps are.

    Dozens of weapons, hundreds of possible builds. All worthless. A serious lack of variety in this post DR universe.
  • bobs1111bobs1111 Member Posts: 471 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    FAW has always been a terrible skill.

    There is a reason that in every other MMO ever made you don't find AOE skills that increase single target DPS by more then any other skill. (as others have pointed out overload is spike but lowered DPS even with the change compared to a FAW cycle).

    Truly FAW is such a badly designed skill that I have heard with my own ears, developers from other AAA games laugh out lout when they read the skills mechanics.

    I mean think about it... what if you played a sword and magic game... and your barbarian toon could choose to swing a single target big hit skill every 30s... or flip on a 360 spin move that lasted for 10s every 30s... and turned the sword into 8 swords that all hit for 140% of the dmg of a normal swing.

    I mean think about it its the worst game design in the history of MMOs.

    It has held this game back for 5 years.
Sign In or Register to comment.