Compared to FAW cannons aren't fine at all. That's the problem.
This has something to do more with your mentality and those who think like you.
If you play PvE ISA most of the time, and want #1 DPS, then you need FAW. The problem is that. Why do one limits his/herself to ISA and why is everyone even aiming for #1 DPS at ISA?
Cannons are viable weapons that can hit 100k+ DPS in ISA but wouldnt be reaching the optimal potential of beams.
So the question would be why would other platform users want competing the #1 DPS of BFAW at a mission optimzed for Beam FAW?
Why cant others just go find their own STF or the own niche meant for their platforms? Rather than actually making other platforms as optimal as beams in an STF/niche meant for beams.
And torpedoes, particularly the basic six types, still need to pack more punch if they are going to be anything other than something BFAWers joke about at torpboaters expense.
I always thought of torps as a 'battle-ender' weapon. At least that's how powerful crew members seemed to treat them in the show... "Can't fire a torp, enemy too close, we'd blow ourselves up!" As it is now, torps are mostly there to not use energy so your beam arrays have more juice.
Compared to FAW cannons aren't fine at all. That's the problem.
You are right Cannons will never compare to Beams because as i've mentioned previously they require a different style of play to Beams.
Cannons you have limited arcs, which limits not only you but against a moving target as well the time spent shooting at it because with Cannons you are always having to manoeuvre to stay in arc. Hence even without the pointed out flaws of Cannons you are going to find it harder to do DPS than with Beams.
Cannons and Beams at base rate dps no aoe abilities used. Beams will always come out the winner because as i've mentioned before
1. Beams have a 250 degree firing arc so more time within firing coverage to pour on the heat.
2. Beams can be equipped both fore and aft so facing any target from a broadside you have the luxury of firing however many Beams you've equipped. Cannons can only be equipped fore so a huge advantage here for Beams technically power issues a side you can equip twice the amount of Beams compared to Cannons on a ship
3. Piloting and positioning is paramount when using Cannons and timing of alpha strikes.
I'll admit there are issues with Cannons but you cannot really compare them to Beams and ask for a Beam nerf as although they are both energy weapon types they are designed to work with different play styles. Its like saying Torpedo's are superior to Mines, so Torpedo's should be nerfed, yes both do Kinetic damage but both require a different style of piloting to use them.
So enough with the BFAW nerf requests. The biggest issue here with Cannons is piloting and firing Arc's
I can ask for a FAW nerf because it's great for both single target and AOE and shouldn't be. BO should be the single target beam skill.
For cannons I want their drop off greatly reduced, so escorts don't have to worry about staying within 5km (or whatever the range is) while also remaining mobile because they can't sit in place like a cruiser. They may also need lowered power drain and a slight damage increase. They (DHCs) should be HARD hitting for their very narrow arc.
I hope you all get the buffs you want for Cannons but not at the expense of nerfing Beams. And once you have this buff and still have a hard time using Cannons compared to Beams i shall remind you.
Piloting is the key.
I just don't see how being able to sit 9.9km away from a target and not lose dps drop off is going to fix the most glaring and obvious flaws in all the arguments being made with Cannons Vs Beams and thats the FIRING ARC.
Sorry but i just can't see anything past the argument other than its hard to dps with Cannons, Beams have all the goodies so lets lash out and punish them because of envy.
Because as you're zipping around moving in and breaking away from the target you don't have to worry about getting within 5k to do your damage. Your turn radius can take you out of that range and you can still do damage.
You want to go fast in an escort. You need the defense. You usually slow down to turn tighter but you cant stay slow and you certainly can't sit there within 5k firing away like you're a cruiser. You move in on the target blasting away, break off and loop around again for another attack run. If drop off is greatly reduced you can start attack runs from 10k away and do almost full damage the entire run.
Because as you're zipping around moving in and breaking away from the target you don't have to worry about getting within 5k to do your damage. Your turn radius can take you out of that range and you can still do damage.
You want to go fast in an escort. You need the defense. You usually slow down to turn tighter but you cant stay slow and you certainly can't sit there within 5k firing away like you're a cruiser. You move in on the target blasting away, break off and loop around again for another attack run. If drop off is greatly reduced you can start attack runs from 10k away and do almost full damage the entire run.
That's what's needed most.
Your explanation here is exactly why AOE attacks with Cannons seem subpar. Zipping in and out and breaking away from a target.
A. Because of the speed you are travelling takes you out of the firing arc
B. The NPC moves
C. You're shield facing collapses forcing you to rotate shield facing
D. You're speed ended up putting you to close to the target forcing you to have to manoeuvre and take a few secs to swing round for another pass.
Using AOE attacks with Cannon requires timing, skill and good piloting to get the maximum benefit out of them. The same with Torpedo's having to wait for the right opportunity to really get any use from them i.e a opening in the targets shields to smash into the hull.
Sure the drop range would benefit where you're dps stays constant from a longer range but its such a small bonus as what happens when the target moves past 45 degrees or B.C.D examples i gave, That bonus becomes useless as the target is once again out of the firing arc.
Please don't think i'm criticising you personally here i'm just trying to highlight that comparing Cannons to Beams is like comparing Apples to Oranges. Both are from the same food group or weapons type but are different from each other.
I'll just re-iterate my position here then: I'll take the FAW Haters' Club nerf suggestions seriously when they start demanding Cryptic nerf the leech console as well.
My issue isn't FAW out performing in AoE situations. My issue is it out performing cannons in single target situations. There's a lot of reasons for that and one being how overcapping works. With beams one can overcap seemingly forever. With cannons only about 20 power overcaps and the rest goes to waste.
There's also the CrtD bug with CSV. On paper CSV should outperform FAW in a gravity well situation but in practice it does not. This is because beams get more out of overcapping and CSV is bugged. This needs to be fixed.
Also, yeah, I do well with cannons, I kill NPCs just fine and I even kill people in PvP just fine, but over the summer I got a flat tire. I had to drive 1 mile to the nearest gas station because of unsafe roadside conditions. Does that mean my tires were working fine because I was able to drive? Nope, and the same goes for cannons and torpedoes for that matter. They're broken and need to be fixed.
Reasoning: If you're looking to reduce 'Fire at Will Spam' this solution does not accomplish that. All it does is make it so that people are mostly spamming FAW II instead of FAW III which overall won't make that much of a difference.
If you're really interested in reducing the usage for Fire At Will, then the answer is not to make sweeping changes, but to instead provide an alternative. Lets put aside for a second the effectiveness of Fire At Will and address the real issue, that it's the only option for beam boats. Cannon ships have an option, do you spec for single target damage (Rapid Fire) or AOE Damage (Scatter Volley.) With Beam Builds there is one option only, and that's fire at will.
Because of the mechanics of Overload it's only a viable skill in builds that feature one beam weapon. Running Overload on a ship with multiple beam weapons is pointless. The only Beam Skill that works well for single target damage is Surgical Strikes which is only available on a very limited number of ships. Beam builds have one option and one option only and that is fire at will. If you run a beam cruiser, what choice do you have but to take Fire At Will even if you don't want to?
The way to create parity is not through nerfs, it never has been and never will be. There have been times when Cryptic has addressed issues like this correctly and it's worked in every occasion. There was a time when Aux2Bat was the only build anyone used and it was the 'Fire At Will' of it's time. Instead of nerfing Aux2Bat, they introduced alternative options and people started diversifying their builds. Now Aux2Bat is not used nearly as much, but those that like it are stil free to use it. There was no diversity in weapon mods, everyone only wanted CritD with Pen, everything else was junk. They didn't nerf CritD, they buffed Damage and now other weapons are viable alternatives.
The fire at will issue is the same thing. You want to reduce dependency on it, give people an option to use instead. The cannon changes you proposed are needed, there is no reason for Cannon skills to be a level higher then the corresponding Beam Skill, that needs to be changed.
People need to get away from the idea that the way to reduce peoples dependency on a skill is to reduce that skills effectiveness. It's not, all that does is get everyone to all shift to the next best option instead and then that skill becomes the new 'problem.' The way you counter dependence on or overuse of an ability is to create viable alternatives. Every other method is treating the symptom and not the problem.
This so much.
I fly a T5U Assault Cruiser Refit on my main, with two DBBs up front, a BA, two BAs and an Omni in the back with the KCB. I want full coverage, but FAW is the blessing and the curse. I WANT a rapid fire phaser ability. Beam Overload is not universally useful. If you're not specifically specced for crit severity it's weak. I'd love to have surgical strikes, but since it's not for non-intel ships, which is ludicrous to me since it's nakedly a tactical skill. This is partially why customizing existing ships could've been a gold mine.
I like FAW. It's great for clearing spam and reminds me of the scene in Conundrum where the E-D just disrespected that squadron of Lysian drones by rapid fire one shotting them. I need a normal tactical beam skill that duplicates the Reliant and the Enterprise cutting each other apart with phaser shots.
I still think the solution to FAW is a two part solution.
1: Make BO fire one powerful shot from all beams on a ship (give HYT and TS the same functionality)
2: Add FBP to all NPCs that have a state of immunity or insta-heal (See CSA nanite probes and cubes, ISA and KASA gateways and transformers)
That would create a single target alternative and make FAW spam a bad idea. On a personal note, I think the FBP idea would be hilarious.
Removing one-weapon buffs will remove any reason of mixing weapon types. BO/HY/TS will require massive nerfs in order to avoid deadly bursts from dedicated torp/beam boats, therefore adding single beam/torpedo to any ship will be obsolete.
Mixing weapons is fun part of this game, and it should be more viable. Adding torpedoboat spam to beamboat spam is not a way to fix it.
If anything, I would like to have an option to "link" specific abilities to specific weapons - for example linking THY to activate on selected torpedo launcher only, instead of the one fired first.
I dont understand why everything has to be at par with the optimal stuff where they are optimal at when both mentioned here are viable.
Right now, even using the current mechanics the problem is knowledge and the community that supports it. There is a massive community supporting beams, massive knowledge available for beams. But too few for cannons and Torps.
Also players have to stop being lazy and start discovering where cannons and torps are optimal at rather than force themselves competing with beams wherein beams are optimal at like ISA. Look at CCA for example where torps are superior than beams except one needs to discover, know and apply it. However, neither of the two DPS league records or support CCA.
So in a sense, the current problem is the community of their respective platforms. If you spend more time complaining, that means less time discovering and less time making your platforms popular.
Don't even get me started on Torpedoes - seriously; I LOATHE the way they've been treated in STO.
Torpdoes are supposed to be the big guns. They're supposed to be what ships use as their 'finishing move'. Not some pathetic 'fire beams all over the place' attack.
To epitomise the point, the most prominent use of BFAW we saw in Trek was Nemesis *shudder*, when the Enterprise-E used it to try and pinpoint the then-cloaked Scimitar; and guess what? Every time they did manage to pinpoint the Scimitar THEY FIRED TORPEDOES AT IT! And when they did finally locate the Scimitar (via Troi) THEY FIRED TORPEDOES AT IT!!
I mean, I'm not saying that they're completely useless, but they're a non-event compaired to the almighty ability to end all abilities known as BFAW.
Amen. I always keep a torpedo, partially out of canon, partially because I like having that punch. I even use a torpedo type console. Keep my Quantums strong.
Torpedoes are supposed to be the reason for your shields.
I think part of it is the way damage operates. Legitimately ship injuries should be a part of the metagame. A torpedo on an unshielded hull is supposed to be an automatic ship injury. A severe one too. The Reliant lost a nacelle, and a torpedo launcher. The Enterprise had a hole punched in its hull. Torpedoes are a starship's fatality and it's sad they aren't treated as such.
What about improving torpedoes instead? The game treats them like something special, whilst in reality they have the same mechanics from original STO but everything else around evolved...
- Shield resitance against torps based on remaing shield strenght
- Better mechanics for multiple launchers
- Variants of launchers (duas, wide, omega-like etc)
With that said, i dislike the current FAW implementation that promotes...well, boring game style.
I'm with you, I've been on board shield resistance drops for a while. There's no logical reason why a sliver, 2% of a shield should stop a torpedo from hitting at full force. I don't need to alter the item system so that we would get the canon ship launchers, but there is a precedent for a dual (Constitution refit launcher) and burst fire (the Galaxy's launcher) since we already have the wide angle launcher from the Sovereign.
The Akira should have a bank of torpedo launchers.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
Because as you're zipping around moving in and breaking away from the target you don't have to worry about getting within 5k to do your damage. Your turn radius can take you out of that range and you can still do damage.
You want to go fast in an escort. You need the defense. You usually slow down to turn tighter but you cant stay slow and you certainly can't sit there within 5k firing away like you're a cruiser. You move in on the target blasting away, break off and loop around again for another attack run. If drop off is greatly reduced you can start attack runs from 10k away and do almost full damage the entire run.
That's what's needed most.
Your explanation here is exactly why AOE attacks with Cannons seem subpar. Zipping in and out and breaking away from a target.
A. Because of the speed you are travelling takes you out of the firing arc
B. The NPC moves
C. You're shield facing collapses forcing you to rotate shield facing
D. You're speed ended up putting you to close to the target forcing you to have to manoeuvre and take a few secs to swing round for another pass.
Using AOE attacks with Cannon requires timing, skill and good piloting to get the maximum benefit out of them. The same with Torpedo's having to wait for the right opportunity to really get any use from them i.e a opening in the targets shields to smash into the hull.
Sure the drop range would benefit where you're dps stays constant from a longer range but its such a small bonus as what happens when the target moves past 45 degrees or B.C.D examples i gave, That bonus becomes useless as the target is once again out of the firing arc.
Please don't think i'm criticising you personally here i'm just trying to highlight that comparing Cannons to Beams is like comparing Apples to Oranges. Both are from the same food group or weapons type but are different from each other.
Oh I know what you mean, I just want to see cannons as powerful as we saw in DS9. The Defiant was able to swoop in, rip through shields and hull, and get away. Yes it's a hero ship which is why it survived like it did but the cannons were devastating. I always figured if they weren't devastating they would have stuck beam arrays on the ship instead. The Defiant didn't have time to spam that cannon, it had to swoop in like a WW2 fighter plane attacking a ground target and unleash hell before breaking off, and in that brief time those cannons did massive damage.
Cannons used to be that devastating and were the preferred DPS weapon but the game has now shifted to a single tactical ability to rule them all: BFAW. Have an AOE situation on your hands? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BFAW. Want to maximize your BFAW? Use upgraded antiproton beam arrays. It's all you ever see.
It should be this: Have an AOE situation on your hands and you have beams? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BO. You want to truly devastate your targets with the highest tactical skills and most damaging weapons in the game, at the expense of survivability? Use DHC and a torpedo.
I'll just re-iterate my position here then: I'll take the FAW Haters' Club nerf suggestions seriously when they start demanding Cryptic nerf the leech console as well.
I'm not opposed to nerfing the leech console either. It's part of the overcapping problem. Overcapping itself is the more pressing concern though.
Oh I know what you mean, I just want to see cannons as powerful as we saw in DS9. The Defiant was able to swoop in, rip through shields and hull, and get away. Yes it's a hero ship which is why it survived like it did but the cannons were devastating. I always figured if they weren't devastating they would have stuck beam arrays on the ship instead. The Defiant didn't have time to spam that cannon, it had to swoop in like a WW2 fighter plane attacking a ground target and unleash hell before breaking off, and in that brief time those cannons did massive damage.
Cannons used to be that devastating and were the preferred DPS weapon but the game has now shifted to a single tactical ability to rule them all: BFAW. Have an AOE situation on your hands? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BFAW. Want to maximize your BFAW? Use upgraded antiproton beam arrays. It's all you ever see.
It should be this: Have an AOE situation on your hands and you have beams? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BO. You want to truly devastate your targets with the highest tactical skills and most damaging weapons in the game, at the expense of survivability? Use DHC and a torpedo.
Agreed. But your remembrance of Escorts Online brings up a problem we have to be quick not to repeat.
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
We need a solution where it's a matter of playstyle and proper execution and equipment instead of a matter of one weapon and set of buffs being outright superior.
That said the hit and run playstyle definitely doesn't seem worth it anymore. Not when freaking Tholian Recluses have 600K HP on Advanced. A firebombing run on a single starship, and an escort is expected to do 600K+ damage, and I'm not even talking about shields. That's outrageous. Even their frigates are packing something like 127k HP. It's silly.
A Defiant class can tear apart another raider or escort level ship, Sisko, Dax and the family used to eat Jem'Hadar Attack ships for breakfast. Martok and the Klingons used to merk them in BoPs too.
On the subject of Beam Overload how do you guys think it should function? I mean I would think it should have if not the power to instantly knock out a shield, it should at least have severe shield penetration and shield damage.
I'll just re-iterate my position here then: I'll take the FAW Haters' Club nerf suggestions seriously when they start demanding Cryptic nerf the leech console as well.
I'm not opposed to nerfing the leech console either. It's part of the overcapping problem. Overcapping itself is the more pressing concern though.[/quote]
Overcapping is an interesting thing. Part of the selling point of cruisers is their "Powerful Warp cores that provide massive amounts of power to ship subsystems", now in game terms that means lots of space for engineering powers that boost power levels, but legitimately a cruiser is designed to be able to overcap and run high power levels across the board as part of its playstyle by design. Other ships have to make compromises because they specialize in powerful weaponry or science, but the cruisers are supposed to be the ships that are able to excel through raw power. High power shields, high power weapons, high power engines. And Canonically of course Cruiser are supposed to be able to do it all, hang in a firefight, hit hard, go fast, go far, and do the in depth science job once it gets where it's going. Ship of the Line. To me overcapping and high power levels seem natural in that brand of ship.
I certainly can't afford the leech, and I want one for my electroplasma deprived sci warbird, but I'm not sure if nerfing overcapping is the answer.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
We need a solution where it's a matter of playstyle and proper execution and equipment instead of a matter of one weapon and set of buffs being outright superior.
That's all in public perception though. I main an escort now, I have more fun with it than I did with the cruisers, and the 16k she's pulling means I'm also being credit to team. And she can still do better than that considering she's running all Mk XII gear.
Meanwhile, I dusted off my badly undergeared Negh'tev last night, replaced the DHCs with DCs, and had a ball running Tau Dewa and Red Alerts. She's got potential too, granted when I can eventually slap on some fleet and rep gear.
There's always going to be the chuckleheads decrying what's optimal and what's not optimal. So it goes in any MMO. Ignore the haters. Take time to figure out how to best fly your ship with the playstyle you want and go for it. (Start with the /r/stobuilds wiki.) You too can break 10k as well and never have to worry.
A Defiant class can tear apart another raider or escort level ship, Sisko, Dax and the family used to eat Jem'Hadar Attack ships for breakfast. Martok and the Klingons used to merk them in BoPs too.
Alas, Sisko and Martok were playing in the inaccessible difficulty level of 'Plot'.
On the subject of Beam Overload how do you guys think it should function? I mean I would think it should have if not the power to instantly knock out a shield, it should at least have severe shield penetration and shield damage.
Make BO the single-target equivalent of FAW would be a good start. Perhaps even make it a bit stronger so that its more of a difficult choice between the two.
Overcapping is an interesting thing. Part of the selling point of cruisers is their "Powerful Warp cores that provide massive amounts of power to ship subsystems", now in game terms that means lots of space for engineering powers that boost power levels, but legitimately a cruiser is designed to be able to overcap and run high power levels across the board as part of its playstyle by design. Other ships have to make compromises because they specialize in powerful weaponry or science, but the cruisers are supposed to be the ships that are able to excel through raw power. High power shields, high power weapons, high power engines. And Canonically of course Cruiser are supposed to be able to do it all, hang in a firefight, hit hard, go fast, go far, and do the in depth science job once it gets where it's going. Ship of the Line. To me overcapping and high power levels seem natural in that brand of ship.
My T6 HEC with the +15 weapon power does it better than a cruiser that maxes out at +5/+10. And even with bottoming shields and engines to keep my weapons and aux power as high as possible, I'm still capable of keeping everything over 75 thanks to the leech. (And EPS Manifold.) I mean, seriously, up to 24 power and maybe more for each subsystem? That's nearly a 50% increase in total power from just one console.
But you'll never hear any of the FAW haters writing entire treatises about how the leech console is OP, because 'balance' is just the cudgel they beat stuff they don't like with. Which is my entire point.
Agreed. But your remembrance of Escorts Online brings up a problem we have to be quick not to repeat.
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
Too late, they already did it. The game is all about AP beam arrays and BFAW.
If they remove cannon drop off it can a long way toward bringing back parity and choice of weapon.
I have a feeling they'll be addressing cannons next season. I think there will be new Defiant-type escorts with cannons in the c-store. DS9 and the Dominion War was all about the Defiant and it's quad cannons.
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
We need a solution where it's a matter of playstyle and proper execution and equipment instead of a matter of one weapon and set of buffs being outright superior.
That's all in public perception though. I main an escort now, I have more fun with it than I did with the cruisers, and the 16k she's pulling means I'm also being credit to team. And she can still do better than that considering she's running all Mk XII gear.
Meanwhile, I dusted off my badly undergeared Negh'tev last night, replaced the DHCs with DCs, and had a ball running Tau Dewa and Red Alerts. She's got potential too, granted when I can eventually slap on some fleet and rep gear.
There's always going to be the chuckleheads decrying what's optimal and what's not optimal. So it goes in any MMO. Ignore the haters. Take time to figure out how to best fly your ship with the playstyle you want and go for it. (Start with the /r/stobuilds wiki.) You too can break 10k as well and never have to worry.
I'm fine in that regard, 10K I can do. It's the 30K and 50K monsters that that the post Crisis -Delta Rising game seems to built around that I can't mess with. It's weird I was reading the wiki and the forums long before I actually started playing.
My Delta Recruit flies a Vor'cha. I'm making it work, does that make me weird?
But yes it is mostly public perception from a what's popular angle. But that doesn't prevent new guys from having to deal with the smart TRIBBLE remarks from the guys who thought flying suboptimal this or that in elite made you garbage. It's perception, but it also has been a culture. I've had to talk some people down after those experiences so I'm a little sensitive to that type of behavior. Comes with the territory, you're right.
A Defiant class can tear apart another raider or escort level ship, Sisko, Dax and the family used to eat Jem'Hadar Attack ships for breakfast. Martok and the Klingons used to merk them in BoPs too.
Alas, Sisko and Martok were playing in the inaccessible difficulty level of 'Plot'.
You say that, but their plot is supposed to be the basis of our canon and the rules and situations governing the game universe. In any event it should have bearing.
On the subject of Beam Overload how do you guys think it should function? I mean I would think it should have if not the power to instantly knock out a shield, it should at least have severe shield penetration and shield damage.
Make BO the single-target equivalent of FAW would be a good start. Perhaps even make it a bit stronger so that its more of a difficult choice between the two.
Like I said I'd love that. A single target rapid fire phaser barrage would make my day...if it was available at the same stations as FAW.
Overcapping is an interesting thing. Part of the selling point of cruisers is their "Powerful Warp cores that provide massive amounts of power to ship subsystems", now in game terms that means lots of space for engineering powers that boost power levels, but legitimately a cruiser is designed to be able to overcap and run high power levels across the board as part of its playstyle by design. Other ships have to make compromises because they specialize in powerful weaponry or science, but the cruisers are supposed to be the ships that are able to excel through raw power. High power shields, high power weapons, high power engines. And Canonically of course Cruiser are supposed to be able to do it all, hang in a firefight, hit hard, go fast, go far, and do the in depth science job once it gets where it's going. Ship of the Line. To me overcapping and high power levels seem natural in that brand of ship.
My T6 HEC with the +15 weapon power does it better than a cruiser that maxes out at +5/+10. And even with bottoming shields and engines to keep my weapons and aux power as high as possible, I'm still capable of keeping everything over 75 thanks to the leech. (And EPS Manifold.) I mean, seriously, up to 24 power and maybe more for each subsystem? That's nearly a 50% increase in total power from just one console.
But you'll never hear any of the FAW haters writing entire treatises about how the leech console is OP, because 'balance' is just the cudgel they beat stuff they don't like with. Which is my entire point.
I see your point in that vein one console certainly does nullify the natural advantage that a cruiser is supposed to have.
Agreed. But your remembrance of Escorts Online brings up a problem we have to be quick not to repeat.
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
Too late, they already did it. The game is all about AP beam arrays and BFAW.
If they remove cannon drop off it can a long way toward bringing back parity and choice of weapon.
I have a feeling they'll be addressing cannons next season. I think there will be new Defiant-type escorts with cannons in the c-store. DS9 and the Dominion War was all about the Defiant and it's quad cannons.
Yeah the cannon drop off doesn't really make sense to me. The narrow firing arc is more than a sufficient penalty for the added power.
I couldn't think of putting anything besides phasers on my Fed main's cruiser, or disruptor cannons on my Klingon's Bird. My Romulan used the Romulan Plasma on her Ha'nom, but Protonic and Thoron Polaron on her Dyson's.
That said, this game as almost ALWAYS been about AP weapons on some level.
Do they need new cannons? You can upgrade the Quad Cannons from the Sao Paolo to Mk XIV right? Do they need new ones?
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
The cannon drop off probably has a simple reason - it means you want to be close to your enemy. Which incidentally is hard if you have a small firing arc. In fact, the drop-off might be something that makes the small firing arc particularly relevant.
I don't think that needs a change. It achieves exactly the kind of gameplay you want for Defiant-Copy-Escorts.
If BFAW is too powerful, nerf it, or, since everyone is using it already and Elite difficulty is kinda build around people optimizing to that level, buff CRF and CSV.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
If you actually look at what cannons can do in a well piloted attack run you'll see they are still deadly to most targets.
The problem is that BFAW has so many benefits and no disadvantages that it can be equally as effective whilst requiring considerably less piloting and build skill for the captain of that ship.
Add in the fact that BFAW is as effective against single and multiple targets and it's no wonder cannon users feel left behind, their skills as a pilot mean nothing when any Kirk wannabe can slap a load of beams on and circle the targets being as effective as the cannon guys well planned attack.
Cannon users currently feel how the majority of torp users have felt since day one.
I think piloting is a concern. The issue with buffing cannons is that people can fire them while stationary.
First step is to make cannon damage scale with throttle and throttle duration, like an innate Pedal to the Metal, only with inverse scaling below 30% throttle or slowing down. You need to be rocking some turnrate. Best bonus for staying on full throttle and not stopping. Maybe an additional bonus for turning while firing.
Then you buff canons based on the expected piloting ability of players after tests.
At this point, turnrate becomes a DPS stat.
Beams should be for minimal maneuverability. Cannons should scale with maneuverability to be effective. No reverse. No caution. No "I'm going to back up and retarget". Full throttle dancing around targets.
If you actually look at what cannons can do in a well piloted attack run you'll see they are still deadly to most targets.
The problem is that BFAW has so many benefits and no disadvantages that it can be equally as effective whilst requiring considerably less piloting and build skill for the captain of that ship.
Add in the fact that BFAW is as effective against single and multiple targets and it's no wonder cannon users feel left behind, their skills as a pilot mean nothing when any Kirk wannabe can slap a load of beams on and circle the targets being as effective as the cannon guys well planned attack.
Cannon users currently feel how the majority of torp users have felt since day one.
No ones arguing that they arent still deadly. The problem is that when the average player (not including those who are canon nuts) is given the option of cannons or beams, even on a ship that traditionally was meant to run cannons. The player will choose beams. Because the beam set up in game is currently the more optimal choice for DPS.
People will defend beams til their dying breath though because its the current setup they use or because they down right are in denial about why everyone and their grandma is going beams over cannons.
My personal opinion is that an AoE ability should never be the go to DPS ability. Every other MMO Ive played has nerfed AoEs when they turned out to be the favored DPS option. But Cryptic has taken the complete opposite position on this and decided that because a light show of 30+ beams going off in every direction from a handful of ships looks cool that its acceptable to be the top choice.
If I was to make changes to the way Tactical Abilities like C:RF, C:SV, BO and BFAW worked. Id turn down BFAWs DPS. Not so much that it was ineffective but that it doesnt dominate. BO should be a gutt punch and currently it doesnt behave that way. As someone else pointed out, it should punch through the shields maybe even knocking that facing out. Id like to see abilities like a Beam Barrage for Beams added to properly take BOs place as a single target ability. And a cannon version of BO introduced.
Maybe what would improve things is to have a decent (blue quality, say) set of buffs that Captains get innately with no DOffs slotted.
Slotting DOffs overrides and replaces the buffs. Each DOff reduces the base buff magnitude by 1/5th. Having 6 DOffs (or more in the future) is a flat out power increase.
<snip>My personal opinion is that an AoE ability should never be the go to DPS ability. Every other MMO Ive played has nerfed AoEs when they turned out to be the favored DPS option. But Cryptic has taken the complete opposite position on this and decided that because a light show of 30+ beams going off in every direction from a handful of ships looks cool that its acceptable to be the top choice.<snip>
The biggest issue that has is simple: STO has multiple targets, with bloated hitpoints.
B:FAW hits two targets per tick of damage compared to B:O and C:RF hitting only one, so unless B:O and C:RF can do the same damage to a single target that B:FAW does to two or more, B:FAW will always parse higher. Maybe measuring cannon DPS in the same target-rich environment you measure B:FAW DPS in is the problem, maybe we need more situations with exceedingly powerful single targets (that don't auto-cloak when you get close, artificially enforcing cannon dropoff), maybe... something? The high volume of spam in STO makes this issue worse; many NPCs that would be prime targets for single-target spike will spawn a number of pets and targetable ordinance that can destroy, debuff, or disable you in the middle of a good cannon barrage (yeah, Heralds are a prime example of this one).
In addition, the relative value of sustained DPS over spike has been inflated right along with the NPC hitpoints in the aftermath of Delta Rising. This is a big part of why a weapon class with the second-lowest base DPS still manages to be the weapon of choice for many players... you can keep enemies in-arc, while at the same time cycling out of their firing arcs and shifting position away from their allies. With beams it isn't necessary to keep your own forward shield facing on target, instead allowing you to switch out port/starboard shields while staying on the same facing of your target, and thereby maintain pressure from one of your two optimal firing arcs. In some ways I agree with the comments about the Defiant making devastating cannon passes... and if NPC hitpoints weren't so inflated a properly buffed C:RF pass would still be able to wipe out a good sized target over its duration.
Theoretically, the next lock box could have a new Tac ability ("Cannon: Point Defense" or somesuch) that works just like B:FAW mechanically but applies to cannons instead. Using a Starship Trait (Versatile Tactical Systems) that allows cannons to benefit from beam attack modifiers and beams to benefit from cannon attack modifiers would also be possible, and could be included in the next cross-faction 3-pack, lock box, lobi, or promo ship(s)... pretty much any source that requires player investment. After all of the complaints on the topic, this seems like something that could be monetized, doesn't it?
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
Also, yeah, I do well with cannons, I kill NPCs just fine and I even kill people in PvP just fine, but over the summer I got a flat tire. I had to drive 1 mile to the nearest gas station because of unsafe roadside conditions. Does that mean my tires were working fine because I was able to drive? Nope, and the same goes for cannons and torpedoes for that matter. They're broken and need to be fixed.
Why do they need fixing when each weapons platforms has its own niche?
Do you even know that certain weapon platforms are more powerful than beams at certain particular STF ?
Why does it need fixing when Beams are far weaker in certain STFs? Why does other weapons platforms need to be better in beams in STFs like ISA where beams are suppose to be better?
No ones arguing that they arent still deadly. The problem is that when the average player (not including those who are canon nuts) is given the option of cannons or beams, even on a ship that traditionally was meant to run cannons. The player will choose beams. Because the beam set up in game is currently the more optimal choice for DPS.
The problem with basing this as an average player is this, piloting improvement/build improvement will help them more than weapons platform.
The other issue is marketing. How many videos guides of cannons/beams/torps from experts? How community supports each weapons platform and its strengths?
People will defend beams til their dying breath though because its the current setup they use or because they down right are in denial about why everyone and their grandma is going beams over cannons.
Lack of knowledge or was given the incorrect information. If a player ask me advice for ease of use, I would recommend beams. If a player asks me for advice for which weapons platforms is better, I have no definite say what weapons platform.
If a player asks me what is best for ISA DPS, I would say Beams. If a player asks me whats best for CCA DPS, it aint beams at all.
I never care about any of the min-max TRIBBLE, a game is meant to be fun, so I think if you want to use cannons, go for it, if you want to use beams in a science vessel or even an escort, I say go for it.
If a player asks me what is best for ISA DPS, I would say Beams. If a player asks me whats best for CCA DPS, it aint beams at all.
I've seen AP beam boats take the entity down faster than any torp boat probably could. (haven't actually seen a torp boat in CCA yet). I mean crazy fast, like it's already down to 33% before the first burst is even finished. A few people are firing torpedoes while it happens but the big damage is being done by beams.
To the Crystalline Entity.
Get an instance without any AP beam boats and watch how much longer it takes. Believe me I've been running CCA nonstop for over two weeks. AP beam boats = quick win, no AP beam boats = can't even kill it within 4 minutes.
BFAW is One Skill To Rule Them All and needs to be changed a bit. I mean when the AOE skill is better vs single targets than the single target skill there's a problem. Imagine if CSV was better vs single targets than CRF? Or if this situation existed in any other MMO? As a rule AOE is never the preferred skill vs single targets.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
I've seen AP beam boats take the entity down faster than any torp boat probably could. (haven't actually seen a torp boat in CCA yet). I mean crazy fast, like it's already down to 33% before the first burst is even finished. A few people are firing torpedoes while it happens but the big damage is being done by beams.
To the Crystalline Entity.
Get an instance without any AP beam boats and watch how much longer it takes. Believe me I've been running CCA nonstop for over two weeks. AP beam boats = quick win, no AP beam boats = can't even kill it within 4 minutes.
That is an apple to oranges comparison. Comparing bad players using other weapons platforms to competent players using beams isnt a good way to know if the problem is the platform.
the best weapons for CCA has been not beams for quite a long time.
Thats why whenever I see complaints/nerf threads like this, it makes me wonder those complaining have no idea what they are talking about.
BFAW is One Skill To Rule Them All and needs to be changed a bit. I mean when the AOE skill is better vs single targets than the single target skill there's a problem. Imagine if CSV was better vs single targets than CRF? Or if this situation existed in any other MMO? As a rule AOE is never the preferred skill vs single targets.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
If your environment is ISA or similar to ISA, sure yes. But why limit the strength of a weapons platforms based on ISA STFs or similar mission that is meant to be the strength of beams?
ISA is meant for normal skilled players, as proven by the last nerf, ease of use. Mobs dont fire as hard as certain elites, which makes you BFAW everything in the middle which you just cant do in other missions or other niches.
If you been playing other missions/more difficult missions/niche and have no hard on hating Beam FAW, you should see the strength of other weapons platforms and weaknesses of beams. But all these beam strengths are based on an environment that is similar to ISA or environments where beams are meant to dominate. So if one weapons platform dominates for a certain niche, the others should get a buff and that particular weapons platforms should get a nerf. Shouldnt this apply to torps and cannons as well in their particular niches?
Also, yeah, I do well with cannons, I kill NPCs just fine and I even kill people in PvP just fine, but over the summer I got a flat tire. I had to drive 1 mile to the nearest gas station because of unsafe roadside conditions. Does that mean my tires were working fine because I was able to drive? Nope, and the same goes for cannons and torpedoes for that matter. They're broken and need to be fixed.
Why do they need fixing when each weapons platforms has its own niche?
Do you even know that certain weapon platforms are more powerful than beams at certain particular STF ?
Why does it need fixing when Beams are far weaker in certain STFs? Why does other weapons platforms need to be better in beams in STFs like ISA where beams are suppose to be better?
OMG DUDE! How many times does it have to be said. CSV does not give the innate CrtD from DHCs. CRF has a bug too but I don't remember what it is right now since I just woke up. Those are bugs..they need to be fixed..that means they're broken. It has nothing to do with "certain STFs," "niche" builds, or "player skill." Yes people can sill kill with them but, they're broken and need to be fixed.
As long as BFAW does whatever BO, CRF, and CSV does only better to the point as to make the other 3 a joke at the expense of those foolish enough to use them, the other 3 have no niche to speak of at all. The just plain simple fact is it's one BFAW to rule them all. In other words it's broken
If your environment is ISA or similar to ISA, sure yes. But why limit the strength of a weapons platforms based on ISA STFs or similar mission that is meant to be the strength of beams?
ISA is meant for normal skilled players, as proven by the last nerf, ease of use. Mobs dont fire as hard as certain elites, which makes you BFAW everything in the middle which you just cant do in other missions or other niches.
If you been playing other missions/more difficult missions/niche and have no hard on hating Beam FAW, you should see the strength of other weapons platforms and weaknesses of beams. But all these beam strengths are based on an environment that is similar to ISA or environments where beams are meant to dominate. So if one weapons platform dominates for a certain niche, the others should get a buff and that particular weapons platforms should get a nerf. Shouldnt this apply to torps and cannons as well in their particular niches?
I haven't played ISA in, oh, maybe 9 months. I have no need of any more omega marks or implants. Right now it's purely CCA, and before that it was some brief daily summer event and that's it. I quit not long after DR because of the issues it introduced. I'm back now (for how long?) and it's very easy to see the disparity. Beams needed a boost for a long time but this is ridiculous.
You keep talking about environments where beams are meant to dominate. They don't really exist. It might be argued that missions or STFs with a lot of fighters or targetable torpedoes are meant for BFAW spam but that's it.
There are no environments where cannons are meant to dominate, but I can tell you this: CCA is meant for torpedoes to dominate and they don't. Beams do. I did manage to get 1st place last week in a torpedo boat with relevant tactical consoles but usually I can't get past 3rd place because beam boats are doing insane damage. I was "lucky" to get an instance with everyone's alts I guess and overall DPS was very low.
BFAW does the jobs of BO, CRF and CSV better than they do and that needs to be changed. The fact that UR/epic mk XIV AP beams with mk XIV consoles are doing insane damage even without BFAW just makes it worse. I mean they do crazy damage even to the crystalline entity which has very high energy resistance.
And here's a warning: Too many buffs to player skills without relevant nerfs to skills that need it leads to more power creep. If we only buff BO, CRF and CSV and leave BFAW alone we will see more power creep than this game needs. It already has too much. Luckily this isn't a PvP game or the effects would be devastating.
The cannon drop off probably has a simple reason - it means you want to be close to your enemy. Which incidentally is hard if you have a small firing arc. In fact, the drop-off might be something that makes the small firing arc particularly relevant.
I don't think that needs a change. It achieves exactly the kind of gameplay you want for Defiant-Copy-Escorts.
If BFAW is too powerful, nerf it, or, since everyone is using it already and Elite difficulty is kinda build around people optimizing to that level, buff CRF and CSV.
Nerfing FAW isn't the solution though, that destroys the variety, especially among those who only fly the strongest version of anything. They will migrate.
So yes buff CRF and CSV. The next question though is to what end? Frankly I think the real problem is NPC health.
I say that cannon drop off makes no sense. These weapons are supposed to have range of a light second, 300K Km. The issue should be accuracy drops off at range, no damage. Which means that for effectively stationary objects like Borg hubs, and Crystalline Entities, and Unimatrix Command ships, or even Borg Cubes. There shouldn't be any accuracy or damage dropoff at range. It should purely be an accuracy issue.
I think piloting is a concern. The issue with buffing cannons is that people can fire them while stationary.
First step is to make cannon damage scale with throttle and throttle duration, like an innate Pedal to the Metal, only with inverse scaling below 30% throttle or slowing down. You need to be rocking some turnrate. Best bonus for staying on full throttle and not stopping. Maybe an additional bonus for turning while firing.
Then you buff canons based on the expected piloting ability of players after tests.
At this point, turnrate becomes a DPS stat.
Beams should be for minimal maneuverability. Cannons should scale with maneuverability to be effective. No reverse. No caution. No "I'm going to back up and retarget". Full throttle dancing around targets.
The damage boost you're proposing would have to be worth it though. You should be able to obliterate a frigate in one or two passes, and do serious damage to a cruiser. I'm talking about punching through their shields AND doing significant hull damage in one pass. Especially on enemies that heal. That's what it will take to basically make it worth people time to actually hit and run like the playstyle would dictate, drive bys versus park and shoot. Where the time you're doing damage with your nose on target is worth the time once you passed where you have to set up your next run.
<snip>My personal opinion is that an AoE ability should never be the go to DPS ability. Every other MMO Ive played has nerfed AoEs when they turned out to be the favored DPS option. But Cryptic has taken the complete opposite position on this and decided that because a light show of 30+ beams going off in every direction from a handful of ships looks cool that its acceptable to be the top choice.<snip>
The biggest issue that has is simple: STO has multiple targets, with bloated hitpoints.
B:FAW hits two targets per tick of damage compared to B:O and C:RF hitting only one, so unless B:O and C:RF can do the same damage to a single target that B:FAW does to two or more, B:FAW will always parse higher. Maybe measuring cannon DPS in the same target-rich environment you measure B:FAW DPS in is the problem, maybe we need more situations with exceedingly powerful single targets (that don't auto-cloak when you get close, artificially enforcing cannon dropoff), maybe... something? The high volume of spam in STO makes this issue worse; many NPCs that would be prime targets for single-target spike will spawn a numer of pets and targetable ordinance that can destroy, debuff, or disable you in the middle of a good cannon barrage (yeah, Heralds are a prime example of this one).
In addition, the relative value of sustained DPS over spike has been inflated right along with the NPC hitpoints in the aftermath of Delta Rising. This is a big part of why a weapon class with the second-lowest base DPS still manages to be the weapon of choice for many players... you can keep enemies in-arc, while at the same time cycling out of their firing arcs and shifting position away from their allies. With beams it isn't necessary to keep your own forward shield facing on target, instead allowing you to switch out port/starboard shields while staying on the same facing of your target, and thereby maintain pressure from one of your two optimal firing arcs. In some ways I agree with the comments about the Defiant making devastating cannon passes... and if NPC hitpoints weren't so inflated a properly buffed C:RF pass would still be able to wipe out a good sized target over its duration.
Theoretically, the next lock box could have a new Tac ability ("Cannon: Point Defense" or somesuch) that works just like B:FAW mechanically but applies to cannons instead. Using a Starship Trait (Versatile Tactical Systems) that allows cannons to benefit from beam attack modifiers and beams to benefit from cannon attack modifiers would also be possible, and could be included in the next cross-faction 3-pack, lock box, lobi, or promo ship(s)... pretty much any source that requires player investment. After all of the complaints on the topic, this seems like something that could be monetized, doesn't it?
Yes, bloated hitpoints are the problem. They're a HUGE problem. Not even logically done. Why does a Tholian Recluse need 600K+ hit points. It's not that big and its not that diesel. That's half a Unimatrix Command Ship, a Tholian Recluse is nowhere NEAR that big. I appreciate that larger hitpoints have made pressure damage relevant, but it's now WAY too much.
Pet spam is also an issue. And even the pets are too tough. And when you have a carrier spitting out frigates that are also tough and have hard shields. It becomes a hassle.
I wouldn't mind the Canon: Point Defense at all, though they probably won't since they have a pay for weapon with that ability integrated. But there also needs to be a single target BFAW that gives that high DPS output for beams. I say do both myself.
But dialing back the health would definitely ease the need for FAW's power.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
I could agree with that if we got a single target skill that was as functional. Beam Overload ain't it. Notice how there's no cannon one shot ability that delivers a single stroke of massive damage. I think the way the devs want it is rapid fire is superior. Even the Phaser Lance which is supposed to be the god mode Beam Overload is garbage.
But even then you're going to have the current situation where the AoE is necessary for the high health spam that requires that level of damage.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
Comments
This has something to do more with your mentality and those who think like you.
If you play PvE ISA most of the time, and want #1 DPS, then you need FAW. The problem is that. Why do one limits his/herself to ISA and why is everyone even aiming for #1 DPS at ISA?
Cannons are viable weapons that can hit 100k+ DPS in ISA but wouldnt be reaching the optimal potential of beams.
So the question would be why would other platform users want competing the #1 DPS of BFAW at a mission optimzed for Beam FAW?
Why cant others just go find their own STF or the own niche meant for their platforms? Rather than actually making other platforms as optimal as beams in an STF/niche meant for beams.
I always thought of torps as a 'battle-ender' weapon. At least that's how powerful crew members seemed to treat them in the show... "Can't fire a torp, enemy too close, we'd blow ourselves up!" As it is now, torps are mostly there to not use energy so your beam arrays have more juice.
You are right Cannons will never compare to Beams because as i've mentioned previously they require a different style of play to Beams.
Cannons you have limited arcs, which limits not only you but against a moving target as well the time spent shooting at it because with Cannons you are always having to manoeuvre to stay in arc. Hence even without the pointed out flaws of Cannons you are going to find it harder to do DPS than with Beams.
Cannons and Beams at base rate dps no aoe abilities used. Beams will always come out the winner because as i've mentioned before
1. Beams have a 250 degree firing arc so more time within firing coverage to pour on the heat.
2. Beams can be equipped both fore and aft so facing any target from a broadside you have the luxury of firing however many Beams you've equipped. Cannons can only be equipped fore so a huge advantage here for Beams technically power issues a side you can equip twice the amount of Beams compared to Cannons on a ship
3. Piloting and positioning is paramount when using Cannons and timing of alpha strikes.
I'll admit there are issues with Cannons but you cannot really compare them to Beams and ask for a Beam nerf as although they are both energy weapon types they are designed to work with different play styles. Its like saying Torpedo's are superior to Mines, so Torpedo's should be nerfed, yes both do Kinetic damage but both require a different style of piloting to use them.
So enough with the BFAW nerf requests. The biggest issue here with Cannons is piloting and firing Arc's
For cannons I want their drop off greatly reduced, so escorts don't have to worry about staying within 5km (or whatever the range is) while also remaining mobile because they can't sit in place like a cruiser. They may also need lowered power drain and a slight damage increase. They (DHCs) should be HARD hitting for their very narrow arc.
Piloting is the key.
I just don't see how being able to sit 9.9km away from a target and not lose dps drop off is going to fix the most glaring and obvious flaws in all the arguments being made with Cannons Vs Beams and thats the FIRING ARC.
Sorry but i just can't see anything past the argument other than its hard to dps with Cannons, Beams have all the goodies so lets lash out and punish them because of envy.
You want to go fast in an escort. You need the defense. You usually slow down to turn tighter but you cant stay slow and you certainly can't sit there within 5k firing away like you're a cruiser. You move in on the target blasting away, break off and loop around again for another attack run. If drop off is greatly reduced you can start attack runs from 10k away and do almost full damage the entire run.
That's what's needed most.
Your explanation here is exactly why AOE attacks with Cannons seem subpar. Zipping in and out and breaking away from a target.
A. Because of the speed you are travelling takes you out of the firing arc
B. The NPC moves
C. You're shield facing collapses forcing you to rotate shield facing
D. You're speed ended up putting you to close to the target forcing you to have to manoeuvre and take a few secs to swing round for another pass.
Using AOE attacks with Cannon requires timing, skill and good piloting to get the maximum benefit out of them. The same with Torpedo's having to wait for the right opportunity to really get any use from them i.e a opening in the targets shields to smash into the hull.
Sure the drop range would benefit where you're dps stays constant from a longer range but its such a small bonus as what happens when the target moves past 45 degrees or B.C.D examples i gave, That bonus becomes useless as the target is once again out of the firing arc.
Please don't think i'm criticising you personally here i'm just trying to highlight that comparing Cannons to Beams is like comparing Apples to Oranges. Both are from the same food group or weapons type but are different from each other.
I'll just re-iterate my position here then: I'll take the FAW Haters' Club nerf suggestions seriously when they start demanding Cryptic nerf the leech console as well.
There's also the CrtD bug with CSV. On paper CSV should outperform FAW in a gravity well situation but in practice it does not. This is because beams get more out of overcapping and CSV is bugged. This needs to be fixed.
Also, yeah, I do well with cannons, I kill NPCs just fine and I even kill people in PvP just fine, but over the summer I got a flat tire. I had to drive 1 mile to the nearest gas station because of unsafe roadside conditions. Does that mean my tires were working fine because I was able to drive? Nope, and the same goes for cannons and torpedoes for that matter. They're broken and need to be fixed.
I fly a T5U Assault Cruiser Refit on my main, with two DBBs up front, a BA, two BAs and an Omni in the back with the KCB. I want full coverage, but FAW is the blessing and the curse. I WANT a rapid fire phaser ability. Beam Overload is not universally useful. If you're not specifically specced for crit severity it's weak. I'd love to have surgical strikes, but since it's not for non-intel ships, which is ludicrous to me since it's nakedly a tactical skill. This is partially why customizing existing ships could've been a gold mine.
I like FAW. It's great for clearing spam and reminds me of the scene in Conundrum where the E-D just disrespected that squadron of Lysian drones by rapid fire one shotting them. I need a normal tactical beam skill that duplicates the Reliant and the Enterprise cutting each other apart with phaser shots.
1. would be fun. But the power drain have mercy.
I don't know about that FBP though.
Amen. I always keep a torpedo, partially out of canon, partially because I like having that punch. I even use a torpedo type console. Keep my Quantums strong.
Torpedoes are supposed to be the reason for your shields.
I think part of it is the way damage operates. Legitimately ship injuries should be a part of the metagame. A torpedo on an unshielded hull is supposed to be an automatic ship injury. A severe one too. The Reliant lost a nacelle, and a torpedo launcher. The Enterprise had a hole punched in its hull. Torpedoes are a starship's fatality and it's sad they aren't treated as such.
I'm with you, I've been on board shield resistance drops for a while. There's no logical reason why a sliver, 2% of a shield should stop a torpedo from hitting at full force. I don't need to alter the item system so that we would get the canon ship launchers, but there is a precedent for a dual (Constitution refit launcher) and burst fire (the Galaxy's launcher) since we already have the wide angle launcher from the Sovereign.
The Akira should have a bank of torpedo launchers.
Oh I know what you mean, I just want to see cannons as powerful as we saw in DS9. The Defiant was able to swoop in, rip through shields and hull, and get away. Yes it's a hero ship which is why it survived like it did but the cannons were devastating. I always figured if they weren't devastating they would have stuck beam arrays on the ship instead. The Defiant didn't have time to spam that cannon, it had to swoop in like a WW2 fighter plane attacking a ground target and unleash hell before breaking off, and in that brief time those cannons did massive damage.
Cannons used to be that devastating and were the preferred DPS weapon but the game has now shifted to a single tactical ability to rule them all: BFAW. Have an AOE situation on your hands? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BFAW. Want to maximize your BFAW? Use upgraded antiproton beam arrays. It's all you ever see.
It should be this: Have an AOE situation on your hands and you have beams? Use BFAW. Have a single target? Use BO. You want to truly devastate your targets with the highest tactical skills and most damaging weapons in the game, at the expense of survivability? Use DHC and a torpedo.
I'm not opposed to nerfing the leech console either. It's part of the overcapping problem. Overcapping itself is the more pressing concern though.
When the cannons and escorts ruled the Cruiser were basically seen as being on the trash heap.
We can't consign whole classes to being "useless" or "suboptimal".
We need a solution where it's a matter of playstyle and proper execution and equipment instead of a matter of one weapon and set of buffs being outright superior.
That said the hit and run playstyle definitely doesn't seem worth it anymore. Not when freaking Tholian Recluses have 600K HP on Advanced. A firebombing run on a single starship, and an escort is expected to do 600K+ damage, and I'm not even talking about shields. That's outrageous. Even their frigates are packing something like 127k HP. It's silly.
A Defiant class can tear apart another raider or escort level ship, Sisko, Dax and the family used to eat Jem'Hadar Attack ships for breakfast. Martok and the Klingons used to merk them in BoPs too.
On the subject of Beam Overload how do you guys think it should function? I mean I would think it should have if not the power to instantly knock out a shield, it should at least have severe shield penetration and shield damage.
I'm not opposed to nerfing the leech console either. It's part of the overcapping problem. Overcapping itself is the more pressing concern though.[/quote]
Overcapping is an interesting thing. Part of the selling point of cruisers is their "Powerful Warp cores that provide massive amounts of power to ship subsystems", now in game terms that means lots of space for engineering powers that boost power levels, but legitimately a cruiser is designed to be able to overcap and run high power levels across the board as part of its playstyle by design. Other ships have to make compromises because they specialize in powerful weaponry or science, but the cruisers are supposed to be the ships that are able to excel through raw power. High power shields, high power weapons, high power engines. And Canonically of course Cruiser are supposed to be able to do it all, hang in a firefight, hit hard, go fast, go far, and do the in depth science job once it gets where it's going. Ship of the Line. To me overcapping and high power levels seem natural in that brand of ship.
I certainly can't afford the leech, and I want one for my electroplasma deprived sci warbird, but I'm not sure if nerfing overcapping is the answer.
That's all in public perception though. I main an escort now, I have more fun with it than I did with the cruisers, and the 16k she's pulling means I'm also being credit to team. And she can still do better than that considering she's running all Mk XII gear.
Meanwhile, I dusted off my badly undergeared Negh'tev last night, replaced the DHCs with DCs, and had a ball running Tau Dewa and Red Alerts. She's got potential too, granted when I can eventually slap on some fleet and rep gear.
There's always going to be the chuckleheads decrying what's optimal and what's not optimal. So it goes in any MMO. Ignore the haters. Take time to figure out how to best fly your ship with the playstyle you want and go for it. (Start with the /r/stobuilds wiki.) You too can break 10k as well and never have to worry.
Alas, Sisko and Martok were playing in the inaccessible difficulty level of 'Plot'.
Make BO the single-target equivalent of FAW would be a good start. Perhaps even make it a bit stronger so that its more of a difficult choice between the two.
My T6 HEC with the +15 weapon power does it better than a cruiser that maxes out at +5/+10. And even with bottoming shields and engines to keep my weapons and aux power as high as possible, I'm still capable of keeping everything over 75 thanks to the leech. (And EPS Manifold.) I mean, seriously, up to 24 power and maybe more for each subsystem? That's nearly a 50% increase in total power from just one console.
But you'll never hear any of the FAW haters writing entire treatises about how the leech console is OP, because 'balance' is just the cudgel they beat stuff they don't like with. Which is my entire point.
Too late, they already did it. The game is all about AP beam arrays and BFAW.
If they remove cannon drop off it can a long way toward bringing back parity and choice of weapon.
I have a feeling they'll be addressing cannons next season. I think there will be new Defiant-type escorts with cannons in the c-store. DS9 and the Dominion War was all about the Defiant and it's quad cannons.
I'm fine in that regard, 10K I can do. It's the 30K and 50K monsters that that the post Crisis -Delta Rising game seems to built around that I can't mess with. It's weird I was reading the wiki and the forums long before I actually started playing.
My Delta Recruit flies a Vor'cha. I'm making it work, does that make me weird?
But yes it is mostly public perception from a what's popular angle. But that doesn't prevent new guys from having to deal with the smart TRIBBLE remarks from the guys who thought flying suboptimal this or that in elite made you garbage. It's perception, but it also has been a culture. I've had to talk some people down after those experiences so I'm a little sensitive to that type of behavior. Comes with the territory, you're right.
You say that, but their plot is supposed to be the basis of our canon and the rules and situations governing the game universe. In any event it should have bearing.
Like I said I'd love that. A single target rapid fire phaser barrage would make my day...if it was available at the same stations as FAW.
I see your point in that vein one console certainly does nullify the natural advantage that a cruiser is supposed to have.
Yeah the cannon drop off doesn't really make sense to me. The narrow firing arc is more than a sufficient penalty for the added power.
I couldn't think of putting anything besides phasers on my Fed main's cruiser, or disruptor cannons on my Klingon's Bird. My Romulan used the Romulan Plasma on her Ha'nom, but Protonic and Thoron Polaron on her Dyson's.
That said, this game as almost ALWAYS been about AP weapons on some level.
Do they need new cannons? You can upgrade the Quad Cannons from the Sao Paolo to Mk XIV right? Do they need new ones?
I don't think that needs a change. It achieves exactly the kind of gameplay you want for Defiant-Copy-Escorts.
If BFAW is too powerful, nerf it, or, since everyone is using it already and Elite difficulty is kinda build around people optimizing to that level, buff CRF and CSV.
The problem is that BFAW has so many benefits and no disadvantages that it can be equally as effective whilst requiring considerably less piloting and build skill for the captain of that ship.
Add in the fact that BFAW is as effective against single and multiple targets and it's no wonder cannon users feel left behind, their skills as a pilot mean nothing when any Kirk wannabe can slap a load of beams on and circle the targets being as effective as the cannon guys well planned attack.
Cannon users currently feel how the majority of torp users have felt since day one.
First step is to make cannon damage scale with throttle and throttle duration, like an innate Pedal to the Metal, only with inverse scaling below 30% throttle or slowing down. You need to be rocking some turnrate. Best bonus for staying on full throttle and not stopping. Maybe an additional bonus for turning while firing.
Then you buff canons based on the expected piloting ability of players after tests.
At this point, turnrate becomes a DPS stat.
Beams should be for minimal maneuverability. Cannons should scale with maneuverability to be effective. No reverse. No caution. No "I'm going to back up and retarget". Full throttle dancing around targets.
No ones arguing that they arent still deadly. The problem is that when the average player (not including those who are canon nuts) is given the option of cannons or beams, even on a ship that traditionally was meant to run cannons. The player will choose beams. Because the beam set up in game is currently the more optimal choice for DPS.
People will defend beams til their dying breath though because its the current setup they use or because they down right are in denial about why everyone and their grandma is going beams over cannons.
My personal opinion is that an AoE ability should never be the go to DPS ability. Every other MMO Ive played has nerfed AoEs when they turned out to be the favored DPS option. But Cryptic has taken the complete opposite position on this and decided that because a light show of 30+ beams going off in every direction from a handful of ships looks cool that its acceptable to be the top choice.
If I was to make changes to the way Tactical Abilities like C:RF, C:SV, BO and BFAW worked. Id turn down BFAWs DPS. Not so much that it was ineffective but that it doesnt dominate. BO should be a gutt punch and currently it doesnt behave that way. As someone else pointed out, it should punch through the shields maybe even knocking that facing out. Id like to see abilities like a Beam Barrage for Beams added to properly take BOs place as a single target ability. And a cannon version of BO introduced.
There's a DOff for that.
Like a lot of things, actually.
Maybe what would improve things is to have a decent (blue quality, say) set of buffs that Captains get innately with no DOffs slotted.
Slotting DOffs overrides and replaces the buffs. Each DOff reduces the base buff magnitude by 1/5th. Having 6 DOffs (or more in the future) is a flat out power increase.
The biggest issue that has is simple: STO has multiple targets, with bloated hitpoints.
B:FAW hits two targets per tick of damage compared to B:O and C:RF hitting only one, so unless B:O and C:RF can do the same damage to a single target that B:FAW does to two or more, B:FAW will always parse higher. Maybe measuring cannon DPS in the same target-rich environment you measure B:FAW DPS in is the problem, maybe we need more situations with exceedingly powerful single targets (that don't auto-cloak when you get close, artificially enforcing cannon dropoff), maybe... something? The high volume of spam in STO makes this issue worse; many NPCs that would be prime targets for single-target spike will spawn a number of pets and targetable ordinance that can destroy, debuff, or disable you in the middle of a good cannon barrage (yeah, Heralds are a prime example of this one).
In addition, the relative value of sustained DPS over spike has been inflated right along with the NPC hitpoints in the aftermath of Delta Rising. This is a big part of why a weapon class with the second-lowest base DPS still manages to be the weapon of choice for many players... you can keep enemies in-arc, while at the same time cycling out of their firing arcs and shifting position away from their allies. With beams it isn't necessary to keep your own forward shield facing on target, instead allowing you to switch out port/starboard shields while staying on the same facing of your target, and thereby maintain pressure from one of your two optimal firing arcs. In some ways I agree with the comments about the Defiant making devastating cannon passes... and if NPC hitpoints weren't so inflated a properly buffed C:RF pass would still be able to wipe out a good sized target over its duration.
Theoretically, the next lock box could have a new Tac ability ("Cannon: Point Defense" or somesuch) that works just like B:FAW mechanically but applies to cannons instead. Using a Starship Trait (Versatile Tactical Systems) that allows cannons to benefit from beam attack modifiers and beams to benefit from cannon attack modifiers would also be possible, and could be included in the next cross-faction 3-pack, lock box, lobi, or promo ship(s)... pretty much any source that requires player investment. After all of the complaints on the topic, this seems like something that could be monetized, doesn't it?
Why do they need fixing when each weapons platforms has its own niche?
Do you even know that certain weapon platforms are more powerful than beams at certain particular STF ?
Why does it need fixing when Beams are far weaker in certain STFs? Why does other weapons platforms need to be better in beams in STFs like ISA where beams are suppose to be better?
The problem with basing this as an average player is this, piloting improvement/build improvement will help them more than weapons platform.
The other issue is marketing. How many videos guides of cannons/beams/torps from experts? How community supports each weapons platform and its strengths?
Lack of knowledge or was given the incorrect information. If a player ask me advice for ease of use, I would recommend beams. If a player asks me for advice for which weapons platforms is better, I have no definite say what weapons platform.
If a player asks me what is best for ISA DPS, I would say Beams. If a player asks me whats best for CCA DPS, it aint beams at all.
I've seen AP beam boats take the entity down faster than any torp boat probably could. (haven't actually seen a torp boat in CCA yet). I mean crazy fast, like it's already down to 33% before the first burst is even finished. A few people are firing torpedoes while it happens but the big damage is being done by beams.
To the Crystalline Entity.
Get an instance without any AP beam boats and watch how much longer it takes. Believe me I've been running CCA nonstop for over two weeks. AP beam boats = quick win, no AP beam boats = can't even kill it within 4 minutes.
BFAW is One Skill To Rule Them All and needs to be changed a bit. I mean when the AOE skill is better vs single targets than the single target skill there's a problem. Imagine if CSV was better vs single targets than CRF? Or if this situation existed in any other MMO? As a rule AOE is never the preferred skill vs single targets.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
That is an apple to oranges comparison. Comparing bad players using other weapons platforms to competent players using beams isnt a good way to know if the problem is the platform.
the best weapons for CCA has been not beams for quite a long time.
Thats why whenever I see complaints/nerf threads like this, it makes me wonder those complaining have no idea what they are talking about.
If your environment is ISA or similar to ISA, sure yes. But why limit the strength of a weapons platforms based on ISA STFs or similar mission that is meant to be the strength of beams?
ISA is meant for normal skilled players, as proven by the last nerf, ease of use. Mobs dont fire as hard as certain elites, which makes you BFAW everything in the middle which you just cant do in other missions or other niches.
If you been playing other missions/more difficult missions/niche and have no hard on hating Beam FAW, you should see the strength of other weapons platforms and weaknesses of beams. But all these beam strengths are based on an environment that is similar to ISA or environments where beams are meant to dominate. So if one weapons platform dominates for a certain niche, the others should get a buff and that particular weapons platforms should get a nerf. Shouldnt this apply to torps and cannons as well in their particular niches?
OMG DUDE! How many times does it have to be said. CSV does not give the innate CrtD from DHCs. CRF has a bug too but I don't remember what it is right now since I just woke up. Those are bugs..they need to be fixed..that means they're broken. It has nothing to do with "certain STFs," "niche" builds, or "player skill." Yes people can sill kill with them but, they're broken and need to be fixed.
I haven't played ISA in, oh, maybe 9 months. I have no need of any more omega marks or implants. Right now it's purely CCA, and before that it was some brief daily summer event and that's it. I quit not long after DR because of the issues it introduced. I'm back now (for how long?) and it's very easy to see the disparity. Beams needed a boost for a long time but this is ridiculous.
You keep talking about environments where beams are meant to dominate. They don't really exist. It might be argued that missions or STFs with a lot of fighters or targetable torpedoes are meant for BFAW spam but that's it.
There are no environments where cannons are meant to dominate, but I can tell you this: CCA is meant for torpedoes to dominate and they don't. Beams do. I did manage to get 1st place last week in a torpedo boat with relevant tactical consoles but usually I can't get past 3rd place because beam boats are doing insane damage. I was "lucky" to get an instance with everyone's alts I guess and overall DPS was very low.
BFAW does the jobs of BO, CRF and CSV better than they do and that needs to be changed. The fact that UR/epic mk XIV AP beams with mk XIV consoles are doing insane damage even without BFAW just makes it worse. I mean they do crazy damage even to the crystalline entity which has very high energy resistance.
And here's a warning: Too many buffs to player skills without relevant nerfs to skills that need it leads to more power creep. If we only buff BO, CRF and CSV and leave BFAW alone we will see more power creep than this game needs. It already has too much. Luckily this isn't a PvP game or the effects would be devastating.
Nerfing FAW isn't the solution though, that destroys the variety, especially among those who only fly the strongest version of anything. They will migrate.
So yes buff CRF and CSV. The next question though is to what end? Frankly I think the real problem is NPC health.
I say that cannon drop off makes no sense. These weapons are supposed to have range of a light second, 300K Km. The issue should be accuracy drops off at range, no damage. Which means that for effectively stationary objects like Borg hubs, and Crystalline Entities, and Unimatrix Command ships, or even Borg Cubes. There shouldn't be any accuracy or damage dropoff at range. It should purely be an accuracy issue.
The damage boost you're proposing would have to be worth it though. You should be able to obliterate a frigate in one or two passes, and do serious damage to a cruiser. I'm talking about punching through their shields AND doing significant hull damage in one pass. Especially on enemies that heal. That's what it will take to basically make it worth people time to actually hit and run like the playstyle would dictate, drive bys versus park and shoot. Where the time you're doing damage with your nose on target is worth the time once you passed where you have to set up your next run.
Yes, bloated hitpoints are the problem. They're a HUGE problem. Not even logically done. Why does a Tholian Recluse need 600K+ hit points. It's not that big and its not that diesel. That's half a Unimatrix Command Ship, a Tholian Recluse is nowhere NEAR that big. I appreciate that larger hitpoints have made pressure damage relevant, but it's now WAY too much.
Pet spam is also an issue. And even the pets are too tough. And when you have a carrier spitting out frigates that are also tough and have hard shields. It becomes a hassle.
I wouldn't mind the Canon: Point Defense at all, though they probably won't since they have a pay for weapon with that ability integrated. But there also needs to be a single target BFAW that gives that high DPS output for beams. I say do both myself.
But dialing back the health would definitely ease the need for FAW's power.
I could agree with that if we got a single target skill that was as functional. Beam Overload ain't it. Notice how there's no cannon one shot ability that delivers a single stroke of massive damage. I think the way the devs want it is rapid fire is superior. Even the Phaser Lance which is supposed to be the god mode Beam Overload is garbage.
But even then you're going to have the current situation where the AoE is necessary for the high health spam that requires that level of damage.