test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Feedback› Builds, Powers, and Game Mechanics

Cannons < Beams because shots are too slow. thoughts?

welcome2earfwelcome2earf Member Posts: 1,746 Arc User
edited October 2015 in Builds, Powers, and Game Mechanics
Aside from the other obvious issues in relation to Cannon builds in the current meta, one thing I have noticed is that because beams connect immediately, they will almost ALWAYS parse higher as targets often get destroyed before cannon shots can hit a target. In fact, current DHC bolts are only about 33% faster than a standard photon torp.

A simple fix to help with parity: Make the shots faster. Not by a huge amount, but enough to notice. Thoughts?
T93uSC8.jpg
Post edited by welcome2earf on

Comments

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    All projectiles need a speed buff. Even my cruiser outruns torpedoes and cannon bolts in the shows were quick to connect.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • seriousdaveseriousdave Member Posts: 2,777 Arc User
    edited October 2015
    adamkafei wrote: »
    All projectiles need a speed buff. Even my cruiser outruns torpedoes and cannon bolts in the shows were quick to connect.

    This. So much this^

    It's gotten quite ridiculous imho. With steadily getting higher mk gear and faster ships in general stuff like torps (especially the destructible ones) & cannon bolts simply got left behind. It's already been an issue for a long time but since it just got continuously ignored it became even worse.

    I still remember when I first saw a standard npc completely outrun a standard photon torp spread and thought "wtf just happened? so torps are pointless now?".
  • kylercakylerca Member Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited October 2015
    Yes, they all do need a base speed boost, discounting the Terran reputation set bonus we will already get. Ships being able to outrun the things doesn't make a lot of sense. I just need to smack Emergency Power to Engines and kinetic damage is irrelevant to me. Even on my command cruiser.
    Say NO to team Omega.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    In the defence of torps, there is a cut off point at which the torp will stop chasing you and just apply the damage. To my knowledge cannon bolts have no such failsafe.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    That's not the only reason. Cannon dropoff over distance is excessive. But yes a speed boost to make sure they don't land on a beam abused corpse would make cannons more fun. Torpedoes need help too. Until they both get what they need, welcome to BFAW online.
  • darkknightucfdarkknightucf Member Posts: 1,546 Media Corps
    edited October 2015
    ...but... but... I want to enjoy watching my bolts of energy travel at sub-light speeds in real-time slo-mo before they hit the target space right there...
    @Odenknight | U.S.S. Challenger | "Remember The Seven"
    Fleet Defiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support | Fleet Manticore Kinetic Strike Ship | Tactical Command Kinetic Siege Refit | Fleet Defiant Quantum Phase Escort | Fleet Valiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support
    Turning the Galaxy-X into a Torpedo Dreadnought & torpedo tutorial, with written torpedo guide.
    "A good weapon and a great strategy will win you many battles." - Marshall
    I knew using Kinetics would be playing the game on hard mode, but what I didn't realize was how bad the deck is stacked against Kinetics.
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    I think the problem is the other way, ships are too fast. I would prefer a cap on combat speed instead everything just blitzing around looking ridiculous.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    dalnar83 wrote: »
    I think the problem is the other way, ships are too fast. I would prefer a cap on combat speed instead everything just blitzing around looking ridiculous.

    Hang on a sec, I like my escort zipping around at close to 100 flight speed, it's fun. Just that cannons and torps aren't so fast :(
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    If you like flying 100, then we need to make make torps and cannons what 200 ? and what later ? the powercreep will push the speed even further, now it's 100, can be 200 few seasons later and then what ?

    Maybe I'm tool old, but at least for me, the combat looks ridiculous atm. NPCs are ultra slow, players are ultra fast.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    I'd prefer faster weapons to slower ships. I would much rather torpedoes catch up to me sooner than just being a sitting duck for a warp core breach destroying my ship too.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    kyrrok wrote: »
    I'd prefer faster weapons to slower ships. I would much rather torpedoes catch up to me sooner than just being a sitting duck for a warp core breach destroying my ship too.

    ^This.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • welcome2earfwelcome2earf Member Posts: 1,746 Arc User
    edited October 2015
    You know, after posting this, I am now of the opinion that in the current meta, time-to-target is the BIGGEST issue that is creating the disparity between Cannons and Beams. As many have suggested before, here are some suggestions:

    1) Increase the speed of Cannon bolts:     As some of you may recall, years ago the speed of cannon bolts was reduced so the visualization of the quad cannons would look neat, seem faster. You then needed to then use C:RF to get something akin to the previous visualization. That kinda put us where we are now. They need to be sped up by at LEAST 30% .
    2) Increase the arc of DHCs/DCs to 120 degrees, Increase Single cannons to standard beam arcs: This is self explanatory.
    3) Reduce the distance penalty of cannons: It should NOT be as extreme as it is now.
    4) Confirm the inherent 10% CritD in DHCs is true.
    5) Enable single cannons for rear mount : (Why this isn't allowed is beyond me. I see NO game-breaking reason why there is only ONE cannon you can tail mount for a 180 degree arc.)
    6) Reduce the power drain of DCs to encourage their usage and functionality.


    Just some thoughts. Not all of these changes are needed, but it's good to at least get a dialog open on this important issue.
    T93uSC8.jpg
  • rmy1081rmy1081 Member Posts: 2,840 Arc User
    welcome2earf wrote: »
    You know, after posting this, I am now of the opinion that in the current meta, time-to-target is the BIGGEST issue that is creating the disparity between Cannons and Beams. As many have suggested before, here are some suggestions:

    1) Increase the speed of Cannon bolts:     As some of you may recall, years ago the speed of cannon bolts was reduced so the visualization of the quad cannons would look neat, seem faster. You then needed to then use C:RF to get something akin to the previous visualization. That kinda put us where we are now. They need to be sped up by at LEAST 30% .
    2) Increase the arc of DHCs/DCs to 120 degrees, Increase Single cannons to standard beam arcs: This is self explanatory.
    3) Reduce the distance penalty of cannons: It should NOT be as extreme as it is now.
    4) Confirm the inherent 10% CritD in DHCs is true.
    5) Enable single cannons for rear mount : (Why this isn't allowed is beyond me. I see NO game-breaking reason why there is only ONE cannon you can tail mount for a 180 degree arc.)
    6) Reduce the power drain of DCs to encourage their usage and functionality.


    Just some thoughts. Not all of these changes are needed, but it's good to at least get a dialog open on this important issue.

    IDK if it's the biggest but it is a huge factor.

    1) I agree cannon bolts and torpedoes could use a flight time increase. They were designed when ships were really slow

    2) I'm not big on increasing any weapon arc. All ships turn faster than they ever have.

    3) I'm iffy on this one but I can see why one would want this

    4) Yes please!!!

    5) I can see why they did this a long time ago but I don't see a reason not allow rear facing single cannons now.

    6) I'm not sure on this one as there's math to show it's not really needed. What I would really like is a rework on any firing haste mechanic for cannons. Most cannons have a short firing cycle so any haste is wasted on cannons.
  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    welcome2earf wrote: »
    You know, after posting this, I am now of the opinion that in the current meta, time-to-target is the BIGGEST issue that is creating the disparity between Cannons and Beams. As many have suggested before, here are some suggestions:

    1) Increase the speed of Cannon bolts:     As some of you may recall, years ago the speed of cannon bolts was reduced so the visualization of the quad cannons would look neat, seem faster. You then needed to then use C:RF to get something akin to the previous visualization. That kinda put us where we are now. They need to be sped up by at LEAST 30% .
    2) Increase the arc of DHCs/DCs to 120 degrees, Increase Single cannons to standard beam arcs: This is self explanatory.
    3) Reduce the distance penalty of cannons: It should NOT be as extreme as it is now.
    4) Confirm the inherent 10% CritD in DHCs is true.
    5) Enable single cannons for rear mount : (Why this isn't allowed is beyond me. I see NO game-breaking reason why there is only ONE cannon you can tail mount for a 180 degree arc.)
    6) Reduce the power drain of DCs to encourage their usage and functionality.


    Just some thoughts. Not all of these changes are needed, but it's good to at least get a dialog open on this important issue.

    Increasing speed is agreed.

    As to the arc, I prefer them to be increased to 60, but am fine with 45. What I would like to see instead is a damage boost to the cannons to justify the confined arc. Right now, you sacrifice too much arc for the power.

    I'd like the distance penalty to be removed entirely

    I would like to see in fact an increas a TRUE +20% minimum CrtD

    Single cannons for rear sounds like a good idea.

    I second the power drain reduction as well, especially the DHCs who take a +2 penalty.

    And as for the fact that NOT ALL of the changes are necessary, I second that as well. I remember the old Hazari proverb: If you don't ask for everything, you don't get anything =)
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    In fairness on power, when you do the maths cannons have it better. DHCs do roughly twice the damage per hit of a Beam array for an extra 2 power drain, so with DHCs you are using 48 power to achieve what takes beam arrays 80.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • delerouxdeleroux Member Posts: 478 Arc User
    Cannon bolts should essentially resemble tracer ammunition, in terms of speed: http://38.media.tumblr.com/27349056629c14a409bc6f18983cde10/tumblr_n37eaqQlPG1rarngto2_400.gif

    Cannon Rapid Fire should resemble something more like this: http://gfycat.com/BareShockedGroundhog

  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    Unfortunately all that extra power is lost over distance greater than 2km. They need a boost, or to reduce sharply the excessive distance dropoff.
  • lordsteve1lordsteve1 Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    Cannons and Torps are in a similar boat in this respect.

    It's not that you cannot do decent damage with these weapons, you definitely can. It's just that because beams hit instantly they will quite often kill a target before you get to do any real damage. It's not so much a problem of beams and torps not doing enough damage, it's that they never have the time because beams attacks are instant.

    So a single escort going for a cannon attack in a team of FAW-boats will not be able to lie up to its full potential purely because its shots take too long to reach the target.

    I'd say fix the speed before you meddle with any damage or arc boosts.
    SulMatuul.png
  • welcome2earfwelcome2earf Member Posts: 1,746 Arc User
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    Cannons and Torps are in a similar boat in this respect.

    It's not that you cannot do decent damage with these weapons, you definitely can. It's just that because beams hit instantly they will quite often kill a target before you get to do any real damage. It's not so much a problem of beams and torps not doing enough damage, it's that they never have the time because beams attacks are instant.

    So a single escort going for a cannon attack in a team of FAW-boats will not be able to lie up to its full potential purely because its shots take too long to reach the target.

    I'd say fix the speed before you meddle with any damage or arc boosts.

    I wholeheartedly agree - hence why I said in the current meta (beams) Cannons need help - not so much because they suck, but more so because beams connect instantly and the time-to-target on Cannons is so inferior that there's nothing left to shoot often times. I think this is likely the BIGGEST issue with weapon parity.

    I will also say that the shots are WAAAAY slower than in the tv series or movie. This is just silly. Something needs to be done.
    T93uSC8.jpg
  • icelancersricelancersr Member Posts: 44 Arc User
    dalnar83 wrote: »
    I think the problem is the other way, ships are too fast. I would prefer a cap on combat speed instead everything just blitzing around looking ridiculous.
    THIS
Sign In or Register to comment.