test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Cant we nerf BFAW?

1910111315

Comments

  • smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    You're intentionally using a non-dps orientated, inferior build to the people you are pugging with, fully aware that you will have less of an impact in dps-centric queues like ISA as a result. So why is this thread still going?
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • lordsteve1lordsteve1 Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    Yea that’s all fine and good but at times I turn out to get annoyed of peeps whining over game mechanics instead of looking how to make the best of it.

    I mean they confine themselves to ship X, career X and build X and wonder how they start to pale compared to others which are not willing to confine themselves to X and bring in Y instead. Especially on a maps like ISA which is entirely about doing Y.

    We have players in game which can do wonders with torpedoes, I myself can do up 90k cannon DPS and you get even build recommendations from this games leading DPSers for the tier 5 ship reyan01 is so fond of. It’s all there, possible and available. Is every other build besides a beam faw scim currently worse when it comes to DPS. Probably but who cares? Has been that way for years. The described scenario of a spectator role for anybody who does not use that ship in that fashion however is so wrong that it stinks.

    My discussion with reyan01 was an attempt if he’d consider build Y on a ship X to share with him the joyful and contributing game experience I have in ISA each day and that with 9 different builds on my 9 chars.

    But hey, when the mind is closed and settled, no chance.

    Yeah but what you are essentially saying is that rather than pick a ship type and playstyle people enjoy, they should follow the DPS pack and we end up with a situation where everyone ends up with the same build to be competitive until the "next big thing" comes along and we all move on.

    reyan01 is happy in his build, he dearly loves that little ship as many people on these forums well know. And he knows his stuff when it comes to that ship and his build. But why should he move into a different type of ship or build just to have a chance at competitive endgame content? To suggest something like that is absurd.

    I enjoy playing a science ship, but by your reckoning I should move to what, a tactical ship like a T6 Battlecruiser? Simply because then I can be more competitive or stand a chance at not being a spectator.

    If there's one culprit in STO that is causing more friction that anything else at the moment is is BFAW. Those who love it can see their DPS skyrocket with little actual skill or build quality. Those who hate it see their build being made redundant in all but a few exceptional circumstances as everything gets instakilled around them.
    A lot of very knowledgeable players have suggested fixes or modifications to the ability but to no avail.
    To simply continue ignoring the insanity of an AOE ability that has literally not got a single downside no matter what scenario you shove it into is sheer lunacy. By the very fact it has no downsides puts all other abilities at a disadvantage.
    SulMatuul.png
  • kapla5571kapla5571 Member Posts: 103 Arc User
    I say give people what they have been wanting for NPCs to use more abilities....
    giving all Borg the "Borg Queen's Octahedron" ability usage would be a start they are a Hive mind afterall so to list
    Borg Queen's Octahedron abilities from wiki entry.....

    The Borg Queen's Octahedron has nearly every ability in the game but these are the ones used most frequently.

    Tyken's Rift
    Borg Shield Neutralizer
    Scramble Sensors
    Torpedo: Spread
    Isometric Charge
    Antimatter Spread
    Feedback Pulse

    ---
    IF even the Borg probes had these it would make it more interesting I say add the EP-Engines effect back to the borg like it was prior to the great teeth nashing about borg spheres scattering across the map due to the EP changes.
  • This content has been removed.
  • e30erneste30ernest Member Posts: 1,794 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    So in summary, with what a Sci Captain in a Sci ship can do in ISA in mind:

    GWIII: Pointless - crowd control isn't required if everything is already dead
    Healing: Pointless - implies that the Borg were a threat and were doing damage to players. They weren't - they were too busy being dead.
    General Sci-based damage abilities (DRB for example) - pointless. Even with partigens at 400 and various buffs in place, this is not capable of killing something as fast as BFAW
    Debuffing - again, pointless. Why would this be necessary? Possibly make the target melt 0.5seconds faster that it did? Big deal.

    Sorry, but again - what I say is based on my experience. It isn't an opinion - it's a reflection on events that have occurred. Saying that, besides the one instance I played at the weekend, described on the last page, I haven't really played an STF for a little while and said instance at the weekend reminded me why I should continue to avoid them.

    TBH most of that can be mitigated by practice and piloting. I do all of the above (except healing) on my sci ships.

    I've been flying sci-torp ships as a Sci toon for most of my gaming in STO. My Sci ship damage is generally split between exotic and torp damage. I also find myself running frequently with 100k+ players because I do more or less equal runs with the DPS-League and PUGs.

    On a science ship equipped with torps and primarily dealing exotic damage, you'll have to be very aggressive with your flying style. It's a matter of timing and knowing how to gauge the DPS of a team (through how fast things melts) and staying at the leading edge of that offensive rush. You don't want to fall behind because that'll mean you won't hit anything, neither would you want to be too far ahead or shields will just eat your torp damage. Once you get that timing right, you'll find yourself dealing a lot more damage than you expected. That's why I mix my time with PUGs and DPS Channel runs. It gives me a set of runs with varying pace and timing so that I can further improve my flying.

    Now I will admit that maps like the Badlands or the Undine space BZ can be difficult to fly in a non-BFAW ship. What I do is pick an area to concentrate in, and let the other ships deal with other zones. If you try to hit everything, or chase every mob that comes into range, you'll get swamped by BFAW ships. However, choosing a zone and making it "yours" will allow you to clear mobs better, and a lot of times faster than those BFAW ships because you won't have to deal with shields.

    I am not a chart-topper, but I do decent above-average damage. But I have to adapt to my team more so in my sci ships than my BFAW engineer. It's a fun challenge and that's why I keep playing my sci-torps.
  • sennahcheribsennahcherib Member Posts: 2,823 Arc User
    edited January 2016
    Hm, I think 18k part related sci DPS is rather decent. On my 60k sci boat under its current build it’s more like 10% part related damage 20-30% plasma explosions from embassy consoles and rest regular weapons fire transported (for the most part) with, yea, 2 copies of faw.

    I also found tractor beam repulsors to do more part dmg than a grav well so I use TBR3 + GW1 over GW3+TBR2. There is a very cool doff around which turns the push effect into a pull effect.

    2 questions:

    - tac captain in a sci ship?
    - do you really think that we can all buy this doff?

    personally, I'm sick to see in ISA, always the same stuff which come from "sci" ships; TBR + faw.

    I'm not against FAW, because I use it (most of the time when I'm tired to see my efforts wasted by other guys with faw), but something must be change; a ship with a full dhc build should be better than a cruiser which use beams. it is more difficult to use a ship with cannons, and most of the time all these efforts are wasted by 2 guys with faw. it is worse when I try to use the flanking skill, everything is destroyed before, I can reach the good position
  • e30erneste30ernest Member Posts: 1,794 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    e30ernest wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    So in summary, with what a Sci Captain in a Sci ship can do in ISA in mind:

    GWIII: Pointless - crowd control isn't required if everything is already dead
    Healing: Pointless - implies that the Borg were a threat and were doing damage to players. They weren't - they were too busy being dead.
    General Sci-based damage abilities (DRB for example) - pointless. Even with partigens at 400 and various buffs in place, this is not capable of killing something as fast as BFAW
    Debuffing - again, pointless. Why would this be necessary? Possibly make the target melt 0.5seconds faster that it did? Big deal.

    Sorry, but again - what I say is based on my experience. It isn't an opinion - it's a reflection on events that have occurred. Saying that, besides the one instance I played at the weekend, described on the last page, I haven't really played an STF for a little while and said instance at the weekend reminded me why I should continue to avoid them.

    TBH most of that can be mitigated by practice and piloting. I do all of the above (except healing) on my sci ships.

    I've been flying sci-torp ships as a Sci toon for most of my gaming in STO. My Sci ship damage is generally split between exotic and torp damage. I also find myself running frequently with 100k+ players because I do more or less equal runs with the DPS-League and PUGs.

    On a science ship equipped with torps and primarily dealing exotic damage, you'll have to be very aggressive with your flying style. It's a matter of timing and knowing how to gauge the DPS of a team (through how fast things melts) and staying at the leading edge of that offensive rush. You don't want to fall behind because that'll mean you won't hit anything, neither would you want to be too far ahead or shields will just eat your torp damage. Once you get that timing right, you'll find yourself dealing a lot more damage than you expected. That's why I mix my time with PUGs and DPS Channel runs. It gives me a set of runs with varying pace and timing so that I can further improve my flying.

    Now I will admit that maps like the Badlands or the Undine space BZ can be difficult to fly in a non-BFAW ship. What I do is pick an area to concentrate in, and let the other ships deal with other zones. If you try to hit everything, or chase every mob that comes into range, you'll get swamped by BFAW ships. However, choosing a zone and making it "yours" will allow you to clear mobs better, and a lot of times faster than those BFAW ships because you won't have to deal with shields.

    I am not a chart-topper, but I do decent above-average damage. But I have to adapt to my team more so in my sci ships than my BFAW engineer. It's a fun challenge and that's why I keep playing my sci-torps.

    Whilst I don't disagree as such, the point was exactly as outlined in this post:
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    The simple fact that reyan01 is making is that nearly all targets are dead long before a science ship can gets it's "one-shot wonder" abilities into range or charged up. I can one-shot a cube with Isokinetic cannon, my DRB is lethal on grav well caught groups, my quantum destabilized beam does crazy damage - but most times they have their target killed before they even kit their max power.

    Hell if you want a really good example of this look no further than the Badlands Battlezone.
    My Scryer can do some nasty damage with torps and partigens (prtg @ 409) but in that zone, if there's any BFAW boats nearby they will wipe the floor clean before my shots even land on the enemies.
    Torps, cannons, charge-up science powers, even carriers with pets - they all suffer the same problem, BFAW kills everything almost instantly and before these attacks can land their hits.
    You can actually see cruiser players parked in the middle of the fight not moving just spamming BFAW 'till the cows come home, i can almost hear the screams of their mashed keyboards from here.

    It's not that science builds are no use, or have no place in PVE runs, its that they cannot possible hope to compete if half the team is BFAW-spam boats.

    The issues with BFAW have been mentioned a million times already but a lot of those who use it don't want it to get nerfed so they expect non-users to come up to their level and build cookie cutter builds to match theirs.

    That's just it though. I am able to participate, land my hits and deal my heavy sci damage abilities even with 100k+ members in the team. But for me to do that required quite a bit of practice and getting my timing right. Even in the Badlands I consistently get the maximum rewards per zone. The same goes for the Undine Battlezone.

    Flying a sci-build is always going to be more challenging that flying a plain BFAW build. So it'll take some work on your end to make it work, but it is more competitive than you put it up to be.
  • kapla5571kapla5571 Member Posts: 103 Arc User
    BFAW is only an issue since NPCs specifically Borg who are suppposed to adapt , don't adapt for example, what would happen when your 100k dps BFAW ship flys into firing range except now they get hit with scramble sensors and feedback pulse at the start of their firing cycle from the various borg ships? Then the borg toss a few torp spreads, shield neutralizers, and Isometric charges. I also think their Plasma burn from weapons should be more like caustic plasma with double the burn damage. If they ever add an Elite version it should scale the Borg weapons to Mk XIV Epic Damage levels. Borg should be hard to fight not the pushovers they currently are.
  • e30erneste30ernest Member Posts: 1,794 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Again, you are not quite seeing my point of view. Again, my build works. It's actually pretty effective when there are either no, or just one, BFAW spammer in the instance.

    However, much like the other day, I defy anyone in my position to feel useful when faced with a team that includes three BFAW spamboat Scimitards forcing everyone to watch their personal game 'who has the biggest epeen' .

    I'm not saying your build doesn't work. Your issue doesn't sound like a build problem, but a piloting issue.

    What I am saying is that to be able to compete in a team of high-end DPS BFAW users, you'll need to change the way you fly. The "flight plan" of a normal PUG and that of a high-DPS team are very different. The same goes for your positioning and target selection. If you get that right, you'll be able to apply the damage your ship is capable of actually dealing, even with 4 high-DPS people in the team.

    Don't get discouraged when you see your "contribution" go down when you get lumped into a group with high-end players. Use that to your advantage and learn from it. Instead of blaming your perceived lack of contribution to their uber DPS, think of ways you can adapt and apply your ship's strengths better. It's how people get better at this game.
  • This content has been removed.
  • lordsteve1lordsteve1 Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Funny thing about FACTS based on PERSONAL experience...it's NOT FACTS. Look, I agree that BFAW needs a nerf...but not for the reason you mentioned. You can meaningfully participate with just about anything...IF you are willing to put in the work for it. That means getting crazy expensive gear as a sci. That means getting crazy good at piloting with a LOT of practice. But to say you can't do anything because you have some BFAW scimmies is hog wash...and I don't generally agree with peter...but I do agree that anything can be made to be significant. I run with multiple 100+k ships in my fleet all the time and I can generally pull 25K in my for fun ship...and no the captain is not a tac. So yeah...no you can do it. Do you WANT to is another matter entirely. To claim you CAN'T do anything about it is false. You don't WANT to do anything about it.

    I don't think its about NOT WANTING to change, it's more about the lack of balance between how easy it is for the BFAW crowd to work their space magic with minimal spending and skill, compared to a science build capable of similar DPS which is a heck of an investment. That makes changing anything to compete an expensive choice.

    It's pretty obvious stuff like BFAW appeals to the masses because it has no negatives and also is cheap to utilise. Now a science player has to carefully consider how to put his/her build together because top science skills are expensive and the equipment needed relies heavily on pushing those skills as far as possible. Look at how difficult it is to get a good flow caps skill without slotting literally every piece of kit that boosts it, you either go all in or not at all.
    Compare that to a BFAW boat, where you can just slot 8 beams and 4 tac spire consoles and spam all day long without a worry about arcs, piloting etc.

    As sci pilots we know we picked the hard route, but that doesn't mean we can't see an ability like BFAW as inherently broken, to the extent that it is considered the be all and end all of abilities. It's an ability that is way out of whack with every other ability, it has no down sides, it requires no skill, it's considered by many to be the only way to do decent damage.
    How many of those space-whales spamming BFAW are really thinking about piloting when they park up and flatten the map with no skill at all.
    SulMatuul.png
  • This content has been removed.
  • risingwolfshadowrisingwolfshadow Member Posts: 619 Arc User
    Hahaha! "BFAW needing skill", yeah if you're going for 100k+, which is pointless really in a game as easy as this with NPCs that don't need that blunt force, you need some piloting skill but nowhere near as much as you do if you're in an escort with cannons. Compared to the skill needed to PvP back in the day, BFAW PvE is easier than eating the cake you've been thinking about all day.

    You need some skill to do anything but BFAW PvE uses little skill when you're running an unnecessarily high DPS build compared to people with low DPS who work together with what they have to complete an STF.
  • risingwolfshadowrisingwolfshadow Member Posts: 619 Arc User
    Also... This discussion is still going!??
  • darkknightucfdarkknightucf Member Posts: 1,546 Media Corps
    Maybe if BFAW received the same treatment like Torpedo Spread, where any secondary weapon effects and enhancements only work off of the main target. So, things like, Leech, Plasma Explosions, Kemocite, etc only happen on the main target. That would require BFAW users to select a main target, or not have the secondary effects/enhancements trigger/activate.

    Fair is fair, right?

    I think that the problem is not BFAW in and of itself, but the way that a plethora of things are designed to enhance BFAW, with relatively little effort into making it effective vs other weapon types and classes.
    @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.
  • maddscottmaddscott Member Posts: 149 Arc User
    kontarnus wrote: »
    Just from a Star Trek story logic perspective, BFAW was only ever shown, in any way, as something that a large ship with a plethora of beam arrays ever did. You didn't see the Defiant shooting beams all over the place. You didn't even see Voyager doing that.
    A proper balancing would involve:
    1) limiting BFAW to cruisers -- making that their primary DPS ability
    2) limiting CSV and CRF to Escorts/Raiders -- making that their primary DPS ability
    3) limiting GW and other major damage dealing Sci magic abilities to Science ships -- making that their primary DPS ability
    4) that leaves TS and THY as an ability available to all types of ship, allowing a variety of torp builds -- balance Torpedo builds against the other three styles.

    Do all that, and make it approximately equal chances, in terms of the possible DPS output.
    But that would take a whole heck of a lot of work.
    That's the way it should be.

    Balance Item #1 - Limiting BFAW to Cruisers - IIRC, canon Fed ships have used BFAW, don't have turrets, don't have cannons. BFAW currently is ONLY (imho) useful in STF's to bolster ones DPS for e-peeners, AND, Mine, Fighter, Swarmer, and Tholian Web dispersal.. All you get with BFAW is addnl AGRO, and Tickle points for DPS..

    Balance Item #3 "Limiting GW to Science Ships..." Needs defined as to WHAT a SCI ships is.. If you mean a ship with LCDR SCI slot (needed for GW1) + 2ndry Deflector + Sensor Scan; or does LT SCI Slots and "Science capable" ships fit.. So, with that being said..

    Hmm.. well then let's see.. Since the FEDS have what 8 "SCI ships" and KDF and Rom have possibly ONE per faction with the exception of the TRIBBLE Dyson, well then that would restrict the GW to, Oh Right "Federation" players..

    tyvm..
  • lordsteve1lordsteve1 Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Funny thing about FACTS based on PERSONAL experience...it's NOT FACTS. Look, I agree that BFAW needs a nerf...but not for the reason you mentioned. You can meaningfully participate with just about anything...IF you are willing to put in the work for it. That means getting crazy expensive gear as a sci. That means getting crazy good at piloting with a LOT of practice. But to say you can't do anything because you have some BFAW scimmies is hog wash...and I don't generally agree with peter...but I do agree that anything can be made to be significant. I run with multiple 100+k ships in my fleet all the time and I can generally pull 25K in my for fun ship...and no the captain is not a tac. So yeah...no you can do it. Do you WANT to is another matter entirely. To claim you CAN'T do anything about it is false. You don't WANT to do anything about it.

    I don't think its about NOT WANTING to change, it's more about the lack of balance between how easy it is for the BFAW crowd to work their space magic with minimal spending and skill, compared to a science build capable of similar DPS which is a heck of an investment. That makes changing anything to compete an expensive choice.

    It's pretty obvious stuff like BFAW appeals to the masses because it has no negatives and also is cheap to utilise. Now a science player has to carefully consider how to put his/her build together because top science skills are expensive and the equipment needed relies heavily on pushing those skills as far as possible. Look at how difficult it is to get a good flow caps skill without slotting literally every piece of kit that boosts it, you either go all in or not at all.
    Compare that to a BFAW boat, where you can just slot 8 beams and 4 tac spire consoles and spam all day long without a worry about arcs, piloting etc.

    As sci pilots we know we picked the hard route, but that doesn't mean we can't see an ability like BFAW as inherently broken, to the extent that it is considered the be all and end all of abilities. It's an ability that is way out of whack with every other ability, it has no down sides, it requires no skill, it's considered by many to be the only way to do decent damage.
    How many of those space-whales spamming BFAW are really thinking about piloting when they park up and flatten the map with no skill at all.

    What part of I think BFAW needs a nerf did you not understand?

    My issue was the claim that reyan made that you CAN'T...as in physically impossible to make a ship that can be meaningful with several BFAW scimmies. Did I say it was easy? No, in fact I said it was hard...even more so because on top of gear, you need piloting skills. And yes this VAST difference is why I think BFAW needs a nerf...and sci needs a boost...along with cannons...but my issues was the the fact that he kept saying you CAN'T do it. No...you CAN...you just probably don't WANT to because it's stupid silly hard.

    Also BFAW does require some piloting skills. Those 100+k BFAW runs you see...you can give the same ship to other people and they won't be able to do it. So yes, you need some skills to use BFAW effectively as well. Please stop with the exaggeration of how little skill it takes. It is one of the easiest skills to make effective mind you...but to master it and get those massive DPS numbers...yeah that takes practice. Trying to sell their skills short just makes you look ignorant and petty.

    Your average BFAW scimmy ain't breaking 100k FYI...my fleeties do. So basically my average fleet run is like running with 4 BFAW scimmies...on steroids. And I can still be meaningful...in a for fun ship.... So don't give me that you can't TRIBBLE.

    Hey look I wasn't accusing you of not agreeing that a nerf is needed so don't accuse me of not understanding you. I'm just saying that from the point of view of someone like me, or reyan01 or a heap of other science captains changing your build and gamestyle to match that of BFAW boats is not an easy option.
    In fact it's not even the easiness of it that's the issue as I freely admitted we picked the hard path. It's that someone can come along with little to no skill and currency and slap together a zero-skill BFAW boat and faceroll through enemies like they don't exist. And in a multiplayer environment that sort of poor balance does create issues.
    It's easy or someone to say "look at my build and copy it and you'll be amazing" but the reality is that it's not that simple. If someone has poured a tonne of cash, resources and time into a build that is extremely good suddenly finds that the kid next door slapped some beams on a cruiser and now kills things in a tenth of the time they will find it hard to adjust.

    As for the 100K guys, yeah I know full well they have great piloting, I'm not trying to sell their skills short and i'm in no way ignorant of their ability, i'm not being petty minded either. They know how to kit their ship out and how to manage cooldowns and fly to the correct place and when to loose off an ability.
    My issue with the race to the top DPS arms race is that it's affecting the whole game now and in a bad way. What those guys posting videos do is all good fun, it shows what the game is capable of, but they also have the nasty side affect of dragging the meta of the game that way as well.
    Before long you're knee-deep in BFAW cruisers all trying to have the biggest epeen but generally just causing an overload of visual spam or actually failing missions with poor piloting. And with the lack of decent elite level material for these wannabe elites to play in is it any wonder that people like reyan get pissed off when their attempts at advanced runs feel meaningless.
    SulMatuul.png
  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    Maybe if BFAW received the same treatment like Torpedo Spread, where any secondary weapon effects and enhancements only work off of the main target. So, things like, Leech, Plasma Explosions, Kemocite, etc only happen on the main target. That would require BFAW users to select a main target, or not have the secondary effects/enhancements trigger/activate.

    Fair is fair, right?

    I think that the problem is not BFAW in and of itself, but the way that a plethora of things are designed to enhance BFAW, with relatively little effort into making it effective vs other weapon types and classes.

    Sounds fair to me.
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    johnnymo1 wrote: »
    Why do people want to nerf stuff? Why not just make everything better so everything can be awesome!

    Issue is that buffing everything up to being awesome makes everything bland an takes away from that feeling of awesomeness. The reason people want to see nerfs is that they work two fold they allow for things that are not as impressive to be more interesting an viable option, while also making it that things don't die nearly as fast as they do (or faster as is the case with buffing things up to match the current benchmark) an lessening the magnitude of the increase in hp/damage of the npcs in content to keep it interesting. I personally would rather see a usage of both smaller scale buffs to the under-performing abilities, and nerfs to the over-performing abilities that would brings both closer to a predetermined goal, while also seeing some under used or more uninteresting abilities/careers get a overhual/rework to make them more interesting an useful. I mean a 30% or more buff to all of the lower performing abilities to make them a equally impressive/viable option as BFAW not only would mean that the overall damage of groups would increase by atleast 15% compared to now leading to a need to buff future content with this overall output in mind, but also that a buff an nerf of 15% to represented sides is moe managable an leads to less of a buff needed for content to remain interesting as the overall dps would be maintained just that the difference between abilities on average is changed.

    As much as people dis-liked the idea of the optional mission parts of the stfs leading to the stf ending early if it was failed, where as myself i like the spirit of it kinda though making it fail the mission fully is kinda harsh. I could see completing the optional objectives being how you gain the elite marks (additional elite marks) from the stfs, and then the elite stf's optional still failing the mission if you do not complete them. Though with the advanced stfs i think that they could use some unique an interesting or important rewards that is only gained thru doing them, like that we get period almost event-like projects that we use items gotten thru Elite stfs to complete.
  • ajalenajalen Member Posts: 113 Arc User
    oh c'mon why u want nerf BFAW ?
    its only chance hit something in brick like VoQuv .....

    and sometimes is fun see DPS-BFAW_Kings in Scimitars .....
    today i meet one , during my Undine battlezone trip , i find nice group 6 undine ships , fire my BFAW3 , TS2 , GW3 etc ......and then rush right in middle of this "ally" in Scimmi , no he dont blast all from safe distane - he run right into my GW and then he fire his BFAW ......
    of course all undine die in less than 3 s

    and then Scimmi due 6 warp core breach explosion around him ......
    mzspQIG.jpg




  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,498 Arc User
    ajalen wrote: »
    oh c'mon why u want nerf BFAW ?
    its only chance hit something in brick like VoQuv .....

    and sometimes is fun see DPS-BFAW_Kings in Scimitars .....
    today i meet one , during my Undine battlezone trip , i find nice group 6 undine ships , fire my BFAW3 , TS2 , GW3 etc ......and then rush right in middle of this "ally" in Scimmi , no he dont blast all from safe distane - he run right into my GW and then he fire his BFAW ......
    of course all undine die in less than 3 s

    and then Scimmi due 6 warp core breach explosion around him ......

    Check the turret topic ^_^
    Only way for a VoQuv to hit something.. pff Beside that, carriers have their pets as primary damage dealers.

    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited January 2016
    2 questions:
    Sure thing :)
    - tac captain in a sci ship?
    No, Sci char in a sci ship. My tacs fly fancy escorts.
    - do you really think that we can all buy this doff?
    No of course not. But I think that if somebody wants to have it he can play the game, grind the currencies in need and buy it eventually if interested enough. That’s how I got the doff after @e30ernest recommended it to me.
    personally, I'm sick to see in ISA, always the same stuff which come from "sci" ships; TBR + faw.
    Aww, that’s deals with that I suppose. Well I never thought about it if others get sick if I hit ISA with TBRs and FAW selected as my boff powers. It’s simply too much fun to use. Only part I care about is that my build selection contributes to an effective conclusion of a match and to bring me into a position to play a participating role as a sci on a sci ship. Works fine. Yesterday’s ISA run was 66k DPS even. More than enough to lead a match and play undisturbed when the pug is terrible.
    I'm not against FAW, because I use it (most of the time when I'm tired to see my efforts wasted by other guys with faw), but something must be change; a ship with a full dhc build should be better than a cruiser which use beams. it is more difficult to use a ship with cannons, and most of the time all these efforts are wasted by 2 guys with faw. it is worse when I try to use the flanking skill, everything is destroyed before, I can reach the good position
    Heh, you probably laugh but I do extremely fine at the moment when not going in with beams. The second ISA run I did with my tac yesterday brought 89k DPS pure cannon love to the match. Funny you bring up space flanking. Your numbers when you have a park and shoot escort out geared with cannons will hit the roof, especially in ISA. Yea, you have to be at the right spots at the right time which takes a lot of practice. And no, objects like gate, tac cube and generators are not destroyed before you do. I also claim that I hit them much harder with my cannons than I would ever do with beams. Still if cryptic ever decides to buff cannons, I’m all for it. In order to get cannons to be portend you basically have to bring in a grav well as meaningful sci power yourself while not closing your mind towards the most effective tac powers you should use for that your build (CSV, AP, TT).


    Post edited by peterconnorfirst on
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited January 2016
    reyan01 wrote: »

    So…
    - what have u slotted for your main armaments? Beams, cannons and/or torpedoes?
    - What are your 3 tac boff powers?
    - What do you do to tend to CD times there?

    Forward: Two Epic MkXIV Phaser beam arrays [CritDx4], One MkXIV Ultra Rare Neutronic Torpedo launcher
    Aft: One Epic MkXIV 360 Phaser beam array [CritDx3 + pen], one Epic MkXIV Phaser beam array [CritDx4], One Very Rare MkXIV Quantum Phase torpedo launcher

    Tac BOFFs: Ensign: KLWI, Lt: TT2, Lt-Cmdr, TSIII

    Not sure on cooldown times, but I do use Reciprocity, AHOD, three Very Rare Torpedo DOFFS (reduced cooldown) and the torpedo-based MU reputation abilities that benefit torpedoes. My torpedo launcher uptime is generally very good.

    Judging form your weapons layout you decided to go with a canon build which happens to work just fine. You have some very decent beams and torpedo’s slotted and even have the means to ensure CD times. Reciprocity is cool for that however a bit tricky. In order to get it to work you need to have aggro and play aggressively. Fun part for you is that a ship with 400 points into part gens and grav wells should be able to do that easily. Even with 200 part gens you can. I would try to balance aggro with your embassy sci consoles as we have + thread and – thread available. Also close proximities to targets has a big influence there.

    What I would do in your position atm would be to experiment with tac boff powers which does not cost a thing.

    How about you slot TTI, FAW II & TSIII as a start?

    I know it’s fire at will and you don’t like it but hey TS is also an multi targeting offensive power so why chose the right approach for your torpedoes and not for you awesome beams? Simply check it out.

    The next step would be to decide which of your offensives capabilities you find more pronounced and like to emphasize more on.

    If it’s your phaser I would reflect that with your tac consoles, if its rather torpedos I would do the same. Respective console are available at fleet spire.

    When made that decision I’d tend to the space set you use. For torpedo centric builds we have the adapted maco 2 pice set which happens to have a nice deflector for scis as well. If it’s rather beams I’d tend to stuff like ico or nukara sets.

    Hm. :/

    I think the discussion in here went a bit out of hand. We seem to have a solid core of “fire at will haters” around but is this really what it’s all about? I mean I can understand that it’s sad that beams work better with faw than cannons and topedos do with their counterpart abilities.

    But what I have a hard time understanding is that peeps are upset and bring in class boff powers and abilities and put them all on the DPS table on DPS centric maps and suddenly see mismatches. I mean what else is new? Somebody really expect the science powers of a starship to deal more DPS than the tac powers do? How about next we start complaining about engineering powers with so few offensive ones available and which all won’t do the big DPS by themselves as well. Different powers have different purposes and on every good build they work as team.

    Just because we have sci ships, escorts and crusier as well as sci captains, tac captains and engineers does not mean that we all don’t have sci boffs, tac boffs as well as engineering boffs on every single ship in game we chose to play. You chose sci ship with an lt. commander tac station reyan01. Even though you are a sci you are out there to shoot stuff. Accept the tactical parts of your ship as the ones dealing the DPS, support them with your build and let your sci powers set yourself apart from the scimitar players while having fun and do stuff they can’t.


    Post edited by peterconnorfirst on
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
  • lordsteve1lordsteve1 Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    I think the discussion in here went a bit out of hand. We seem to have a solid core of “fire at will haters” around but is this really what it’s all about? I mean I can understand that it’s sad that beams work better with faw than cannons and topedos do with their counterpart abilities.

    I don't consider myself a BFAW hater but I do despise what it has done to the current meta in the game.

    Here you have an ability which is an AOE ability that does more single target damage than the actual beam single target ability (Beam Overload) does. It has no downsides from its use in any situation with the exception of poor piloting killing targets at the wrong time.
    No other ability is so poorly balanced as BFAW currently is, and I've never seen another game where an AOE ability is considered better against single targets than stuff actually designed for single targets!

    That's where the OP came from and where people like myself and other so called "haters" are coming from. We don't hate the ability itself because under the right circumstances and with some adjustments it could have a proper place in the game. But right now it's just way out of hand to the detriment of the game, where the outcome of most matches depends on how much BFAW is being used.
    The true place of BFAW should be fairly obvious, its an AOE ability for cleaning fighter/mine/torp spam and from hitting multiple targets to grab aggro. It should be there to allow cruisers to sweep the battlefield for minor targets and attract the fire of the bigger ones so the escorts cane make attack runs and the science ships can disrupt the enemy.
    Some small changes to the ability would make in into this ability.
    SulMatuul.png
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited January 2016
    There are multiple peeps around which focus their builds on something besides BFAW, as do I as stated above. They are all quiet successful.

    Even though those approaches won’t outdo those which utilize beam fire at will to the best they are still WORLDS beyond forcing somebody into a spectator role of an ISA run.

    The only reason this happens is when a build and/or a pilot is not good enough at shooting stuff on a map which’s only objective is to shoot stuff. I hope you realize that either way it does not matter if they nerf fire at will or not simply because those players which decided to become good at shooting stuff will still erase those critters faster than anybody who does not. They will just use something else. I am also afraid that even under current meta they will easily outclass a canon build which uses 4 expensive beams arrays without a special beam attack ability besides subsystem targeting and that slotted on a tier 5 science ship where every item is dedicated to augment particle generators for a gravity well III.

    I don’t judge your build or you reyan01. I don’t even do that with peeps which bring in 2k DPS for as long as they have fun. Why? Because I don’t need to! Each time I queue up for ISA the efforts I have put into my builds as well as my piloting skills the past year grand me the satisfactory game experience I seek no matter who or what awaits me.

    The only thing I find a bit short sighted from you is to pop in here criticizing other players which chose to make current game rules work out for them best and thereby deny you a 15 minutes ISA run where your crowned control abilities turn you into the hero of the optional directive. Neither a “Scimitard” nor a “BFAW Epeen” is needed for that.

    I doubt a nerf to BFAW will do your gaming experience any good. Only you can do that with your build and piloting skills. :)


    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
  • kyrrokkyrrok Member Posts: 1,352 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    I think the discussion in here went a bit out of hand. We seem to have a solid core of “fire at will haters” around but is this really what it’s all about? I mean I can understand that it’s sad that beams work better with faw than cannons and topedos do with their counterpart abilities.

    I don't consider myself a BFAW hater but I do despise what it has done to the current meta in the game.

    Here you have an ability which is an AOE ability that does more single target damage than the actual beam single target ability (Beam Overload) does. It has no downsides from its use in any situation with the exception of poor piloting killing targets at the wrong time.
    No other ability is so poorly balanced as BFAW currently is, and I've never seen another game where an AOE ability is considered better against single targets than stuff actually designed for single targets!

    That's where the OP came from and where people like myself and other so called "haters" are coming from. We don't hate the ability itself because under the right circumstances and with some adjustments it could have a proper place in the game. But right now it's just way out of hand to the detriment of the game, where the outcome of most matches depends on how much BFAW is being used.
    The true place of BFAW should be fairly obvious, its an AOE ability for cleaning fighter/mine/torp spam and from hitting multiple targets to grab aggro. It should be there to allow cruisers to sweep the battlefield for minor targets and attract the fire of the bigger ones so the escorts cane make attack runs and the science ships can disrupt the enemy.
    Some small changes to the ability would make in into this ability.

    Exactly. And whilst I confess that I do hate it, it is exactly because I don't feel that any one ability should be the 'be-all-end-all' of the game.
    And, due the the reasons you already listed, that is exactly what BFAW has become.

    I must also agree. I'm not entirely fond of BFAW being the "steroids" of STO, with all others being placebo at best in comparison. Why even have Beam:Overload, Torpedo:High Yield, or Cannon:Rapid Fire when BFAW is so overpowering? It's not the hate of BFAW that is getting some of us to ask for it to be nerfed (not even including myself, I want the others powers buffed), it's our hope for a half decently comparabe chance at contributing to the effort with our own style of play instead of copy/pasting the same-old cookie-cutter no distinctiveness no build variety nature of BFAW. One BFAW to rule them all is anyway you cut it wrong.
  • ajalenajalen Member Posts: 113 Arc User
    edited January 2016
    ok but how ?
    my idea :
    BFAW I can hit max 3 targets , II max 4 and BFAW III max 5 targets
    5 cycles per activation all = zero DPM buff against single target , u still can do LOT more dmg but only against multiple targets
    target selection still random
    debuffs like APB works at all targets
    procs only against main target

    plus of course remove DMG drop on guns , beams can hit with full power at any range , why not guns ?
    and its not even cannon i think
    mzspQIG.jpg




  • jaymclaughlinjaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    kyrrok wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    I think the discussion in here went a bit out of hand. We seem to have a solid core of “fire at will haters” around but is this really what it’s all about? I mean I can understand that it’s sad that beams work better with faw than cannons and topedos do with their counterpart abilities.

    I don't consider myself a BFAW hater but I do despise what it has done to the current meta in the game.

    Here you have an ability which is an AOE ability that does more single target damage than the actual beam single target ability (Beam Overload) does. It has no downsides from its use in any situation with the exception of poor piloting killing targets at the wrong time.
    No other ability is so poorly balanced as BFAW currently is, and I've never seen another game where an AOE ability is considered better against single targets than stuff actually designed for single targets!

    That's where the OP came from and where people like myself and other so called "haters" are coming from. We don't hate the ability itself because under the right circumstances and with some adjustments it could have a proper place in the game. But right now it's just way out of hand to the detriment of the game, where the outcome of most matches depends on how much BFAW is being used.
    The true place of BFAW should be fairly obvious, its an AOE ability for cleaning fighter/mine/torp spam and from hitting multiple targets to grab aggro. It should be there to allow cruisers to sweep the battlefield for minor targets and attract the fire of the bigger ones so the escorts cane make attack runs and the science ships can disrupt the enemy.
    Some small changes to the ability would make in into this ability.

    Exactly. And whilst I confess that I do hate it, it is exactly because I don't feel that any one ability should be the 'be-all-end-all' of the game.
    And, due the the reasons you already listed, that is exactly what BFAW has become.

    I must also agree. I'm not entirely fond of BFAW being the "steroids" of STO, with all others being placebo at best in comparison. Why even have Beam:Overload, Torpedo:High Yield, or Cannon:Rapid Fire when BFAW is so overpowering? It's not the hate of BFAW that is getting some of us to ask for it to be nerfed (not even including myself, I want the others powers buffed), it's our hope for a half decently comparabe chance at contributing to the effort with our own style of play instead of copy/pasting the same-old cookie-cutter no distinctiveness no build variety nature of BFAW. One BFAW to rule them all is anyway you cut it wrong.


    The problem is that everyone's complaining about an AOE ability that buffs the only weapon type that does fast damage from long range, in a game that's about doing AOE damage to multiple targets against a timer (whether it be an actual timer or when npc group a get's to point b).

    Of course FAW is going to be the best ability... that's the way the game is!!!!

    It's not that FAW needs to be nerfed... we just need new content that isn't centred around killing mobs of npc's. One of the exceptions is CCA, which currently massively favours torpedos, especially with high yield. Maybe that should be nerfed too? I mean if you can kill the entity before it even releases it's first shockwave, then it must be OP right?

    The other issue is that there's a serious lack of Elite content in the game, and not only do they keep removing things (Breach, NWS etc), but currently advanced gives out more marks. Last time I did VCE I was rewarded with 13 undine marks! I mean seriously????

    I have all sorts of builds for all sorts of purposes (mostly because I get bored easily and like to do weird things). Sure I have some with FAW, but I also have cannon and torp builds. At one point I was messing around in PVP with my 492 part gen Scryer. The thing is, the majority of people will follow the easiest past for the most reward, so even if you did nerf FAW, it would only mean everyone used something else and then after a while it would become OP and we'd be in exactly the same situation. As long as the content is the same, and has the same overall objectives, the problem will remain, the numbers will get bigger, and the gap between player abilities will get wider and wider. Ideally a far more wider approach needs to be taken to player abilities, but unfortunately that would be like effectively re-writing the entire game.
    animated.gif
  • jaymclaughlinjaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    ajalen wrote: »
    ok but how ?
    my idea :
    BFAW I can hit max 3 targets , II max 4 and BFAW III max 5 targets
    5 cycles per activation all = zero DPM buff against single target , u still can do LOT more dmg but only against multiple targets
    target selection still random
    debuffs like APB works at all targets
    procs only against main target

    plus of course remove DMG drop on guns , beams can hit with full power at any range , why not guns ?
    and its not even cannon i think

    I hate the idea of making cannons behave more like beams... you might as well just have 1 weapon type and call it 'energy weapons'. Would be much better to keep the range fall off, but make them do more damage at close range, with less energy drain (they pulse rather than fire continuously), and move cannon boff abilities down a rank.
    animated.gif
  • darkknightucfdarkknightucf Member Posts: 1,546 Media Corps
    kyrrok wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    lordsteve1 wrote: »
    I think the discussion in here went a bit out of hand. We seem to have a solid core of “fire at will haters” around but is this really what it’s all about? I mean I can understand that it’s sad that beams work better with faw than cannons and topedos do with their counterpart abilities.

    I don't consider myself a BFAW hater but I do despise what it has done to the current meta in the game.

    Here you have an ability which is an AOE ability that does more single target damage than the actual beam single target ability (Beam Overload) does. It has no downsides from its use in any situation with the exception of poor piloting killing targets at the wrong time.
    No other ability is so poorly balanced as BFAW currently is, and I've never seen another game where an AOE ability is considered better against single targets than stuff actually designed for single targets!

    That's where the OP came from and where people like myself and other so called "haters" are coming from. We don't hate the ability itself because under the right circumstances and with some adjustments it could have a proper place in the game. But right now it's just way out of hand to the detriment of the game, where the outcome of most matches depends on how much BFAW is being used.
    The true place of BFAW should be fairly obvious, its an AOE ability for cleaning fighter/mine/torp spam and from hitting multiple targets to grab aggro. It should be there to allow cruisers to sweep the battlefield for minor targets and attract the fire of the bigger ones so the escorts cane make attack runs and the science ships can disrupt the enemy.
    Some small changes to the ability would make in into this ability.

    Exactly. And whilst I confess that I do hate it, it is exactly because I don't feel that any one ability should be the 'be-all-end-all' of the game.
    And, due the the reasons you already listed, that is exactly what BFAW has become.

    I must also agree. I'm not entirely fond of BFAW being the "steroids" of STO, with all others being placebo at best in comparison. Why even have Beam:Overload, Torpedo:High Yield, or Cannon:Rapid Fire when BFAW is so overpowering? It's not the hate of BFAW that is getting some of us to ask for it to be nerfed (not even including myself, I want the others powers buffed), it's our hope for a half decently comparabe chance at contributing to the effort with our own style of play instead of copy/pasting the same-old cookie-cutter no distinctiveness no build variety nature of BFAW. One BFAW to rule them all is anyway you cut it wrong.

    I support this statement. Like I said earlier, the big issue with BFAW (aside from some past/present bugs that also affected/affect TS) is not BFAW in and of itself, but of the multitude of things added to the game that work BEST with BFAW, be it by accident or by design. It has only been recently that there has been significant additions to the game that affect other weapon types; some by association (energy - Cannons), others by a push to feel more canon (Command Space Tier 1 for torps) and then eventually its own Reputation (Terran Task Force for torps, which has the best energy weapon in the game, FYI), to Hot Pursuit for mines (Did mines get anything else?).

    To the Devs,
    "If you build it properly, more people will use it."

    So long as people have a good network connection on a non-laggy night, a good computer, a ship with 6 beam arrays (any flavor(s)), 3 +Beam & 3 Plasma sci consoles, one good spacebar keybind, and a strong forehead, they can headbang their way into 20K. Toss in Leech, and things only get better for them.

    There's nothing wrong with having a good entry point for a game that focuses on blowing up things. In fact, I advocate that for people who are new to the game, as well as people who just want to relax while doing content appropriate for their level of play. The thing that I have some sort of objection to is that the same entry level build is also the same build for max level play, and other build styles are extremely restricted at the high end for a few reasons (some have been mentioned in this thread), and that translates into other areas of gameplay for those builds.

    Is it, "One build to rule them all?" Depends on the content, but the vast majority (read all but one space STF) can be completed easily and quickly by the one build; a build that has no bad/obsolete options in its weapon type, just only better performing ones.
    @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.
Sign In or Register to comment.