Sure OP, they can nerf beam fire at will. They just can’t do it without demotivating the 95% of the community which use it and invested quiet some time and resources to arrange their builds around it.
Curious if the 5% creative sci captains and religious torpedo maniacs in game who don’t rely on FAW are strong enough to carry matches and ensure fun play for the others while another million Dil or two is in order for everybody to rearrange.
The number of running PvE matches is not even half the value of what it is has been 14 months ago. I think the nerf you ask for would ensure another cut in half within the next 14. If at all cuz by the time peeps will have lost confidence in this game entirely.
Been there, done that, doing it again later, & with bugs. Oh, and it's 15% THANKYOUVERYMUCH
Beam Fire at Will and Torpedo Spread when used together should get a huge damage bonus. It is of course the ultimate combo.
That right there IS Star Trek Baby !!!!
That is THE definitive Star Trek combo and should be the most devastating attack in the game PERIOD.
Wouldn't the definitive Star Trek combo involve rerouting something through the space magic, err, deflector dish?
No.
That would be the post-Roddenberry, "Holy TRIBBLE use the tetrionic/chronotonic/plasmonic/tachyonic/ocillating/nano/grind-orrific/ magic/C-Store cha-ching machine."
Faction energy weapon and projectile is the definitive Star Trek combo.
I'm a Star Trek fan though, so I admit to bias.
"I don't use beams, and they are so good, so I want them less good for the people that use and depend on them, and until then I'll just stomp my feet because ONE ability happens to be good, because nothing in this game should ever be good or desirable ever. We should all just be miserable!"
Beam overload should be a duration effect much like Fire at will.
For 10 secodns, every shot fired willl be a BO, which means a guranteed crit (though at a lower magnitude than currently).
It will be a good single target power and mesh well with some pet builds for added fun. Pets using this obviously benefit as well.
+ it looks absolutely cool, for reference use the singularity overcharge with beam arrays , it looks very nice.
Cannon's
Get rid of the damage drop off. (and with that i mean equalize it with beams). That alone would fix half the issues.
Beams are superior due to their easy to use nature. They hit instantly and require little positioning and function at all ranges.
Bring cannons up to that usability. It woudl do them very good, visually, to have faster moving "projectiles" and near instant hit like beams have.
curiously, the vaadwaur beam arrays are exactly how i wish cannons would present themselves, minus the long projectile trail.
Not completely sure how much the cannons need to be changed on a base level as they are quite good on a escort or other high turn rate ships, and which can close with the target to minimize the drop off distance. Though i will agree the travel time on the projectiles needs to be increased even if just to reduce the disparity caused by beams having instant hit basically damage.
I personally would love to see some mechanic added to full cruisers and carriers that can use/slot cannons, which would make using cannons more effective an minimize the issue of their low turn rate has on using dual/dual heavy cannons though with a draw back. Like how i so would have loved it if the new fed carrier had a siege like mechanic it could deploy that would sacrifice mobility/turn-rate for increasing the range an damage drop off of cannons. To me these changes would make using cannons on the cruisers that can slot them more viable an option, while giving a suitable trade off to not make either choice completely better than the rest. To me alot of times when i think of some huge vessel like carriers that are not normally seen in the thick of the fighting, i think of them being on the edges with long range cannons an intelligence coming from their fighters/frigates/shuttles or other vessels in the thick of combat relaying info for them to bombard with their long range weapons.
Siege mode: in this mode the carrier/cruiser diverts power from their engines to their weapon system, as well as to their shield systems. Which would than reduce their mobility yet also would empower their cannons an beam banks giving them higher range an either rates of fire or reducing the damage drop off from range, and also give their shields a boost to their hardness/resistance.
While in this siege mode the carrier or cruiser would have their turn rate reduced to either extremely low degree or to zero, while also have their speed reduced by 60% during the duration they spend in this mode.
Than their weapons would gain the fallowing buffs based on which weapon system they are using; Cannons would gain a increased firing arc going from 45 degrees to 75 for dual heavy, while dual cannons/dual beam banks would go up to 120 degrees from 90 degrees, but single cannons as beam arrays.
Now also beam arrays as well as dual beam banks would gain an improved rate of fire While in this mode. Where as the cannons would gain a buff to their range, as well as having the damage drop off from range reduced to either very low amounts or completely negated.
Are cannons canon? Has and ship other than the AT Constitution used them? Do the broken beams of the TOS films count as cannons or beams? Why do the NX cannons fire beams? Why did the Kelvin's cannons fire beams? Why were all the prior mentioned phaser red and not orange? Do any of these questions have anything to do with BFaW?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Are cannons canon? Has and ship other than the AT Constitution used them? Do the broken beams of the TOS films count as cannons or beams? Why do the NX cannons fire beams? Why did the Kelvin's cannons fire beams? Why were all the prior mentioned phaser red and not orange? Do any of these questions have anything to do with BFaW?
@artan42 : I found the "cannon" thing funny in STO from the very first moment. What the Defiant used were "pulse phasers" and from what I piece tohether those are basically very short "beam" bursts, sacrificing the superior targeting of continous beams for... what exactly? I think they are just more compact or something? The TMP-era red phasers are type-8s, which are still shuttle mounted weaponry in TNG and I think the "attack fighters" also used those (but DS9 confused a lot of VFX, sadly). NX cannons firing beams - no idea. I give up on anything ENT, to me none of it makes sense. For example, they develop the phaser, yet in "The Cage" laser weaponry is still in use (it doesn't matter that there are RL reasons for that, it was said in canon and shown).
Regardin soem general statements in here, the notion of "never nerf anything" dooms a game to be stagnant and promote power creep, it is literally the unhealthiest of choices.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Are cannons canon? Has and ship other than the AT Constitution used them? Do the broken beams of the TOS films count as cannons or beams? Why do the NX cannons fire beams? Why did the Kelvin's cannons fire beams? Why were all the prior mentioned phaser red and not orange? Do any of these questions have anything to do with BFaW?
Honestly it is more of a issue in that cannons would be less true to form of what cannons should be, as both cannons an arrays/banks are still beam based. I see it more of a difference in the power of the energy discharge in that pulse-beams/cannons are more based on firing a volley of condensed beam-pulses that might have a higher discharge density per pulse than a full on beam, but the beam arrays/banks have a higher energy focus as the blast is focused into a single sustained burst. It could also be that by increasing the energy discharge levels it would have burned out the relays supplying the power, and so using a pulse-firing sequence allowed the stress on the relays from firing them to be dissipated over several pulse instead of/compared to a constant stream.
It could also just be that it is designation of power, like an array is the basic armament classification, banks are above those, than cannons, and lances being the highest an highest discharge weapons. Each could use a beam type attack an just that the strength of the discharged energy determine the classification, though normally that is more of a Mark type thing. The color could just be the system used for generating the beam, the power of the beam, and what was used for discharging the beam, as with evolution of technology could result in changes. There is also the fact these weapons might have been developed by difference races or technology from other races, and so the end result is different , but this is all guess work.
Beam overload should be a duration effect much like Fire at will.
For 10 secodns, every shot fired willl be a BO, which means a guranteed crit (though at a lower magnitude than currently).
It will be a good single target power and mesh well with some pet builds for added fun. Pets using this obviously benefit as well.
+ it looks absolutely cool, for reference use the singularity overcharge with beam arrays , it looks very nice.
I like that idea of beam overload having a duration, but I would almost say i would rather see beam overload (and cannon rapid fire) as toggles you can enable and disable, but which might drain your weapon power faster in exchange for a increased rate of fire/damage output buff while active. In this way you could toggle on either version an if you used cannon spread/bfaw along-side it you would take a high weapon power drain for a large boost in damage output for aoe, also it would make for some interesting power-management choices as well as choices in play based on when to use both at the same time. Now with a change to make cannon rapid fire toggle-able it could be that it might increase not just the rate of fire of the cannons, but also the speed of the projectiles they fire as well during it being active. This could even done for a new ability that ramps down the damage of a torp fired while the ability is toggled, but increased their rate of travel to the target, and so if the ability is used with high yield the destructible torp would travel at a much higher speed an be less likely to be fired down, maybe giving it a chance to evade being fired down by anything other than actual hanger-pets or point-defense systems.
Umm...yeah...no. When a skill is SO freaking high above EVERYTHING else, you HAVE to nerf it. You should power up the other stuff too, but to make EVERYTHING broken is not a valid solution either. You need to unbreak the broken stuff.
Nerfs are bad. If, for nothing else, because of the wickedly costly Upgrade system: if I pay thru my nose to get stuff upgraded, I don't want others to take it away (all in the name of 'balance,' of course). Buff instead of nerf. And, as I've said before, live and let live. Personally I've never felt the impulse to try and take other people's toys away.
I have said this before, I'll say it again. The chief concern with Fire At Will right now is that everyone uses it. It's the 'best' ability and is therefore the 'go to.'
Lets ask ourselves why this is? Why does everyone FAW everything? Does everyone hate the idea of Cannons?
There is one reason only.. lack of alternatives.
You can go Cannons, who's mechanics are horribly flawed and make them require far more effort for less payoff (in most cases.)
Even if you're a Beam Captain, what's your alternative? Beam Overload? Again.. odd mechanics, most people don't use it. Surgical Strikes? Sure.. that one is not bad but of course there is what.. 3 ships that can even use it? Hardly a mass solution.
Nerfing abilities does not cause diversity.. it never has and it never will. When you take the best ability and reduce it's effectiveness, it has one of two effects. Either it still remains the best ability even after the nerf and everyone sticks with it while setting the forums on fire. Or the nerfed ability moves below the 2nd best option and the 2nd best becomes the new 'Meta' and the problem persists.
The way you create diversity is creating desirable alternatives. You overhaul Cannons to make them competitive. You look at introducing other Beam Skills or improving things like Overload or Surigical Strikes to make them viable alternatives to Fire At Will. When you give people options, they'll try different things. Back when Aux2Bat was the big thing everyone wanted it nerfed. Cryptic instead did the smart thing, and introduced alternatives. They put in the Nukara traits that made people want high Aux, they put in traits and other mechanics that people could use as alternatives and people naturally moved away from A2B. Meanwhile, those who enjoyed it were able to stick with it and didn't have to change if they didn't want to.
Nerfing Fire At Will is a reactionary, short sided solution that lacks imagination and won't fix the problem. You want to really fix the problem? Give people alternatives.. give them other effective abilities and people will naturally migrate away from Fire At Will.
Just say no to nerfs.
I think I already supported this post. It's so true, though, it deserves to be restated.
No nerfs are not bad, nor is seeking balance that minimizes power creep. Just because people spent time an resources to upgrade is not a counter argument for not nerfing something that is over performing. Big reason why is that you still have all that gear you upgraded, it is not taken from you, and you can still use it with the same build you had even if it is weaker. Now if a nerf to the ability actually caused you to lose the gear without your choice, if you choose to switch to a different spec or ability that is your choice and issue., than you might have a a point. Also no one is losing anything as the ability still exists an usable, you still got use out of it prior to the nerf, and so nothing lost yet alot is gained via limiting the power-creep just using buffs to balance abilities would cause.
Having abilities that perform at that level an need to be nerfed is bad for the game at large, and buffing other abilities to be equal to this abilities new par is even worse as you now made it that enemies have to be buffed creating more power-creep. The best way to combat power-creep an keep the game actually fun overall, not just fun for the min/maxers, is to use a combination of smaller buffs an nerfs to balance the abilities to a set an new lower par, and doing this over several stages of patches over a single large scale buff/nerfing patch.
No nerfs are not bad, nor is seeking balance that minimizes power creep. Just because people spent time an resources to upgrade is not a counter argument for not nerfing something...
It is when you're a business who wants ppl to keep spending (and, in the process, want ppl to think you're half-way trustworthy).
Big reason why is that you still have all that gear you upgraded, it is not taken from you, and you can still use it with the same build you had even if it is weaker. Now if a nerf to the ability actually caused you to lose the gear without your choice, if you choose to switch to a different spec or ability that is your choice and issue., than you might have a a point.
Semanics. Nerfing, for all purposes and intent, is 'taking away.'
Having abilities that perform at that level an need to be nerfed is bad for the game at large, and buffing other abilities to be equal to this abilities new par is even worse as you now made it that enemies have to be buffed creating more power-creep.
Whilst people here are tripping over themselves, with glee, to say how bad power creep is, in reality, power creep is the most natural incentive in any business: you buy a good TV set now, and an even better one a few years down the road. If it weren't for power creep, no one would ever seek to upgrade, ever.
The best way to combat power-creep an keep the game actually fun overall, not just fun for the min/maxers, is to use a combination of smaller buffs an nerfs to balance the abilities to a set an new lower par, and doing this over several stages of patches over a single large scale buff/nerfing patch.
'The best way to combat power-creep' is to not do it. Everyone using BFAW is not an indicaion of this ability 'overperforming' (as you put it), but of other abilities underperforming. Like cannons, for instance.
seaofsorrows wrote: »
Nefing FAW is not the answer.
I have said this before, I'll say it again. The chief concern with Fire At Will right now is that everyone uses it. It's the 'best' ability and is therefore the 'go to.'
Lets ask ourselves why this is? Why does everyone FAW everything? Does everyone hate the idea of Cannons?
There is one reason only.. lack of alternatives.
You can go Cannons, who's mechanics are horribly flawed and make them require far more effort for less payoff (in most cases.)
Even if you're a Beam Captain, what's your alternative? Beam Overload? Again.. odd mechanics, most people don't use it. Surgical Strikes? Sure.. that one is not bad but of course there is what.. 3 ships that can even use it? Hardly a mass solution.
Nerfing abilities does not cause diversity.. it never has and it never will. When you take the best ability and reduce it's effectiveness, it has one of two effects. Either it still remains the best ability even after the nerf and everyone sticks with it while setting the forums on fire. Or the nerfed ability moves below the 2nd best option and the 2nd best becomes the new 'Meta' and the problem persists.
The way you create diversity is creating desirable alternatives. You overhaul Cannons to make them competitive. You look at introducing other Beam Skills or improving things like Overload or Surigical Strikes to make them viable alternatives to Fire At Will. When you give people options, they'll try different things. Back when Aux2Bat was the big thing everyone wanted it nerfed. Cryptic instead did the smart thing, and introduced alternatives. They put in the Nukara traits that made people want high Aux, they put in traits and other mechanics that people could use as alternatives and people naturally moved away from A2B. Meanwhile, those who enjoyed it were able to stick with it and didn't have to change if they didn't want to.
Nerfing Fire At Will is a reactionary, short sided solution that lacks imagination and won't fix the problem. You want to really fix the problem? Give people alternatives.. give them other effective abilities and people will naturally migrate away from Fire At Will.
No nerfs are not bad, nor is seeking balance that minimizes power creep. Just because people spent time an resources to upgrade is not a counter argument for not nerfing something...
It is when you're a business who wants ppl to keep spending (and, in the process, want ppl to think you're half-way trustworthy).
Big reason why is that you still have all that gear you upgraded, it is not taken from you, and you can still use it with the same build you had even if it is weaker. Now if a nerf to the ability actually caused you to lose the gear without your choice, if you choose to switch to a different spec or ability that is your choice and issue., than you might have a a point.
Semanics. Nerfing, for all purposes and intent, is 'taking away.'
Having abilities that perform at that level an need to be nerfed is bad for the game at large, and buffing other abilities to be equal to this abilities new par is even worse as you now made it that enemies have to be buffed creating more power-creep.
Whilst people here are tripping over themselves, with glee, to say how bad power creep is, in reality, power creep is the most natural incentive in any business: you buy a good TV set now, and an even better one a few years down the road. If it weren't for power creep, no one would ever seek to upgrade, ever.
The best way to combat power-creep an keep the game actually fun overall, not just fun for the min/maxers, is to use a combination of smaller buffs an nerfs to balance the abilities to a set an new lower par, and doing this over several stages of patches over a single large scale buff/nerfing patch.
'The best way to combat power-creep' is to not do it. Everyone using BFAW is not an indicaion of this ability 'overperforming' (as you put it), but of other abilities underperforming. Like cannons, for instance.
No nerfs are not bad, nor is seeking balance that minimizes power creep. Just because people spent time an resources to upgrade is not a counter argument for not nerfing something...
It is when you're a business who wants ppl to keep spending (and, in the process, want ppl to think you're half-way trustworthy).
Big reason why is that you still have all that gear you upgraded, it is not taken from you, and you can still use it with the same build you had even if it is weaker. Now if a nerf to the ability actually caused you to lose the gear without your choice, if you choose to switch to a different spec or ability that is your choice and issue., than you might have a a point.
Semanics. Nerfing, for all purposes and intent, is 'taking away.'
Having abilities that perform at that level an need to be nerfed is bad for the game at large, and buffing other abilities to be equal to this abilities new par is even worse as you now made it that enemies have to be buffed creating more power-creep.
Whilst people here are tripping over themselves, with glee, to say how bad power creep is, in reality, power creep is the most natural incentive in any business: you buy a good TV set now, and an even better one a few years down the road. If it weren't for power creep, no one would ever seek to upgrade, ever.
The best way to combat power-creep an keep the game actually fun overall, not just fun for the min/maxers, is to use a combination of smaller buffs an nerfs to balance the abilities to a set an new lower par, and doing this over several stages of patches over a single large scale buff/nerfing patch.
'The best way to combat power-creep' is to not do it. Everyone using BFAW is not an indicaion of this ability 'overperforming' (as you put it), but of other abilities underperforming. Like cannons, for instance.
Yes power-creep is going to happen, and is natural, but the degree of power creep is the issue. A buff to all abilities to bring them up to what bfaw is doing is going to create too much power creep, which will create a steep climb in other areas to compensate for the increased power, power creep should be a creep not a wave something that takes alot of time. Buffing or nerfing solely is a bad idea in both directions, it creates too much of a swing, which is exactly why using both is better than using one or the other solely. An i never said not to buff up the under-performing abilities, but to use nerfs to the over performing ability to minimize the degree you will need to buff these under performing an limit the degree of power creep that is created. You have a great example there in that TVs get better overtime by increments allowing you to use the same TV for at least a year an a half before you really should look to get a new one if not longer. An you do not see huge swings in improvements very often it is more a long process of minor improvements.
No nerfing is not taking anything other than power/performance from an ability, just like buffing is not giving anything other than power to an ability, in both parts the weapons/consoles are still present an usable. Under or over performing are the same thing an yes if something is doing better than others it is over-performing, just like by the same coin that does imply the others are under-performing.
Not completely sure how much the cannons need to be changed on a base level as they are quite good on a escort or other high turn rate ships, and which can close with the target to minimize the drop off distance.
I find my escorts have an additional problem: they over-run their target before getting more than a volley off.
The biggest problem with strafing is that I have to spend a lot time off-target to bring her 'round. I could ease off the throttle, but that lowers my defense. I would like to see a mechanic for cannons that improves damage based on your ship's speed.
"I deprived your ship of power, and when I swing around, I mean to deprive you of your life." - Khan Noonien Singh
Not completely sure how much the cannons need to be changed on a base level as they are quite good on a escort or other high turn rate ships, and which can close with the target to minimize the drop off distance.
I find my escorts have an additional problem: they over-run their target before getting more than a volley off.
The biggest problem with strafing is that I have to spend a lot time off-target to bring her 'round. I could ease off the throttle, but that lowers my defense. I would like to see a mechanic for cannons that improves damage based on your ship's speed.
"I deprived your ship of power, and when I swing around, I mean to deprive you of your life." - Khan Noonien Singh
Yeah that is annoying it is a matter of knowing when to throttle down, and such to maximize time on target. Like i said before with a change to cannon rapid fire which would make it a toggle ability, that increased your weapon power drain (maybe a static value over a increased drain for each weapon fired) while toggled on an which would buff your cannon's rate of fire during that time,and such a change would be nice as it would give you more volleys on the target. One reeason i like this idea is that it would give you alot of leeway, in that you could choose when an how long you use the ability. Like with strafing you can toggle it on at the start an then when you bank-off you toggle it off, while not feeling you need to use every second of the buff, also the buff to the rate of fire can be higher as you can make the drain harder to compensate for an keep it toggled on. This could also work into making managing power system levels more interesting.
Though i normally run a mine on the back so when I bank off for another run they are normally destroyed by the mines that converged on them I had laid. I would not if they actually had it that cannons actually gained a buff to their damage when used at very close range specifically, kinda like a counter-balance to the drop-off they get from being used too far away. Though there are alot of traits that do this like point blank, and such that are more general buffs that might make it too powerful.
Everyone using BFAW is not an indicaion of this ability 'overperforming' (as you put it), but of other abilities underperforming. Like cannons, for instance.
To truly decipher this statement, we need to know which one is the intended level of power.
It's not up to us, as players, to make that determination. If Cryptic believes that cannons and CSV is "balanced" in their scheme, and BFaW is "overperforming", then, well...
And how many of the "Lockbox OP Clicky powers" were... adjusted... within weeks of the release of a new lockbox? We're starting to see Kemocite get visited with this treatment - so the obvious statement of "you paid for it, you're due to keep it" has a history of not holding water...
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
I really doubt they did what they did to Kemocite lightly. They probably had lockbox ability credibility and preserving lockbox value on their minds the entire time. But it was freezing/crashing players out of the game. They finally came to the realization that keeping Kemocite as powerful as steroids for those who "paid" for it was not worth letting the game be that excessively unplayable for far too many others. People continue to refuse to realize that this fix had to happen.
I really doubt they did what they did to Kemocite lightly. They probably had lockbox ability credibility and preserving lockbox value on their minds the entire time. But it was freezing/crashing players out of the game. They finally came to the realization that keeping Kemocite as powerful as steroids for those who "paid" for it was not worth letting the game be that excessively unplayable for far too many others. People continue to refuse to realize that this fix had to happen.
Really? What I gathered from the most recent change of Kemocite is that it was "designed" as a once-per-volley effect, with correspondingly high damage due to it's design to only go off once every 4 shots, but because BFaW (and possibly to a lesser extent Torp Spread) generates a "volley check" every time it selects a new random target - it was spawning multiple "high strength once per volley effects" within "a single volley"...
Therefore, Kemocite had it's damage adjusted to a "once per shot" level - and, more importantly, it was changed to a "once per shot" effect so that it was checking "every shot", whether said shots are done under the effects of BFaW, CSV, BO, no BOff effect, whatever.
This would "partially" be what Meimeitoo's been looking for - bringing the rest of the world up to the level of the OP. However, while Meimietoo would "believe" that the numbers didn't need to change, Cryptic has said that said number is "too high" for a once-per-shot effect, and therefore "nerfed" it to be within the Cryptic-desired strengths, not left completely alone so that all the other procs could be increased to Kemocite levels...
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Comments
Agreed 100%, this would be my only change (for now) and then go from there after the devs have had time to assess this change.
That right there IS Star Trek Baby !!!!
That is THE definitive Star Trek combo and should be the most devastating attack in the game PERIOD.
Wouldn't the definitive Star Trek combo involve rerouting something through the space magic, err, deflector dish?
Then nerfed again. Seriously, did you all not play this game the last few months when hybrid TS3+BFAW3 was the ultimate DPS machine?
Or just bandwagoning with BFAW haters for the sake of hating because BFAW complainers dont know how to play the other weapons platforms?
Wouldn't that be the BFAW complainer complainers that don't know how to play the other weapon platforms?
Other platforms require you to *gasp* *shock* *horror* turn your ship!
Been there, done that, doing it again later, & with bugs. Oh, and it's 15% THANKYOUVERYMUCH
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.
No.
That would be the post-Roddenberry, "Holy TRIBBLE use the tetrionic/chronotonic/plasmonic/tachyonic/ocillating/nano/grind-orrific/ magic/C-Store cha-ching machine."
Faction energy weapon and projectile is the definitive Star Trek combo.
I'm a Star Trek fan though, so I admit to bias.
This made me chuckle!
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Beam overload should be a duration effect much like Fire at will.
For 10 secodns, every shot fired willl be a BO, which means a guranteed crit (though at a lower magnitude than currently).
It will be a good single target power and mesh well with some pet builds for added fun. Pets using this obviously benefit as well.
+ it looks absolutely cool, for reference use the singularity overcharge with beam arrays , it looks very nice.
Cannon's
Get rid of the damage drop off. (and with that i mean equalize it with beams). That alone would fix half the issues.
Beams are superior due to their easy to use nature. They hit instantly and require little positioning and function at all ranges.
Bring cannons up to that usability. It woudl do them very good, visually, to have faster moving "projectiles" and near instant hit like beams have.
curiously, the vaadwaur beam arrays are exactly how i wish cannons would present themselves, minus the long projectile trail.
I personally would love to see some mechanic added to full cruisers and carriers that can use/slot cannons, which would make using cannons more effective an minimize the issue of their low turn rate has on using dual/dual heavy cannons though with a draw back. Like how i so would have loved it if the new fed carrier had a siege like mechanic it could deploy that would sacrifice mobility/turn-rate for increasing the range an damage drop off of cannons. To me these changes would make using cannons on the cruisers that can slot them more viable an option, while giving a suitable trade off to not make either choice completely better than the rest. To me alot of times when i think of some huge vessel like carriers that are not normally seen in the thick of the fighting, i think of them being on the edges with long range cannons an intelligence coming from their fighters/frigates/shuttles or other vessels in the thick of combat relaying info for them to bombard with their long range weapons.
Siege mode: in this mode the carrier/cruiser diverts power from their engines to their weapon system, as well as to their shield systems. Which would than reduce their mobility yet also would empower their cannons an beam banks giving them higher range an either rates of fire or reducing the damage drop off from range, and also give their shields a boost to their hardness/resistance.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
@artan42 : I found the "cannon" thing funny in STO from the very first moment. What the Defiant used were "pulse phasers" and from what I piece tohether those are basically very short "beam" bursts, sacrificing the superior targeting of continous beams for... what exactly? I think they are just more compact or something? The TMP-era red phasers are type-8s, which are still shuttle mounted weaponry in TNG and I think the "attack fighters" also used those (but DS9 confused a lot of VFX, sadly). NX cannons firing beams - no idea. I give up on anything ENT, to me none of it makes sense. For example, they develop the phaser, yet in "The Cage" laser weaponry is still in use (it doesn't matter that there are RL reasons for that, it was said in canon and shown).
Regardin soem general statements in here, the notion of "never nerf anything" dooms a game to be stagnant and promote power creep, it is literally the unhealthiest of choices.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Honestly it is more of a issue in that cannons would be less true to form of what cannons should be, as both cannons an arrays/banks are still beam based. I see it more of a difference in the power of the energy discharge in that pulse-beams/cannons are more based on firing a volley of condensed beam-pulses that might have a higher discharge density per pulse than a full on beam, but the beam arrays/banks have a higher energy focus as the blast is focused into a single sustained burst. It could also be that by increasing the energy discharge levels it would have burned out the relays supplying the power, and so using a pulse-firing sequence allowed the stress on the relays from firing them to be dissipated over several pulse instead of/compared to a constant stream.
It could also just be that it is designation of power, like an array is the basic armament classification, banks are above those, than cannons, and lances being the highest an highest discharge weapons. Each could use a beam type attack an just that the strength of the discharged energy determine the classification, though normally that is more of a Mark type thing. The color could just be the system used for generating the beam, the power of the beam, and what was used for discharging the beam, as with evolution of technology could result in changes. There is also the fact these weapons might have been developed by difference races or technology from other races, and so the end result is different , but this is all guess work.
I like that idea of beam overload having a duration, but I would almost say i would rather see beam overload (and cannon rapid fire) as toggles you can enable and disable, but which might drain your weapon power faster in exchange for a increased rate of fire/damage output buff while active. In this way you could toggle on either version an if you used cannon spread/bfaw along-side it you would take a high weapon power drain for a large boost in damage output for aoe, also it would make for some interesting power-management choices as well as choices in play based on when to use both at the same time. Now with a change to make cannon rapid fire toggle-able it could be that it might increase not just the rate of fire of the cannons, but also the speed of the projectiles they fire as well during it being active. This could even done for a new ability that ramps down the damage of a torp fired while the ability is toggled, but increased their rate of travel to the target, and so if the ability is used with high yield the destructible torp would travel at a much higher speed an be less likely to be fired down, maybe giving it a chance to evade being fired down by anything other than actual hanger-pets or point-defense systems.
Nerfs are bad. If, for nothing else, because of the wickedly costly Upgrade system: if I pay thru my nose to get stuff upgraded, I don't want others to take it away (all in the name of 'balance,' of course). Buff instead of nerf. And, as I've said before, live and let live. Personally I've never felt the impulse to try and take other people's toys away.
I think I already supported this post. It's so true, though, it deserves to be restated.
Having abilities that perform at that level an need to be nerfed is bad for the game at large, and buffing other abilities to be equal to this abilities new par is even worse as you now made it that enemies have to be buffed creating more power-creep. The best way to combat power-creep an keep the game actually fun overall, not just fun for the min/maxers, is to use a combination of smaller buffs an nerfs to balance the abilities to a set an new lower par, and doing this over several stages of patches over a single large scale buff/nerfing patch.
It is when you're a business who wants ppl to keep spending (and, in the process, want ppl to think you're half-way trustworthy).
Semanics. Nerfing, for all purposes and intent, is 'taking away.'
Whilst people here are tripping over themselves, with glee, to say how bad power creep is, in reality, power creep is the most natural incentive in any business: you buy a good TV set now, and an even better one a few years down the road. If it weren't for power creep, no one would ever seek to upgrade, ever.
'The best way to combat power-creep' is to not do it.
I agree
Totally agree
Yes power-creep is going to happen, and is natural, but the degree of power creep is the issue. A buff to all abilities to bring them up to what bfaw is doing is going to create too much power creep, which will create a steep climb in other areas to compensate for the increased power, power creep should be a creep not a wave something that takes alot of time. Buffing or nerfing solely is a bad idea in both directions, it creates too much of a swing, which is exactly why using both is better than using one or the other solely. An i never said not to buff up the under-performing abilities, but to use nerfs to the over performing ability to minimize the degree you will need to buff these under performing an limit the degree of power creep that is created. You have a great example there in that TVs get better overtime by increments allowing you to use the same TV for at least a year an a half before you really should look to get a new one if not longer. An you do not see huge swings in improvements very often it is more a long process of minor improvements.
No nerfing is not taking anything other than power/performance from an ability, just like buffing is not giving anything other than power to an ability, in both parts the weapons/consoles are still present an usable. Under or over performing are the same thing an yes if something is doing better than others it is over-performing, just like by the same coin that does imply the others are under-performing.
The biggest problem with strafing is that I have to spend a lot time off-target to bring her 'round. I could ease off the throttle, but that lowers my defense. I would like to see a mechanic for cannons that improves damage based on your ship's speed.
"I deprived your ship of power, and when I swing around, I mean to deprive you of your life." - Khan Noonien Singh
Yeah that is annoying it is a matter of knowing when to throttle down, and such to maximize time on target. Like i said before with a change to cannon rapid fire which would make it a toggle ability, that increased your weapon power drain (maybe a static value over a increased drain for each weapon fired) while toggled on an which would buff your cannon's rate of fire during that time,and such a change would be nice as it would give you more volleys on the target. One reeason i like this idea is that it would give you alot of leeway, in that you could choose when an how long you use the ability. Like with strafing you can toggle it on at the start an then when you bank-off you toggle it off, while not feeling you need to use every second of the buff, also the buff to the rate of fire can be higher as you can make the drain harder to compensate for an keep it toggled on. This could also work into making managing power system levels more interesting.
Though i normally run a mine on the back so when I bank off for another run they are normally destroyed by the mines that converged on them I had laid. I would not if they actually had it that cannons actually gained a buff to their damage when used at very close range specifically, kinda like a counter-balance to the drop-off they get from being used too far away. Though there are alot of traits that do this like point blank, and such that are more general buffs that might make it too powerful.
To truly decipher this statement, we need to know which one is the intended level of power.
It's not up to us, as players, to make that determination. If Cryptic believes that cannons and CSV is "balanced" in their scheme, and BFaW is "overperforming", then, well...
And how many of the "Lockbox OP Clicky powers" were... adjusted... within weeks of the release of a new lockbox? We're starting to see Kemocite get visited with this treatment - so the obvious statement of "you paid for it, you're due to keep it" has a history of not holding water...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Really? What I gathered from the most recent change of Kemocite is that it was "designed" as a once-per-volley effect, with correspondingly high damage due to it's design to only go off once every 4 shots, but because BFaW (and possibly to a lesser extent Torp Spread) generates a "volley check" every time it selects a new random target - it was spawning multiple "high strength once per volley effects" within "a single volley"...
Therefore, Kemocite had it's damage adjusted to a "once per shot" level - and, more importantly, it was changed to a "once per shot" effect so that it was checking "every shot", whether said shots are done under the effects of BFaW, CSV, BO, no BOff effect, whatever.
This would "partially" be what Meimeitoo's been looking for - bringing the rest of the world up to the level of the OP. However, while Meimietoo would "believe" that the numbers didn't need to change, Cryptic has said that said number is "too high" for a once-per-shot effect, and therefore "nerfed" it to be within the Cryptic-desired strengths, not left completely alone so that all the other procs could be increased to Kemocite levels...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]