what will it take to bump FAW spam from the top spot?

icsairguns

I am wondering what my fellow warriors think it would take to bump beam faw spam out of the top spot.


Now I know cannons are still extremely good and high dps bursting powerhouses but we all know beam faw and its lazy easy playstyle of flying in circles is the new norm for most players.

so whats it gonna take to fix the problem or bring some balance back?

we know they will not nerf beams too many feddybear cry babies out there for that to ever happen. so thats already out the window.

my thoughts would be .
1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.
2. have scatter volley last a tad bit longer and make it so it actually fires if no target is selected like FAW does. right now if a group of ships are in route and i target one then hit scatter volley when that main ship is gone i have to target another or wait for the auto target to take hold and current lag sometimes that takes a bit.
3. turrets should use scatter volley like beams do and fire in all directions not just the forward arc.
4. Or fix science skills and gw1 be a lt slot instead of ltcmdr. as it is now gw1 is ltcmdr gw2 commander and gw3 is also commander not sure the logic behind that one.

so anyways have at it lets hear what it would take.

tasila

I also hate bfaw :P and i like d/hc s but Scatter Volley leaves behind and Cannon Rapidfire need much more efford to get propperly played its sadly just easyer to slot beams to bfaw...

goodscotch

I have a "beam boat" so to speak. It's a Fleet T5-U K'tinga. I use BFAW. I only have three total slots for tactical. I prefer to use the Beam Overload though on single targets. If you have your ship set up well, matching tactical consoles and good weapons, Beam Overload is devastating to a single target. I think if they bumped beam overload a bit more, you would see players use BFAW less.

kyrrok

I would love to see the end of that useless, borked for the sake of borking cannon dropoff. A slight boost in base damage would also be much appreciated. They also need to rework the cannons especially the DHCs so they can be fired more often, instead of waiting so long between firing.

I'd also like to see Beam:Overload get to be a better single target weapon than BFAW. A boost to crtD during the big blast would certainly help it become a hunter's friend again.

Torpedoes, mostly the basic 6 need a boost. They don't enjoy the boosts given to others with science consoles so they need the most help. They need more base damage. The diminishing returns of Torpedo:High Yield, that is each torpedo being weaker in T:HY3 than in T:HY:2 and the same further on down, also a bork for borking's sake, gotz ta go.

But as much as I share the opinion that BFAW is too much of the be-all end-all make-other-abilities-a-fool's-choice ability, I don't even need to take away its crown. All I'd want for is the others to be more competitive, and to have their place. I can certainly understand if plenty of others want it actually nerfed. I wouldn't hold my breath for a nerf, being that the one who made it the be-all end-all is still large and in charge, meaning it's not getting nerfed anytime soon. Of course if it did, then, my deepest sympathies.

icsairguns

I always just seen beams in general as more of a federation weapon. cannons klingon and torps romulan maybe if they gave a boost to faction prefered weapon type and flavor like phaser beams for feds get a boost, cannon disruptor Klingon get a boost, plasma torps rommy get a boost sort of thing. might even help the faction stand apart a bit instead of them all becoming the same damn thing.

I mean im sporting beams now also on most of my ships but i just hate doing it and still carry my cannon setup in inventory to change over to but i never seem to cause if i do some beam faw person clears the map before i get a few shots off. and i get less for my specialization points .

kyrrok

That cultural advantage sounds like a good idea. I doubt it's going to come automatic. I would like to see phaser beams and Q-torps get a boost for Feds. Disruptor cannon and photorps enhancement would do well for the Klingons. Plasma beam and torpedo damage for the Romulans would also be nice. And maybe a few others that get a boost to an energy weapon type and delivery method, and a torpedo. Of course I'd like this on top of the base boost that would be necessary as mentioned in my previous post.

I have seen beams used by Romulans and Klingons, so it's not entirely spitting canon in the face in using them. From DS9 season 3, Federation ships have been known to pack cannons too, so no harm there. I have beams in most of my Klingon ships primarily for 360 degree coverage, but I mostly refuse to leave DHC's and torpedoes out of them. Only my Negh'tev has a beam/torp setup, and only because I decide to. Those min/maxing snobs don't have the right to tell me what builds I may and may not have.

vetteguy904

I'd like to see BOL fire ALL beams at teh target at a boosted level. remember in the original Star Wars when the Xwing would alternate fire from the emitters but they could fire all at once for a really powerful attack? something like that, and I think BFAW should be limited to 90 degrees either side of target, or, the faster firing beams go at half power. it should also be a monster agrro grab

freakium

I think the most optimal change to knock BFAW off its high horse is to bring cannons back into the mix. Move its abilities down a rank so that you can use cannon abilities at ensign level with the highest ranking ability at Lt. Commander. This has been suggested for many years and I'm all for it if it changes the current beam only meta.

sohtoh

icsairguns wrote: »

I am wondering what my fellow warriors think it would take to bump beam faw spam out of the top spot.


Now I know cannons are still extremely good and high dps bursting powerhouses but we all know beam faw and its lazy easy playstyle of flying in circles is the new norm for most players.

so whats it gonna take to fix the problem or bring some balance back?

we know they will not nerf beams too many feddybear cry babies out there for that to ever happen. so thats already out the window.

my thoughts would be .
1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.
2. have scatter volley last a tad bit longer and make it so it actually fires if no target is selected like FAW does. right now if a group of ships are in route and i target one then hit scatter volley when that main ship is gone i have to target another or wait for the auto target to take hold and current lag sometimes that takes a bit.
3. turrets should use scatter volley like beams do and fire in all directions not just the forward arc.
4. Or fix science skills and gw1 be a lt slot instead of ltcmdr. as it is now gw1 is ltcmdr gw2 commander and gw3 is also commander not sure the logic behind that one.

so anyways have at it lets hear what it would take.

While I am primarily a cruiser pilot, so therefore I am a beam user; but I also have escorts that I enjoy to fly. I agree with 1, 2 and 4; not sure about number 3, it might hurt cannons more. I think that it would also help if CSV would add an additional target per power rank. I think it is currently the primary target and two additional targets. So at CSV I: it would remain the same; CSV I: it would be three additional targets; and at CSV III: it would be four additional targets. I would also add a small damage boost to CSV and CRF.

dareau

icsairguns wrote: »

I am wondering what my fellow warriors think it would take to bump beam faw spam out of the top spot.


Now I know cannons are still extremely good and high dps bursting powerhouses but we all know beam faw and its lazy easy playstyle of flying in circles is the new norm for most players.

so whats it gonna take to fix the problem or bring some balance back?

we know they will not nerf beams too many feddybear cry babies out there for that to ever happen. so thats already out the window.

my thoughts would be .
1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.
2. have scatter volley last a tad bit longer and make it so it actually fires if no target is selected like FAW does. right now if a group of ships are in route and i target one then hit scatter volley when that main ship is gone i have to target another or wait for the auto target to take hold and current lag sometimes that takes a bit.
3. turrets should use scatter volley like beams do and fire in all directions not just the forward arc.
4. Or fix science skills and gw1 be a lt slot instead of ltcmdr. as it is now gw1 is ltcmdr gw2 commander and gw3 is also commander not sure the logic behind that one.

so anyways have at it lets hear what it would take.

1. Starting to agree. Make it's drop a lot more like beams...
2. FaW doesn't shoot unless there's a target either. However, all it takes to get a target back in range for FaW is twist camera to see baddie, apply spacebar. CSV might require an actual starship turn...
3. I thought turrets did this already. Died a few times in Khitomer Space because I scatter volleyed with a turret on and the spheres that moved on behind me suddenly remembered I was there.
4. GW is supposed to be a much more "science-y" skill, to help encourage the use of mixed parties. Back in the day, the MVAE with it's LtCmdr Sci "was amongst the most popular ships of escorts online" primarily because it could CSV and GW I all by itself. Cryptic doesn't want everyone spamming CC, which would be the case if GW I was Lt, as just about every ship has at least a Lt Sci slot...

gradii

WARRIORS PREPARE FOR BATTLE! our enemy is a formidable foe, the Ruthless and Evil Beam Fire At Will.Never before since Fek'lhr have we faced such a threat, but now our battle is set before us. We will FIGHT LIKE TRUE KLINGONS or we will DIE WITH HONOR!

For Glory! For Cannons! For The Empire!

icsairguns

gradii wrote: »

WARRIORS PREPARE FOR BATTLE! our enemy is a formidable foe, the Ruthless and Evil Beam Fire At Will.Never before since Fek'lhr have we faced such a threat, but now our battle is set before us. We will FIGHT LIKE TRUE KLINGONS or we will DIE WITH HONOR!

For Glory! For Cannons! For The Empire!

finally a fed who gets it !

kdf isn't like fed side or atleast it was not like the fed side in the past.

almost all kdf ships can equip cannons. ( but why bother these days the game wants us all to clones)

so yes it is a fight against the evil FAW unless you are fine with the one play style fits all, absolute ZERO diversity and one weapon choice solely because of borked game mechanics.

dareau wrote: »

2. FaW doesn't shoot unless there's a target either. However, all it takes to get a target back in range for FaW is twist camera to see baddie, apply spacebar. CSV might require an actual starship turn...
3. I thought turrets did this already. Died a few times in Khitomer Space because I scatter volleyed with a turret on and the spheres that moved on behind me suddenly remembered I was there.
4. GW is supposed to be a much more "science-y" skill, to help encourage the use of mixed parties. Back in the day, the MVAE with it's LtCmdr Sci "was amongst the most popular ships of escorts online" primarily because it could CSV and GW I all by itself. Cryptic doesn't want everyone spamming CC, which would be the case if GW I was Lt, as just about every ship has at least a Lt Sci slot...

check your setting or something my beam FAW fire with no targets all the time. and noticed as soon as faw runs out if no target was selected weapons have stopped firing ( lol maybe i should check my settings come to think of it )

and no turrets do not unless you have a target selected ( but whats the point if only a limited number of you weapons are on target ) and that the problem now if im a cluster of enemy and had fore weapons firing in one direction at enemy and aft weapons firing fore sides and aft (truly a scatter volley) with damage along the lines of faw it would make for more balance.

we don't have escorts for escorts online crowd. ( battle cruisers is why most ships can equip cannon )
and yeah most ships do have a lt science slot but on kdf side anything above that is few and far between. (once you get out of the raider class of ships.)

and i have never been a fan of the old school raid mixed group thing for this this game. i mean in other games you mages and healers and warrior characters but that's all you got here we have bridge crew and away team members to take up where our player character lacks. i mean kirk was no engineer but scotty one of his officers should pulled off miracle worker plenty of times. same held true for entire line of captains its about your crew and ship and a whole not just the captain.

sohtoh wrote: »

While I am primarily a cruiser pilot, so therefore I am a beam user; but I also have escorts that I enjoy to fly. I agree with 1, 2 and 4; not sure about number 3, it might hurt cannons more. I think that it would also help if CSV would add an additional target per power rank. I think it is currently the primary target and two additional targets. So at CSV I: it would remain the same; CSV I: it would be three additional targets; and at CSV III: it would be four additional targets. I would also add a small damage boost to CSV and CRF.

Intruder ALERT we have another fed here .
but really and this goes to another thread here on the KLINGON forums about the Bort. cannon usage should be on par with beams kdf does not have cruisers. we have battle cruisers and the bort used to be a hated ship but now so many of the older kdf pilots have gone the Bort has come into favor with people who really only know how to use beams ( like a good federation lap dog) i remember the days of crybaby feds talking about escorts online, never understood it until now. but they were blaming a class of ships instead of the an unbalanced game. rather than going after the real problem,Balance.

gradii

I'm not entirely a Fed, I play all 3 factions (Or 2 and a half depending how you see it) becuase each one is worth it on its merits.

I do use BFAW but I don't rely on it, my main uses gravwell and torp spread, that's already enough AoE. If they change BFAW it just means more room for something else in my build.

I'd still rather they address the issue with cannons. Getting rid of the falloff would be a good start.

My KDF toon and my Romulan both use DHC escorts with torpedoes. Canon builds too, best way to fire cannons is to fire the Canon cannons.

I used to use turrets on my bortasque till I realized how much turrets sucked.. then stopped using the giant Battlecruisers entirely since I can't do it RIGHT.

They should introduce heavy turrets. (Aside from that ONE CC rep thing which you can only use ONE of)

autumnturning

autumnturning wrote: »

Oddball suggestions for nerfing BF@Wesley ...

One of the things that makes BFAW overpowered is the fact that it is "autohit" for 10 seconds of weapon cycling against multiple targets. So the first order of business is to ... question ... the "autohit" feature used by BFAW. If you make [ACC] an issue for BFAW usage, that would be helpful in toning down the overpowered nature of BFAW. Best possible option would be to do a Best of Both Worlds take on nerfing BFAW in this fashion, such that attacks made against:

• Starships are still "autohit"
• Shuttles and Fighters are NOT "autohit" and require Accuracy checks
• Destructible Torpedoes and Destructible Mines are NOT "autohit" and require Accuracy checks

Add in a "flavoring" of having an Accuracy penalty of distance between firing ship and target (similar to the damage reduction due to range) and we'd be in business. "Tune" the Accuracy penalty to BFAW such that there is less of a penalty on higher ranks of skill (-5% Accuracy penalty per 1.5/2.0/2.5 km range to $Target at Ranks I/II/III?) and validate with playtesting.

The "random" aspect of BFAW is something that shouldn't be interfered with, methinks.

Do that change and you'd be going a long way, as a Developer, to toning down the overpowered nature of BFAW versus things that can't even withstand a single hit, let alone multiple hits.

I'm thinking this might *start* the process on nerfing Beam Fire at Everything Forever.

gradii

autumnturning wrote: »

autumnturning wrote: »

Oddball suggestions for nerfing BF@Wesley ...

One of the things that makes BFAW overpowered is the fact that it is "autohit" for 10 seconds of weapon cycling against multiple targets. So the first order of business is to ... question ... the "autohit" feature used by BFAW. If you make [ACC] an issue for BFAW usage, that would be helpful in toning down the overpowered nature of BFAW. Best possible option would be to do a Best of Both Worlds take on nerfing BFAW in this fashion, such that attacks made against:

• Starships are still "autohit"
• Shuttles and Fighters are NOT "autohit" and require Accuracy checks
• Destructible Torpedoes and Destructible Mines are NOT "autohit" and require Accuracy checks

Add in a "flavoring" of having an Accuracy penalty of distance between firing ship and target (similar to the damage reduction due to range) and we'd be in business. "Tune" the Accuracy penalty to BFAW such that there is less of a penalty on higher ranks of skill (-5% Accuracy penalty per 1.5/2.0/2.5 km range to $Target at Ranks I/II/III?) and validate with playtesting.

The "random" aspect of BFAW is something that shouldn't be interfered with, methinks.

Do that change and you'd be going a long way, as a Developer, to toning down the overpowered nature of BFAW versus things that can't even withstand a single hit, let alone multiple hits.

I'm thinking this might *start* the process on nerfing Beam Fire at Everything Forever.

You're wrong because everything requires accuracy checks.

It's just that once you put enough points in accuracy you no longer NOTICE that fact.

noroblad

the first piece is simple, remove damage falloff on cannons or at least equalize it to beams.
The second would be to improve CSV's cone to 180 degrees (1/2 of what a beam array ship can do).
Small steps... change these 2 things and test it before going nuts.

yakodym

Imo it's simple - when you fire a beam, it eats 10 units of weapon power. Faw makes each beam fire twice at the same time --> double the power consumption.

noroblad

Faw is not what is broken, though. FAW is fine.. so long as damage done per shot is reasonable. Its the 50k per hit that is the problem.

sinn74

The most glaring problem with BFAW compared to TS and CSV is that it fires in all directions. It will fire behind you if there is a target within any beam arc. It works with Omni beams.

"Fire at Will" should not just apply to beams. It should apply the same mechanic to any weapon you have slotted, firing everything within its own arc. Aft torpedo with a target? FAW should fire it off. Turrets should act like Omni beams, hitting random targets. It's still the most head-scratching thing about the power to me.

Beams need some other skill to replace BFAW, and "Fire at will" should be a LT Commander/ Commander ability that can be used instead of TS, HY, CSV, CRF, BOL, and whatever other skill beams should have.

Changing this would normalize the 3 weapon types to a great extent. But it will never happen. Ever.

autumnturning

icsairguns wrote: »

1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.

I'll settle for "normalizing" the damage decay at range with Beams that's coming in Season 11.5 ... along with the Long Range Targeting to reduce that drop off ... both of which were announced today.

goodscotch

One other thought in reference to BFAW...what if using BFAW significantly bumped the amount of threat your ship generated? Then players would be less apt to pop it every time it became available...especially if they were in a crowd of enemy ships. Because if they did, most of the enemy ships would start to target them and...bye bye BFAW spammer. This would make it viable for only one or maybe two shots and then the player would have to significantly back off...at least for a while until their threat leveled off. Of course, Cryptic would have to change the mechanic of it in order for it to do this.

kyrrok

autumnturning wrote: »

icsairguns wrote: »

1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.

I'll settle for "normalizing" the damage decay at range with Beams that's coming in Season 11.5 ... along with the Long Range Targeting to reduce that drop off ... both of which were announced today.

Announced? Where???

freakium

kyrrok wrote: »

autumnturning wrote: »

icsairguns wrote: »

1. reduce or remove the power fall off on cannons.

I'll settle for "normalizing" the damage decay at range with Beams that's coming in Season 11.5 ... along with the Long Range Targeting to reduce that drop off ... both of which were announced today.

Announced? Where???

Per the tribble patch notes...

All energy weapons now benefit from unified Range Drop-off Mechanics.

• All energy weapons will now lose a maximum of 50% of their base damage, when fired at maximum range.
  • This drop-off begins at 2.0km from the targeted Foe, and increases linearly out to max range.
  • This change unifies the mechanic by improving Cannon weapons which previously lost up to 60% of their base damage at 10.0km but slightly decreasing the effectiveness of Beam weapons which previously only lost 40% of their damage potential at 10.0km.

hugin1205

only Thing that will make BFAW redundant is many enemies with FBP

sinn74

I did mess around with DHC on Tribble using the new system, and...I can say it's a noticeable difference, even with just 1 point spent. Not only is the damage penalty noticeably less, but it actually makes it a point to spell out what the damage distance difference is. There are still people having no idea that being at 10km loses damage with energy weapons.

It's actually a nice little buff to cannons.

icsairguns

yes i spent yeasterday on tribble messing around with it. then lvled one to 60 plus for the spec points and skills to come close to mathing holodeck toon and with the new skill tree you can reduce energy weapon fall off down to 20% at max range with the new long range sensor skills. with that beams are still going to kick some butt with faw but our cannons just got a whole hell of allot deadlier .

icsairguns

update after a few days testing it out cannons are better than they were but beams are still king. so they did fix a few issues with using cannons but it does nothing at all for balance between the two.

sinn74

icsairguns wrote: »

update after a few days testing it out cannons are better than they were but beams are still king. so they did fix a few issues with using cannons but it does nothing at all for balance between the two.

I think everything that could be done with skills was done. The boff abilities need changing.

hugin1205

as far as I know, Beam overload only works on ONE beam, while FAW works on ALL beams. So even if description Claims that BO does more damage to a single target actually FAW deals more damage to a single target while also damaging others. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

IMO surgical strikes was the answer. BUT People compared surg Strikes III (even II is a commander skill) with BO3 which is a lt. commander skill. Hence Surg strikes was badly nerfed. So Surg stirkes by itself isn't an overpowered skill anymore but in Combo with override safeties it is still incredibly powerful - against a single target.
However as people want to do parsable DPS rather than kill an enemy and not all ships have Intel seating, BFAW is still much more frequent.

I tried out the piloting skill (engine power to weapons for hasted firing circle) and was HUGELY disappointed. Esp as it is a turn on/off power, so you cannot put it into a cycle. Which I mostly do because I am upset with clicking skills and nothing Happening - so when some dev wrote that they wouldn'T Change it because "Players should not just use keybinds, but also learn the art of micromanagment" or something along those lines (and not very friendly) I was so upset, that I haven'T used any piloting skills since. Mind you, this was some time ago and devs seem to have gotten much friendlier since

stofsk

BFAW is more efficient, but BO is more fun. The visceral pleasure of having a BO3 crit on a single target whose shields fail and then get one-shotted in a glorious explosion is too good. BFAW in comparison just looks inane. Especially with DBBs. Like I have one character in a T6 Hestia fly it like a beam boat but I don't use DBBs.

sander233

I'm an engineer. I fly the T6 sci BortaSqu' (Gorkon-class.) I have two [CritD]x3 DBBs, a Wide-angle DHC and the neutronic torp up front, an Omni beam, the heavy bio turret, and two regular turrets in the back. (All disruptors, all mk.14) My tac skills consist of BO2, TS3, THY1, and tt. (Full build here: Norgh'a'Qun T6)

Why would I build a ship this way? Because I felt like it. Because I refuse to embrace the cookie-cutter route. Because I think ships like this should have a mixed weapons load, and attack from the forward arc. And because I still place in CCA every single time, and rarely get out-parsed in anything else.

Reject the tyranny, and build your ship the way you want to, not the way 'they' say you should.