test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Dual Cannons vs Heavy Dual Cannons: Can we get some changes?

Is it That Big of a deal to give the 90 firing arc to dual cannons? on paper, it would seem that's the natural route: i.e. single cannons 180 arc, dual cannons 90, heavy dual cannons 45 degrees. With this change, you could also raise the embedded [CrtD] to +20 on the heavies. At this point, do many people use DCs?

Comments

  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,602 Arc User
    Yes it IS a big deal. It's bad enough that cannons were equalized with beams with fall-off range, which is not only wrong, but the 'physics' don't agree with that change. Cannons are short range weapons, always have been. They are supposed to do higher damage at close range than Beams, as you get further away the bleed effect means that fall off is quick.

    To be honest, I'm surprised you didn't ask them to make 360 degree Duals!
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • goodscotchgoodscotch Member Posts: 1,680 Arc User
    I have a full set of dual cannons at Mk XIV Epic! Good BoP weapons!
    klingon-bridge.jpg




  • gavinrunebladegavinruneblade Member Posts: 3,894 Arc User
    My understanding is that Dual cannons are the current cannon meta replacing heavies. They fire faster triggering console procs more often.

    If your build lacks proc based damage then heavies are better.
  • dragonhef01dragonhef01 Member Posts: 422 Arc User
    edited November 2016
    leemwatson wrote: »
    To be honest, I'm surprised you didn't ask them to make 360 degree Duals!

    That's what my turret ship is for...Anyway, if a range penalty is part of the package(maybe even increacing the RoF a little more too then), I'm fine with that. It's just not making them a bit different from the heavies using the excuse of proc popping doesn't work: that's been tested quit a few times with pretty Lame results(excluding the Embassy plasma consoles). My KDF toon has a full DC loadout on his Raptor carrier, but it feels more like a penalty compared to his BoP with all HDCs of the same types and procs. This would also be a counter to the turn bug, which will probably be a thing off and on from now on.
    Post edited by dragonhef01 on
  • tacticalrooktacticalrook Member Posts: 810 Arc User
    My understanding is that Dual cannons are the current cannon meta replacing heavies. They fire faster triggering console procs more often.

    If your build lacks proc based damage then heavies are better.
    DCs have outclassed DHCs for a very long time, the "meta" (playerbase) is only just now catching on. This is the norm, really.

    People have historically gone with DHCs over DCs for two reasons:

    1) The useless DPS number given in the tooltip lies to folks and tells them DHCs deliver more deeps.. and they don't know they can't believe it;
    2) Folks don't seem to realize the crit bonus on DHCs magically goes away when they pop scatter volley or rapid fire, just like accuracy overflow magically goes away on beams when FAW is activated.

    They also seem to live in denial about this and claim they do it for the "spike damage", despite DCs packing more of a punch.

    Honestly, seems to be they just enjoy the sound of those DHCs. Maybe it plays into some sort of epic-captainry or RPist immersion thing, who knows.
    /channel_join grind
  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,602 Arc User
    My understanding is that Dual cannons are the current cannon meta replacing heavies. They fire faster triggering console procs more often.

    If your build lacks proc based damage then heavies are better.
    DCs have outclassed DHCs for a very long time, the "meta" (playerbase) is only just now catching on. This is the norm, really.

    People have historically gone with DHCs over DCs for two reasons:

    1) The useless DPS number given in the tooltip lies to folks and tells them DHCs deliver more deeps.. and they don't know they can't believe it;
    2) Folks don't seem to realize the crit bonus on DHCs magically goes away when they pop scatter volley or rapid fire, just like accuracy overflow magically goes away on beams when FAW is activated.

    They also seem to live in denial about this and claim they do it for the "spike damage", despite DCs packing more of a punch.

    Honestly, seems to be they just enjoy the sound of those DHCs. Maybe it plays into some sort of epic-captainry or RPist immersion thing, who knows.

    It's more they saw the DMG figure and not the DPS figure in brackets. The only cannons I use on my Feds are my Epic Quads anyway.
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,794 Arc User
    What about that sweet terran rep DHC? That scaling damage is nice right?
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    Heh, I use a cannon build... but it's an SC build.... on a Khopesh. Yeah, not quite maneuverable enough for a DC or DHC build imo. I totes should slap on some PlasExp.... Never even thought of that before.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • dragonhef01dragonhef01 Member Posts: 422 Arc User
    Heh, I use a cannon build... but it's an SC build.... on a Khopesh. Yeah, not quite maneuverable enough for a DC or DHC build imo. I totes should slap on some PlasExp.... Never even thought of that before.

    Both the plasma and research station consoles come in Very handy for that. I have a H&C AP SC variant of my Regent. A bit like my turret ship.

  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    I would not mind seeing the upped to something like a firing arc of 75ish degrees, which could also make it that using the dual cannons on a dual cannon capable cruiser would not need as much turn rate buffing consoles unless you want to go with the heavy version. Though it would also be nice to see them give out a heavy turret variant like we have with omni-arrays that is not hidden behind certain reps, can keep the one per ship requirement in place like the undine rep heavy turret.
  • tacticalrooktacticalrook Member Posts: 810 Arc User
    Turn consoles aren't needed in order to use narrow arc weapons, like dual cannons or dual beam banks, effectively in PvE. All it really takes is deliberate arc management, good flight and maneuver planning, and, once engaged, shooting until everything in front of you is dead.

    Using turn consoles or wide arc cannons in PvE in order to avoid getting better at arc management or flight planning is a harsh crutch, since it only serves to encourage continued mediocrity.
    /channel_join grind
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited November 2016
    What about that sweet terran rep DHC? That scaling damage is nice right?

    Oh yea the Terran DHC rules them all, well almost all. It should be noted that for every energy type except AP we have wide arc DHCs with decent mods around. Depending how you play they can easily outdo even the Terran DHC.

    On my 169k ISA pug run I did with cannons yesterday evening the parsed DPS order of my 4 frontal weapons was like usual:

    Wide Arc DHC (Crit D x 3 | Pen) > Terran DHC >> DHC (Crit D x 4) = Elachi Crescent Heavy (but single) Cannon

    So I did the run with my “heavy” cannon escort which shows in two extreme cases how much the arc of a weapon matters. A wide arc DHC outperforming even the Terran DHC and a single (heavy) cannon being on par with a regular DHC.

    I also have a “light” cannon escort utilizing DCs and even the quad cannon (which parses roughly the same as a DC). While it is correct that you get more procs with those faster firing weapons I’m unsure at how much of a performance increase we look at here. With one wide arc DHC and the terran DHC one would like to carry anyway there are only 2-3 weapons left to decide over. There are also not many none-sci ships that have a lot of sci console slots where the embassy plasma explosion proc could lead to a noteworthy performance increase. On a sci scimi or pilot escort with 4-5 sci slots yea I take DCs over DHCs but on my bug ship with only 2 I don’t really bother.
    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
  • tacticalrooktacticalrook Member Posts: 810 Arc User
    edited November 2016
    On a sci scimi or pilot escort with 4-5 sci slots yea I take DCs over DHCs but on my bug ship with only 2 I don’t really bother.

    That's the gist of it, isn't it? DCs work with the per-shot domain a lot more effectively than DHCs, but since this is STO - where jack-of-all-trades builds are sub-par - if you can't or don't build specifically to utilize and magnify that potential to an absurd degree, you're probably much better off using the slots to magnify the effect of something else you've already got buffed to high heaven.

    After all, there is a big difference between running 2 plasma exploders and running 5 of them, when you've dedicated a substantial portion of your build to amplify that proc.
    /channel_join grind
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited November 2016
    On a sci scimi or pilot escort with 4-5 sci slots yea I take DCs over DHCs but on my bug ship with only 2 I don’t really bother.

    That's the gist of it, isn't it? DCs work with the per-shot domain a lot more effectively than DHCs, but since this is STO - where jack-of-all-trades builds are sub-par - if you can't or don't build specifically to utilize and magnify that potential to an absurd degree, you're probably much better off using the slots to magnify the effect of something else you've already got buffed to high heaven.

    After all, there is a big difference between running 2 plasma exploders and running 5 of them, when you've dedicated a substantial portion of your build to amplify that proc.

    I can neither verify nor falsify your position, sorry. My light cannon build on a fed sci pilot escort is much more emphasized on procs as in plasma explosions. They surely have greater percentage of the overall damage there as on my heavy cannon bug ship but the build is otherwise different and performs weaker as a result.

    What I tried to deliver in my post was that with stuff like the terran and wide arc DHCs around any discussion between the potency of DHCs compared to DCs is reduced to verry few slots on a ship so should not have much of a difference in the overall performance. I also wanted to volunteer that single cannons could be underestimated by a lot of people as I found them to be on par with their dual cannon counterparts even on rather fast turning ships.

    What was your highest ISA-DPS on a cannon build and would you mind sharing your build? I sadly don’t know many player who manage to use cannons well so I hope you don't mind my asking. :)
    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
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    It's interesting to see people suggesting that DCs are superior to DHCs (under certain circumstances), my impression was that between the base damage difference and ROF difference the difference in dps was negligible. Maybe I should throw a set on my escort and see how the power reacts...

    Personally I agree with the idea of upping DC arcs to 90° and then re-balancing the damage around that to make them a good option for the slower turning cannon wielding cruisers, and for escorts they'd synergise a little better with torps.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    I have long since held the idea that DCs should remain as they are but DHC should be turned into the equivalent of Turbo lasers we see in Star Wars. Basically fire big gigantic bolt beams, or in modern day the equivalent of firing a battleship level gun. Make it so they can be mounted front and aft, 200 degree arc, and limited to battlecruisers and up.

    Just so we have that "big gun" aesthetic I think the game is missing.

    So to recap, make the DHCs fire much slower, but hit WAY harder, Infact harder than most weapons, make them energy hogs, make them able to be mounted fore and aft, and 200 degree turn radius. Turns them into Star Trek space battleship guns.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,919 Arc User
    adamkafei wrote: »
    It's interesting to see people suggesting that DCs are superior to DHCs (under certain circumstances), my impression was that between the base damage difference and ROF difference the difference in dps was negligible. Maybe I should throw a set on my escort and see how the power reacts...

    Personally I agree with the idea of upping DC arcs to 90° and then re-balancing the damage around that to make them a good option for the slower turning cannon wielding cruisers, and for escorts they'd synergise a little better with torps.

    Honestly, it is negligible, but in most cases.. yes.. DC outperform DHC. Thing is, we're talking percentage points here, it's not a huge victory. If you already have a full set of DHC all upgraded with the Mods you want then changing over to DC is probably not worth the cost for such a slight upgrade. It really all comes down to how many 'per shot proc' abilities you use in your build. The less of those you use, then the less difference there is between a DHC and a DC build.

    Cannons have been in need of an upgrade from 45 to 90 degrees for quite some time. It's honestly silly that this has never been done. Cannons are still a bit too far behind the curve, upping their forward arc would definitely be helpful and is a change that should have been made quite a while ago.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • fcedfced Member Posts: 385 Arc User
    leemwatson wrote: »
    Yes it IS a big deal. It's bad enough that cannons were equalized with beams with fall-off range, which is not only wrong, but the 'physics' don't agree with that change. Cannons are short range weapons, always have been. They are supposed to do higher damage at close range than Beams, as you get further away the bleed effect means that fall off is quick.

    To be honest, I'm surprised you didn't ask them to make 360 degree Duals!

    Lol yes !!
    PS4 / PS3 - Star Trek online (Trekkie) - Neverwinter - Mass Effect 1/2/3 Fan, I like Andromeda - Main language : Français - Secondary language : English - Third language : Forget you won't like it...
  • fluorescentblackfluorescentblack Member Posts: 79 Arc User
    Depending on what I am doing I will use either or both. A lot has been said about both but my top reasons for either are faster fire rate for better proc chance on duals and the slower fire rate is more energy efficient on the heavys.

    As for the 45 degree arc not only does it make sense but it allows you to do things like efficiently run more turrets on the back. You keep something at a 46+ degree angle in front then after your rear weapons finish cycling you swing in to the front arc and get your front weapons firing cycle staggered allowing far more energy efficiency.

    Cannons are fine. If you can not figure out how to use them then don't but don't try to fix something that works fine.
    Leader of The Temporal Guard and Temporal Defence Force
Sign In or Register to comment.