test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
So...will the older reps ever get updated with a second special weapon 3 set piece?
marcel314
Member Posts: 181 Arc User
As rom plasma user who would love to take advantage of the buffed 2 set passive, i would love to have an experiemental dhc/turret.
Since cryptic fullied so many wishes like tier 6 conni and nx, science for everyone and so on, i might try to ask for a present too.
Since cryptic fullied so many wishes like tier 6 conni and nx, science for everyone and so on, i might try to ask for a present too.
0
Comments
I would like to use that set on an escort, but I'm already giving up one cannon (or turret) for the torpedo, don't want to have to give up two for the torpedo and beam array.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
And I don't think there should be alternate set pieces at all. Special equipment shouldn't fit every ship and every build, that's what makes it special.
I would agree if the sets would be tailored for their specific theme. But the choice is disproportionally biased towards a beam array and a DHC, disregarding all that lies in between.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Would like to see more sets including single cannons (or heavy single cannons) as well.
Hell I always thought that these special weapon sets could use having a toggle-able mode selection for them. Such as that the beam array could be mode changed between a beam array an a beam bank mode, or that the cannon variant ould mode change between a single cannon an dual cannon (or a dual cannon and heavy dual cannon) mode. This would give more appeal an use for the sets to be used on more ships, but also the toggle could be handled kinda like the mode-change of the dyson destroyer having a tray pop-up that you for that or just a ability.
Right now for me with the phaser and disruptor sets we have in game gained via missions not having a omni-array, maybe making it that the three piece set of them gives the beam array a "arc" mod would fit as than that would turn the beam array into a omni array essentially.
Especially as in most ship models, single and dual beams/cannons don't even fire from the same position.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Oh not saying switching between beam and cannons, though they did do something like this in the dyson proton weapon system. Yet with the dyson proton weapon had the issue that you needed to get more of the rep set bonuses to gain access to both the beam an cannon ability, which if they had done it more as a standpoint of a set piece ability to switch between it being a cannon or beam weapon for what abilities affect it. than they could have given the set's bonuses a bit more love.
There is also the idea of having it function something like how the dyson destroyer worked, but more in that you have both weapon types on your ship but that only one of them is functional at a time. such as that while the weapon is in beam array mode it would be sending power to the beam array setup of the weapon, but then when you shifted to the beam bank mode it would shunt power to the hidden beam banks located in a different location revealing them as the beam arrays shifted into a hidden/shielded spot, which would explain them being able to fire from both beam hardpoints just not at the same time since the weapon system has a beam emitter set-up at both locations. An honestly you would not have to have a animation to show the shift like with the dyson's heavy proton cannon where it swivels in an out of sight, but the concept would be the same that while the specific weapon mode is receiving power it is active but the other is deactivated.
Not sure I would call this a "space magic" explanation, but merely looking at what is used an then applying it to how it might function in a way that is feasible. We already know we can slot weapons systems with vastly different firing arcs, and so those hard-point locations could still be outfitted with a secondary emitter/bank set-up to give more flexibility to the system overall.If you needed a higher output power up the beam bank set-up, but if you needed a more wider angle of fire aquisition power-up the beam array set-up, and in the same way you cold have a single cannon assembly an then the dual/dual-heavy cannon assembly for varied duties.
I quite agree with you, that having new equipement projects would be nice. Those ranging from shields to engines an the like, to also hanger-pets, and even just vanity projects would be interesting. Like having some project that need you to get items from certain specific stfs would be nice, as that could lead to people playing more of the ques given more reason to look outside the highest payout to time investment ques.
Imagine you want a Terran DBB version of the Terran Beam Array from the rep project. Instead of adding a new rep project, the devs could add a crafting project instead which requires all of the normal crafting mats for special crafting gear plus the specific rep marks and elite marks.
Also, the gear would have to be char bound upon crafting, obviously. They could do this for all the rep energy weapons projects. That way, if we wanted, we could have the ability to craft a terran DBB or even a turret with the same scaling damage bonus. However, this has the potential to be OP, so you should only be allowed to use one of the weapons at once, Beam Array, DHC, craftable DBB, craftable, DC, craftable cannon or craftable turret.
That's what I'd like too see a bump up in stats!!!
USS Sharlin NCC79713 B (part of sheridans access code) - T6, Hestia Class Advanced Escort
USS Babylon IV - T6 Krenim Science Vessel
USS Brakiri - T6 Elachi Escort
"We are Grey. We stand between the darkness and the light."
– Grey Council greeting
That would not be bad, though having them as a rep project like we had in the Nukara and New romulan reps would be just as nice too. Though no combat pets we could make via the R&D would be interesting too.
well it be an impovement for many people, more flexilbe is rather debateable on one hand if only want part of it you have more choice but if you want all the bonus it take more making it less so.
personally I'ld prefer new sets be added that happen to cover holes in be older existing sets. like how the krenim temporal manipulation set works with the nalura rep stuff instead of partly or completely replacing it.
actually I'ld prefer we got more sets with "missing" pieces, more so if design to work with existing sets or fleet gear.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
By comparison, a switch between beam mode and cannon mode hardly requires any explaining at all. A cannon bolt is effectively just a very short beam to begin with.
Often, they give fun "account wide" benefits to old characters as well as your new one. Adding new items to the older rep stores seems like it would fit that aspect of the Recruiting Events.
By comparison, a switch between beam mode and cannon mode hardly requires any explaining at all. A cannon bolt is effectively just a very short beam to begin with.[/quote]
Not sure it would honestly be two different weapons, but merely a weapon that could change it's configuration to simulate both a beam bank or a beam array, since the biggest difference between a beam array an beam bank is the emitter configuration. A beam blast from a beam array is merely a lower output blast from a much more spread out emitter arrangement allowing for a much greater firing arc, while a beam bank's beam blast (or pair of beam blasts) is a more consolidated beam blast from stacked emitters that restricts the firing arc as a trade off. So it would be how you would power the additional stacked emitters while in beam bank mode. Such as via shunting power from the emitters on the array that are not in the forward most portion of the array to the additional emitters stacked on the normal emitters in that forward most portion of the array, but also that you would need to disperse the additional power output via a second beam blast.
Well firing both or more accurately firing both the full beam array an the additional stacked emitters like from the above example for the beam bank mode would drain excessive weapon power for marginal gains in damage. Why would you slot four beam arrays and four beam banks onto your ship for little or no benefit, but having the option to power up additional emitters to deal a burst of additional damage on a target in your forward arc while still being able to go back to a much more reliable wider arc between such moments has it's merits. You could say that it is not like slotting two weapons, but slotting one weapon with a supplemental system of emitters that re-enforces the weapon system in the forward firing arc during a optional weapon mode.
Using the same example of having additional emitter stacks that are powered up during the beam bank mode would shift the firing hardpoint to the beam bank location, since the additional emitters would be in that area an you could imagine that the beam array an beam bank emitters overlap somewhat to aid this.
I hope that explains it a bit more clearly how I see it working.
Of course in reality, in so much as one can use that word for a videogame, the difference between a beam array and a beam bank (or a single cannon and a dual cannon) is simply that the former is one gun and the latter is two guns. Two guns do more damage than one gun, because there's two of them.
Quite true. Or that visually one produces twin beams, and the other produces a single beam, with the stats actually determining the actual damage inflicted. So a mode shift in that fact would merely be a visual change two firing two beams, and then a switch in the stats to reflect the changes stat-wise. Though even the experimental proton weapon though did not use that type of a system, but only a visual change an a addition of what boff abilities could affect the weapon.
So the only remaining question would be could they code such a mode-switching system, which alters the visual an some of the stats of the weapon based on the mode it is in. I think it might take some work an tweaking they could, and it would have a lot of appeal an success.
No, I think the much better question would be why such a mode-switching system would be considered at all. If it were physically possible for a dual weapon to fire sideways (or half a dual weapon, since one of the pair would be on the wrong side of the ship), then it would make no sense for it to require a mode-switch to do so. One would simply expect if the target were within firing arc for one gun but not the other, that the gun capable of firing would fire at it and the other would not.
But then, if the dual weapons could do that, there'd be no point in their single versions existing at all.
Well I would ask are you looking for a canon reasoning or a mechanic reasoning on this one.
Yet that would be different since the weapons that would use such a mode-switching would be experimental or advanced weapons that are unique, but also costly to produce compared to other types that are locked to one mode. It is like why we can't buy several of the advanced rep set weapons an slot them on our ships, the tech is just either too expensive in my head canon to produce, or too complicated to run several on the same ship.
Well a dual weapon can not fire side ways, even a dual beam bank, since the beam array gains it's firing arc in canon from being a strip of emitters that runs along the length of a ship, while a beam bank is a stacking of emitters in a localized area of the ship to focus the output of the emitters in a single smaller arc. A mode-switching variant though would modify that by having emitters placed above the front most portion of the array, but to not deal with the added energy consumption of those emitters they would only be used in the beam bank mode.
For the most part having the beam bank portion of the weapon always active would cause a higher drain on power compared to a normal beam array or bank version, such as that to keep the system powered like that in game I would say it would need to have a power drain of 17-20. yet to combat this having it that you can switch between a beam bank or beam array mode would allow you to only power the emitters that are being effective at the time of use, and gives you the flexibility to choose which mode to use based on your target's locations an your ship-weapon load out.
Also there is the fact that you could have more variety in what ship loadouts can use the rep sets. Some players enjoy the style of beam banks on a escort or other forward oriented ships, and a beam array can just seem odd an less impactful to equip. Yet giving them the option to switch between a array or bank mode gives that that fact of using all beam banks while keeping the rep beam from the set. Like with the romulan set I love the set an yet prefer the dual beam firing animation, and wish the experimental beam array had a beam bank version, but a mode change/shift could add more builds that can use it effectively.
also the experimental proton weapon which can use both beam overload and scatter volley with rapid fire and BFAW unlocked usage after completing the set.
the last part is enabled with set powers
Set 2: Arsenal Synergy
Passive
+22.9% Photon Projectile Weapon Damage
+3% Critical Chance
Enables usage of Beam Array: Fire at Will with the Experimental Proton Weapon
Set 3: Particle Stabilizer
Passive
+10% Critical Chance with Photon Projectile weapons
+10% Critical Severity
Enables usage of Cannon: Rapid Fire with the Experimental Proton Weapon
USS Sharlin NCC79713 B (part of sheridans access code) - T6, Hestia Class Advanced Escort
USS Babylon IV - T6 Krenim Science Vessel
USS Brakiri - T6 Elachi Escort
"We are Grey. We stand between the darkness and the light."
– Grey Council greeting
The "stacking of emitters in a localized area" you just made up. It makes no sense to "stack" emitters in a localized area because the entire power of the array can be fired from any point along its length anyway. If the design needs more emitters for more power, there's no reason not to also arrange them into a longer strip for a wider field of fire.
If a DBB (whether a stock DBB or an "experimental" one) had emitters positioned in such a way that it was capable of being fired sideways, it could simply do so at all times (and, of course, do half the damage because it's only one beam). If it did not have emitters positioned for that, a "mode-switch" can't make it magically sprout new emitters that are.