I would say only really dual beams, and single cannon has need to be adjusted, though it would not be a bad thing to see abit of shift away from dual cannons an dual heavy cannons being really close in style. I actually think that giving the different weapon types a different effect, or bonus under the effect of some of the weapon buffs might be interesting, even if it is just the dual beam bank an single cannon. We have so many weapons that adjusting how some fo them work with the weapon buffs, to make them have niches via that could add some depth of choice.
Agreed with the 1st part.
One of the bad things was also making how dmg over distance occurs.
From a logical point of view, cannons should decrease damage over distance until 10k is reached. Beams should have a max damage focal point a 5k and decrease when you get closer or further.
As for the angle problem, it's easy to fix it in both situations: wider angle should have higher energy losses and implicitly higher damage loss per distance unit, while tighter angles should have less energy loss per distance unit.
I would say only really dual beams, and single cannon has need to be adjusted, though it would not be a bad thing to see abit of shift away from dual cannons an dual heavy cannons being really close in style. I actually think that giving the different weapon types a different effect, or bonus under the effect of some of the weapon buffs might be interesting, even if it is just the dual beam bank an single cannon. We have so many weapons that adjusting how some fo them work with the weapon buffs, to make them have niches via that could add some depth of choice.
Agreed with the 1st part.
One of the bad things was also making how dmg over distance occurs.
From a logical point of view, cannons should decrease damage over distance until 10k is reached. Beams should have a max damage focal point a 5k and decrease when you get closer or further.
As for the angle problem, it's easy to fix it in both situations: wider angle should have higher energy losses and implicitly higher damage loss per distance unit, while tighter angles should have less energy loss per distance unit.
Well with higher damage loss an energy loss, that is also dependant on how much energy is put in. Beams should have more the most even damage application on target, since the beam is a constant stream as has been said . Yet cannons that use a energy pulse or bullet is harder as it depends alot on how much power is being expelled in each pulse/bullet, for instance how I see single cannons compared to dual/dual heavy cannons is like comparing a large artillery cannon on a battle ship to some heavy gattling guns or mechine guns. The artillery cannon is pushing out a single heavy damage shot at a much slower rate of fire, while the gatling/mechine guns are belting out a stream of quicker an yet less damaging shots, as such a artilery shot would have a much longer range comparitively speaking than the other (an would also have less time on target giving beams more constant damage application).
Now this could not really be done as t put in too many varables to balance baseline. Yet if you instead gave dual beams, an single cannons a effect that while user the effect of rapid fire/scatter volley/beam overload/faw their style of dealing damage might change that could work. Like for single cannons under the effect of rapid fire might slow their fire rate, while instead buffing their damage per shot giving that style of a large battleship firing all of their main batteries. While dual beams I am not sure what might be an interesting change to how beam overload or faw works to give them a different feel, and yet also something that would differentiate it from beam arrays while using these two weapon buffs.
Comments
One of the bad things was also making how dmg over distance occurs.
From a logical point of view, cannons should decrease damage over distance until 10k is reached. Beams should have a max damage focal point a 5k and decrease when you get closer or further.
As for the angle problem, it's easy to fix it in both situations: wider angle should have higher energy losses and implicitly higher damage loss per distance unit, while tighter angles should have less energy loss per distance unit.
Now this could not really be done as t put in too many varables to balance baseline. Yet if you instead gave dual beams, an single cannons a effect that while user the effect of rapid fire/scatter volley/beam overload/faw their style of dealing damage might change that could work. Like for single cannons under the effect of rapid fire might slow their fire rate, while instead buffing their damage per shot giving that style of a large battleship firing all of their main batteries. While dual beams I am not sure what might be an interesting change to how beam overload or faw works to give them a different feel, and yet also something that would differentiate it from beam arrays while using these two weapon buffs.