test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The Regent and Dual Beam Banks
unangbangkay
Member Posts: 10 Arc User
My usual image and practice for the Regent has been for a Broadside machine with added torp support. With 6 arrays front and back, the wide-torpedo aft, and a quantum up front, the enemy generally sees my side more often than anything else.
I was just wondering however, how effective using more dual beam banks would be, in a forward-heavy cruiser design.
My idea:
Fore: 3x Dual Beam banks + Quantum (or wide-angle quantum)
Aft: 3x Beam arrays + wide-angle quantum (or mines or standard quantum)
The approach I imagine with the following setup is to charge a target head-on, firing beams and torps, then either snake away to bring rear weapons to bear or use them to back-attack while I turn around.
Using beam arrays instead of turrets avoids the weapon-mixing problem (and tac-slot limit), and allows me to use Fire At Will (which AFAIK is arrays-only), while the DBBs have higher DPS and allow me to make better use of Beam Overload (should I decide to slot it in).
What do you think? Will a setup like this work? Also, will it drain less power than the 6-array setup?
I was just wondering however, how effective using more dual beam banks would be, in a forward-heavy cruiser design.
My idea:
Fore: 3x Dual Beam banks + Quantum (or wide-angle quantum)
Aft: 3x Beam arrays + wide-angle quantum (or mines or standard quantum)
The approach I imagine with the following setup is to charge a target head-on, firing beams and torps, then either snake away to bring rear weapons to bear or use them to back-attack while I turn around.
Using beam arrays instead of turrets avoids the weapon-mixing problem (and tac-slot limit), and allows me to use Fire At Will (which AFAIK is arrays-only), while the DBBs have higher DPS and allow me to make better use of Beam Overload (should I decide to slot it in).
What do you think? Will a setup like this work? Also, will it drain less power than the 6-array setup?
Post edited by unangbangkay on
0
Comments
Thanks for the advice. I didn't have the stats available to me at the time so it was an idle thought.
Speaking which, in which kinds of builds/ships are DBB's viable as a main weapon anyway? Are they ever?
They can be. I have a sci ship running a DBB, 2 quantum torps, and 3 turrets, works pretty well. Or an all beam Excelsior thats 2 DBB 2 BA fore, 4 BA aft. Gives me an extra-punch approach, a standard broadside, and one heck of a FAW display. All 8 beams going off together though makes me thankful for Nadion Inversion though, as the power drain cuts into the low 70s (even with EPTW-1 running) otherwise.
It performs pretty well in fleet missions and STFs, the only downside might be, that you are aggroing practically everything, so your tank should be prepared to handle it.
Do you mean beam BANKS or beam ARRAYS? Because I thought Fire At Will doesn't work with Beam Banks...
Exactly. Once you decide to narrow your arc just plop some turrets on the back and be done with it. A nice utility mine launcher is nice to have their also. It's not terribly hard to plunk yourself down right in the path of the probes and spheres.
But......if you're considering that......come to the dark side of the Federation.....
Cannon Cruisers!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZfTwMQRIOE&feature=plcp
about 4:30 in if you just like to skip ahead.
Cheers!
What pottsey said. The smaller arc of DBBs really allows for much finer control and focus of BFAW - it's not CRF, but it's better than 8 beam arrays just scatter firing all over the place.
That being said.
This is just not going to work.
Here are your options:
1) Broadside with 6-8 beam arrays. (allows for the most flexibility with regards to positioning and is not very demanding with regards to tac slot usage)
2) Forward Facing with 3 to 4 DBBs & 4x Turrets Rear (allows you to use BFAW in a more controlled arc or APB to boost the damage of all your weapons - BFAW allows for a boost against ST when there is only 1 target present or grants you some AoE scatter which is mostly good for drawing aggro.)
3) Forward Facing with 3 to 4 Single Cannons & 4x Turrets Rear (has a wider forward arc and allows for synergy with cannon skills, but require your higher tac slots and a lack of higher tac slots means less flexibility forcing you to go AoE or ST - could alternatively use APB instead but with APB instead of Cannon skills I think DBB set up, or even just beam arrays, would be stronger at a cursory glance)
With so many mixed weapon types, APB is going to do more for you than CRF will.
CRF would only be buffing 3 Turrets and 2 Single Cannons.
APB would increase the damage output of every weapon you have.
While I like APD, and have a specific thread advocating a tiny boost to it's functionality, the problem with APD in this case is that the target needs to be firing at you for it to function.
Even with threat control, structures will not fire at you - and in general most cruisers have more than enough survivability that the added resistance and longer cooldown of APD means APB comes out as a winner.
Just think, if you can squeeze 2 copies of APB into a build you get basically "perma" (not true perma, but good enough) debuff of your targets.
How is it "perma"?
Well, APB the buff on you lasts for 10s.
APB the debuff on your target lasts for 5s but gets applied repeatedly (without stacking) so when the APB buff on you is at the 10s mark (and about to expire), the target gets tagged and is still debuffed for 5 more seconds.
When the first APB buff, on yourself, wears off there is a GCD that keeps you from activating the second APB for 5s, which is coincidentally right when the debuff will finally wear off on your target.
The boff layout is far to limited for that sadly. So I'd use volleys and scatters knowing that I'd have DEM helping out also.
Team build? It may be GREAT! On a pug, your better off sticking with abilities that maximize your overall damage. AOE will win that race. Each time.
For dual APB, yes seems to be.
That's why I've held off on the Regent and remain in the Ody.
It could go both ways.
On one hand, sure taking BFAW 2 instead of BFAW 1 will help your personal output a bit, on the other hand APB 1 will help the output of the entire team - which I would imagine is a boon to PUG teams.
To be perfectly honest I haven't done a PUG queue ESTF in a very, very long time - so I admit it's a bit outside of my regular game experience.
What I remember, vaguely, of the PUG queue is that I eventually stopped flying anything but Escorts due to the over-prevalence of Cruisers and the generally terrible quality of players and builds.
mk I DBB 141 112 mk XII 287 229 change of 146 117 per level 13.2 10.6 90 degree
mk I BA 100 80 mk XII 220 176 change of 120 096 per level 10.9 08.7 250 degree
some one said they didn't have the stats
with a high enough turn rate you can make 3 DBB work fairly well. Your no escort but given that you can keep your nose on target you can do higher damage than a standard broad side. But you have to adapt to strafing run tactics.
Head in hyt bo apo Pass ewp or riker manuver drop mines if you have them turn evasive manuvers eptw park or repeat.
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
There's the catch. It's only great if they are ready to take advantage of it. It's somewhat like having GW. Give it a few seconds to really get a nice grouping on some probes and its goodbye probes. But who on a pug waits for that? Can't really blame them to much as maybe they just don't know its coming or what you expect? The matches aren't that long.
So on this little tac layout that you get on this ship, if you just go with the sensible 4, 2 spreads, 2 scatters. Having 2 sci's is nice not even SO much for yourself, but because u can use it on a team mate.
As a team build in Elites or even in any team build hell let them argue over who's bringing the beta to dinner. Just by being a team you know they'll be far far ahead of the curve in any case!
Cheers and happy flying!
And use cannons!
Bye!
It has a wide angle launcher...intended for broadsides.........Using duals will defeat that purpose entirely.
There are other ships this build would be better suited for entirely IMO
I run the ship with 3 torps and the rest beams and i can maintain, as a tac, good dps for a cruiser......but you would be firing only 3 duals and or from the rear 3 beams at any one time...not good dps......if i am reading your build right.
With my build my weapons power never really falls below 90
My answer would be to get rid of this ship entirely and use a oddy for the same task 3 duals up front with a torp and 3 beams in the rear with a torp. But alas you already own the ship so make the nest u can with it. I also use turret over beams in the rear..allow for the full frontal beatdown.
I already used to do single cannons on a regular assault cruiser using cannon rapid fire 1, it does much better DPS then when I was using a broadside beam setup.