test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Double / Stacking Beam Overload under review, what do you think?

iskandusiskandus Member Posts: 1,062 Arc User
Dev's comment here

Discussion in the PvP forum: here

In light of this long-standing issue & controversy surrounding double/triple BO, which of the following options do you feel would be the most sensible change & why?

1) After a Beam Overload is fired, all weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds (original design of STO at the very beginning)

2) Beam Overload can no longer be activated while cloaked (just like many other powers), whereas cloaking will remove an existing BO buff that hasn't fired yet

3) Once a Beam Overload buff is activated, a 2nd copy cannot be activated until the first copy is fired, similar to how different copies of Subsystem Targeting cannot be stacked on top of each other until the first one is fired or expired

4) After a Beam Overload is fired, all energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

5) After a Beam Overload is fired, all beam energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

6) Beam Overload has an internal CD such that no more than 1 copy can be fired within every 5 seconds cycle

Let's provide some constructive feedback for the Devs to review. Comments are welcome.
Post edited by iskandus on
«1

Comments

  • Options
    tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    iskandus wrote: »
    1) After a Beam Overload is fired, all weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds (original design of STO at the very beginning)
    Wouldn't matter, could be fixed with a weapon battery in the same way it is now. As these reactivate disabled weapons systems.
    iskandus wrote: »
    2) Beam Overload can no longer be activated while cloaked (just like many other powers), whereas cloaking will remove an existing BO buff that hasn't fired yet
    Just removes half of the strategy and doesn't solve the problem. People would still be able to stack it but just not while cloaked.
    iskandus wrote: »
    3) Once a Beam Overload buff is activated, a 2nd copy cannot be activated until the first copy is fired, similar to how different copies of Subsystem Targeting cannot be stacked on top of each other until the first one is fired or expired
    Probably the only way to successfully nerf it in all scenarios if that is what people are insisting on doing.
    iskandus wrote: »
    4) After a Beam Overload is fired, all energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

    5) After a Beam Overload is fired, all beam energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

    See 1
    iskandus wrote: »
    6) Beam Overload has an internal CD such that no more than 1 copy can be fired within every 5 seconds cycle
    Is still a lot of burst in short space of time. Wouldn't really solve the problem.
  • Options
    captainwexlercaptainwexler Member Posts: 60 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    iskandus wrote: »
    Dev's comment here

    Discussion in the PvP forum: here

    In light of this long-standing issue & controversy surrounding double/triple BO, which of the following options do you feel would be the most sensible change & why?

    1) After a Beam Overload is fired, all weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds (original design of STO at the very beginning)

    2) Beam Overload can no longer be activated while cloaked (just like many other powers), whereas cloaking will remove an existing BO buff that hasn't fired yet

    3) Once a Beam Overload buff is activated, a 2nd copy cannot be activated until the first copy is fired, similar to how different copies of Subsystem Targeting cannot be stacked on top of each other until the first one is fired or expired

    4) After a Beam Overload is fired, all energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

    5) After a Beam Overload is fired, all beam energy weapons are automatically disabled for 5 seconds

    6) Beam Overload has an internal CD such that no more than 1 copy can be fired within every 5 seconds cycle

    Let's provide some constructive feedback for the Devs to review. Comments are welcome.

    I'm sorry, I don't pvp alot, so correct me if I'm wrong in the assumption that it's when you end up with multiple BO buffs due to cooldown reductions that can be fired in succesion.

    Yeah, the proposals make sense. Don't know about the weapon dissable one is a good idea, nor the one that stops it being activated while cloaked (doesnt seem to adress mutliple stacking at all), but the others seem reasonable.
  • Options
    burstorionburstorion Member Posts: 1,750 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    1) No to any kind of disable (seriously, if it has a disable, it bloody better be doing 90k+ on a BO3 to make up for that horrendous wait)

    2)The cloaking idea has merit...but I wouldn't trust cryptic to code it without wrecking other attacks

    3) This would be fair - retaining the ability to use a BO in an alpha - plus its copy paste from sub target

    4) See 1

    5) See 1

    6) Wouldn't trust cryptic to code something like that
  • Options
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Member Posts: 3,660 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Rather than disable all weapons it might make sense for BO to disable the specific weapon that fires it temporarily. You are, after all, overloading that beam. That would also mean that if you're going to commit to use of BO as a tactic, you're not going to want to just put one DBB on an escort. Run a beamboat if you want to use beam attacks.
  • Options
    panserbjorne39panserbjorne39 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    *Spock Voice* Number 3 and number 6 are the only logical options. All other options are illogical.
    Also, if this will be tweaked, then it is only logical to also tweak Singularity Overload as my experience with it is, if a dual beam bank is equipped, it gives multiple BO's in quick succession.
    *Panser Voice*
    While were busy nerfing everything (or fixing things depending on bias) into oblivion, lets also remove the Purple Tech doff cool down stacking. Or make it so that the cool down effect only applies to Emergency to X abilities.
  • Options
    dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    how about none of that, thats a massive nerf to BO, not double taps exactly. a 5 second lockout befor another BO would be an easy fix to remove double taping without nerfing the DEM doff, or more normal BO use
  • Options
    virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    While BO is often the headline act for the process, it's not the only such ability that can be stacked in that fashion.

    You can HY#1...wait the 15s, HY#2...wait until the buff from HY#1 is almost gone (leave yourself room for the activations)...fire off the HY#1 and HY#2...following it with HY#1 again. You can do the same with TS. You can mix HY and TS.

    You could mix BO and TS..doing a double stack of BO and TS...and wheeeeee!

    If you want to remove stacking, then remove stacking. Applying a second buff of the same type would overwrite the first buff. Apply the CD from the use of the ability with the use of the ability, not the pre-use of the ability.
  • Options
    canisanubiscanisanubis Member Posts: 187 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    1) Get rid of the power drain.
    2) Increase the power of the shot based on the number of bearing beam weapons at firing time. That way you nerf the 'carry one beam for a killing blow' problem. People wanting good damage from beam overload, they'll need to be flying a beam boat, not a cannon-armed escort with a token beam array.
    3) Make the Beam Overload buff last only 15 seconds (identical to the duplicate ability cooldown).

    Problem solved.
  • Options
    yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    While BO is often the headline act for the process, it's not the only such ability that can be stacked in that fashion.

    You can HY#1...wait the 15s, HY#2...wait until the buff from HY#1 is almost gone (leave yourself room for the activations)...fire off the HY#1 and HY#2...following it with HY#1 again. You can do the same with TS. You can mix HY and TS.

    You could mix BO and TS..doing a double stack of BO and TS...and wheeeeee!

    If you want to remove stacking, then remove stacking. Applying a second buff of the same type would overwrite the first buff. Apply the CD from the use of the ability with the use of the ability, not the pre-use of the ability.
    Thats about it.

    Either a rule applies everytime or leave it.
    I'd say leave BO alone, it's already one of the few burst dmg powers cruisers can use.

    If you feel the urge to change BO then increase the first BO buff with a slight diminishing buff the 2nd time and so on.

    1) Get rid of the power drain.
    2) Increase the power of the shot based on the number of bearing beam weapons at firing time. That way you nerf the 'carry one beam for a killing blow' problem. People wanting good damage from beam overload, they'll need to be flying a beam boat, not a cannon-armed escort with a token beam array.
    3) Make the Beam Overload buff last only 15 seconds (identical to the duplicate ability cooldown).

    Problem solved.
    THIS, THIS, THIS!

    I found it odd from the beginning that a small escort can not only equip the heaviest weapons in the game but is also able to generate even more damage than a Cruiser with a Cruisers prime weapon.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • Options
    marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Thanks to Romulans the KDF is at risk of getting another nerf to one of the only things that let BOP have a reason to still exist, yay.

    This is really just part of the larger issue of imbalance that Romulan boff traits and the lack of boff traits on other factions have caused, lets just look at that first, Drunk has good ideas on boff traits in a thread yesterday.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • Options
    eradicator84eradicator84 Member Posts: 1,116 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    1) Get rid of the power drain.
    2) Increase the power of the shot based on the number of bearing beam weapons at firing time. That way you nerf the 'carry one beam for a killing blow' problem. People wanting good damage from beam overload, they'll need to be flying a beam boat, not a cannon-armed escort with a token beam array.
    3) Make the Beam Overload buff last only 15 seconds (identical to the duplicate ability cooldown).

    Problem solved.

    I do like that idea, would make BO more a cruiser speciality. Broadsiding and using BO would have good purpose.
    AFMJGUR.jpg
  • Options
    mustafatennickmustafatennick Member Posts: 868 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    It really is easy yet the debs are that simple they can't see it no need for all of these suggestion of weapons disables and such

    DDIS hit the nail on the head

    A 5 second gap before the next BO Can be used

    Done fixed sorted
    ----=====This is my opinion you don't have to listen and no one else has to read them these "OPINIONS" are based on my exploits and my learning other people will have their opinions and that's fine just don't knock my way of doing things thanks=====---- :cool:
  • Options
    mustafatennickmustafatennick Member Posts: 868 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Please don't disable the Phaser Spinal Lance and stacked BO ability, it's the only mechanic that allows the Galaxy-X to shine. Treat the Spinal Lance as a different type of weapon if you make changes to the BO abilities.

    So tired of setting up ships using lots of expensive DOFFs, weapons, respecs, consoles etc to see them nerfed to death for those with no counters or those who aren't quick enough to hit TT. If my Dread is neutered it will be the last time I bother buying into any build in this game.

    No offence but I'm sure re gal x user make up a smaller amount of players than the sheer number of disgruntled pvpers that keep wrong nuked
    ----=====This is my opinion you don't have to listen and no one else has to read them these "OPINIONS" are based on my exploits and my learning other people will have their opinions and that's fine just don't knock my way of doing things thanks=====---- :cool:
  • Options
    momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Shared cooldown on tactical abilities with a "charge" that can be deployed at will, like beam overload, starts when the charge is used.

    Solved.
  • Options
    schneemann83schneemann83 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Personally I would alter BO to be in line with the other energy weapon buffs: 15sec GCD, 10s uptime, in which all beam arrays fire a single, heavy hitting volley per fire cycle. The current (escort) damage overkill of stacked overloads would vanish, single target dps of beamboats would be brought more in line with cannon+rapid fire setups, making full beam setups more of a viable choice. And torpedoes could return in many setups, replacing the single DBB+overload.
  • Options
    warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    People seem to be hating Beam Overloads, but are fine with CRF + DHCs ripping targets apart. WTH is up with this?
    XzRTofz.gif
  • Options
    mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    People seem to be hating Beam Overloads, but are fine with CRF + DHCs ripping targets apart. WTH is up with this?

    Probably because of the more 'burst' nature of DHCs, compared to the instant 'spike' of a DBB BO, especially a double tap. Which is harder to handle:

    A bunch of heavily buffed DHC fire which is going to deliver it's damage over the course of a couple seconds because of the nature of DHCs

    Or

    Two BO shots, also heavily buffed that are going to be fired one, right after the other, both dealing a LOT of damage in each hit, and that damage is pretty much instantly applied, needing a more 'twitch' reactions to handle.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • Options
    yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Why are Escorts even allowed to create so much damage by using Beam arrays/DBB like a Cruiser?
    Are DHCs not powerful enough?


    Like Canisanubis already said:
    2) Increase the power of the shot based on the number of bearing beam weapons at firing time. That way you nerf the 'carry one beam for a killing blow' problem. People wanting good damage from beam overload, they'll need to be flying a beam boat, not a cannon-armed escort with a token beam array.

    I think that would be the best sollution.
    Escorts already get the heaviest Weapons in the Game and since they got the highest Tac BOFF slots they can even create more burst Damage with a cruisers prime Weapon system. :confused:
    I don't think that's balanced or even believable, i mean ok they already can equip much more devestating weapons than ships 10x the size.
    But making them able to do more damage with a crusiers weapon than a cruiser can do is just bizarre. Especially since Escorts (in "real" trek, not STO :D) are supposed to be cheap and mass produced ships.

    On the other hand, making the BO damage more powerful the more Beam arrays are equipped, using Beam arrays would finally make some sense for Starfleet Cruisers.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • Options
    bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Been here since CB and I do not remember BO ever shutting weapons down after being used. It has always just had the massive power drain side effect.
    I do not thnk its stacking is an issue as one could always stack BO (even back before F2P) with a good build. Its just easier to accomplish now.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • Options
    skyranger1414skyranger1414 Member Posts: 1,785 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    yreodred wrote: »
    I don't think that's balanced or even believable, i mean ok they already can equip much more devestating weapons than ships 10x the size.
    But making them able to do more damage with a crusiers weapon than a cruiser can do is just bizarre. Especially since Escorts (in "real" trek, not STO :D) are supposed to be cheap and mass produced ships.

    We all get that you have a special kind of resentment for escorts, but if you look at the HEC, the Patrol Escort, the Prometheus, they are not tiny ships. Sure, the iconic escort was super small, but all ships considered escorts in STO are mostly medium sized.

    I also never see where escorts are described as cheap and mass produced. They are easier to produce than a slow, bulky, boring cruiser for sure, but that's hardly the same a calling them throwaway weapons. Unlike cruisers, which are throwing resources away, who needs such bloated hulls anyway? Trek is sometimes extra silly, but trying to push the galaxy as an actual working ship was simply ridiculous! Somehow it managed to be constantly shown up in its own show! By far, they were at their best in DS9; go figure, right?
  • Options
    havokreignhavokreign Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    In my experience it's a pretty specialized way to use your abilities, and it costs you at least one weapon that's not on auto, so you'll lose that DPS for the sake of spiking in quicker succession.

    So for a little less damage you've gained the ability to quickly overcome a facing shield, or obliterate somebody that just got caught with them down.

    I prefer to stack TS & HY, saving it for 'shaka; when the walls fell'. Plus you avoid the whole weapon drain issue.
  • Options
    blessedladyboyblessedladyboy Member Posts: 349 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    yreodred wrote: »
    Why are Escorts even allowed to create so much damage by using Beam arrays/DBB like a Cruiser?
    Are DHCs not powerful enough?


    Like Canisanubis already said:


    I think that would be the best sollution.
    Escorts already get the heaviest Weapons in the Game and since they got the highest Tac BOFF slots they can even create more burst Damage with a cruisers prime Weapon system. :confused:
    I don't think that's balanced or even believable, i mean ok they already can equip much more devestating weapons than ships 10x the size.
    But making them able to do more damage with a crusiers weapon than a cruiser can do is just bizarre. Especially since Escorts (in "real" trek, not STO :D) are supposed to be cheap and mass produced ships.

    On the other hand, making the BO damage more powerful the more Beam arrays are equipped, using Beam arrays would finally make some sense for Starfleet Cruisers.

    This is the worst idea ever, I want versality not escorts can only use cannons, cruisers can only viablly use beams. Also most vape builds use two dual beams so what then?
    Just dont let BO stack, add a lockout timer similar to the ealchi proc timer. Perhaps BO could be buffed slightly in damage or have its power drain reduced a little to compensate.
  • Options
    stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    We all get that you have a special kind of resentment for escorts, but if you look at the HEC, the Patrol Escort, the Prometheus, they are not tiny ships. Sure, the iconic escort was super small, but all ships considered escorts in STO are mostly medium sized.

    That's because with the exception of the Defiant and the Steamrunner, every single Federation "escort" is actually a cruiser. The Defiant is classified as an Escort, while the Steamrunner is a Heavy Frigate.

    Akira? Heavy Cruiser. Prometheus? Long Range Tactical Cruiser. Saber? Light Cruiser. Maelstrom? Medium/Heavy Cruiser (based on its size since it's a Cryptic design. It's just a smidge smaller than an Excelsior)
    I also never see where escorts are described as cheap and mass produced. They are easier to produce than a slow, bulky, boring cruiser for sure, but that's hardly the same a calling them throwaway weapons.

    They never were. The only ship that was ever described in any way as "mass produced" was the Saber. Which is actually rather amusing to me since she's effectively the Defiant's big sister.
  • Options
    hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Personally I would alter BO to be in line with the other energy weapon buffs: 15sec GCD, 10s uptime, in which all beam arrays fire a single, heavy hitting volley per fire cycle. The current (escort) damage overkill of stacked overloads would vanish, single target dps of beamboats would be brought more in line with cannon+rapid fire setups, making full beam setups more of a viable choice. And torpedoes could return in many setups, replacing the single DBB+overload.

    I kinda like this idea. Make BO act like Singularity Overcharge. Turns each of your beam shots into a mini BO instead of a beam volley (does nice damage too at level 5). Will boost beam damage significantly, make BO more a cruiser choice (imagine 6 or 7 BAs hitting for 300% damage for a little while) and would also remove the insta-vape builds that guys like Gohan are so proud of.

    The only problem there is that you are essentially removing a tactic that these guys have spent a long time and a lot of ECs and dil perfecting. So it would be a slap to them.

    Outside of that one issue, I rather like this idea quite a lot.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • Options
    capnshadow27capnshadow27 Member Posts: 1,731 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    If i had my say it would be the third and sixth only.

    Seriously. It isnt just Gal-X (which i am currently flying) that use this to deal considerable damage. Most tactical cruisers NEED this.

    Someone has to stop PvP from running the nerf train. 75% of thi game is built around a grind that centers around PvE and missions.

    At the rate these guys keep going you might as well drop every single cruiser in this game.

    Nerf alpha strikes.

    Nerf CRF.

    Cruisers and beams in general get paltry tricks to remain somewhat relevent and you guys want to take that away?

    Beams have the worst weapon power draw in the game.

    so lets make cruisers and beams even more irrelevant.

    NO THANKS.
    Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
    I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    As far as I have experienced, most PvP tactical cruisers with beam arrays rely on A2B-boosted FAW rather than BO, which seems more suited to an escort with a single DBB. An A2B or FAW nerf would be far more sorely felt than anything suggested here.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • Options
    capnshadow27capnshadow27 Member Posts: 1,731 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    As far as I have experienced, most PvP tactical cruisers with beam arrays rely on A2B-boosted FAW rather than BO, which seems more suited to an escort with a single DBB. An A2B or FAW nerf would be far more sorely felt than anything suggested here.

    In PvP yeah. But what gets Nerfed there gets Nerfed in PvE..... and thats BS.
    Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
    I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In or Register to comment.