"...'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
As has been stated many times in many ways. Fed Cruisers only do not need this. It would give the ability to fire ALL weapons forward at once, ONLY to Fed Cruisers. THAT would make them OP to some degree.
IF this ability is going to implemented, it needs to be for ALL ships capable of mounting Omni Beams, or, restrict the use of them to 1 fore, 1 aft or keep it the way it is.
No canonical sources exist for a ship firing all weapons, fore and aft, in the same direction. Aft weapons are there for a reason, to cover the rear of a ship while it repositions or retreats. They are not there to use in a main assault.
The fact that people in this game seem to believe in that useage, says something more about the players than any perceived broken game mechanic.
Personally, I believe 1 fore and 1 aft Omni beam would be the ideal mix when paired with other weapons to provide maximum coverage and utility. It would give you a minimum of 2 weapons always firing in the same direction (all around coverage) and then whatever cannons, torpedos or other beams or weapons, you have on each end for that direction of fire.
And yes, not being a DPS ***** like some people, I tend to focus my ship builds more on the concept of coverage rather than max power deliverable at any given time. I would rather have good 360 coverage from attack at all angles, than to be able to deliver massive damage in one direction and be vulnerable to attack from other angles.
"Go play with your DPS in the corner, I don't care how big it is." ~ Me "There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
I have written this at another thread already, but i feel this should be discussed on it's own.
Klingon Cruisers have acess to DHCs, and cloak.
Romulan Warbirds have acess to DHCs, Battle(?)cloak and singularity powers.
Starfleet Cruisers have ... ?
I know that a very old debate and that Starfleet Cruisers get a tiny bit more hull, but STOs game mechanics allow to heal hull faster than anything. So a bit more hull is worth nothing IMO.
Man, more whining just what we need...
The Federation has more ship choices all three factions. That is your advantage... more variety, more options. Hell, the Federation even has access to the Plasmonic Leech which was originally exclusive to the KDF faction.
There is nothing truly unique about the KDF anymore except for the cloaking device and literally complete disinterest by Cryptic to provide anything to the KDF faction. Hell, even the Mogh is just a stupid cut and paste job of the Avenger. The only thing special about is the innate cloaking ability. But the Avenger can also cloak using the cloak console from the Defiant.
The Bortasqu' is nothing more than the Odyssey without the chevron separation.
The Romulan is in a similar situation, hell I created a Romulan Science toon, but I have to wait until I reached level 40 to get a science ship. The Ha'nom Guardian Warbird is the only free science ship available the Romulans.
Here's a radical idea.... Try playing the other factions.
I play all three factions. Do you know what I want? I want more differences between the factions. I want each faction to have a set of abilities / technologies that no other factions can have. I want all factions to be developed equally (or at least within reason). I want a reason to play other factions to have a different experience. I want the factions look and feel unique so that STO is not some single sided Federation Love Fest.
We've already tried, but you have a never-ending supply of counter-arguments that make absolutely zero sense.
If you say what's so hard to understand, maybe i can try to explain better?
Basicly 4 Omni Beams + 4 Beam Arrays would simply be a differnt form of broadsiding, just facing forward.
It would have a lower total dmg output so it would be a natural choice for ppl how like to use torpedoes. Maybe the use of DBBs should be limited depending on how many Omni Beams are equiped and vice versa.
I can understand that FAW is the BIG BAD here, i don't like it too. It will be changed/nerfed sooner or later (hopefully sooner) anyway.
As has been stated many times in many ways. Fed Cruisers only do not need this. It would give the ability to fire ALL weapons forward at once, ONLY to Fed Cruisers. THAT would make them OP to some degree.
Isn't that the same what ROM, KDF and most Lockbox "cruisers" and Escorts can do with cannons+turrets anyway?
IF this ability is going to implemented, it needs to be for ALL ships capable of mounting Omni Beams, or, restrict the use of them to 1 fore, 1 aft or keep it the way it is.
No canonical sources exist for a ship firing all weapons, fore and aft, in the same direction. Aft weapons are there for a reason, to cover the rear of a ship while it repositions or retreats. They are not there to use in a main assault.
I agree there isn't much canon source for this.
But i haven't seen many (none?) 360° turrets on Klingon or Romulan ships in canon Trek also.
Personally, I believe 1 fore and 1 aft Omni beam would be the ideal mix when paired with other weapons to provide maximum coverage and utility. It would give you a minimum of 2 weapons always firing in the same direction (all around coverage) and then whatever cannons, torpedos or other beams or weapons, you have on each end for that direction of fire.
The idea behind this is to give players the choice between broadsiding and a forward facing attack (especially 250° like in the shows).
Both choices would have its pros and cons. broadsiding would still deal a more massive damage while BA+Omnis would be better for torpedo combinations (but it wouldn't be nearly as massive as a KDF/ROM "cruiser" fireing DHCs + Turrets).
And yes, not being a DPS ***** like some people, I tend to focus my ship builds more on the concept of coverage rather than max power deliverable at any given time. I would rather have good 360 coverage from attack at all angles, than to be able to deliver massive damage in one direction and be vulnerable to attack from other angles.
This would also be a alternative for sure.
You see, the problem i have is that Starfleet Cruisers only offer one effective kind of tactic, while other ships offer more choices.
The Federation has more ship choices all three factions. That is your advantage... more variety, more options. Hell, the Federation even has access to the Plasmonic Leech which was originally exclusive to the KDF faction.
There is nothing truly unique about the KDF anymore except for the cloaking device and literally complete disinterest by Cryptic to provide anything to the KDF faction. Hell, even the Mogh is just a stupid cut and paste job of the Avenger. The only thing special about is the innate cloaking ability. But the Avenger can also cloak using the cloak console from the Defiant.
The Bortasqu' is nothing more than the Odyssey without the chevron separation.
The Romulan is in a similar situation, hell I created a Romulan Science toon, but I have to wait until I reached level 40 to get a science ship. The Ha'nom Guardian Warbird is the only free science ship available the Romulans.
No offense, but the only whining i can identify here is yours, about the Federation side having more ships than KDF or ROM.
Here's a radical idea.... Try playing the other factions.
I play all three factions. Do you know what I want? I want more differences between the factions. I want each faction to have a set of abilities / technologies that no other factions can have. I want all factions to be developed equally (or at least within reason). I want a reason to play other factions to have a different experience. I want the factions look and feel unique so that STO is not some single sided Federation Love Fest.
I don't play soley FED faction i play other factions too.
That's where i noticed how boring Starfleet Cruisers are compard to other factions ships in the first place.
You talk about uniqueness, that's my point in this threat. Where's the uniqueness of Starfleet cruisers?
Sure there are many of them and the variety offers some choices, but what makes the inidvidual ship truely uniqe? What makes a Star Cruiser or Heavy Cruiser unique?
Comm arrays? KDF has them too.
A tiny bit more hull? :rolleyes:
Let me ask you a question.
If STO wheren't a Star Trek game and ships would look completely different, how many ppl do you think would fly a G-R, Heavy Cruiser, Star Cruiser or Assault Cruiser?
Sorry for typos.
"...'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
The Bortasqu' is nothing more than the Odyssey without the chevron separation.
It's not. Tactical Borta has 5 tac consoles, tac oddy has 3, for instance. You can argue about the performance of the Bortasqu', but it's not just an oddy clone. (unlike the mogh/avenger)
No offense, but the only whining i can identify here is yours, about the Federation side having more ships than KDF or ROM.
Of course I am whining about the number of ships in the KDF and Romulan . Have you compared just how many there are to the Fed?
However, I am not whining for ships to have equal abilities as Fed ships. The last thing I want is a copy and paste job. I just want a better selection to choose from that are unique to those factions.
However, you are whining about certain abilities (ships in this case) that the KDF and Romulan have that the Fed does not have.
The most whining I have read are from people playing the Feb about not having abilities like cloak and in the past the Plasmonic Leech. I am whining about the lack of development effort devoted to the KDF and Romulan faction as a whole. I am pretty sure a lot of people would generally agree that the Federation gets the lion's share of development effort. Just look at the number of starships and available costumes for purchase.
I see the OP's point and to a point(pardon the pun) I agree. Though I do NOT agree that a cruiser should be able to tack on basically 3 of the 360 AP arrays you get from the FE or 4 kinetic beams.
No just no. With FAW and A2B, that is OP.
HOWEVER, why is it the only build that gets 360 deg coverage with it's weapon type is cannons? I still think they should have a low DPS much like cannon turrets do now and have 360 arrays.
I mean seriously I fail to see how a low dps 360 array is OP in the least and I challenge the naysayers to tell me why it is?
Would it be so OP to have a 360 array at the same DPS or lower i(f you're so freaked out about it)? Is that super OP?
Frankly I too get sick of being stuck into broadsiding most of the times instead of being able to do like an escort and pile 4 DBB up front then 4 360 turrets in the back if it so strikes my fancy.
Or hell I have a carrier build where I run 6 turrets to keep guns on target along with my pets. Why could it not be 6 360 arrays?
Again answer me that.
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!
Of course I am whining about the number of ships in the KDF and Romulan . Have you compared just how many there are to the Fed?
Even if there where hundred more, if they where all like the Star Crusiers, Heavy Cruiser or G-R it wouldn't mean any step towards more quality.
Sure FED got the most ships but that doesn't say anything about their performance.
Of course there are exceptions, like the G-X and the Avenger. But the rest leaves space for improvement, so to say.
However, I am not whining for ships to have equal abilities as Fed ships. The last thing I want is a copy and paste job. I just want a better selection to choose from that are unique to those factions.
Sure, why should anyone want to have less useful abilities on their ships, lol.
I don't want a copy and paste job too, if i wanted something like that i'd suggested to give Starfleet Cruisers access to DHCs, more maneuverability and cloak.
Also i don't want more ships, i want the ones already in game be less boring an dull. Haven't you ever asked yourself if there's something else you could do with a cruiser besides broadsiding?
Have you ever seen Starfleet ships on TV/Movies explicitly trying to broadside because such attacks where the most desirable fireing position?
They where always trying to face the enemy ship with their forward weapons.
However, you are whining about certain abilities (ships in this case) that the KDF and Romulan have that the Fed does not have.
If whining means specifying arguments to support an argument, then you are right.
As i said, i do not want Starfleet ships be able to use DHCs, there couldn't be much more anti trek like this IMO (besides carriers, lol).
My point is KDF and ROM "cruisers" not only simply have more abilites than Starfleet ships, they have simply more useful abilities in general.
Sure Starfleet Cruisers got "Attract Fire" ability and a tiny bit more hull. But do you really think this compensates the lack of DHC, cloak, better console layout and higher turnrate?
(I'm not mentioning more crew, because it's a almost useless stat)
I was just comparing G-R/Starcruiser with Negh'Var/Vor'cha. Sorry for generalizating, but i hope you get the point.
Have you ever flown those ships and still think they where balanced to each other?
Yeah there are certain ships that are OP, like the Avenger for example. They wouldn't had to be included to the multiple omnis/rear weapons slot club.
I see the OP's point and to a point(pardon the pun) I agree. Though I do NOT agree that a cruiser should be able to tack on basically 3 of the 360 AP arrays you get from the FE or 4 kinetic beams.
No just no. With FAW and A2B, that is OP.
Fully agreed.
My suggestion was made with the coming FAW nerf in mind, i thought i was clear about that.
"...'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
Okay, so, I saw the number of posts and skipped... a few. Sorry, but I have a life outside of STO and intend to use it, not spend the rest of it reading each and every post. So yeah, sorry to everyone whose posts I've just skipped.
I agree with OP that Fed Cruisers need an edge; every other ship has one, but the core Cruiser types of the Federation don't. This, of course, is a VERY canon thing. Starfleet builds multi-role vessels, not dedicated warships (well, other than the Defiant... do NOT get me started on the Avenger!) and these tend to be more flexible, but therefore, somewhat weaker in a direct combat-efficiency comparison.
So, what's the trade off? Well, Science Vessels have their 'Space Magic' and Escorts have their Dual Cannons. Battlecruisers have DC's too, but lack the tanking abil...oh wait.
What we do NOT need, and I say this as a Cruiser Captain, is more 360 beams. Certainly a wider range or weapons with the [Arc] bonus would be nice (not having to pay 2500 for a Wide Angle Quantum Torpedo would be nice Cryptic) and you could theoretically even restrict them to Cruiser class vessels (though I'm definitely not suggesting it), but you know what would be REALLY useful? More tanking power.
If the shows and films have taught us anything about the Enterprise, it's that she just keeps going. She's a tough ship, but not as a result of her base stat line. Any old engineer could improve a cruisers structural integrity. No, it's her, or rather, her crews flexibility that sets her apart. They always have a trick up their collective sleeves.
What we need is the ability to work around our limitations. More or better weapons does not answer that problem, more and more varied abilities does.
A simple solution then? Improve any one Ensign BOff station on all Cruisers (but not Battle Cruisers, Warbird Battle Cruisers or Dreadnaughts) to a Lieutenant. It's not much. One ability, and not a particularly high level one at that, but it would certainly make them more competitive and interesting. And no, I would NOT give it to the Galaxy X, it has enough toys already.
Just look at the Enterprise E. Check what ranks her BOffs actually hold... Riker, Troi, Crusher: Commander. LaForge, Data, Worf: Lieutenant Commander. Hell, the Enterprise A had THREE CAPTAINS (Scotty, Spock and Kirk - http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Montgomery_Scott#Chronology ).
Now, I know that this, as a thing, is NEVER going to happen; there's probably more chance of a T6 Connie (Brace for impact!), but it's a lot more reasonable and far more canon-Trek than asking for more Omni-Beams; which is never going to happen either.
Well, that's my ten pence, and if nobody reads it (and at 1:45 am, who would?) then never mind. I'm off to bed, I have a life outside STO (amazing I know) and it starts at 7:30, regardless of whether I'm ready or not.
:cool:
General T'Reirr Asei Captain of the venerable I.K.S. Y'Kun.
Warrior of the Empire; Savior of Cookies; Lord of String; Devious Little S*!7
It would have a lower total dmg output so it would be a natural choice for ppl how like to use torpedoes. Maybe the use of DBBs should be limited depending on how many Omni Beams are equiped and vice versa.
I can understand that FAW is the BIG BAD here, i don't like it too. It will be changed/nerfed sooner or later (hopefully sooner) anyway.
Lower than what? Having Turrets in those rear slots? Not bloody likely.
I agree there isn't much canon source for this.
But i haven't seen many (none?) 360° turrets on Klingon or Romulan ships in canon Trek also.
Actually, the Trek everyone loves to hate, Star Trek V, showed a turret on a BoP. Mr/ Spock fired it at the "god" creature that was about to kill Kirk.
The idea behind this is to give players the choice between broadsiding and a forward facing attack (especially 250° like in the shows).
...snip...
While the weapons on the various shows may technically be 250, they are effectively 360, especially the dorsal arrays. Because the emitters at the end of the strips can and have fired in directions other than their "designated" degree direction.
This would also be a alternative for sure.
You see, the problem i have is that Starfleet Cruisers only offer one effective kind of tactic, while other ships offer more choices.
...snip...
No. Wrong. EVERY ship has many tactics it can use. Most of them effective. All work. Some output more DPS than others. THIS is the primary reason people broadside. With all weapons firing on the same target, the DPS output is "teh ROXORZ". Very rarely have you EVER seen ANY ship in ANY of the shows from ANY faction,... broadside. This is applying WWII tactics to a 24th/25th century ship and weapons.
I have 7 weapons on my ship. Only one is an Omni beam, all but one CAN fire forward, ONLY the omni beam and the KCB can fire anywhere and in any direction and I handle all content I fly into, except for HIVE Elite, just fine and in a timely manner.
"Go play with your DPS in the corner, I don't care how big it is." ~ Me "There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
Actually, the Trek everyone loves to hate, Star Trek V, showed a turret on a BoP. Mr/ Spock fired it at the "god" creature that was about to kill Kirk.
That shot came from the BoPs wing cannon. just because it was moevable to a certain degree doesn't mean it's a turret.
While the weapons on the various shows may technically be 250, they are effectively 360, especially the dorsal arrays. Because the emitters at the end of the strips can and have fired in directions other than their "designated" degree direction.
They certainly wheren't 360°. ships whouldn't have to fire any other beam weapons aside their main array.
No. Wrong. EVERY ship has many tactics it can use. Most of them effective. All work. Some output more DPS than others. THIS is the primary reason people broadside. With all weapons firing on the same target, the DPS output is "teh ROXORZ".
So at one time you say fireing all beam weapons is not broadside and the other time it is...
As i said its effect would be similar like broadsiding, just facing forward.
Very rarely have you EVER seen ANY ship in ANY of the shows from ANY faction,... broadside. This is applying WWII tactics to a 24th/25th century ship and weapons.
Broadsiding is rather a napoleonic kind of tactics IMO. WWII didn't had as many side facing broadsiding battles anymore.
Btw, WWII battleships had a much bigger fireing arc than those 70° each side. Guns where staggered so they could be used in a frontal attack.
I have 7 weapons on my ship. Only one is an Omni beam, all but one CAN fire forward, ONLY the omni beam and the KCB can fire anywhere and in any direction and I handle all content I fly into, except for HIVE Elite, just fine and in a timely manner.
That's not the point, i can handle the games content quite well. As i said it is not about making any ship OP, but to offer more working options.
As you said everyones broadsiding. I thnk its because of the lack of other options TBH.
Sorry i don't have much time to answer appropriately. I hope you don't mind.
(sorry for typos)
"...'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
If the only ship type/faction allowed to have multiple Omni Beams is Fed Cruisers, THAT makes them OP.
Oh and in case you missed it, my comment about DPS being the "ROXORZ" was dripping with so much sarcasm, you could paint your house with it. Also, I never said firing all weapons forward was broadsiding, I said that the reason people DO broadside is to get all weapons on target. Was this tactic started in WWII, obviously not, as ships of the line did this when wind and sail was the pinnacle of technology and someone probably did it before them with less sophisticated weaponry, but, WWII ideas and tactics is what a lot of people, especially the ones who advocate broadsiding, use as justification for how a cruiser should be used.
If one ship type has the ability to fire 8 weapons in one direction, then they ALL need that ability. Especially with the "we're all friends now and sharing most technology anyway" thing that's going on right now in the game.
Like I have said throughout, the solution is simple. In order to facilitate more options for ALL ships, either allow multiple unlimited Omni beams for ALL, allow one Omni Beam fore and one Omni Beam aft, or, leave it as is. Personally, I would prefer the allowing of two Omni's one fore, one aft. It would solve my issues nicely, without making my defiant OP by any stretch.
Of course this doesn't address the issue of Wide Arc DHC's or any other crafted "special" weapon. Also, if multiples are allowed, there needs to be some mechanism to obtain them more easily. As 10 to 50 mil per is totally outrageous if you need 8 of them.
"Go play with your DPS in the corner, I don't care how big it is." ~ Me "There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
If the only ship type/faction allowed to have multiple Omni Beams is Fed Cruisers, THAT makes them OP.
In what way, several Omni beams in the rear weapons slot of a SF Cruiser wouldn't raise their dmg output compared to 8 Beam array broadsides. (All that AFTER fire at will has been nerfed)
I can't see what's so OP about that.
If one ship type has the ability to fire 8 weapons in one direction, then they ALL need that ability. Especially with the "we're all friends now and sharing most technology anyway" thing that's going on right now in the game.
All ships (cruisers) can run 8 beam arrays = broadsiding.
Non Fed "Cruisers" can equip DHCs+Turrets = all weapons directed to front.
BA+Omnis (rear) = all weapons directed to front (less dmg then above, but wider fireing arc).
Like I have said throughout, the solution is simple. In order to facilitate more options for ALL ships, either allow multiple unlimited Omni beams for ALL, allow one Omni Beam fore and one Omni Beam aft, or, leave it as is. Personally, I would prefer the allowing of two Omni's one fore, one aft. It would solve my issues nicely, without making my defiant OP by any stretch.
Escorts shouldn't able to equip multiple omni beams at all.
Allowing that, would be completey counterproductive to the purpose of the original idea of giving Starfleet Cruisers something special.
Of course this doesn't address the issue of Wide Arc DHC's or any other crafted "special" weapon. Also, if multiples are allowed, there needs to be some mechanism to obtain them more easily. As 10 to 50 mil per is totally outrageous if you need 8 of them.
Agreed, Omnis should be drops and buyable at Starbases and rep stores, like any other weapon type.
But i never suggested that anyone should be able to equip 8 of them, that would be completely over the top IMO.
Again,
4 (or less) Omni beam arrays for Starfleet Cruisers rear weapon slots (maybe even 2 or 3, depending on their turn rate), simply because they can't equip DHCs.
All that after FAW has been nerfed to a reasonable level.
I don't care about A2Bat because i don't use it anymore, but if the devs are looking for a sollution, without alienating too many ppl, they should probably make it more like A2S. (but that's another topic)
Of course there could be restirictions to certain ships like the Avenger or G-X which already can equip DHCs.
What's so OP about that compared to a 4DHC+4 Turret Negh'Var, Vor'cha or D'Deridex?
"...'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
I'd like to see a cruiser with 8 front and 8 back , but you can only have 8 active at a time.
Say, 4 beams front with a mix of dhcs and maybe a torp, while the back slots single cannons and torps plus 4 beams.
Broadside you would be like beamboats right now, but if you can manage to point your nose at something, you would shut down the back beams and bring the front cannons online. Similar scenario for the aft.
Maybe being an engineer would make the power transfers fast, where sci and tac captains in these cruisers would have a delay swapping weapons
I'd like to see a cruiser with 8 front and 8 back , but you can only have 8 active at a time.
Say, 4 beams front with a mix of dhcs and maybe a torp, while the back slots single cannons and torps plus 4 beams.
Broadside you would be like beamboats right now, but if you can manage to point your nose at something, you would shut down the back beams and bring the front cannons online. Similar scenario for the aft.
Maybe being an engineer would make the power transfers fast, where sci and tac captains in these cruisers would have a delay swapping weapons
No no and HELL NO! Hard enough keeping track of 8 weapons and power management, you want to make that worse?! NO!
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!
No no and HELL NO! Hard enough keeping track of 8 weapons and power management, you want to make that worse?! NO!
I'll try to resist trolling your inability to track 8 things, and say that something like this could provide decent DPs for engineers and cruisers. It could be a solution for a2b. Could also be a step towards more of a trinity meta.
I'd like to see a cruiser with 8 front and 8 back , but you can only have 8 active at a time.
Say, 4 beams front with a mix of dhcs and maybe a torp, while the back slots single cannons and torps plus 4 beams.
Broadside you would be like beamboats right now, but if you can manage to point your nose at something, you would shut down the back beams and bring the front cannons online. Similar scenario for the aft.
Maybe being an engineer would make the power transfers fast, where sci and tac captains in these cruisers would have a delay swapping weapons
Yeah, and then you would never have to actually pilot your ship. You want the global for RSP removed as well, don't you? Somehow this thread is actually getting worse.
Yeah, and then you would never have to actually pilot your ship. You want the global for RSP removed as well, don't you? Somehow this thread is actually getting worse.
Agreed. The OP seems intent on either not hearing, not accepting or totally ignoring any of the reasons that the problem he's having is him and not the equipment.
Some of the "suggestions" by others since, are even worse.
"Go play with your DPS in the corner, I don't care how big it is." ~ Me "There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
I'll try to resist trolling your inability to track 8 things, and say that something like this could provide decent DPs for engineers and cruisers. It could be a solution for a2b. Could also be a step towards more of a trinity meta.
You just don't get it. I'd have to spend so much time tracking my weapons and which ones were active, I wouldn't be able to track powers, damage ore even where in the name of hell I am going.
Sorry sometimes there's simply too much. And doubling the weapons then only providing power for half. Sorry that's too much micro managing.
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!
I would be fine with upping the limit from 1to 2 omni beams per ship, especially on ships with giant saucers like the Galaxy to serve as mounting points.
As a mostly KDF player, aestetically I wonder where you even mount a 360° weapon on some ships.
How ever I think you should be limited to one forward, and one aft. They are rear slots for a reason, and allowing over captilization of rear weapons for forward damage could have unintended balance consequences. Especially when you factor in the KCB.
Thanks for the Advanced Light Cruiser, Allied Escort Bundles, Jem-Hadar Light Battlecruiser, and Mek'leth
New Content Wishlist
T6 updates for the Kamarag & Vor'Cha
Heavy Cruiser & a Movie Era Style AoY Utility Cruiser
I would love for people actually go and learn how to program , all those if-statement, exclusions, dependancies, exceptions, memory management and making it work as well. And then see how a suggestion can "shake up your careful laid house of cards.
Agreed. The OP seems intent on either not hearing, not accepting or totally ignoring any of the reasons that the problem he's having is him and not the equipment.
Some of the "suggestions" by others since, are even worse.
Yup. He just want more power creep because he can't handle being a good engineering/cruiser captain. Heck, I suck at using a tac/escort for PvP, it's my fault, and I admit it. I don't go asking for more power creep to make things easier for me.
I would be fine with upping the limit from 1to 2 omni beams per ship, especially on ships with giant saucers like the Galaxy to serve as mounting points.
As a mostly KDF player, aestetically I wonder where you even mount a 360° weapon on some ships.
How ever I think you should be limited to one forward, and one aft. They are rear slots for a reason, and allowing over captilization of rear weapons for forward damage could have unintended balance consequences. Especially when you factor in the KCB.
Technically you can't make a full 360° weapon if STO had full 3D environment, it would be impossible.
(this includes cannon turrets)
But since turrets are in the game without anyone objecting them for years, i don't see a reason why a beam 360° weapon shouldn't exist.
To the naysayers, what about this:
Ships without DHCs should be able to equip 1 or 2 omni beams more than normal, depending on their turn rate. Or they could simply allow all ships to equip DCs and DHCs.
Another thing:
Every space combat weapon should offer the option to change its visual from beam to cannon and vice versa, just like you can activate a shield/defelctor visual.
That would be only a visual difference, all stats would stay the same and when entering a PvP area the weapons visual would be reset to its original setting.
"...'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
To the naysayers, what about this:
Ships without DHCs should be able to equip 1 or 2 omni beams more than normal, depending on their turn rate. Or they could simply allow all ships to equip DCs and DHCs.
A low-dps beam vs unable-to-keep-on-target weapons? Lol. Luckily I've gone for smart and just used beams. Still got 360 degrees coverage and an awesome dps to boot . It tastes great and you know you like it!
Another thing:
Every space combat weapon should offer the option to change its visual from beam to cannon and vice versa, just like you can activate a shield/defelctor visual.
That would be only a visual difference, all stats would stay the same and when entering a PvP area the weapons visual would be reset to its original setting.
It's all or nothing, you can't "change back" visuals when you're in a PVP area. That's just like "I'm kinda pregnant, not really but only a bit". Sorry, I had to laugh about this.
Or they could simply allow all ships to equip DCs and DHCs.
Why even bother with different ship classes? As I said long ago in this thread, I get it, you want to be able to do anything you want on any ship you want, boohoo it's not happening.
Comments
Yup, he's a one man spam machine.
Very constructive, thanks.
As has been stated many times in many ways. Fed Cruisers only do not need this. It would give the ability to fire ALL weapons forward at once, ONLY to Fed Cruisers. THAT would make them OP to some degree.
IF this ability is going to implemented, it needs to be for ALL ships capable of mounting Omni Beams, or, restrict the use of them to 1 fore, 1 aft or keep it the way it is.
No canonical sources exist for a ship firing all weapons, fore and aft, in the same direction. Aft weapons are there for a reason, to cover the rear of a ship while it repositions or retreats. They are not there to use in a main assault.
The fact that people in this game seem to believe in that useage, says something more about the players than any perceived broken game mechanic.
Personally, I believe 1 fore and 1 aft Omni beam would be the ideal mix when paired with other weapons to provide maximum coverage and utility. It would give you a minimum of 2 weapons always firing in the same direction (all around coverage) and then whatever cannons, torpedos or other beams or weapons, you have on each end for that direction of fire.
And yes, not being a DPS ***** like some people, I tend to focus my ship builds more on the concept of coverage rather than max power deliverable at any given time. I would rather have good 360 coverage from attack at all angles, than to be able to deliver massive damage in one direction and be vulnerable to attack from other angles.
"There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
We've already tried, but you have a never-ending supply of counter-arguments that make absolutely zero sense.
Man, more whining just what we need...
The Federation has more ship choices all three factions. That is your advantage... more variety, more options. Hell, the Federation even has access to the Plasmonic Leech which was originally exclusive to the KDF faction.
There is nothing truly unique about the KDF anymore except for the cloaking device and literally complete disinterest by Cryptic to provide anything to the KDF faction. Hell, even the Mogh is just a stupid cut and paste job of the Avenger. The only thing special about is the innate cloaking ability. But the Avenger can also cloak using the cloak console from the Defiant.
The Bortasqu' is nothing more than the Odyssey without the chevron separation.
The Romulan is in a similar situation, hell I created a Romulan Science toon, but I have to wait until I reached level 40 to get a science ship. The Ha'nom Guardian Warbird is the only free science ship available the Romulans.
Here's a radical idea.... Try playing the other factions.
I play all three factions. Do you know what I want? I want more differences between the factions. I want each faction to have a set of abilities / technologies that no other factions can have. I want all factions to be developed equally (or at least within reason). I want a reason to play other factions to have a different experience. I want the factions look and feel unique so that STO is not some single sided Federation Love Fest.
Basicly 4 Omni Beams + 4 Beam Arrays would simply be a differnt form of broadsiding, just facing forward.
It would have a lower total dmg output so it would be a natural choice for ppl how like to use torpedoes. Maybe the use of DBBs should be limited depending on how many Omni Beams are equiped and vice versa.
I can understand that FAW is the BIG BAD here, i don't like it too. It will be changed/nerfed sooner or later (hopefully sooner) anyway.
Isn't that the same what ROM, KDF and most Lockbox "cruisers" and Escorts can do with cannons+turrets anyway?
I agree there isn't much canon source for this.
But i haven't seen many (none?) 360° turrets on Klingon or Romulan ships in canon Trek also.
The idea behind this is to give players the choice between broadsiding and a forward facing attack (especially 250° like in the shows).
Both choices would have its pros and cons. broadsiding would still deal a more massive damage while BA+Omnis would be better for torpedo combinations (but it wouldn't be nearly as massive as a KDF/ROM "cruiser" fireing DHCs + Turrets).
This would also be a alternative for sure.
You see, the problem i have is that Starfleet Cruisers only offer one effective kind of tactic, while other ships offer more choices.
No offense, but the only whining i can identify here is yours, about the Federation side having more ships than KDF or ROM.
I don't play soley FED faction i play other factions too.
That's where i noticed how boring Starfleet Cruisers are compard to other factions ships in the first place.
You talk about uniqueness, that's my point in this threat. Where's the uniqueness of Starfleet cruisers?
Sure there are many of them and the variety offers some choices, but what makes the inidvidual ship truely uniqe? What makes a Star Cruiser or Heavy Cruiser unique?
Comm arrays? KDF has them too.
A tiny bit more hull? :rolleyes:
Let me ask you a question.
If STO wheren't a Star Trek game and ships would look completely different, how many ppl do you think would fly a G-R, Heavy Cruiser, Star Cruiser or Assault Cruiser?
Sorry for typos.
It's not. Tactical Borta has 5 tac consoles, tac oddy has 3, for instance. You can argue about the performance of the Bortasqu', but it's not just an oddy clone. (unlike the mogh/avenger)
Of course I am whining about the number of ships in the KDF and Romulan . Have you compared just how many there are to the Fed?
However, I am not whining for ships to have equal abilities as Fed ships. The last thing I want is a copy and paste job. I just want a better selection to choose from that are unique to those factions.
However, you are whining about certain abilities (ships in this case) that the KDF and Romulan have that the Fed does not have.
The most whining I have read are from people playing the Feb about not having abilities like cloak and in the past the Plasmonic Leech. I am whining about the lack of development effort devoted to the KDF and Romulan faction as a whole. I am pretty sure a lot of people would generally agree that the Federation gets the lion's share of development effort. Just look at the number of starships and available costumes for purchase.
No just no. With FAW and A2B, that is OP.
HOWEVER, why is it the only build that gets 360 deg coverage with it's weapon type is cannons? I still think they should have a low DPS much like cannon turrets do now and have 360 arrays.
I mean seriously I fail to see how a low dps 360 array is OP in the least and I challenge the naysayers to tell me why it is?
Would it be so OP to have a 360 array at the same DPS or lower i(f you're so freaked out about it)? Is that super OP?
Frankly I too get sick of being stuck into broadsiding most of the times instead of being able to do like an escort and pile 4 DBB up front then 4 360 turrets in the back if it so strikes my fancy.
Or hell I have a carrier build where I run 6 turrets to keep guns on target along with my pets. Why could it not be 6 360 arrays?
Again answer me that.
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
Sure FED got the most ships but that doesn't say anything about their performance.
Of course there are exceptions, like the G-X and the Avenger. But the rest leaves space for improvement, so to say.
Sure, why should anyone want to have less useful abilities on their ships, lol.
I don't want a copy and paste job too, if i wanted something like that i'd suggested to give Starfleet Cruisers access to DHCs, more maneuverability and cloak.
Also i don't want more ships, i want the ones already in game be less boring an dull. Haven't you ever asked yourself if there's something else you could do with a cruiser besides broadsiding?
Have you ever seen Starfleet ships on TV/Movies explicitly trying to broadside because such attacks where the most desirable fireing position?
They where always trying to face the enemy ship with their forward weapons.
If whining means specifying arguments to support an argument, then you are right.
As i said, i do not want Starfleet ships be able to use DHCs, there couldn't be much more anti trek like this IMO (besides carriers, lol).
My point is KDF and ROM "cruisers" not only simply have more abilites than Starfleet ships, they have simply more useful abilities in general.
Sure Starfleet Cruisers got "Attract Fire" ability and a tiny bit more hull. But do you really think this compensates the lack of DHC, cloak, better console layout and higher turnrate?
(I'm not mentioning more crew, because it's a almost useless stat)
I was just comparing G-R/Starcruiser with Negh'Var/Vor'cha. Sorry for generalizating, but i hope you get the point.
Have you ever flown those ships and still think they where balanced to each other?
Yeah there are certain ships that are OP, like the Avenger for example. They wouldn't had to be included to the multiple omnis/rear weapons slot club.
Fully agreed.
My suggestion was made with the coming FAW nerf in mind, i thought i was clear about that.
I agree with OP that Fed Cruisers need an edge; every other ship has one, but the core Cruiser types of the Federation don't. This, of course, is a VERY canon thing. Starfleet builds multi-role vessels, not dedicated warships (well, other than the Defiant... do NOT get me started on the Avenger!) and these tend to be more flexible, but therefore, somewhat weaker in a direct combat-efficiency comparison.
So, what's the trade off? Well, Science Vessels have their 'Space Magic' and Escorts have their Dual Cannons. Battlecruisers have DC's too, but lack the tanking abil...oh wait.
What we do NOT need, and I say this as a Cruiser Captain, is more 360 beams. Certainly a wider range or weapons with the [Arc] bonus would be nice (not having to pay 2500 for a Wide Angle Quantum Torpedo would be nice Cryptic) and you could theoretically even restrict them to Cruiser class vessels (though I'm definitely not suggesting it), but you know what would be REALLY useful? More tanking power.
If the shows and films have taught us anything about the Enterprise, it's that she just keeps going. She's a tough ship, but not as a result of her base stat line. Any old engineer could improve a cruisers structural integrity. No, it's her, or rather, her crews flexibility that sets her apart. They always have a trick up their collective sleeves.
What we need is the ability to work around our limitations. More or better weapons does not answer that problem, more and more varied abilities does.
A simple solution then? Improve any one Ensign BOff station on all Cruisers (but not Battle Cruisers, Warbird Battle Cruisers or Dreadnaughts) to a Lieutenant. It's not much. One ability, and not a particularly high level one at that, but it would certainly make them more competitive and interesting. And no, I would NOT give it to the Galaxy X, it has enough toys already.
Just look at the Enterprise E. Check what ranks her BOffs actually hold... Riker, Troi, Crusher: Commander. LaForge, Data, Worf: Lieutenant Commander. Hell, the Enterprise A had THREE CAPTAINS (Scotty, Spock and Kirk - http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Montgomery_Scott#Chronology ).
Now, I know that this, as a thing, is NEVER going to happen; there's probably more chance of a T6 Connie (Brace for impact!), but it's a lot more reasonable and far more canon-Trek than asking for more Omni-Beams; which is never going to happen either.
Well, that's my ten pence, and if nobody reads it (and at 1:45 am, who would?) then never mind. I'm off to bed, I have a life outside STO (amazing I know) and it starts at 7:30, regardless of whether I'm ready or not.
:cool:
Captain of the venerable I.K.S. Y'Kun.
#MaybeALittleFluffy
No. It would be all weapons firing forward. That's NOT broadsiding in ANY form.
Lower than what? Having Turrets in those rear slots? Not bloody likely.
Actually, the Trek everyone loves to hate, Star Trek V, showed a turret on a BoP. Mr/ Spock fired it at the "god" creature that was about to kill Kirk.
While the weapons on the various shows may technically be 250, they are effectively 360, especially the dorsal arrays. Because the emitters at the end of the strips can and have fired in directions other than their "designated" degree direction.
No. Wrong. EVERY ship has many tactics it can use. Most of them effective. All work. Some output more DPS than others. THIS is the primary reason people broadside. With all weapons firing on the same target, the DPS output is "teh ROXORZ". Very rarely have you EVER seen ANY ship in ANY of the shows from ANY faction,... broadside. This is applying WWII tactics to a 24th/25th century ship and weapons.
I have 7 weapons on my ship. Only one is an Omni beam, all but one CAN fire forward, ONLY the omni beam and the KCB can fire anywhere and in any direction and I handle all content I fly into, except for HIVE Elite, just fine and in a timely manner.
"There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
That shot came from the BoPs wing cannon. just because it was moevable to a certain degree doesn't mean it's a turret.
They certainly wheren't 360°. ships whouldn't have to fire any other beam weapons aside their main array.
Look your own statement below. So at one time you say fireing all beam weapons is not broadside and the other time it is...
As i said its effect would be similar like broadsiding, just facing forward.
Broadsiding is rather a napoleonic kind of tactics IMO. WWII didn't had as many side facing broadsiding battles anymore.
Btw, WWII battleships had a much bigger fireing arc than those 70° each side. Guns where staggered so they could be used in a frontal attack.
That's not the point, i can handle the games content quite well. As i said it is not about making any ship OP, but to offer more working options.
As you said everyones broadsiding. I thnk its because of the lack of other options TBH.
Sorry i don't have much time to answer appropriately. I hope you don't mind.
(sorry for typos)
Oh and in case you missed it, my comment about DPS being the "ROXORZ" was dripping with so much sarcasm, you could paint your house with it. Also, I never said firing all weapons forward was broadsiding, I said that the reason people DO broadside is to get all weapons on target. Was this tactic started in WWII, obviously not, as ships of the line did this when wind and sail was the pinnacle of technology and someone probably did it before them with less sophisticated weaponry, but, WWII ideas and tactics is what a lot of people, especially the ones who advocate broadsiding, use as justification for how a cruiser should be used.
If one ship type has the ability to fire 8 weapons in one direction, then they ALL need that ability. Especially with the "we're all friends now and sharing most technology anyway" thing that's going on right now in the game.
Like I have said throughout, the solution is simple. In order to facilitate more options for ALL ships, either allow multiple unlimited Omni beams for ALL, allow one Omni Beam fore and one Omni Beam aft, or, leave it as is. Personally, I would prefer the allowing of two Omni's one fore, one aft. It would solve my issues nicely, without making my defiant OP by any stretch.
Of course this doesn't address the issue of Wide Arc DHC's or any other crafted "special" weapon. Also, if multiples are allowed, there needs to be some mechanism to obtain them more easily. As 10 to 50 mil per is totally outrageous if you need 8 of them.
"There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
I can't see what's so OP about that.
All ships (cruisers) can run 8 beam arrays = broadsiding.
Non Fed "Cruisers" can equip DHCs+Turrets = all weapons directed to front.
BA+Omnis (rear) = all weapons directed to front (less dmg then above, but wider fireing arc).
Escorts shouldn't able to equip multiple omni beams at all.
Allowing that, would be completey counterproductive to the purpose of the original idea of giving Starfleet Cruisers something special.
Agreed, Omnis should be drops and buyable at Starbases and rep stores, like any other weapon type.
But i never suggested that anyone should be able to equip 8 of them, that would be completely over the top IMO.
Again,
4 (or less) Omni beam arrays for Starfleet Cruisers rear weapon slots (maybe even 2 or 3, depending on their turn rate), simply because they can't equip DHCs.
All that after FAW has been nerfed to a reasonable level.
I don't care about A2Bat because i don't use it anymore, but if the devs are looking for a sollution, without alienating too many ppl, they should probably make it more like A2S. (but that's another topic)
Of course there could be restirictions to certain ships like the Avenger or G-X which already can equip DHCs.
What's so OP about that compared to a 4DHC+4 Turret Negh'Var, Vor'cha or D'Deridex?
There's a lot of I's in your posts there matey.
Say, 4 beams front with a mix of dhcs and maybe a torp, while the back slots single cannons and torps plus 4 beams.
Broadside you would be like beamboats right now, but if you can manage to point your nose at something, you would shut down the back beams and bring the front cannons online. Similar scenario for the aft.
Maybe being an engineer would make the power transfers fast, where sci and tac captains in these cruisers would have a delay swapping weapons
No no and HELL NO! Hard enough keeping track of 8 weapons and power management, you want to make that worse?! NO!
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
I'll try to resist trolling your inability to track 8 things, and say that something like this could provide decent DPs for engineers and cruisers. It could be a solution for a2b. Could also be a step towards more of a trinity meta.
Yeah, and then you would never have to actually pilot your ship. You want the global for RSP removed as well, don't you? Somehow this thread is actually getting worse.
Agreed. The OP seems intent on either not hearing, not accepting or totally ignoring any of the reasons that the problem he's having is him and not the equipment.
Some of the "suggestions" by others since, are even worse.
"There... are... four... lights!" ~Jean Luc Picard
You just don't get it. I'd have to spend so much time tracking my weapons and which ones were active, I wouldn't be able to track powers, damage ore even where in the name of hell I am going.
Sorry sometimes there's simply too much. And doubling the weapons then only providing power for half. Sorry that's too much micro managing.
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
As a mostly KDF player, aestetically I wonder where you even mount a 360° weapon on some ships.
How ever I think you should be limited to one forward, and one aft. They are rear slots for a reason, and allowing over captilization of rear weapons for forward damage could have unintended balance consequences. Especially when you factor in the KCB.
Lol, for every their own, right? :cool:
Yup. He just want more power creep because he can't handle being a good engineering/cruiser captain. Heck, I suck at using a tac/escort for PvP, it's my fault, and I admit it. I don't go asking for more power creep to make things easier for me.
(this includes cannon turrets)
But since turrets are in the game without anyone objecting them for years, i don't see a reason why a beam 360° weapon shouldn't exist.
To the naysayers, what about this:
Ships without DHCs should be able to equip 1 or 2 omni beams more than normal, depending on their turn rate. Or they could simply allow all ships to equip DCs and DHCs.
Another thing:
Every space combat weapon should offer the option to change its visual from beam to cannon and vice versa, just like you can activate a shield/defelctor visual.
That would be only a visual difference, all stats would stay the same and when entering a PvP area the weapons visual would be reset to its original setting.
It's all or nothing, you can't "change back" visuals when you're in a PVP area. That's just like "I'm kinda pregnant, not really but only a bit". Sorry, I had to laugh about this.
No. Figure out how to fly a cruiser, you don't need more 360 degree weapons.
Why even bother with different ship classes? As I said long ago in this thread, I get it, you want to be able to do anything you want on any ship you want, boohoo it's not happening.