The damage differential between cannon weapons and beam weapons is so narrow now that its hard to justify usign Cannons anymore, given their limitations. I would suggest as others have:
1. Reduce BoFf requirements so there is something useful at ensign level
2. Increase base damage of cannons, and/or:
3. Reducing the range penalty
4. Allow single cannons to be mounted aft
5. Buff Single and dual cannons, the most useless weapons ever.
6. Currently rightnow DHC supposedly get an additional 10% CritD. Why not give Dual cannons a CritX variant....we'll call it CritZ, that offers 1.25% CritH and 5% CritD and single cannons a built in CritH.
I'm a 'fed player' that uses the plasmonic leech, and in all my years of playing this game, I have never figured out how people get so much EC. The Leech for me was an enormous investment, I had to save for it for months. Honestly, this change would without question force me to quit, and I fear it would for many others as well. Even KDF Players that didn't have to save up EC for it, they still paid cash which is actually even worse. Making a change that's focused on reducing the effectiveness of the Leech console would start a firestorm of negativity.
You know, the fact that you felt the need to save up for months and get the console, and that you figure nerfing it would cause a "firestorm of negativity" and that you'd personally quit if that happened tells me this...
...Isn't true. While it may not be the problem, it's definitely a problem. If it weren't you wouldn't have felt the need to save up for months and get it, and you wouldn't be so devastated by a change to it that you'd quit. Obviously you know the console is out of whack and you know it (and yeah, so does everyone else... so no sense in denying it).
If a player asks me what is best for ISA DPS, I would say Beams. If a player asks me whats best for CCA DPS, it aint beams at all.
I've seen AP beam boats take the entity down faster than any torp boat probably could. (haven't actually seen a torp boat in CCA yet). I mean crazy fast, like it's already down to 33% before the first burst is even finished. A few people are firing torpedoes while it happens but the big damage is being done by beams.
To the Crystalline Entity.
Get an instance without any AP beam boats and watch how much longer it takes. Believe me I've been running CCA nonstop for over two weeks. AP beam boats = quick win, no AP beam boats = can't even kill it within 4 minutes.
BFAW is One Skill To Rule Them All and needs to be changed a bit. I mean when the AOE skill is better vs single targets than the single target skill there's a problem. Imagine if CSV was better vs single targets than CRF? Or if this situation existed in any other MMO? As a rule AOE is never the preferred skill vs single targets.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
You know ran a CCA this morning for the event. I walked in there and it was mostly warbirds and escorts and just about everyone I saw was running cannons, including an Andorian kumari which I haven't seen in ages. Gotta say. The cannon boats MurderDeathKilled that Entity. I was over in a minute and thirty easy. It was one of those runs where you wonder if you actually did anything at all. It was the swiftest most brutal snowflake melting I've run in a long time and certainly this season of entity hunting.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
...?
Considering how fast shields drop and how ineffective Torps are to shields, that would be considered a huge nerf to Beams.
"I'm not big on telepaths myself. I'm not big on guns either. But if everyone else has them, I want to make sure I can get my hands on the biggest one I can."
Nerf FAW. It is too powerful. It is good against everything and weak against nothing. You cannot 'balance' against that as you will end up making everything else too OP as well.
Suggestion to decrease FAW power as follows:
Increase the cumulative power drain when firing beams at multiple targets (1st shot drains 5, 2nd drains 7, third drains 10 etc...) and massively reduce the accuracy (when you use FAW accuracy of your scattered firing shots should be really low - you should be missing most fast moving high defense spam unless you are deliberately built with accuracy in mind).
After you have done this there needs to be a two new abilities:
Cannon Overload (like its beam variant will upgrade next cannon attack to be significantly more powerful - but also this and BO will likely require the function to be tied with a chosen weapon slot - eg you can select the following powers onto your powerbar (BO-any, BP-slot1, BO-slot2, etc) and chose to activate the ability tied to a specific weapon.
Beam Rapid Fire like its cannon counterpart this would be a single target ability where all available beam arrays would fire an accelerated cycle.
CSV needs to be changed so that it fires everywhere within weapons arcs - not just in a cone ahead of the ship but turrets would fire 360.
After this has been done you need to make changes to reflect the arc differences between DC/DHC, DBB and BA (and associated arcs of those weapons under abilities. Cannons and beam damage drop off should be switched around (beams having faster dropoff than cannons... it never made sense the way it was originally setup)
All in all lots of changes required - but that's only a reflection of how broken space combat is at the moment.
Simpler fix...Eliminate the drop off of cannon damage. They are high energy highly cohearant bolts not beams that can be disburssed by dust and gas. Beams should have the drop off that cannons have right now.
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
...?
Considering how fast shields drop and how ineffective Torps are to shields, that would be considered a huge nerf to Beams.
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
...?
Considering how fast shields drop and how ineffective Torps are to shields, that would be considered a huge nerf to Beams.
Beams are OP right now though. You can equip 8 beam arrays on your ship and get full broadside coverage. For the damage beam arrays do now their 250 degree arcs are too much.
But it used to not be. Earlier in STO's life the large arc of a beam array was balanced by it's relatively low damage - and not coincidentally a dual cannon's very small arc was balanced by it's significantly higher damage. Dual beam banks were often used instead of arrays because of their power, and even cannon escorts would sometimes equip a single dual beam bank in order to use BO.
That's because things were a lot more balanced back then. Was it perfectly balanced? Not at all. It wasn't called Escorts Online for no reason. But it was a lot more balanced than now. I mean people actually used skills other than BFAW. People actually used BO!
Then there's the problems with overcapping and BFAW-for-every-single-situation. Overcapping is a concept I never agreed with (IMO you should reach the cap and that's it. No reserve power beyond that) and I've already said numerous times that I think BFAW needs to be changed.
Shield resistance vs torpedoes most definitely needs to be changed though. 10% of shields remaining on an arc should not give the same full resistance vs torpedoes that 100% full shields does. It's a dumb mechanic that has always been imbalanced.
I think piloting is a concern. The issue with buffing cannons is that people can fire them while stationary.
First step is to make cannon damage scale with throttle and throttle duration, like an innate Pedal to the Metal, only with inverse scaling below 30% throttle or slowing down. You need to be rocking some turnrate. Best bonus for staying on full throttle and not stopping. Maybe an additional bonus for turning while firing.
Then you buff canons based on the expected piloting ability of players after tests.
At this point, turnrate becomes a DPS stat.
Beams should be for minimal maneuverability. Cannons should scale with maneuverability to be effective. No reverse. No caution. No "I'm going to back up and retarget". Full throttle dancing around targets.
The damage boost you're proposing would have to be worth it though. You should be able to obliterate a frigate in one or two passes, and do serious damage to a cruiser. I'm talking about punching through their shields AND doing significant hull damage in one pass. Especially on enemies that heal. That's what it will take to basically make it worth people time to actually hit and run like the playstyle would dictate, drive bys versus park and shoot. Where the time you're doing damage with your nose on target is worth the time once you passed where you have to set up your next run.
Incidentally, one other thought would be to adjust DHCs to continue functioning as turrets when out of arc. So they become 360 degree weapons that become heavier cannons when a target is "in sights". That reduces the damage you'd need to add to make a throttle bonus for cannons worthwhile.
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
...?
Considering how fast shields drop and how ineffective Torps are to shields, that would be considered a huge nerf to Beams.
Beams are OP right now though. You can equip 8 beam arrays on your ship and get full broadside coverage. For the damage beam arrays do now their 250 degree arcs are too much.
But it used to not be. Earlier in STO's life the large arc of a beam array was balanced by it's relatively low damage - and not coincidentally a dual cannon's very small arc was balanced by it's significantly higher damage. Dual beam banks were often used instead of arrays because of their power, and even cannon escorts would sometimes equip a single dual beam bank in order to use BO.
That's because things were a lot more balanced back then. Was it perfectly balanced? Not at all. It wasn't called Escorts Online for no reason. But it was a lot more balanced than now. I mean people actually used skills other than BFAW. People actually used BO!
Then there's the problems with overcapping and BFAW-for-every-single-situation. Overcapping is a concept I never agreed with (IMO you should reach the cap and that's it. No reserve power beyond that) and I've already said numerous times that I think BFAW needs to be changed.
Shield resistance vs torpedoes most definitely needs to be changed though. 10% of shields remaining on an arc should not give the same full resistance vs torpedoes that 100% full shields does. It's a dumb mechanic that has always been imbalanced.
I'm not saying that there isn't a problem with them. However, Orangeitis' idea seems to be to nerf them to being completely ineffective. I also remember the old days of Escorts Online, beams were a joke.
I made a post a couple pages back about a rough idea I had for a change to FAW
Currently:
FAW1 - 5 pulses @ 100% * 8 Beams = 4000 damage
FAW2 - 5 pulses @ 106% * 8 Beams = 4240 damage
FAW3 - 5 pulses @ 112% * 8 Beams = 4480 damage
With reductions in pulses, mechanics would remain the same:
FAW1 - 4 pulses @ 100% * 8 Beams = 3200 damage (same as single target, but spread out)
FAW2 - 4 pulses @ 106% * 8 Beams = 3392 damage
FAW3 - 4 pulses @ 112% * 8 Beams = 3584 damage
On retrospect, maybe also reducing the max number of targets from 10 to either 5 or 6.
I do agree with you about Overcapping, anything above 125 should not be available and considered a waste. With the recent resurgence into EPS, thanks to Sarcasm Detector, I don't think it is actually necessary. Which is something I am thinking about checking out.
"I'm not big on telepaths myself. I'm not big on guns either. But if everyone else has them, I want to make sure I can get my hands on the biggest one I can."
I've seen that video before. Very impressive, and is also not a PUG. I only PUG CCA and as you know in PUGs you get all sorts of strange ship setups. I can tell you that in the PUGverse AP beam boats are beating everything else.
I guess I haven't had a PUG with a dedicated torp boat. Even my "torp boat" isn't a true one, it's just torpedoes and +torpedo consoles on a cruiser.
If a player asks me what is best for ISA DPS, I would say Beams. If a player asks me whats best for CCA DPS, it aint beams at all.
I've seen AP beam boats take the entity down faster than any torp boat probably could. (haven't actually seen a torp boat in CCA yet). I mean crazy fast, like it's already down to 33% before the first burst is even finished. A few people are firing torpedoes while it happens but the big damage is being done by beams.
To the Crystalline Entity.
Get an instance without any AP beam boats and watch how much longer it takes. Believe me I've been running CCA nonstop for over two weeks. AP beam boats = quick win, no AP beam boats = can't even kill it within 4 minutes.
BFAW is One Skill To Rule Them All and needs to be changed a bit. I mean when the AOE skill is better vs single targets than the single target skill there's a problem. Imagine if CSV was better vs single targets than CRF? Or if this situation existed in any other MMO? As a rule AOE is never the preferred skill vs single targets.
I don't want BFAW's AOE changed, I want it's single target efficiency dropped. Buffing BO instead will lead to further power creep and the game already has too much of that. Not that BO couldn't use a buff.
You know ran a CCA this morning for the event. I walked in there and it was mostly warbirds and escorts and just about everyone I saw was running cannons, including an Andorian kumari which I haven't seen in ages. Gotta say. The cannon boats MurderDeathKilled that Entity. I was over in a minute and thirty easy. It was one of those runs where you wonder if you actually did anything at all. It was the swiftest most brutal snowflake melting I've run in a long time and certainly this season of entity hunting.
What a shock...A Single Target dominate weapon type dominated a single target. The problem is most maps are not single target maps (nothing in the Mission Requirements for the CCN/A require you to engage anything but the CE) that allow cannon ships to provide much more then a sigh of relief with single targets. Maps where trash mobs and clusters of mobs dominate the map. Cannon users are going to be of less use than those sporting BFAW with 8 beams.
I've seen that video before. Very impressive, and is also not a PUG. I only PUG CCA and as you know in PUGs you get all sorts of strange ship setups. I can tell you that in the PUGverse AP beam boats are beating everything else.
I guess I haven't had a PUG with a dedicated torp boat. Even my "torp boat" isn't a true one, it's just torpedoes and +torpedo consoles on a cruiser.
You can also dominate Torps with PuG. The issue has always been the user/player.
If you base those PuG runs on bad players with bad builds using torps, you end up with your conclusion. It is no different if you keep seeing Beam users being outDPSed in ISA by torps or cannons. The problem is the player quality.
That is why PuG runs are inaccurate to know what are the optimal stuff. Because you wont know when the DPS wizards are PuGGing or even the pilot quality of the torp user.
What a shock...A Single Target dominate weapon type dominated a single target. The problem is most maps are not single target maps (nothing in the Mission Requirements for the CCN/A require you to engage anything but the CE) that allow cannon ships to provide much more then a sigh of relief with single targets. Maps where trash mobs and clusters of mobs dominate the map. Cannon users are going to be of less use than those sporting BFAW with 8 beams.
Sorry no. Torps also dominate certain AoE Map. The difference players doing that know the more advance mechanics. If you just believe forum rants you wont get the right information about weapons platforms.
It is the same issue with cannons. The problem is most like I keep on saying on this thread, the main complainers in this thread cannons are not really cannon experts nor torp experts in PvE. So players end up spreading misinformation and/or hate instead.
Which goes back to my point, why does one need to deal 175k DPS-200k DPS in cannons/torps in a map where beams are suppose to be optimal ? Isnt the problem just the map? Look at NWS, which platform dominated that when that map existed.
Arent you not content for Cannons/Torps to deal 100-120k DPS? Which map has DPS requirement of more than 100k DPS? Or is this all about greed? Not unless those complaining are not one of those dealing 100-120k DPS on cannons or torps in ISA but bandwagoners instead and having a hard time dealing even 30k with cannons/torps.
I've seen that video before. Very impressive, and is also not a PUG. I only PUG CCA and as you know in PUGs you get all sorts of strange ship setups. I can tell you that in the PUGverse AP beam boats are beating everything else.
I guess I haven't had a PUG with a dedicated torp boat. Even my "torp boat" isn't a true one, it's just torpedoes and +torpedo consoles on a cruiser.
I'm in the same boat... I simply don't have the gear, build, or reliable team to accomplish that level of performance. I simply wanted to share that video because it shows what a dedicated torpedo boat can do, in a queue (and using a strategy) that is designed to favor it. I have one character that's close to the base gear used in the video, but I'd need to invest in a few additional items and a lot of upgrades to get there from where I'm at.
In many ways it seems like many of the complaints about the gloriousness of B:FAW in "every situation" are akin to your sigpic... comparing the size of each others' DPeenS, for lack of a better term and metaphor. The thing is, the most common measure of DPeenS is ISA, a situation that specifically favors AoE damage because there are enough targets to maintain contact with 2+ targets whenever B:FAW is active. Since B:FAW strikes two targets per shot, it's like comparing two DPeenS's (B:FAW) to a single DPeenS (C:RF), and wondering why the combined total is greater than the individual measure.
Hrm, while an apt metaphor, it's probably better to get away from that...
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
You can also dominate Torps with PuG. The issue has always been the user/player.
If you base those PuG runs on bad players with bad builds using torps, you end up with your conclusion. It is no different if you keep seeing Beam users being outDPSed in ISA by torps or cannons. The problem is the player quality.
That is why PuG runs are inaccurate to know what are the optimal stuff. Because you wont know when the DPS wizards are PuGGing or even the pilot quality of the torp user.
The fact that I PUG doesn't mean that BFAW doesn't need a nerf along with buffing the other skills. One actually has nothing to do with the other.
You can also dominate Torps with PuG. The issue has always been the user/player.
If you base those PuG runs on bad players with bad builds using torps, you end up with your conclusion. It is no different if you keep seeing Beam users being outDPSed in ISA by torps or cannons. The problem is the player quality.
That is why PuG runs are inaccurate to know what are the optimal stuff. Because you wont know when the DPS wizards are PuGGing or even the pilot quality of the torp user.
The fact that I PUG doesn't mean that BFAW doesn't need a nerf along with buffing the other skills. One actually has nothing to do with the other.
I never said that. i merely stated all your examples and rationalities don't point to any reason to buff other platforms nor nerf bfaw but merely point to bad pilots with bad builds which had nothing to do with weapons platforms.
That is why we go back to the rationailty why do all of these platforms need to be equal in a map meant for beams? Does this mean Torps need to be nerfed in CCA and HSE as well? Or nerf cannons in their particular niche?
Because if everyone here is fair and balance without any bias or agenda then we need to nerf every weapons platforms on their strength/niche to be inline with all other weapons and buff those who are weak on those niche. But that is not happening in this thread nor most balance threads in STO forums. It is nerf beams were they are strong, buff cannons where they are weak but don't touch where cannons are stronger than beams.
balance is a two way street not a one way street. That is why I don't always agree with "balance" threads in STO forums since they are more of biased threads rather than balance threads.
Maybe, if people wouldn't be so obsessive about their dps and there wouldn't be hundreds of epeen posts about di..i mean dps measurement all over internet, people wouldn't care that much about weapon balance, as long the job is done, mission accomplished.
But when you do some STF for the first time (like I did after I returned from 2 years break), and at the end some wannabe "leet" player executes some macro that tells everyone how bad they were compared to them, you can't really be suprised that people "care" about their dps and some sort of "balance" between weapons.
And when everyone is pidgeon holed to certain builds because they are "optimal", "best" or whatever, some people may dislike it and raise questions.
"Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Maybe, if people wouldn't be so obsessive about their dps and there wouldn't be hundreds of epeen posts about di..i mean dps measurement all over internet, people wouldn't care that much about weapon balance, as long the job is done, mission accomplished.
But when you do some STF for the first time (like I did after I returned from 2 years break), and at the end some wannabe "leet" player executes some macro that tells everyone how bad they were compared to them, you can't really be suprised that people "care" about their dps and some sort of "balance" between weapons.
And when everyone is pidgeon holed to certain builds because they are "optimal", "best" or whatever, some people may dislike it and raise questions.
I agree with this post. The DPS league, in all their transparency in attempting to aid in "how things work" has done quite an effective job at turning this game for many players into more of a chore than it already is with the grind.
"Its how we have fun!" Some will argue, and that's entirely valid, I wont dispute that even I myself have put more time into my build performance than enjoying the latest Episode.
Anyway, as I DHC user myself and as someone else stated a few pages back quite a bit of the edge is about piloting. Intel Spec abilities that provide crits for flanking puts some insane numbers when I decloak from behind and alpha strike.
I'm not saying a tweak isnt needed, most PUGs I do have people who spam BFAW with their beam boats and pull the aggro off me so I can do my job at taking out my targets.
(Oh and for the record BO is not as useless as people will claim it to be. Its all situational whereas BFAW isn't.)
I never said that. i merely stated all your examples and rationalities don't point to any reason to buff other platforms nor nerf bfaw but merely point to bad pilots with bad builds which had nothing to do with weapons platforms.
Ok here's my rationale, from a player who doesn't play ISA:
BFAW is currently the best single target and AOE skill in the game, to a point where virtually nobody uses BO or cannons if they want the highest DPS (which is not me, I still like my DHC escorts and am not a DPS chaser). BFAW's single target ability needs to be nerfed along with maybe increasing the effectiveness of BO slightly. To simply buff BO without nerfing BFAW's single target ability is to add more power creep and this game cannot afford it. I need to stress that because some people think only buffs are acceptable to fix balance issues.
Cannons also need a buff in the form of greatly reduced fall off. Cannons have a very narrow arc, beam arrays a very wide arc. The damage they do no longer matches their arcs. They used to match - the wide arc of a beam array was balanced by it's lower damage - but the game is completely out of balance now. That lack of balance has led to BFAW becoming the One Skill To Rule Them All.
There is hope that the upcoming season addresses cannons, since over half of DS9 was all about the Defiant and it's very impressive cannons.
Always makes me laugh when people say how powerful the Defiant's cannons are. Sure she cut through Bird of Prey's, Dominion Attack ships and Breen frigates but i don't remember her actually taking on and disabling or destroying anything outside her weight class. The only ships she destroyed or disabled outside her weight class that i can remember were a Dominion Battlecruiser flanked by 2 Bird of Prey's in Sacrifice of Angels and a Galor/Keldon in the DS9 Ep. Defiant but that was a quantum torp not cannons.
So please why is the Defiant considered a uber ship when during the Dominion War in all the battle scenes bar SOA she was only seen fighting ships in her weight class no actual capital ships.
The problem with this game isn't the weapons, its the players, the way it was before the beams got buffed was this: cannons are better, beams are for cruisers and science vessels, escorts use cannons, using beams in escorts means you are doing it wrong.
That is how it was, now that the roles are reversed, it seems like people are crying over it, i mean, can't cannons and beams do the same overall damage, cannons do the dps faster, while beams take longer due to their much bigger firing arc?, that way, those that want to use cannons, can, whose that don't, won't..problem solved.
but i guess in the end, most players just care about what the utmost best is and then just running to it.
I even rolled a KDF character to get the Plasmonic Leech, i refuse to pay 90mil for it on the federation side, its not something i NEED, its something i want.
Always makes me laugh when people say how powerful the Defiant's cannons are. Sure she cut through Bird of Prey's, Dominion Attack ships and Breen frigates but i don't remember her actually taking on and disabling or destroying anything outside her weight class. The only ships she destroyed or disabled outside her weight class that i can remember were a Dominion Battlecruiser flanked by 2 Bird of Prey's in Sacrifice of Angels and a Galor/Keldon in the DS9 Ep. Defiant but that was a quantum torp not cannons.
So please why is the Defiant considered a uber ship when during the Dominion War in all the battle scenes bar SOA she was only seen fighting ships in her weight class no actual capital ships.
I believe it out-manuvered a Klingon Neg'Var Battlecruiser in one of the mirrored universe episodes, where the Rebels built a Defiant ship and Sisko helped get it working and then helped command it and then took control of the helm and flyed in close range to prevent target lock on them, thats how they won that fight.
Not quite a head-2-head fight, but either way, they won, isn't that all that people care about? winning.
Comments
1. Reduce BoFf requirements so there is something useful at ensign level
2. Increase base damage of cannons, and/or:
3. Reducing the range penalty
4. Allow single cannons to be mounted aft
5. Buff Single and dual cannons, the most useless weapons ever.
6. Currently rightnow DHC supposedly get an additional 10% CritD. Why not give Dual cannons a CritX variant....we'll call it CritZ, that offers 1.25% CritH and 5% CritD and single cannons a built in CritH.
You know, the fact that you felt the need to save up for months and get the console, and that you figure nerfing it would cause a "firestorm of negativity" and that you'd personally quit if that happened tells me this...
...Isn't true. While it may not be the problem, it's definitely a problem. If it weren't you wouldn't have felt the need to save up for months and get it, and you wouldn't be so devastated by a change to it that you'd quit. Obviously you know the console is out of whack and you know it (and yeah, so does everyone else... so no sense in denying it).
You know ran a CCA this morning for the event. I walked in there and it was mostly warbirds and escorts and just about everyone I saw was running cannons, including an Andorian kumari which I haven't seen in ages. Gotta say. The cannon boats MurderDeathKilled that Entity. I was over in a minute and thirty easy. It was one of those runs where you wonder if you actually did anything at all. It was the swiftest most brutal snowflake melting I've run in a long time and certainly this season of entity hunting.
Beams: Heavy shield damage, low hull damage (as much damage to hull as torps do to shields)
Torpedoes: Low shield damage, heavy hull damage (same as now)
Cannons: A balance of both; moderate damage to all
...?
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Considering how fast shields drop and how ineffective Torps are to shields, that would be considered a huge nerf to Beams.
Suggestion to decrease FAW power as follows:
Increase the cumulative power drain when firing beams at multiple targets (1st shot drains 5, 2nd drains 7, third drains 10 etc...) and massively reduce the accuracy (when you use FAW accuracy of your scattered firing shots should be really low - you should be missing most fast moving high defense spam unless you are deliberately built with accuracy in mind).
After you have done this there needs to be a two new abilities:
Cannon Overload (like its beam variant will upgrade next cannon attack to be significantly more powerful - but also this and BO will likely require the function to be tied with a chosen weapon slot - eg you can select the following powers onto your powerbar (BO-any, BP-slot1, BO-slot2, etc) and chose to activate the ability tied to a specific weapon.
Beam Rapid Fire like its cannon counterpart this would be a single target ability where all available beam arrays would fire an accelerated cycle.
CSV needs to be changed so that it fires everywhere within weapons arcs - not just in a cone ahead of the ship but turrets would fire 360.
After this has been done you need to make changes to reflect the arc differences between DC/DHC, DBB and BA (and associated arcs of those weapons under abilities. Cannons and beam damage drop off should be switched around (beams having faster dropoff than cannons... it never made sense the way it was originally setup)
All in all lots of changes required - but that's only a reflection of how broken space combat is at the moment.
...#LLAP...
You say beams dominate in CCA, except the top DPSers are torp users in CCA.
I didnt know revisionism is already popular in STO forums.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Top DPS I've seen so far has come from beam users. Torp users do very respectable damage but some of those AP beam boats are higher.
Note I said AP beam boats. Virtually every other beam boat hasn't come close to the same DPS.
Beams are OP right now though. You can equip 8 beam arrays on your ship and get full broadside coverage. For the damage beam arrays do now their 250 degree arcs are too much.
But it used to not be. Earlier in STO's life the large arc of a beam array was balanced by it's relatively low damage - and not coincidentally a dual cannon's very small arc was balanced by it's significantly higher damage. Dual beam banks were often used instead of arrays because of their power, and even cannon escorts would sometimes equip a single dual beam bank in order to use BO.
That's because things were a lot more balanced back then. Was it perfectly balanced? Not at all. It wasn't called Escorts Online for no reason. But it was a lot more balanced than now. I mean people actually used skills other than BFAW. People actually used BO!
Then there's the problems with overcapping and BFAW-for-every-single-situation. Overcapping is a concept I never agreed with (IMO you should reach the cap and that's it. No reserve power beyond that) and I've already said numerous times that I think BFAW needs to be changed.
Shield resistance vs torpedoes most definitely needs to be changed though. 10% of shields remaining on an arc should not give the same full resistance vs torpedoes that 100% full shields does. It's a dumb mechanic that has always been imbalanced.
Incidentally, one other thought would be to adjust DHCs to continue functioning as turrets when out of arc. So they become 360 degree weapons that become heavier cannons when a target is "in sights". That reduces the damage you'd need to add to make a throttle bonus for cannons worthwhile.
Torpedoes...
CCA...
41 secs...
125.90K DPS...
and much laughter...
I'm not saying that there isn't a problem with them. However, Orangeitis' idea seems to be to nerf them to being completely ineffective. I also remember the old days of Escorts Online, beams were a joke.
I made a post a couple pages back about a rough idea I had for a change to FAW
Currently:
FAW1 - 5 pulses @ 100% * 8 Beams = 4000 damage
FAW2 - 5 pulses @ 106% * 8 Beams = 4240 damage
FAW3 - 5 pulses @ 112% * 8 Beams = 4480 damage
With reductions in pulses, mechanics would remain the same:
FAW1 - 4 pulses @ 100% * 8 Beams = 3200 damage (same as single target, but spread out)
FAW2 - 4 pulses @ 106% * 8 Beams = 3392 damage
FAW3 - 4 pulses @ 112% * 8 Beams = 3584 damage
On retrospect, maybe also reducing the max number of targets from 10 to either 5 or 6.
I do agree with you about Overcapping, anything above 125 should not be available and considered a waste. With the recent resurgence into EPS, thanks to Sarcasm Detector, I don't think it is actually necessary. Which is something I am thinking about checking out.
I've seen that video before. Very impressive, and is also not a PUG. I only PUG CCA and as you know in PUGs you get all sorts of strange ship setups. I can tell you that in the PUGverse AP beam boats are beating everything else.
I guess I haven't had a PUG with a dedicated torp boat. Even my "torp boat" isn't a true one, it's just torpedoes and +torpedo consoles on a cruiser.
What a shock...A Single Target dominate weapon type dominated a single target. The problem is most maps are not single target maps (nothing in the Mission Requirements for the CCN/A require you to engage anything but the CE) that allow cannon ships to provide much more then a sigh of relief with single targets. Maps where trash mobs and clusters of mobs dominate the map. Cannon users are going to be of less use than those sporting BFAW with 8 beams.
You can also dominate Torps with PuG. The issue has always been the user/player.
If you base those PuG runs on bad players with bad builds using torps, you end up with your conclusion. It is no different if you keep seeing Beam users being outDPSed in ISA by torps or cannons. The problem is the player quality.
That is why PuG runs are inaccurate to know what are the optimal stuff. Because you wont know when the DPS wizards are PuGGing or even the pilot quality of the torp user.
Sorry no. Torps also dominate certain AoE Map. The difference players doing that know the more advance mechanics. If you just believe forum rants you wont get the right information about weapons platforms.
It is the same issue with cannons. The problem is most like I keep on saying on this thread, the main complainers in this thread cannons are not really cannon experts nor torp experts in PvE. So players end up spreading misinformation and/or hate instead.
Which goes back to my point, why does one need to deal 175k DPS-200k DPS in cannons/torps in a map where beams are suppose to be optimal ? Isnt the problem just the map? Look at NWS, which platform dominated that when that map existed.
Arent you not content for Cannons/Torps to deal 100-120k DPS? Which map has DPS requirement of more than 100k DPS? Or is this all about greed? Not unless those complaining are not one of those dealing 100-120k DPS on cannons or torps in ISA but bandwagoners instead and having a hard time dealing even 30k with cannons/torps.
I'm in the same boat... I simply don't have the gear, build, or reliable team to accomplish that level of performance. I simply wanted to share that video because it shows what a dedicated torpedo boat can do, in a queue (and using a strategy) that is designed to favor it. I have one character that's close to the base gear used in the video, but I'd need to invest in a few additional items and a lot of upgrades to get there from where I'm at.
In many ways it seems like many of the complaints about the gloriousness of B:FAW in "every situation" are akin to your sigpic... comparing the size of each others' DPeenS, for lack of a better term and metaphor. The thing is, the most common measure of DPeenS is ISA, a situation that specifically favors AoE damage because there are enough targets to maintain contact with 2+ targets whenever B:FAW is active. Since B:FAW strikes two targets per shot, it's like comparing two DPeenS's (B:FAW) to a single DPeenS (C:RF), and wondering why the combined total is greater than the individual measure.
Hrm, while an apt metaphor, it's probably better to get away from that...
The fact that I PUG doesn't mean that BFAW doesn't need a nerf along with buffing the other skills. One actually has nothing to do with the other.
I never said that. i merely stated all your examples and rationalities don't point to any reason to buff other platforms nor nerf bfaw but merely point to bad pilots with bad builds which had nothing to do with weapons platforms.
That is why we go back to the rationailty why do all of these platforms need to be equal in a map meant for beams? Does this mean Torps need to be nerfed in CCA and HSE as well? Or nerf cannons in their particular niche?
Because if everyone here is fair and balance without any bias or agenda then we need to nerf every weapons platforms on their strength/niche to be inline with all other weapons and buff those who are weak on those niche. But that is not happening in this thread nor most balance threads in STO forums. It is nerf beams were they are strong, buff cannons where they are weak but don't touch where cannons are stronger than beams.
balance is a two way street not a one way street. That is why I don't always agree with "balance" threads in STO forums since they are more of biased threads rather than balance threads.
But when you do some STF for the first time (like I did after I returned from 2 years break), and at the end some wannabe "leet" player executes some macro that tells everyone how bad they were compared to them, you can't really be suprised that people "care" about their dps and some sort of "balance" between weapons.
And when everyone is pidgeon holed to certain builds because they are "optimal", "best" or whatever, some people may dislike it and raise questions.
I agree with this post. The DPS league, in all their transparency in attempting to aid in "how things work" has done quite an effective job at turning this game for many players into more of a chore than it already is with the grind.
"Its how we have fun!" Some will argue, and that's entirely valid, I wont dispute that even I myself have put more time into my build performance than enjoying the latest Episode.
Anyway, as I DHC user myself and as someone else stated a few pages back quite a bit of the edge is about piloting. Intel Spec abilities that provide crits for flanking puts some insane numbers when I decloak from behind and alpha strike.
I'm not saying a tweak isnt needed, most PUGs I do have people who spam BFAW with their beam boats and pull the aggro off me so I can do my job at taking out my targets.
(Oh and for the record BO is not as useless as people will claim it to be. Its all situational whereas BFAW isn't.)
Ok here's my rationale, from a player who doesn't play ISA:
BFAW is currently the best single target and AOE skill in the game, to a point where virtually nobody uses BO or cannons if they want the highest DPS (which is not me, I still like my DHC escorts and am not a DPS chaser). BFAW's single target ability needs to be nerfed along with maybe increasing the effectiveness of BO slightly. To simply buff BO without nerfing BFAW's single target ability is to add more power creep and this game cannot afford it. I need to stress that because some people think only buffs are acceptable to fix balance issues.
Cannons also need a buff in the form of greatly reduced fall off. Cannons have a very narrow arc, beam arrays a very wide arc. The damage they do no longer matches their arcs. They used to match - the wide arc of a beam array was balanced by it's lower damage - but the game is completely out of balance now. That lack of balance has led to BFAW becoming the One Skill To Rule Them All.
There is hope that the upcoming season addresses cannons, since over half of DS9 was all about the Defiant and it's very impressive cannons.
So please why is the Defiant considered a uber ship when during the Dominion War in all the battle scenes bar SOA she was only seen fighting ships in her weight class no actual capital ships.
That is how it was, now that the roles are reversed, it seems like people are crying over it, i mean, can't cannons and beams do the same overall damage, cannons do the dps faster, while beams take longer due to their much bigger firing arc?, that way, those that want to use cannons, can, whose that don't, won't..problem solved.
but i guess in the end, most players just care about what the utmost best is and then just running to it.
I even rolled a KDF character to get the Plasmonic Leech, i refuse to pay 90mil for it on the federation side, its not something i NEED, its something i want.
I believe it out-manuvered a Klingon Neg'Var Battlecruiser in one of the mirrored universe episodes, where the Rebels built a Defiant ship and Sisko helped get it working and then helped command it and then took control of the helm and flyed in close range to prevent target lock on them, thats how they won that fight.
Not quite a head-2-head fight, but either way, they won, isn't that all that people care about? winning.