test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
A Proposal for Cannons
benirving
Member Posts: 32 Arc User
I've been thinking a lot about BFAW, A2B, DPS, etc. lately as I've been trying out the technical side of DPS a bit more. I've also been paying attention more to PUGs and thinking about the issues that have resulted in making BFAW popular on escorts.
While, sure, BFAW is powerful, I think the skill demands of BOff management plus piloting are a bit demanding and, really, that keybinding is intuitive for a large number of players.
So I'll cut to the chase:
Piloting an escort at full throttle results in DPS dips when you turn around and requires more focus than firing beams.
I suggest:
- Turning cannon abilities into toggles rather than click abilities.
- Reducing the cooldown for these abilities (without reducing the GCD) to discourage A2B builds on ships with cannons while supplying some of the benefits of A2B inherently.
If cannons ran at the global cooldown for their own abilities, they wouldn't be worth running A2B with. If their attacks were "always on", escort pilots would focus on piloting.
Now, one other thing I'd consider is to actually reduce what the CD and GCD is for certain abilities based on ship class. There currently are no GCD reductions but if ship class could modify this and CDs as well for SPECIFIC ABILITIES, you'd see more specialization.
Destroyers: Reduction in Attack Pattern and Debuff cooldowns (and global cooldown reduction).
Science: Reduction in exotic damage and shield heal cooldowns (and global cooldown).
Escorts: Reduction in cannon upgrade and cooldowns (and global cooldowns).
Cruisers: Reduction in torpedo and beam cooldowns.
Battle Cruisers: Reduction in torpedo and cannon cooldowns.
Additionally, maybe give each ship class a subsystem specific flow capacitor mod that matches what they already get bonus power to and a flow capacitor penalty to subsystems their class doesn't ordinarily get bonus power to. So if you run plasmonic leech on an escort, sure, your weapon power is maxed out but your shields won't QUITE be. If you run it on a cruiser, your weapon power won't be QUITE maxed out but your engine power will be.
While, sure, BFAW is powerful, I think the skill demands of BOff management plus piloting are a bit demanding and, really, that keybinding is intuitive for a large number of players.
So I'll cut to the chase:
Piloting an escort at full throttle results in DPS dips when you turn around and requires more focus than firing beams.
I suggest:
- Turning cannon abilities into toggles rather than click abilities.
- Reducing the cooldown for these abilities (without reducing the GCD) to discourage A2B builds on ships with cannons while supplying some of the benefits of A2B inherently.
If cannons ran at the global cooldown for their own abilities, they wouldn't be worth running A2B with. If their attacks were "always on", escort pilots would focus on piloting.
Now, one other thing I'd consider is to actually reduce what the CD and GCD is for certain abilities based on ship class. There currently are no GCD reductions but if ship class could modify this and CDs as well for SPECIFIC ABILITIES, you'd see more specialization.
Destroyers: Reduction in Attack Pattern and Debuff cooldowns (and global cooldown reduction).
Science: Reduction in exotic damage and shield heal cooldowns (and global cooldown).
Escorts: Reduction in cannon upgrade and cooldowns (and global cooldowns).
Cruisers: Reduction in torpedo and beam cooldowns.
Battle Cruisers: Reduction in torpedo and cannon cooldowns.
Additionally, maybe give each ship class a subsystem specific flow capacitor mod that matches what they already get bonus power to and a flow capacitor penalty to subsystems their class doesn't ordinarily get bonus power to. So if you run plasmonic leech on an escort, sure, your weapon power is maxed out but your shields won't QUITE be. If you run it on a cruiser, your weapon power won't be QUITE maxed out but your engine power will be.
0
Comments
But my max (61k) still was done with aux2bat, aegis set and some other "don't"s
KDF: 2 tacs, 2 engs, 3 scis
KDF Roms: 3 tacs, 1 eng, 1 scis
FED: 2 tacs, 1 eng, 2 scis
TOS: 1 tac
all on T5 rep (up to temporal)
all have mastered Intel tree (and some more specs Points)
highest DPS: 60.982
Yes, this. Single cannons have a 180 degree arc, why can't dual cannons have a 90 degree arc? I'd use them on some of my cruisers then.
It is somewhat ironic that beam arrays perform better in high speed attacks where movement is used in a defensive way.
Making cannons more like beams would solve it but i'm not sure if that is a good solution. Then again, i'm pretty certain that a in-depth solution, while probably better, involves more dev time than will be available for such an issue.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Such as:
Fire at Will: Ships energy weapons fire at multiple targets in there respective weapon arcs. (this would replace BFW and CVF)
Full power to energy weapons: Beams focus there power into one powerful burst, Cannons overcharge their firing rate for x amount of time (this removes CRF and BO)
This would allow players to mix energy weapon systems more freely allowing for ships to run beams and cannons.
As far as the boom and zoom that the escorts are designed to do.. a longer cool down on the cannons but increased damage would help.. given the lack of up time a moving ship has on target.. the longer cool down at firing cycle would make so sitting and shooting away would not be helpful and the increased damage would make boom and zoom escort fighting style more rewarding.
Post with your main.
Cutting to the chase as you say should have involved two things, cannon abilities should have been the same boff rank from the beginning, and the dropoff should have been the same.
Anything else that you posted is just overkill.
You could already mix energy weapons, starting an alpha with FAW brought the shields down, lighting up CRF after that along with TS shattered hull.
Its just simpler and better to do it with FAW and TS paired, or FAW alone.
Like Hugin1205 says A2B isn't dead, your build just eventually gets to a point where it is hampering you more than it helps.
Your either satisfied at that point or you chuck it.
http://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline#/discussion/1204096/a-proposal-for-cannons
it's not plagiarism if the OP of this thread is an alt account of the one from the prior thread
of course, if true, that would mean said alt account is circumventing a ban, so, either way, he's in heap big trouble
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Total missed the point.. you have to use more skills to use mixed weapon systems. What I suggested would make it more viable to mix them then having to waste BO skills on 2 different systems.. 3 if using torps.
Still, some good ideas are being discussed.
I still want to see dual cannons get a wider arc. If not 90 degrees, then at least 70?
http://imgur.com/pU2cs5A
http://i.imgur.com/yxYhezC.jpg
Brand new account created for the sole purpose of necroing that^ old thread. Then the OP of this thread copies the entire text of that other thread in order to create a new thread. Seems fishy.
I'm curious. How would you know for a fact the OP isn't stoleleviathan? I also have the feeling you know exactly who the OP is.
We already have them actually. When you get R&D:Cannons to level 15 you unlock the recipe to craft wide-arc dual heavy cannons that have a 90 degree firing arc. You can only equip 1 wide-arc DHC on a single ship though, no matter what damage type they do.
I agree leave it to the mods to find out, deal with, and lets not derail the discussion anymore than it is currently.
Where the wide-arc dual heavy cannon is concerned I think that is abit bad kinda, as it even more pushes dual cannons into a pigeon-hole of being seen as less-viable to heavy cannons. THe one per ship makes it that it starts firing abit before your other dual heavies, while if we adjusted the dual cannons to having 75-90 degree firing arcs you could slot it with these an have a heavier hitting dual cannon slotted with them that fires in the same arc. Also it would make the dual cannons more apt to be used on the slower-turning cruisers that can use dual cannons, yet can't turn quick enough to use dual heavies effectively without using alot of turn-rate boosting consoles. This is the spirit of the request though to see a weapon type that is seen by many as less-desirable/viable to slot get a use on the slower turning cruisers that can slot dual cannons, but yet can't slot dual heavies, while as said making using dual cannon-using cruiser have a effective/viable place next to beam-using cruisers. Also such a change would not need to see any changes to ships that can use dual cannons to make them more viable to use these cannons, as the change to the firing arc would be enough of a buff to be a viable option to many players by reducing the time lost by having to turn to require your target. I would personally love to run a dual cannon cruiser with one of the dual heavy wide-arcs equipped, if the dual cannons were brought up to a 90 degree firing arc.
i could think maybe he create alt
to argue with himself troll people
and maybe only way he could know
op not stolevi is if he really op was
but i dont really know which is true