test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Cannon types ever going to be internally balanced?
mercurythefirst
Member Posts: 104 Arc User
Like, -6.5 power firing cannons
-8 power firing dual cannons
-10 power firing dual heavy cannons
Or are we going to keep pretending?
It's been what, 8 years, and nobody ever slotted cannons more than for curiosity's sake? Can we... Do something about it?
-8 power firing dual cannons
-10 power firing dual heavy cannons
Or are we going to keep pretending?
It's been what, 8 years, and nobody ever slotted cannons more than for curiosity's sake? Can we... Do something about it?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
bloodpact.net
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it."
-Michelangelo
bloodpact.net
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it."
-Michelangelo
0
Comments
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Ehm yeah I do.
I have a cannon-turret build on my Xindi toon. Rapid fire looks quite nice when using Phased bio-matter phasers
At one point I would agree with you but quite awhile back Cannons got some love thanks to the changes in drop off. I use a Cannon/Beam build on 90% of my ships with great success. Beaams to take the shields down torps and cannon to rip them apart.
I would say that even a shift to make all weapon buffing abilities, such as beam overload an cannon rapid fire, to start at ensign station rank would be a nice change to make single cannons a viable alternative to beam arrays or banks.
It should be that they deliver the same damage, but in a more concentrated burst. Offset by firing cycle and targeting arc. This was of course out the window almost immediately.
You are misreading me if you get that impression.
That's exactly the concentrated vs. sustained damage I was describing. More damage per shot in a narrow firing arc that isn't constantly maintained, versus less damage per shot, but more opportunities to shoot due to the wider arc. I was not merely referencing the damange stats in the tooltip.
No need to parse the rest of your condescending lecture.
I still think that the dual cannons shpuld operate on the 90° arc.. so we cover the spectrum, and also we give life to those... as of now, Heavy Cannons are more useful in the 45° arc
An to be truthful i would be fine with a reduction in the damage output of dual cannons if they were increased to a firing arc of 75-90 degrees, while keeping the dual heavy cannons at their current damage output an firing arc. Since in truth unless you wanted to invest the needed additional turn rate boosting options to gain the needed mobility to use dual heavy cannons in the slower turning large ships that can use dual cannons, these types of ships would gain more use an potential output of slotting dual cannons an using the slots an talent/traits they might use to gain the needed agility to use the narrower arc of the dual heavies to gain more damage boosts an other such bonuses, while nimble escort an raider type ships would still be the main ship types that would use the dual heavy cannons as they have innately the needed mobility to utilize the firing arc effectively.
Works for me:
Single Cannon 180°
Dual Cannons 90° (damage might have to be modified a bit)
Dual Heavies 45°
My character Tsin'xing
Also better power management is what killed Cannons. Back in the day when cannons were better that beams it was mainly because no one would broadside with 8 beams the power drain was just too much and would net lower dps overall. The game was never balanced at it's core to be able to fire all 8 weapons all the time.
I am not sure on the idea of making single cannons capable of being slotted on the rear slots of a ship, Mostly as with them having a firing arc of 180 degrees does not give them any overlap in their firing arc on the sides of the ship they are slotted on, which is one reason beam arrays (since they have 250 degrees of firing arc) are quite effective as a broad-siding weapons. So without a change to single cannons to give them at least a 200 degree firing arc broadsiding with single cannons would be almost worthless compared to beam arrays.
So a big FU to those of us who took the time and resources to craft wide angle dual heavy cannons...
No it was the insane broken beam FAW that worked just the opposite of how it should have. it boosted beam power tot he moon and broke both cannon and Beam overload tot he point they were a joke comapred to space bar FAW. Thank goodness FAW has been nerfed not enough if you ask me but it a start.
I disagree with that Cannons are a weapon that requires some tactics and skill to employ effectivly and the higher rank reflects that. I'm not so sure about the Tac commnader thing on the cannons at least in my case most of my ships have a cannon no matter the capt. skill set . They are just so good at dishing out damage and well most of my toons are Klingon so Cannons are a must. LOL
Not sure I would call it a FU at all for those that used the time an resources to craft wide-arc/angle dual heavy cannons, unless they make a wide-arc/angle dual cannon (so would have a 180 degree arc), but would actually be quite a nice addition to slot with newly changed dual cannons for the added punch of the dual heavy cannon. Since the arcs would compliment each other, and for the loss of one mod to get the arc mod on the dual heavy you would get the added damage an crit severity of the dual heavy cannon alongside the dual cannons. Also would unlike using the wide arc/angle with other non-wide arc/angle dual heavy cannons would be on target with the other slotted weapons longer together, compared to the time it takes for you to close that additional 45 degree to bring your non-wide arc dual heavies into firing range, even though it would retain the value of using it with normal dual heavy cannons still.
Yeah I agree it would make more sense that weapon augmenting boff abilities started at ensign rank, as to me attack patterns make more sense to need more training to use effectively as would be implied by a higher seat ranking to slot on a ship.
FAW was fine originally because you didn't use it all the time, there were no cooldown reductions and 4 beams FAWing wouldn't outperform Scatter Volley. FAW existed when cannons and escorts ruled DPS it's not like it suddenly appeared in all it's OP glory. Consoles, traits and doffs that helped power regenerate faster or weapons drain less power allowed cruisers to use more beams which meant that FAW got stronger. Dragon/Drake builds showed up, people discovered overcapping, EPS numbers got crazy and FAW just became better and better.