I still think that the dual cannons should 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
Works for me:
Single Cannon 180°
Dual Cannons 90° (damage might have to be modified a bit)
Dual Heavies 45°
I got an even better one.
Single cannon 200 deg, can be mounted front and rear.
Dual cannons, become like the DHCs now.
DHCs, become the Star Trek version of turbo lasers from SW, or for lack of a better term space versions of big battleship cannons. They have a radius of 200 deg, can be mounted for and rear, but have a very slow RoF, high energy use, but can do A LOT of damage per shot. And can only be mounted on really big ships.
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'd say make dual heavies full 360 degree, double their damage output and give them a 0.5 sec fire rate. This is the 25th century, after all. I'd be disappointed if we have replicators, quantum slip stream, quantum torps, anti proton weapons and we didn't have the technology to make awesome cannons. If you don't like it, then don't make yourself an enemy of the Federation...
Cannons work well for me. One I use is a disruptor build with as much disruptor based set bonuses as I can stuff in with 1 dual heavy coalition and another build uses the defiant quad Cannon setup. I think they're both plenty fun and effective even without getting past mkXIV very rare. Can destroy ships left and right, but staying alive though...
So a big FU to those of us who took the time and resources to craft wide angle dual heavy cannons...
Everyone gets that every now and then in a MMO; its part of the deal. Your wide angle DHCs will still work and maybe be superior to a normal DC in some respects. Or you'll start crafting wide angle DCs for a wider than 90 degree arc.
> @nikeix said:
> so far all of the heavy weapon slot weapons have been 360. I think that's your real dual heavy cannons right there.
Is heavy weapon slot only for PC? I've read people talk about it but never seen it. I'm on the Xbox, though.
Yes only on PC, atm.
Other than a new gimmick for escorts, I'm not sure why Cryptic decided we 'needed' these in STO.
And calling them Heavy Weapons and then putting them on the smallest ships is silly, imo. Call 'em Advanced Tactical Weapons (ATWs) or something. Just kind of a lame name.
if you read some coments, players would equip cannons when they would fire in all directions like beams, or when we would have FAW for cannons ... LOL... Main problem with cannons is not DMG(DPS) problems, but piloting problems and fact that they are not easy mode... You actualy need to piloting with them and not just broadside, and you need pick your targets well or you are dead... you cant go in the middle of cluster ***k, and fire at everyone in every directions... That is the main problem with cannons not power menagment or DPS potentional... I myself dont have eny problem with cannons, i use DHCs on every single Escort, and i refuse to put beams on them, cannons are way much fun...
You actualy need to piloting with them and not just broadside, and you need pick your targets well or you are dead... you cant go in the middle of cluster ***k, and fire at everyone in every directions...
What's frustrating is unless you're doing monstrous damage, doing just that in places like the final battle in the Undine and Badlands BZs will likely net you a reward penalty due to the players snoozing in their FAW cruisers. You can work harder for less reward (cannons) or you can roll your face across your keyboard and win WIN WIN (with FAW)!
With firing haste and Cannon scatter volley, you can keep your cannons pretty hot, especially if you know how to pilot your ship. It's actually fun to ram full speed down an enemy's throat and let your speed and inertia power slide you around the remaining ships while keeping 4 cannons firing on the enemy. I'd much rather do that than just park and use beams.
I'd like this better:
-10 power firing cannons
-12.5 power firing dual cannons
-15 power firing dual heavy cannons
Honestly if we are going to talk about weapon power drain changes, than I think the drain on the dual variants (dual or dual-heavy cannons) could stay relatively similar. Yet I think the energy cost of a single cannon could use an adjustment further down, since for the most part the difference between a dual an dual heavy type cannons is not that large, but even by the term a single cannon to a dual cannon would imply you are doubling up on the cannon. Also a change to the single cannon to have even if it is 2 weapon power points less drain than a beam array could prompt more players to see single cannons as a more competitive choice for non-dual cannon capable ships.
So something like this
-Single cannon- 7 weapon power drain
-dual cannons- 10 weapon power drain
-dual heavy cannons- 12 weapon power drain
Though the other thing is where would you put the power drain of turrets at if you are lowering the power drain of the three other cannon types, yet we could just say by head-canon that the extra weapon power drain on turrets is for 360 degree firing arc.
-Single cannon- 7 weapon power drain
-dual cannons- 10 weapon power drain
-dual heavy cannons- 12 weapon power drain
Well I'm talking about internal balance among cannons, let's not break the external balance towards beams even further by raising DHC power past the superior beams.
[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."
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!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
-Single cannon- 7 weapon power drain
-dual cannons- 10 weapon power drain
-dual heavy cannons- 12 weapon power drain
Well I'm talking about internal balance among cannons, let's not break the external balance towards beams even further by raising DHC power past the superior beams.
Yeah the only change would actually be a reduction to the weapon power drain of single cannon type, which would make them very possibly more of a reasonable an appealing alternative to beam arrays or banks on non-dual cannon capable ships. Because the dual cannon an dual heavy cannon energy drain on that is what they are currently, which is pretty fine as is. The other issue is that you can't make a change to balance the internal balance between cannons, and not have an affect on beams. Even a change of increasing the firing arc of dual cannons would need to be balanced against the beams, as well as make a change to the damage output of the dual cannons to balance the increased arc.
The biggest issues I see with cannons is that single cannons do not really seem competitive, and also do not seem appealing enough compared to running beam arrays or beam banks. While both variants of the dual cannon types (dual cannons and dual heavy cannons) feel redundant when compared to each other, since they do not have enough of a unique niche they feel that the other does not.
if you read some coments, players would equip cannons when they would fire in all directions like beams, or when we would have FAW for cannons ... LOL... Main problem with cannons is not DMG(DPS) problems, but piloting problems and fact that they are not easy mode... You actualy need to piloting with them and not just broadside, and you need pick your targets well or you are dead... you cant go in the middle of cluster ***k, and fire at everyone in every directions... That is the main problem with cannons not power menagment or DPS potentional... I myself dont have eny problem with cannons, i use DHCs on every single Escort, and i refuse to put beams on them, cannons are way much fun...
So basically what you're saying is Cannons suck because of Pilot error?
What you're saying is not one single skilled player has decided to try out cannons...only the lousy players have tried cannons?
It has nothing to do with the dozen advantages beams have over cannons?
Silly me...I just can't do similar DPS with cannons as beams because I suck!
I'd like this better:
-10 power firing cannons
-12.5 power firing dual cannons
-15 power firing dual heavy cannons
Honestly if we are going to talk about weapon power drain changes, than I think the drain on the dual variants (dual or dual-heavy cannons) could stay relatively similar. Yet I think the energy cost of a single cannon could use an adjustment further down, since for the most part the difference between a dual an dual heavy type cannons is not that large, but even by the term a single cannon to a dual cannon would imply you are doubling up on the cannon. Also a change to the single cannon to have even if it is 2 weapon power points less drain than a beam array could prompt more players to see single cannons as a more competitive choice for non-dual cannon capable ships.
So something like this
-Single cannon- 7 weapon power drain
-dual cannons- 10 weapon power drain
-dual heavy cannons- 12 weapon power drain
Though the other thing is where would you put the power drain of turrets at if you are lowering the power drain of the three other cannon types, yet we could just say by head-canon that the extra weapon power drain on turrets is for 360 degree firing arc.
Comments
I got an even better one.
Single cannon 200 deg, can be mounted front and rear.
Dual cannons, become like the DHCs now.
DHCs, become the Star Trek version of turbo lasers from SW, or for lack of a better term space versions of big battleship cannons. They have a radius of 200 deg, can be mounted for and rear, but have a very slow RoF, high energy use, but can do A LOT of damage per shot. And can only be mounted on really big ships.
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
> so far all of the heavy weapon slot weapons have been 360. I think that's your real dual heavy cannons right there.
Is heavy weapon slot only for PC? I've read people talk about it but never seen it. I'm on the Xbox, though.
Everyone gets that every now and then in a MMO; its part of the deal. Your wide angle DHCs will still work and maybe be superior to a normal DC in some respects. Or you'll start crafting wide angle DCs for a wider than 90 degree arc.
Yes only on PC, atm.
Other than a new gimmick for escorts, I'm not sure why Cryptic decided we 'needed' these in STO.
And calling them Heavy Weapons and then putting them on the smallest ships is silly, imo. Call 'em Advanced Tactical Weapons (ATWs) or something. Just kind of a lame name.
What's frustrating is unless you're doing monstrous damage, doing just that in places like the final battle in the Undine and Badlands BZs will likely net you a reward penalty due to the players snoozing in their FAW cruisers. You can work harder for less reward (cannons) or you can roll your face across your keyboard and win WIN WIN (with FAW)!
I'd like this better:
-10 power firing cannons
-12.5 power firing dual cannons
-15 power firing dual heavy cannons
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
Honestly if we are going to talk about weapon power drain changes, than I think the drain on the dual variants (dual or dual-heavy cannons) could stay relatively similar. Yet I think the energy cost of a single cannon could use an adjustment further down, since for the most part the difference between a dual an dual heavy type cannons is not that large, but even by the term a single cannon to a dual cannon would imply you are doubling up on the cannon. Also a change to the single cannon to have even if it is 2 weapon power points less drain than a beam array could prompt more players to see single cannons as a more competitive choice for non-dual cannon capable ships.
So something like this
-Single cannon- 7 weapon power drain
-dual cannons- 10 weapon power drain
-dual heavy cannons- 12 weapon power drain
Though the other thing is where would you put the power drain of turrets at if you are lowering the power drain of the three other cannon types, yet we could just say by head-canon that the extra weapon power drain on turrets is for 360 degree firing arc.
Well I'm talking about internal balance among cannons, let's not break the external balance towards beams even further by raising DHC power past the superior beams.
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
#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!"
Yeah the only change would actually be a reduction to the weapon power drain of single cannon type, which would make them very possibly more of a reasonable an appealing alternative to beam arrays or banks on non-dual cannon capable ships. Because the dual cannon an dual heavy cannon energy drain on that is what they are currently, which is pretty fine as is. The other issue is that you can't make a change to balance the internal balance between cannons, and not have an affect on beams. Even a change of increasing the firing arc of dual cannons would need to be balanced against the beams, as well as make a change to the damage output of the dual cannons to balance the increased arc.
The biggest issues I see with cannons is that single cannons do not really seem competitive, and also do not seem appealing enough compared to running beam arrays or beam banks. While both variants of the dual cannon types (dual cannons and dual heavy cannons) feel redundant when compared to each other, since they do not have enough of a unique niche they feel that the other does not.
So basically what you're saying is Cannons suck because of Pilot error?
What you're saying is not one single skilled player has decided to try out cannons...only the lousy players have tried cannons?
It has nothing to do with the dozen advantages beams have over cannons?
Silly me...I just can't do similar DPS with cannons as beams because I suck!
Personally I'd say something alone the lines of
Singles - 6 drain
Duals - 9 drain
Dual Heavies - 12 drain
Nice round numbers (imo) Singles and Duals need some love and this would be a good start to it.