Also, the OP opening two Discovery Boxes and not getting both ships is what this thread is really supposed to be about.
Not quite. I never get ships from boxes, nor would I expect to. They are Lobi boxes with possible useful stuff inside, but never SHIPS. That's crazy talk.
I opened 2 Discovery DISRUPTOR CANNON boxes and got 2 single cannons. This was after opening 10 boxes, and 2 of them gave me Discovery Weapons choices. As I also said, the OP was mainly tongue-in-cheek.
I'll use single cannons on my cruiser if I'm in the mood. But I don't think of them as a great build for a cruiser since Cryptic was stupid by making cannon powers a level higher than beam powers. The best thing I can say about single cannons is that you can get them cheap on the Exchange.
Single cannons have two big selling points:
1 CRF with a wide firing-arc. Its potentially insanely expensive to min-max( NX trait + Husnock trait + Jemmy Strike Ship trait.)
NX trait is +100% as a cat 1 boost, so like 3-4 tac consoles whilst CRF is active as long as CRF was started soon after CSV. Husnock trait 25% cat 2 triggered by dem and temporal abilities, so not great for most escorts. Strike Ship trait simply extends CRF at a huge EC cost. All three are single character unlocks; the NX and Husnock traits also work with BO.
2 CSV with the ability to pew pew between setting up the cone of death. For min-maxing the T6 defiant/t'varo/kdf whatever trait is not super expensive, and attack pattern delta prime is cheaper than a lobi ship and applicable to many AOE or high threat builds.
A CSV oriented build will be getting its damage from CSV, in which case you might as well go for dual cannons. A big issue here is that the 45 degree cone of fire could really use some powerful crowd control to bunch targets together.
Whether building for single or multiple target theres the issue of only escorts having the tac seats, sci being better for crowd control and cruisers better for DEM and most ships not having temporal abilities at all.
I've spent enough time using SCs that I think anyone who says "A CSV oriented build will be getting its damage from CSV, in which case you might as well go for dual cannons." never tried them on a non-escort ship.
I've spent enough time using SCs that I think anyone who says "A CSV oriented build will be getting its damage from CSV, in which case you might as well go for dual cannons." never tried them on a non-escort ship.
Thats my point, the firing angle is too small for most players with most ships, so you're left prodding away until you can setup a csv. I tried this years ago on a sci ship, for me with that gear it was better than beams but not as good as DBB, but since then a lot of turn boosts have been introduced and ship speed increased.
I imagine the top dpsers could put up big numbers in a scimi or pilot ship.
I used single cannon/turret builds previously, and now I use pure turret builds, and I find that they're quite fun.
I really like the Battlestar Galactica actually-worth-watching-science-fiction look that CSV + all turrets (or cannon/turret in the front 180º arc) gives.
Is it optimal? No, of course not, but on the flip side this is a video game and "what looks cool and feels fun" ultimately matters more than parsing the highest DPS numbers in your elite STF.
Lets put a pin in this. First lest start with the Miranda Light Cruiser class ships and the Klingon/Romulan versions. The Fedeartion versions cannot repeat cannot mount dual cannon. If you want a fairly canon accurate version it can only be made by mounting two single cannons in the outer port and starboard weapon slots. There are other ships like this as well where the fed versions cannot use dual cannon. So single cannons have there place. Second there firiging arc is nearly double that of any dual cannon period. They have there use and just because you didn't get the shiney you wanted doesn't mean they are useless. Maybe try a build with them before you dismiss them out of hand.
Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
My 2 cents.
DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
> @ssbn655 said: > talonxv wrote: » > > Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways. > > SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted. > > DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind). > > DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns. > > My 2 cents. > > > > > DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
You totally misunderstood. For DHC I want to turn them from a big gatling gun into an Iowa 16 inch main battleship gun. Hence the longer reload.
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!
OP just because you don't use them doesn't mean that they should be removed from the game. I have a build that uses the hirogen lobi set and diffusive tetryon cannons and turrets on the Fleet Qin HEC and it's pretty effective.
Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
My 2 cents.
DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I use cannons on my KDFs all the time and see no difference.
JJ Connie > TOS Connie
Lag denied your Heal
What happened to my Halon consoles
Poni?
OP just because you don't use them doesn't mean that they should be removed from the game. I have a build that uses the hirogen lobi set and diffusive tetryon cannons and turrets on the Fleet Qin HEC and it's pretty effective.
Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
My 2 cents.
DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I use cannons on my KDFs all the time and see no difference.
USing them without pumping power levels up they can drain you pretty quick. -15 per cannon can add up quick unless you dump power into weapons mostly. Thats what Iw as getting at sorry.
> @ssbn655 said:
> talonxv wrote: »
>
> Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
>
> SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
>
> DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
>
> DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
>
>
>
> DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
You totally misunderstood. For DHC I want to turn them from a big gatling gun into an Iowa 16 inch main battleship gun. Hence the longer reload.
You miss my point. First off I am a Navy Veteran and had family serve as Gunnersmates on BB's in the PTO. The 16/45 Mk6 on the Iowas were EXTREMELY slow. One round every 72 seconds under perfect conditions. The current 127 mm gun on a Burke fires at 20 rounds a minute. Which to be honest is damn close to what DHC's fire at in this game. The average one v one ship fight in the game is well under a minute most times you are facing more then one opponent. So lets see you blow up a target and while you are waiting out the 72 second cooldown you are facing other ships without your best weapon. What you want would return this game to Escorts and Phaser beams on line.
In honesty i think that there is little need to change the firing rate of the dual heavies, only a shift of dual cannon type from 45 to 60-75 degrees, since that would give both battle-cruisers an escort ships thier own cannon types they prefer to use. As well as making it that it is less likely they would overlap causing one of the types to overshadow the other.
If we were to see something like the implementation of a slow firing high damage weapon system/type. Than i would say do it via adding into the game two new weapon types in the shape of artillery cannons , and a mass-produced lance-like beam weapon type. Both of these I think would need a much higher range, which has the issue that have been talked about alot, while having their firing cycle being more of a slow build up that ends with a single or pair of shots giving a high single damage output. The reason I think using a longer range on them would allow you to fire on a target, while outside of their own range minimizing incoming damage the target would normally inflict.
A CSV oriented build will be getting its damage from CSV, in which case you might as well go for dual cannons. A big issue here is that the 45 degree cone of fire could really use some powerful crowd control to bunch targets together.
Whether building for single or multiple target theres the issue of only escorts having the tac seats, sci being better for crowd control and cruisers better for DEM and most ships not having temporal abilities at all.
Perhaps I misunderstood last weeks patch notes but doesn't CSV have a set firing arc for all cannon weapons. It was 45" even with turrets and single cannons. Now its 90° arc for everything.
I used single cannon/turret builds previously, and now I use pure turret builds, and I find that they're quite fun.
I really like the Battlestar Galactica actually-worth-watching-science-fiction look that CSV + all turrets (or cannon/turret in the front 180º arc) gives.
Is it optimal? No, of course not, but on the flip side this is a video game and "what looks cool and feels fun" ultimately matters more than parsing the highest DPS numbers in your elite STF.
As far as I recall the Kelvin Timeline Phasers with FaW look more like Battlestar Galactica then the CSV + turrets. While I am not a big fan of FaW I do like the look of those weapons with it.
I use single cannons sparingly, usually on my all cannon ships (just to add in an extra visual) and I always use one Single Cannon on the Breen Heavy Raider (along with Dual and Heavy Dual, or switching the Dual for Quad if the energy types match up) because that fires from the almost unused lower weapon mount on the ship model.
Are they optimal? Probably not, but they're fun. And that's what is important to me; fun while making somewhat canon styled ships.
Isn't it time to remove single cannons from the game? (And, yes, this is because I opened 2 Discovery disruptor cannon boxes and got 2 single cannons in them).
Does anyone use them? If so, please tell me why. And none of this, "Well, they have a wider arc of fire so are useful in some cases" or "you can mount them on things that can't mount dual cannons."
The question is, do YOU use them? And why?
I use them quite frequently and with very good results.
One needs to know how to set up a proper build though since it is not as straight forward as a beam boat or DHC build.
Started using SC after seeing an old PVP build for a Galaxy X in action and developed the build from that point.
There has been the mandatory stop at the plasma explosion consoles along the way. Kemocite also works quite well.
Currently there are still a few consoles and traits which allow cruisers with SC/turrets to throw down close to insane amounts of damage. Maybe it would be higher if i actually bothered to upgrade my weapons or consoles, but it is more than sufficient for any PVE.
Oh man, this made me remember one of the guys years ago doing a single cannon + turrets with a Photonic Shockwave D'Deridex build for PVP and killing peasants with it. Using a D'D in PVP demanded respect already (anything was better), but shaming guys with single cannon and turret attacks was funny.
> @ssbn655 said: > talonxv wrote: » > > > @ssbn655 said: > > talonxv wrote: » > > > > Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways. > > > > SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted. > > > > DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind). > > > > DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns. > > > > My 2 cents. > > > > > > > > > > DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe. > > You totally misunderstood. For DHC I want to turn them from a big gatling gun into an Iowa 16 inch main battleship gun. Hence the longer reload. > > > > You miss my point. First off I am a Navy Veteran and had family serve as Gunnersmates on BB's in the PTO. The 16/45 Mk6 on the Iowas were EXTREMELY slow. One round every 72 seconds under perfect conditions. The current 127 mm gun on a Burke fires at 20 rounds a minute. Which to be honest is damn close to what DHC's fire at in this game. The average one v one ship fight in the game is well under a minute most times you are facing more then one opponent. So lets see you blow up a target and while you are waiting out the 72 second cooldown you are facing other ships without your best weapon. What you want would return this game to Escorts and Phaser beams on line.
It's why I said 6-8 second reload. Not 72. God do people have a freaking reading impediment?
Oh and BTW. Iowa had 16/50s. NC and SD class BBs had 16/45s Because the Iowa fired 16 SHS, and out of the 16 inch barrels the USN produced, only the 50s could fire SHS.
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!
> @asuran14 said: > In honesty i think that there is little need to change the firing rate of the dual heavies, only a shift of dual cannon type from 45 to 60-75 degrees, since that would give both battle-cruisers an escort ships thier own cannon types they prefer to use. As well as making it that it is less likely they would overlap causing one of the types to overshadow the other. > > If we were to see something like the implementation of a slow firing high damage weapon system/type. Than i would say do it via adding into the game two new weapon types in the shape of artillery cannons , and a mass-produced lance-like beam weapon type. Both of these I think would need a much higher range, which has the issue that have been talked about alot, while having their firing cycle being more of a slow build up that ends with a single or pair of shots giving a high single damage output. The reason I think using a longer range on them would allow you to fire on a target, while outside of their own range minimizing incoming damage the target would normally inflict.
the reason why I say shift DHCs over to high spike low reload guns is because there is little difference between DHC and DCs right now. Sure you could increase the angle but I'll trade DPS over angle any day. Especially in something like the Defiant.
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!
DHCs frankly should be more like the only know example of them in star trek - namely, the heavy disruptors used by the IKS Negh'Var in way of the warrior to disable DS9's shield grid
they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
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.
> @shadowfang240 said: > DHCs frankly should be more like the only know example of them in star trek - namely, the heavy disruptors used by the IKS Negh'Var in way of the warrior to disable DS9's shield grid > > they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
That could work too. Again slower firing but higher damage per bolt where as singles and doubles are gatling guns.
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!
> @asuran14 said:
> In honesty i think that there is little need to change the firing rate of the dual heavies, only a shift of dual cannon type from 45 to 60-75 degrees, since that would give both battle-cruisers an escort ships thier own cannon types they prefer to use. As well as making it that it is less likely they would overlap causing one of the types to overshadow the other.
>
> If we were to see something like the implementation of a slow firing high damage weapon system/type. Than i would say do it via adding into the game two new weapon types in the shape of artillery cannons , and a mass-produced lance-like beam weapon type. Both of these I think would need a much higher range, which has the issue that have been talked about alot, while having their firing cycle being more of a slow build up that ends with a single or pair of shots giving a high single damage output. The reason I think using a longer range on them would allow you to fire on a target, while outside of their own range minimizing incoming damage the target would normally inflict.
the reason why I say shift DHCs over to high spike low reload guns is because there is little difference between DHC and DCs right now. Sure you could increase the angle but I'll trade DPS over angle any day. Especially in something like the Defiant.
Well dual heavy cannons an dual cannons already have a style like that as they have a firing cycle of 3 seconds during which they fire two shots during that cycle, with those shots fire dealing at base 173 damage for dual heavy cannons. Yet dual cannon's have the same 3 second firing cycle as dual heavy cannons, but with 4 shots fired during that cycle doubling the shorts fired, but those shots deal at base 86 damage. So already these two cannon types do have an existing fact of being either a sustain damage weapon in the case of the Dual-cannons, or a more spike damage weapon in the case of the Dual-heavy cannons, so not sure how much more difference you would get from making the dual-heavy cannons fire even slower (2 shots every 4-6 seconds). I would say the bigger issue is that since they share a firing arc one will always outshine the other, render one of them redundant, outside of visual preferences of seeing more or less shots fired.
> @shadowfang240 said: > DHCs frankly should be more like the only know example of them in star trek - namely, the heavy disruptors used by the IKS Negh'Var in way of the warrior to disable DS9's shield grid > > they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
I agree. DHCs should be weapons for large ships not escorts. Fed side they could create a analogous heavy beam array. DC right now are superflous compared to DHC.
As for the OP I have used them but since their firing cycle has been gimped I don't build for them any more. Now they are cosmetic items for fluff/flavour builds.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I've never used them, but I'm tempted to put them on a ship and go have fun with them. We can get by with just about any build these days, especially on Normal difficulty, so I might give them a go.
Now a LTS and loving it.
Just because you spend money on this game, it does not entitle you to be a jerk if things don't go your way.
I have come to the conclusion that I have a memory like Etch-A-Sketch. I shake my head and forget everything.
Isn't it time to remove single cannons from the game? (And, yes, this is because I opened 2 Discovery disruptor cannon boxes and got 2 single cannons in them).
Does anyone use them? If so, please tell me why. And none of this, "Well, they have a wider arc of fire so are useful in some cases" or "you can mount them on things that can't mount dual cannons."
Might be interesting if they turned single cannons into a slow firing high damage output per shot weapon type. Single cannons an dual cannons already share the same 4 shots over a 3 second firing cycle format, so maybe shifting down to a 1 shot per 3 second cycle could give it a better reason to be used compared to beam arrays or dual banks.
Comments
Not quite. I never get ships from boxes, nor would I expect to. They are Lobi boxes with possible useful stuff inside, but never SHIPS. That's crazy talk.
I opened 2 Discovery DISRUPTOR CANNON boxes and got 2 single cannons. This was after opening 10 boxes, and 2 of them gave me Discovery Weapons choices. As I also said, the OP was mainly tongue-in-cheek.
+1 on that!
1 CRF with a wide firing-arc. Its potentially insanely expensive to min-max( NX trait + Husnock trait + Jemmy Strike Ship trait.)
NX trait is +100% as a cat 1 boost, so like 3-4 tac consoles whilst CRF is active as long as CRF was started soon after CSV. Husnock trait 25% cat 2 triggered by dem and temporal abilities, so not great for most escorts. Strike Ship trait simply extends CRF at a huge EC cost. All three are single character unlocks; the NX and Husnock traits also work with BO.
2 CSV with the ability to pew pew between setting up the cone of death. For min-maxing the T6 defiant/t'varo/kdf whatever trait is not super expensive, and attack pattern delta prime is cheaper than a lobi ship and applicable to many AOE or high threat builds.
A CSV oriented build will be getting its damage from CSV, in which case you might as well go for dual cannons. A big issue here is that the 45 degree cone of fire could really use some powerful crowd control to bunch targets together.
Whether building for single or multiple target theres the issue of only escorts having the tac seats, sci being better for crowd control and cruisers better for DEM and most ships not having temporal abilities at all.
My character Tsin'xing
I imagine the top dpsers could put up big numbers in a scimi or pilot ship.
I really like the Battlestar Galactica actually-worth-watching-science-fiction look that CSV + all turrets (or cannon/turret in the front 180º arc) gives.
Is it optimal? No, of course not, but on the flip side this is a video game and "what looks cool and feels fun" ultimately matters more than parsing the highest DPS numbers in your elite STF.
DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
> talonxv wrote: »
>
> Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
>
> SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
>
> DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
>
> DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
>
>
>
> DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
You totally misunderstood. For DHC I want to turn them from a big gatling gun into an Iowa 16 inch main battleship gun. Hence the longer reload.
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 have no idea what you're talking about. I use cannons on my KDFs all the time and see no difference.
Lag denied your Heal
What happened to my Halon consoles
Poni?
USing them without pumping power levels up they can drain you pretty quick. -15 per cannon can add up quick unless you dump power into weapons mostly. Thats what Iw as getting at sorry.
If we were to see something like the implementation of a slow firing high damage weapon system/type. Than i would say do it via adding into the game two new weapon types in the shape of artillery cannons , and a mass-produced lance-like beam weapon type. Both of these I think would need a much higher range, which has the issue that have been talked about alot, while having their firing cycle being more of a slow build up that ends with a single or pair of shots giving a high single damage output. The reason I think using a longer range on them would allow you to fire on a target, while outside of their own range minimizing incoming damage the target would normally inflict.
Are they optimal? Probably not, but they're fun. And that's what is important to me; fun while making somewhat canon styled ships.
Oh man, this made me remember one of the guys years ago doing a single cannon + turrets with a Photonic Shockwave D'Deridex build for PVP and killing peasants with it. Using a D'D in PVP demanded respect already (anything was better), but shaming guys with single cannon and turret attacks was funny.
> talonxv wrote: »
>
> > @ssbn655 said:
> > talonxv wrote: »
> >
> > Though I've been of the opinion that Cryptic needs to redo cannons anyways.
> >
> > SC buff the angles to 200 and allow them to be rear mounted.
> >
> > DC buff to DHC numbers(no I haven't lost my mind).
> >
> > DHC: make them slow energy hogs that put down BIG blasts. Think the big phaser cannons off the Vengeance. Allow Dreadnoughts, battleships etc. The big battle wagons to be able to mount them. Imagine 6-8 of them firing and it looks like space battleship Yamato. Give them say a 6-8 second reload so not to make them OP. Big spike damage guns.
> >
> > My 2 cents.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > DHC are energy hogs if you don't allocate power to compnesate for it. The CD you want is crazy and lets be blunt would favor Feds even more then the game does now talk about messing up the balance even more then it is. Compared to DHC SC sip power. Klingon Disruptors would be useless and frankly KDF players get the short end as it is now. Concerning KT we do not know for sure what those actually were on that KT universe ship as they were never named in the film afik. KT really needs it own decent stand alone game and if anything what is here is too much at least ship wise both the JJprise and the Vengence are a dime a dozen here. But they trew a bone to the KT fans I guess by making them so easy to get. Hope the TRIBBLE ship numbers swamp the KT ships at least TRIBBLE is TOS universe.
>
> You totally misunderstood. For DHC I want to turn them from a big gatling gun into an Iowa 16 inch main battleship gun. Hence the longer reload.
>
>
>
> You miss my point. First off I am a Navy Veteran and had family serve as Gunnersmates on BB's in the PTO. The 16/45 Mk6 on the Iowas were EXTREMELY slow. One round every 72 seconds under perfect conditions. The current 127 mm gun on a Burke fires at 20 rounds a minute. Which to be honest is damn close to what DHC's fire at in this game. The average one v one ship fight in the game is well under a minute most times you are facing more then one opponent. So lets see you blow up a target and while you are waiting out the 72 second cooldown you are facing other ships without your best weapon. What you want would return this game to Escorts and Phaser beams on line.
It's why I said 6-8 second reload. Not 72. God do people have a freaking reading impediment?
Oh and BTW. Iowa had 16/50s. NC and SD class BBs had 16/45s
Because the Iowa fired 16 SHS, and out of the 16 inch barrels the USN produced, only the 50s could fire SHS.
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
> In honesty i think that there is little need to change the firing rate of the dual heavies, only a shift of dual cannon type from 45 to 60-75 degrees, since that would give both battle-cruisers an escort ships thier own cannon types they prefer to use. As well as making it that it is less likely they would overlap causing one of the types to overshadow the other.
>
> If we were to see something like the implementation of a slow firing high damage weapon system/type. Than i would say do it via adding into the game two new weapon types in the shape of artillery cannons , and a mass-produced lance-like beam weapon type. Both of these I think would need a much higher range, which has the issue that have been talked about alot, while having their firing cycle being more of a slow build up that ends with a single or pair of shots giving a high single damage output. The reason I think using a longer range on them would allow you to fire on a target, while outside of their own range minimizing incoming damage the target would normally inflict.
the reason why I say shift DHCs over to high spike low reload guns is because there is little difference between DHC and DCs right now. Sure you could increase the angle but I'll trade DPS over angle any day. Especially in something like the Defiant.
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
they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
#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!"
> DHCs frankly should be more like the only know example of them in star trek - namely, the heavy disruptors used by the IKS Negh'Var in way of the warrior to disable DS9's shield grid
>
> they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
That could work too. Again slower firing but higher damage per bolt where as singles and doubles are gatling guns.
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
Well dual heavy cannons an dual cannons already have a style like that as they have a firing cycle of 3 seconds during which they fire two shots during that cycle, with those shots fire dealing at base 173 damage for dual heavy cannons. Yet dual cannon's have the same 3 second firing cycle as dual heavy cannons, but with 4 shots fired during that cycle doubling the shorts fired, but those shots deal at base 86 damage. So already these two cannon types do have an existing fact of being either a sustain damage weapon in the case of the Dual-cannons, or a more spike damage weapon in the case of the Dual-heavy cannons, so not sure how much more difference you would get from making the dual-heavy cannons fire even slower (2 shots every 4-6 seconds). I would say the bigger issue is that since they share a firing arc one will always outshine the other, render one of them redundant, outside of visual preferences of seeing more or less shots fired.
> DHCs frankly should be more like the only know example of them in star trek - namely, the heavy disruptors used by the IKS Negh'Var in way of the warrior to disable DS9's shield grid
>
> they fired a single volley of two pulses, rather than multiple volleys of two pulses - so more like the andorian wing cannon overload console than the DHCs we currently have
I agree. DHCs should be weapons for large ships not escorts. Fed side they could create a analogous heavy beam array. DC right now are superflous compared to DHC.
As for the OP I have used them but since their firing cycle has been gimped I don't build for them any more. Now they are cosmetic items for fluff/flavour builds.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I use the lobi Elachi cannon for the set bonus.