Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 267
# 1 360 Degree Beam Arrays
10-30-2012, 02:25 PM
Anyone with a beam cruiser must of asked this question at one point or another: "where are the 360 degree beam arrays?" Why don't they exist as an option for Beam Boat cruisers? I think they would be a great addition to the game and solve quite a few problems. Here is my reasoning why:

For the record...I am talking about the introduction of a new class of weapon...not modifying the existing beam arrays to become 360. The entire point of this thread is to put forward the idea of the 360 degree beam array

1. Turrets do not work well with beam arrays / dual beam banks.

I have experimented with a federation cruiser that had 4 dual beam banks on front, and 4 turrets on aft. The end result was not very impressive. Throughout my tests, not once did the turrets fire at the same time as the dual beam banks. The turrets and the dual beam banks did not work very synergistically, as opposed to cannons and turrets which CAN fire at the same time.

2. A 360 beam array would give cruisers an extra bit of firepower during direct assaults.

Lets face it...the DPS that an escort can do with cannons/turrets puts a beam cruiser to shame. The ability to have 360 beam turrets on aft for a cruiser would allow players to construct a sort of assault cruiser build intended for direct assaults, instead of limiting the iconic Galaxy Class and Soveriegn class to "extra guns" for escorts

3. For an escort...4 turrets on aft means 8 hard points on front. Cruisers don't stand a chance

This is undeniable. This has to be one of the greatest advantages that escorts have. It gets worse when you have the zippy Defiant flying around, out turning, and out maneuvering cruisers, just laying waste to shields.

Cruisers should be able to counter this with a head-on assault of their own. Forget patches to add further debuffs to escort shields, or buffs to cruiser turn rates...360 turrets would solve most of the problems of cruisers not being "strong enough" according to some players.

4. 360 beam arrays will be the weakest of the beam weapons

This would also be undeniable. The greater your firing arc, the less damage that it should do...this is balance 101. I am sure everyone could agree on this.

5. 360 Beam arrays will compliment Dual beam Banks like the turrets compliment Dual Canons

Fair is fair right? This would enable the players, "us", to expand on the possible builds for our ships, giving us more options, more choices, and expanding the type of play-style. THis would increase the amount of styles of ships, and thus, creating more diversity in PVP arenas or improving performance in PVE.

====

It is not like introducing 360 beam arrays would break the game. It would not enable cruisers to be uber or godly. There is obvious drawbacks to using the weaker 360 beam arrays as opposed to the standard (and stronger) 250 beam arrays. 360 beam arrays are for players who want to maximize forward damage at the expense of aft damage. 360 beam arrays are for players who prefer head on attacking as opposed to attacking while running away. It is almost self balancing.

Naturally, as firing arc increases...DPS and base damage goes down...that is called balance, and I would expect that with 360 beam arrays.

We already have 360 degree beam arras for shuttles. The assets are there, the code is there, the foundation is there. The Devs just need to expand on it. Adding 260 degree beam arrays for all the weapon types would be an excellent way to expand player choice, and the way we play in both PVE and PVP. It will defiantly shake things up...and give people an excuse to play the game to get this new class of weapon.

If you guys have any input on this idea, or criticisms...please...feel free to post.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,414
# 2
10-30-2012, 02:32 PM
Turrets are cannons because cannon-equipped ships can stay pointed at their target. They have the turn rate for it.

Cruisers turn sideways and broadside targets with overlapping arcs of fire.

Therefore they don't need 360-degree beam arrays. They're mutually exclusive ship types.


EDIT: Though I can see what you mean with the DBB point.

Last edited by rodentmaster; 10-30-2012 at 02:34 PM.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 3
10-30-2012, 02:37 PM
So basically you just want the beam equivalent of a turret? The damage would probably be abysmal.

If beam arrays hit 176 DPS, and turrets are 132 DPS, I can't see a 360 degree beam array doing more than 130 DPS.

You'd need a good way to distinguish it from a turret; there's really no direct comparison between other types of weapons (DBB =/= DHC, for example).

I'm not sure what a good distinguishing factor would be. Slower recycle time but higher DPV/DPS? So make it say hit 130 DPS but rather than the turret's 99 DPV, make it, say, 160 DPV?
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,414
# 4
10-30-2012, 02:42 PM
In Enterprise they had a phaser beam that was on a rotating gimbal. It moved to aim towards the target.

They could make it just like turrets but make it beam damage type. They could call it a "Beam Bank" (not a Dual Beam Bank) or something like Beam Turret, so FAW and BO applies to it as well.

Now that I think about it more, I think it's a good idea. Useless on slow cruisers, but useful for anything other than cruisers. Turrets aren't very powerful, but they do help. I've had to run beam arrays on the aft slots on some ships that run DHCs up front, for better coverage of targets. However, these don't fire forward.
Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 267
# 5
10-30-2012, 02:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmaster View Post
Turrets are cannons because cannon-equipped ships can stay pointed at their target. They have the turn rate for it.

Cruisers turn sideways and broadside targets with overlapping arcs of fire.

Therefore they don't need 360-degree beam arrays. They're mutually exclusive ship types.

Not all cruisers use all 250 beam arrays. I have seen many cruisers with dual beam banks on front in an attempt to be a head on assault ship. Adding the turrets would allow them to better that performance.

Fact is, the game lacks a 360 beam option, and one should be provided to fit this play style.


Quote:
Originally Posted by squishkin View Post
So basically you just want the beam equivalent of a turret? The damage would probably be abysmal.

You'd need a good way to distinguish it from a turret; there's really no direct comparison between other types of weapons (DBB =/= DHC, for example).

I'm not sure what a good distinguishing factor would be. Slower recycle time but higher DPV/DPS? So make it say hit 130 DPS but rather than the turret's 99 DPV, make it, say, 160 DPV?
Distinguishing factor? That is hardly important. Turrets act almost exactly like cannons and dual cannons, except for firing arc and damage. If you truely want a way to distinguish turrets and 360 beam arrays, then you could say while turrets are better at rate of fire, but lack in damage, 360 beam arrays are middle of the ground.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 6
10-30-2012, 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmaster View Post
In Enterprise they had a phaser beam that was on a rotating gimbal. It moved to aim towards the target.

They could make it just like turrets but make it beam damage type. They could call it a "Beam Bank" (not a Dual Beam Bank) or something like Beam Turret, so FAW and BO applies to it as well.

Now that I think about it more, I think it's a good idea. Useless on slow cruisers, but useful for anything other than cruisers. Turrets aren't very powerful, but they do help. I've had to run beam arrays on the aft slots on some ships that run DHCs up front, for better coverage of targets. However, these don't fire forward.
I honestly can't see the devs going "let's make a weapon type that is identical other than using beams instead of pulses".

For a couple of reasons.

1. It's basically repetitive.
2. Cannons and turrets are designed to be mounted in two very different styles of ship, and 360 beam banks don't really suit that model.


Shuttles are quite a different circumstance, and their gear is restricted to them.

Unless you can come up with a totally different style of weapon that happens to be both 360 degrees and a beam, I can't see them going for it.

Like...say... phaser bloom turrets. 360 degrees, range capped at 2km, turret DPS, very high volley rate.

(I can't see this going into effect, by the way, since it would basically kill of heavy plasma and the Borg would cry.)
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,414
# 7
10-30-2012, 02:52 PM
By that logic we shouldn't have DBBs AND arrays, or 4 types of cannons. It's not repetitive because it's a different weapon. You don't equip 8 turrets on a cruiser because the power is too low. By making it the same as a turret, only with beam type damage, you don't have to worry about balancing it -- it already follows existing balances and checks.

Less work for the devs, less to screw up, etc.
Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 267
# 8
10-30-2012, 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by squishkin View Post
I honestly can't see the devs going "let's make a weapon type that is identical other than using beams instead of pulses".

For a couple of reasons.

1. It's basically repetitive.
2. Cannons and turrets are designed to be mounted in two very different styles of ship, and 360 beam banks don't really suit that model.
Lets talk about repetition...

Dual Cannons vs Dual Heavy Cannons. Same weapons, same pictures for the weapons...the only difference is rate of fire and DPS...and those two stats are NEGLIGIBLE!

Or how about Split beam rifles vs high density rifles. Same weapons...just with a different secondary firing function.

Or how about the Regent class "RESKIN" of the Sovereign? Shall I go on about REAL examples of repetition?

360 beam arrays are NOT on the same premise as these three examples as above! A 360 beam array adds an alternative to the current weapon set. However...this "repetitive addition" as you would call it, would allow the creation of a whole new play style in true assault cruisers. Giving Sovereigns and other cruiser more forward firepower makes them excellent head on ships. Not everyone wants a broadside cruiser. Adding more ship builds is what this game needs. This game needs more ways for people to play differently, not more was to play the same.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,553
# 9
10-30-2012, 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nakedcrook View Post
Lets talk about repetition...

Dual Cannons vs Dual Heavy Cannons. Same weapons, same pictures for the weapons...the only difference is rate of fire and DPS...and those two stats are NEGLIGIBLE!

Or how about Split beam rifles vs high density rifles. Same weapons...just with a different secondary firing function.

Or how about the Regent class "RESKIN" of the Sovereign? Shall I go on about REAL examples of repetition?
Sorry to burst your bubble.

Dual Cannons vs Dual Heavy Cannons. DHCs have a different firing animation, they fire from further out on the ships stabilizers. ALSO DHCs have a natural 10% bonus Crit severity. They also fire fewer shots, which means fewer chances for procs from the cannons.

Split Beam Rifles vs High Density Beam Rifles. You are correct, their primary firing function is almost identical. However the secondaries make them MASSIVELY different. Split Beam Rifles have an exploit secondary that fires three beams at three targets. Since it's an exploit, you can vaporize targets with it. The High Density Beam Rifle, it's secondary, one high power beam that has a knockback. That is a HUGE difference. You cannot claim repetition based solely on primary attack.

As for the Regent class? How dare you call that a repetition of the sovereign. It has huge differences. Primarily in BOff layout and bonus power settings. Big differences.

And tbh, your weapon idea kind of is a repetition of turrets. You already have a high firing arc low damage weapon. And if you want a true "Assault Cruiser", then you use single cannons on the nose, since their DPS and damage capability are similar to beams. Plus you can use CRF and CSV. And yes, those affect turrets.

And if you say one is beam damage and the other cannon? Both of them count as energy damage. There is no difference in damage type between cannons and beams.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Tired of Wasting EC and Time trying to get Superior Romulan Operative BOffs? Here's a cheap and easy way to get them, with an almost 100% chance of success.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,414
# 10
10-30-2012, 04:32 PM
Let's not blow things out of proportion heretic. DHCs and DCs have minor differences between the two. They're the same dps even. And calling the Regent totally different from the Assault Cruiser is a gross injustice. It's a subvariant.

I think the point stands that the argument: "They won't add this because it's redundant" isn't a valid argument, given the other redundancies and similarities between the weapons. No need to nitpick the semantics of it. The basic premise holds true.

EDIT: P.S. Yes there IS a difference between beam and cannon weapon types. They're not just "energy" because there are 2 classes, and different boff skills affect different classes. Might as well claim that mines and torpedoes are the same, since you need different skills to get the most out of each.

So while escorts can mount all cannons and CRF/CSV will affect also those aft-mounted turrets, beam ships cannot mount turrets and have FAW and BO affect them also.

Last edited by rodentmaster; 10-30-2012 at 04:35 PM.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:51 AM.