Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Commander
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 307
# 41
01-27-2013, 06:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post
If you can seriously look at ship A, which is devoting half of its capacity just to not fall flat on its face when it tries to fire its weapons, and compare it to ship B which plugs in a set of weapons and sets power to maximum and then never worries about it ever again, and not realize that this is a serious gameplay balance problem, then I don't even know how to talk to you. It's like trying to explain the principles of mathematics to somebody who thinks the counting numbers are one, two, purple, dog, squish.
That's nonsense. That Escort has all it's tac slots filled with: APO, CSW/CRF, TT & THY/TS
Most likely it also has EP2W & A2B.
This leaves Hazard Emitters and Transfer Shield Strength or whatever for Science slots.

What you say is true for every ship. There is some build to optimize damage.

He's dead, Jim.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,241
# 42
01-27-2013, 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
I don't even know where to start here.

1) Procs on DHCs are not more powerful. They're 100% the same.

2) DHCs receive the exact same bonuses from a given boff ability as every other cannon type

3) What makes DHCs better is not some crazy base damage superiority, but their power efficiency. Solve the drain problem for DCs, single cannons and beams, and they'll be just
as good as DHCs.

4) If you really think FaW only affects one beam array, you've got serious issues.
You completely misread my post.

1- Im not saying they are now. Im saying the proc on my suggested SINGLE heavy cannon BE twice as strong.

2- Yes they do. But DHS has higher damage and much better power efficiency. When CRF is applied it becomes better than dual cannons when it comes to power drain : dmg ratio. Much better.

3- Correct, see #2. The issue is not about solving power drain..that is balanced as it now except for the DHC's.

4- FAW affects all beams. I was talking about overload vs CRF. You cannot really compare FAW to Cannon spread since FAW has a limit on how many targets it hit whereas cannon spread does not (or its limit is way higher).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
Why frack with cannons, especially change the DHCs to Single Heavy Cannons, when the issue is with beams? Nerfing cannons based on perception doesnt fix beams.
Fix Beam Arrays, not nerf cannons.
Fix Beam Array power drain issue.
Give Beams a CRF style BOff ability in the game.
Adjust All other weapon types to make sense in reflection with handicaps balanced to thier increased damage values.
DBBs a better Firing arc.
Single Cannons a better firing arc.
Dual Cannons a better firing arc.
Create a Heavy Beam Bank that is to Cruisers as DHCs are to Escorts.
Create a Beam turret.

Do anything but go backwards by nerfing cannons, especialy based on perception.

Why? Because the perception of thier suckage will never change to those who continue to to thinks cannons are why thry suck.

Because Beam Arrays still suck because they havent fixed them yet.
I think beam arrays are fine as they are. By 'fixing' beams you merely turn them into somewhat copies of cannons and thats just dumb. Each weapon needs to have its big pro and big cons to using them. Right now the beams are just right...cannons are not. Cannons just have massive pro's and no cons.

In my suggestion, im literally putting the CON in the cannons. The DHS once removed makes cannons become more of a burst-damage weapon rather than a spike damage weapon and beams become the spike damage weapon (via overload) that have PBAOE-like attack mode (FAW). CRF would no longer be the OMFGOUCH damage since DHS is gone. The Dual cannons can still put out a really good amount of damage but you'll need to fire the entire CRF duration worth of DualCannon to achieve the same effect that a 1/4th of CRF duration snapshot from DHS's.

I would add two more suggestions:

1- Give all energy weapons a power consumption reduction/increase based on the ship's weapon power level settings.

If you think about it, if you lower weapon power the damage the weapon does goes down..but why then does the power consumption stay the same? It should also go up or down.

Firing a beam or cannon at 100% power should have 2x power consumption penalty but it would do 2x the base damage. Lowering it to 25% power should lower power consumption to 1/4th and DO 1/4th of the base damage.

2- Beams: Increase the duration of the beam's 'lase' animation to 2x what it is now. Its rather silly and un-trek like to see a beam array just spamming short duration beams. To counteract the reduction in 'shots' simply increase the dmg, proc % chance and proc effect so that it all remains the same as it is now per weapon cycle..its just less beams visually being spat out but each beam lasts twice as long and we can enjoy the visuals.

(it could also allow them to add the famous trek 'phaser charge-up' animation of the lights coming from both sides of the saucer beam array, meeting in the middle and spitting the beam out).

I do agree with having a beam turret. Id LOVE that! I once even spent a week trying to 'hack' the client's graphics to see if I could make the turrets fire beams not little puffs.
http://media.tumblr.com/160cacdb395f8340dac90864182ebe16/tumblr_inline_mx9yxhItkb1qg9pkt.jpg
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 43
01-27-2013, 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmdrskyfaller View Post

I think beam arrays are fine as they are. By 'fixing' beams you merely turn them into somewhat copies of cannons and thats just dumb. Each weapon needs to have its big pro and big cons to using them. Right now the beams are just right...cannons are not. Cannons just have massive pro's and no cons.

In my suggestion, im literally putting the CON in the cannons. The DHS once removed makes cannons become more of a burst-damage weapon rather than a spike damage weapon and beams become the spike damage weapon (via overload) that have PBAOE-like attack mode (FAW). CRF would no longer be the OMFGOUCH damage since DHS is gone. The Dual cannons can still put out a really good amount of damage but you'll need to fire the entire CRF duration worth of DualCannon to achieve the same effect that a 1/4th of CRF duration snapshot from DHS's.

I would add two more suggestions:

1- Give all energy weapons a power consumption reduction/increase based on the ship's weapon power level settings.

If you think about it, if you lower weapon power the damage the weapon does goes down..but why then does the power consumption stay the same? It should also go up or down.

Firing a beam or cannon at 100% power should have 2x power consumption penalty but it would do 2x the base damage. Lowering it to 25% power should lower power consumption to 1/4th and DO 1/4th of the base damage.

2- Beams: Increase the duration of the beam's 'lase' animation to 2x what it is now. Its rather silly and un-trek like to see a beam array just spamming short duration beams. To counteract the reduction in 'shots' simply increase the dmg, proc % chance and proc effect so that it all remains the same as it is now per weapon cycle..its just less beams visually being spat out but each beam lasts twice as long and we can enjoy the visuals.

(it could also allow them to add the famous trek 'phaser charge-up' animation of the lights coming from both sides of the saucer beam array, meeting in the middle and spitting the beam out).

I do agree with having a beam turret. Id LOVE that! I once even spent a week trying to 'hack' the client's graphics to see if I could make the turrets fire beams not little puffs.
My idea is to fix the drain issue with beams to correct thier inefficiency and retain all thier other attributes. Creating a new beam buffing BOff ability only helps the viability of beams and overall gameplay.

Your ideas strike me as just nerfong cannons to the point that they make beams look better in comparison, which is no fix for the Beam Array issue.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 44
01-27-2013, 02:22 PM
Or,

Emergency power to weapons trades places with Auxiliary to Dampeners, becoming a LT->COM level ability.

Then,

Emergency power to weapons 1 (lieutenant): +20 weapon power, 25% immunity to weapon power drain

Emergency power to weapons 3 (commander): +40 weapon power, 50% immunity to weapon power drain

That would solve the problem quite nicely. You want to run a damage-dealing cruiser, then just slot a high level EPTW for the drain resistance.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,976
# 45
01-27-2013, 02:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post
Or,

Emergency power to weapons trades places with Auxiliary to Dampeners, becoming a LT->COM level ability.

Then,

Emergency power to weapons 1 (lieutenant): +20 weapon power, 25% immunity to weapon power drain

Emergency power to weapons 3 (commander): +40 weapon power, 50% immunity to weapon power drain

That would solve the problem quite nicely. You want to run a damage-dealing cruiser, then just slot a high level EPTW for the drain resistance.
Problem... what do we then do with our ensign engineering skill slots?
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,241
# 46
01-27-2013, 03:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
My idea is to fix the drain issue with beams to correct thier inefficiency and retain all thier other attributes. Creating a new beam buffing BOff ability only helps the viability of beams and overall gameplay.

Your ideas strike me as just nerfong cannons to the point that they make beams look better in comparison, which is no fix for the Beam Array issue.
Like I said, beams are fine and cannons are what have a really overpowered advantage. What you seem to want is for beams to be improved so they are basically a lased cannon with different boff abilities. Thats not improving the game, thats just turning it more and more into a generic no-flavor game.

Beams don't have an efficiency problem. You're comparing them to cannons which have a ridiculously good efficiency.

The fact that beams have access to disable subsystem abilities and much wider firing arcs makes their alleged power inefficiency balanced. Cannons on the other hand were given very high efficiency and very high damage output with narrow firing arc as an attempt at some sort of balancing act... which was really dumb since the ships that make use of cannons are literally quick turning escorts (we really cant count the few cannon capable cruisers/carriers in comparison to the huge number of escorts/raptors).

So... like I said: Remove the very highest dps/power efficient cannon (that IS the real source of the dps/pwr eff issue) and replace it with a single heavy cannon. Then add power cost modifiers to the weapons based on the ship's weapon power setting and finally, for beams, just a cosmetic enhancement, make the beam animations last twice as long for this makes it TREK.
http://media.tumblr.com/160cacdb395f8340dac90864182ebe16/tumblr_inline_mx9yxhItkb1qg9pkt.jpg
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 47
01-27-2013, 04:47 PM
I was there when you said it the first time and as I continue to say, I disagree, and have my reasons on why.
I believe the game would be lessened if the DHCs are nerfed when they are the one thing about cannons done correctly.
There is a risk that could change if even just beam drain is directly addressed but its a diffinent if DHCs are changed dirrectly to accomidate what I find to be Beam Arrays design problem.
A bar has been set by DHCs with Tac buff support on escorts. Its time for beams to be made more for cruisers in a similiar fashion.
Its an honest desire to see beams better ingame, even for me. I like putting my Tac in a slow cruiser, BortasQu at the moment, and playing a tanking heal support role. I would like beams to be better for such play.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 48
01-27-2013, 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post
Or,

Emergency power to weapons trades places with Auxiliary to Dampeners, becoming a LT->COM level ability.

Then,

Emergency power to weapons 1 (lieutenant): +20 weapon power, 25% immunity to weapon power drain

Emergency power to weapons 3 (commander): +40 weapon power, 50% immunity to weapon power drain

That would solve the problem quite nicely. You want to run a damage-dealing cruiser, then just slot a high level EPTW for the drain resistance.
Its a great idea on its on but I still hold the opinion that the flaw lies in beam design fixes and keeps the player free to choose any BO ff ability without limitatoon to attain effecient fdrain effects.
Thougj the idea that EPTW should give a WP drain buffer is cool
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 49
01-27-2013, 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmdrskyfaller View Post
The fact that beams have access to disable subsystem abilities and much wider firing arcs makes their alleged power inefficiency balanced.
Strongly disagree.

1.) Subsystem targeting requires a very high Flow Capacitors score in order to have a meaningful impact on the target. So there's an added level of infrastructure cost.

2.) The ships most likely to use beam arrays don't have the tactical slots available to use subtargeting abilities.

3.) Subtargeting has a 45 second cooldown with 10 second active time. Power-efficient dual cannons do more damage all the time.

4.) Subtargeting does not increase your basic damage output. It can create a vulnerability on the target, but without damage output to capitalize on that vulnerability it's a useless ability.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,636
# 50
01-27-2013, 05:58 PM
I don't think they are BS. My Fed cruiser uses 4 of them, granted I PVE solo most my gaming time. With that set up it can do damage from broadside. I focus all 4 on a target, drop speed down to a crawl, and just rain down on it. Soon as the shields drop, turn head on and fire torpedoes. Using this I blown up all kinds of ships. It all matters how your play style is. Also very handy on those pesky fighters and multiple smaller ships you fight. I use the "Fire at Will" on those to help take those out faster as well.

Now my KDF Battlecruiser is different. That one is packing DHCs and DBs in the front. So that ship is totally different on how to attack. That one you don't want it to be facing you. As it will literally eat ships of any size up. Even the Battleship ones, I call those easy targets.

Beams has their place in use, and different play styles. I don't have any problems with them.
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 01:02 PM.