Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
Wall of text... you were warned.

Because my last thread was jacked and turned into a cruiser vs escort thread I'm starting a new one with some newer ideas. But I would like to first say, I am not talking about a buff or nerf to any specific ship type, and though I may refrence ship types and their relation to one another this is just for the purpose of refering to weapons, their use, and general effectiveness. While I fully acknowlage any change to weapons changees ship effectiveness I also wish to point out that it will change ALL ship effectiveness. I am also aware of all the other issues which affect weapons currently but am restricting my discussion to types since most of those issues dont really affect some of the problems I see, and wont really chance the way my suggestions perform.

The origional thread can be found here http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/sh...d.php?t=526491

So I may have been a little ambitious with the heavy beam array. And as I thought about it I realized that even if they did put it in it would be less than an ideal weapon for anyone.


In my previous thread I addressed what I saw as an issue with there being 4 cannon type weapons and only 2 beam type, and with 2 of the cannon type restricted to certain vessels.

However my suggested additions didnt really take off so here are 2 new ones to replace the old ones. and like the two high level cannons these should also be restricted to vessel type.

Extended beam arrays

Like an oft used argument for the galaxy class, we know that the power of a beam array is, in canon, supposed to be tied to the number of emitters it has and therefore it's size. And I think perhaps the drain mechanic should be reworked so that beams drain power over time instead of all at once.


So...

Extended beam array

300 degree arc
200 dpv 200 dps
- 2.5 weapons power per sec for 4 seconds
+10% shield penetration
Restricted to larger vessels (most likely all cruisers most science vessels and probably 1 or 2 escorts)

My rationale for this weapon is that more emitters means more coverage and there for more firing arc. More emitters also means more energy stored before and during firing so more often. I figure more emitters would also mean a higher efifencey so less energy per shot but I'm not married to this. Since you are firing a sustained confined beam of energy over a long duration I figure it should produce more stress on shields so more penetration The percentage is representitive.

The reasoning for the restriction is that like cannons beam arrays are most functional on specific ships. Slower ships tend to get more mileage out of high arc weapons,and science vessels have innate beam abilitys anyway, Plus its only fair. no ship should be able to mount every weapon (again with exceptions there are some things that have to be grandfathered in and cryptic does like to do odd things).

On a side note I do feel all beam weapons should get some kind of penetration bonus it would make them a more viable option for all vessels.

High energy beam array

250 degree arc
275 dpv 200 dps
- 2.75 weapons power per sec for 4 seconds
10% shield penetration
+10 critical chance
Restricted to larger vessels...again

This weapon is the beams heavy cannon. It features a higher spike damage but does not have the large firing arc. Beacuse it does more damage it uses more energy, I'm also not married to this number. The extra critical chance reflects the implied precision of the beam weapon and I think nicely offsets the chritical severity bonus of the DHC's.

I still like the idea for the beam turret. And since my original argument was the number of available weapons per type, a cannon should be added.

Single heavy cannon

90 degree arc
318 dpv 212 dps
-12 weapons energy when firing
+5 critical severity

In keeping with the way dual cannons work the heavy version has doubble the DPV of a single cannon with the same dps, and since its a single cannon half the critical bonus of a DHC. Restricted it to 90 degrees so that only ships that were going to use high damage weapons anyway can use it.

I also still think the beam skills should all be availablt at the LT level. Since the highest versions of these skills are only trainable by tac captains or theough Special bridge officers, i don't think this will make the less tactical ships too much more mowerful. Considering it also give the tactical ships the advantage of using the high level slots these powers used to occupy and still use them.




Some more thoughts.

In general most content is best played with a high DPS ship. This tends to mean that the only use for healers or controllers is in PVP or team play matches, and even then their contribution is debateable.

So since these roles are seen mainly as support what if we gave them a woder variety of support powers?
I'm talking about more than just healing and controll, I'm talking about supression.

Yes technicaly debuffing counts as supression, but in general the only powers that can supress multiple targets are either easily negated or are captain powers. Such as tykens rift and sensor scan.

ANd there are lots of prety strong supression powers but they are mostly in the tactical trees( so generaly un available to support vessels) and/or affect only one target. Most disabling or debuffing abilitys start at lt level in tactical and aceton beam for example only hits one target.

Here are sum suggestes supression powers that either replace or supplant existing powers.


Revamped aceton beam = aceton injector.

Instead of doing damage and debuffing a single target I propose this be turned into a weapon modification available at LTC level in the engineering tree.

It would buff all weapons for a short time causing a weapons power reduction hazaed on the target and could be combined with any other weapon power.

Revamped directed energy modulation

With the changes I propose to beam weapons this power loosed some of its flavor so what if it added a %chance to disable a specific subsystem like engines or auxilary.

A player version of the tholian FAW/Subsystem disable power would be neat but maybe the beam disable powers should be an additive affect instead od a weapon effect, so they could be combined with other powers.
This would make them worth slotting on higher level tac ships since you could combine them with weapon boosters. On that maybe the beam disable powers should be added into the science skill set instead of the tac set.

Space supressing fire

A beam only ability that affects targets on a cone around your current target and applys a movement debuff on hit. Probably not a strong one but one that does stack and can re apply on every hit. Available at Ens and LT levls.

Perhaps scramble sensors anf jam sensors should switch places.

Scramble sensors becomes a single target ability with a stronger effect, not only removing friend foe markings but for a time causing detection range to drop off steeply making it more effective at negating stronger enemys.
but not being too strong in pvp since its still easily cleared.

While jam sensors becomes a multi target effect that instead places an accuracy debuff on effected targets. making it more useful at supressing enemy fire on you and your allies.

I also feel we have been viewing ships in the wrong context. The fact is we see them as ships, when by all appearences the game sees them as characters. This mean that trying to apply a naval view point gets up into the never ending roundabout discussions on purpose and role. I find things make much more sence when you start to think of them like infantry, if compared to the role an individual soldier may take on alot of other things click into place.

You could then draw similaritys from games like Battlefield where each class excells at a particular function but is also capeable of fulfiling the basic role (killing the other guy before he kills you) adequately without any drop off in performance compared to the other classes..

And really if you stop trying to apply canon to everything (and canon is generaly loose on everything to begin with) you may find you end up with a much more enjoyable play experiance. (unless they add plot device buffs and de buffs that randomly and for no real reason alter the established paramiters of our ships for the sake of story telling.)

Just some thoughts, any one else have any similar ideas?
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln

Last edited by disposeableh3r0; 02-15-2013 at 01:05 AM. Reason: For content and to run in the time allowed.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
# 2
01-31-2013, 09:29 PM
Guess this is well liked 63 views and not a single your wrong post.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,456
# 3
01-31-2013, 09:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
Guess this is well liked 63 views and not a single your wrong post.
I lol'd.

Accurate summation IMO.

That or lots of tl;dr viewers.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
# 4
01-31-2013, 09:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by topset View Post
I lol'd.

Accurate summation IMO.

That or lots of tl;dr viewers.
lol well the warning is right at the top so their fault if the warning was also to long to read.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 775
# 5
01-31-2013, 09:48 PM
Good start for the thread, let's see where it goes.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 662
# 6
01-31-2013, 10:02 PM
I'll reserve comment until I have time later to sit down and crunch my own numbers. That said, this actually looks to be a much better start than your last attempt. As one of the players who made sure to steer the conversation to cruiser vs. escort, since that was the logical extension of your original proposal, I'm intrigued by the ideas you outlined.

This certainly isn't the first time I've seen this posted recently, but it does appear to be fairly well-thought-out. These weapons don't look like they'd eclipse the existing DCs and DHCs for damage output, but would add some versatility to beam ships.

I'll add more (probably tomorrow) after I've done my own calculations.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
# 7
01-31-2013, 10:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eulifdavis View Post
I'll reserve comment until I have time later to sit down and crunch my own numbers. That said, this actually looks to be a much better start than your last attempt. As one of the players who made sure to steer the conversation to cruiser vs. escort, since that was the logical extension of your original proposal, I'm intrigued by the ideas you outlined.

This certainly isn't the first time I've seen this posted recently, but it does appear to be fairly well-thought-out. These weapons don't look like they'd eclipse the existing DCs and DHCs for damage output, but would add some versatility to beam ships.

I'll add more (probably tomorrow) after I've done my own calculations.
I generaly don't ming the cruiser VS escort debate as an example, but it tends to become the focus of the debate and the origional conversation gets lost.

But the primary purpose (at least for me) is to add utility to beams and make them viable for all ships. Granted the two I suggest would not be available to most escorts but DBB's are prety common and if they gained a shield penetration bonus then escorts running them would do more damage on a BO3 attack if they hit a shield facing than they currently get.

That said I look foreward to your input.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 202
# 8
01-31-2013, 10:26 PM
I agree with you in that I believe DPS is king in this game for the majority of missions and events. I used to be a purely cruiser captain, but time and again I'd lose at fleet actions, have missions take forever in PVE all because I couldn't damage things fast enough, it was a slow grind. However the problem does not lie in the design of weapons, it lies in the design of the missions. We have three distinct ship classes that do 3 different jobs. Escorts are meant for high DPS, Cruisers are meant to tank and take a pounding, and Sci ships are meant to disable, hold, confuse, etc. That's their purpose and they do it very well.

However, PVE missions (which is what the majority of players do) are meant to be able to be completed in any ship so high dps ships win in the end because they can kill things fast enough to not need to survive. FA events count how much damage a ship does or how many ships it blows up to determine a winner. It doesn't matter in SB 24 if your cruiser didn't die once, because all that matters is that the defiant did 1 million damage even though it died 8 times. While STF's see an increased need for survivability, but in the end it doesn't matter because even the most defended cruiser still gets one shot with invisible torpedoes negating the need for survivability because nothing can survive. While PVP has a place for all of these ship types, and some players fly a variety of different ships depending on what the situation call for, the majority of players don't want to go through the hassle of changing everything out, so they just stick with what works best over all...and that is by far escorts!
STOP THE
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
We planned on doing it next weekend, but then we saw your post and were like, "Dude, we should totally move that up a week! Tee Hee!"
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
# 9
01-31-2013, 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam062307 View Post
I agree with you in that I believe DPS is king in this game for the majority of missions and events. I used to be a purely cruiser captain, but time and again I'd lose at fleet actions, have missions take forever in PVE all because I couldn't damage things fast enough, it was a slow grind. However the problem does not lie in the design of weapons, it lies in the design of the missions. We have three distinct ship classes that do 3 different jobs. Escorts are meant for high DPS, Cruisers are meant to tank and take a pounding, and Sci ships are meant to disable, hold, confuse, etc. That's their purpose and they do it very well.

However, PVE missions (which is what the majority of players do) are meant to be able to be completed in any ship so high dps ships win in the end because they can kill things fast enough to not need to survive. FA events count how much damage a ship does or how many ships it blows up to determine a winner. It doesn't matter in SB 24 if your cruiser didn't die once, because all that matters is that the defiant did 1 million damage even though it died 8 times. While STF's see an increased need for survivability, but in the end it doesn't matter because even the most defended cruiser still gets one shot with invisible torpedoes negating the need for survivability because nothing can survive. While PVP has a place for all of these ship types, and some players fly a variety of different ships depending on what the situation call for, the majority of players don't want to go through the hassle of changing everything out, so they just stick with what works best over all...and that is by far escorts!
Again the point was just to spread out the dps some by adding higher damage weapons on the beam side of things, thus making more builds viable and providing more options for all captains. The re design of the basic mission system is a different subject entirely.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,624
# 10
02-01-2013, 01:57 AM
Added more to the OP
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
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 09:51 PM.