Are beams and multicannons truly the end-all?

[hudsond]

I want to start by saying that I love this game. I paid $75 for the beta a while back and have never regretted it. I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to incite a yelling match. I am genuinely very pleased with this game.

But... Weapons.

I've been researching for some time and I know that this is a well trod topic, but I have a specific question. Actually, I just want to be wrong... my answer is frustrating.

First, some quick background. I started in the beta. I had a hard drive crash and only recently re-installed and started playing again. I started bounty hunting with the freagle, eventually started rare routes in the type 6, and I'm currently doing a little bit of each with my ASP (I change loadouts depending on my desired playstyle for the time I have available). I'm up to around 11m in net worth and have been exploring upgraded weapons.
Here's my great, huge, colossal, gargantuan, epic frustration: I can't find ANY reason to use anything except beam lasers and multicannons. I have plenty of money to kit out my ASP or completely load out a viper... and there doesn't seem to be any point to using anything except the weapons (and even class of weapon) I've been using since I started upgrading my freagle.

This frustrates me. Please, tell me I'm wrong. Based on what I'm reading and from my own in-game tests... I already have the best set up, and there isn't a reason to upgrade weapons. None. DPS, Cost, overall effectiveness... What I'm reading and experiencing tells me that I would be best served, against all targets, with 2 beams and 4 multi-cannons.. or POSSIBLY cannons if I'm doing the anaconda hunting missions.
Missiles: I love missiles in every game I've ever played. But heat seekers are too easily defended by larger ships and totally unnecessary and cost prohibitive against smaller ships. Dumbfire only work against slow large ships... and ultimately are less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

Railguns: I'm pretty accurate, but I'm not seeing this "Shred the subsystems" effect when I use them. Recently fought a 'conda with double railguns. Targeted the power plant the entire battle. Generally, I hit the box. In fact, I'd say more than 50% of my total hits against the ship were double railgun hits to the box. When the hull of the 'Conda collapsed, the powerplant was still around 90%. Like I said, I'm pretty accurate. I have no problems hitting the box (or very, very close to it). I can indefinitely paint fast ships with my beam lasers while in an evasive turn battle. If this mythical shredding of the subsystems requires more accuracy than I have... sheesh. Oh... and the 31 shots thing. Which leads me back to the research that says... just pull down the shields and fire gimballed cannons or multicannons into the hull. Lather, rinse, repeat. Research says that Railguns are ultimately less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.
Particle Accelerator: Slow. High temp. Slow fire rate. Same damage as the railgun but less specialized. I'll skip straight to this: Research says that Particle Accelerators are ultimately (much) less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

Torpedoes: nope.

Fragment cannons: read a great post on r/EliteDangerous (I'm looking for it, and can't find it again) which detailed how the Fragment cannon and the cannon serve the same combat purpose due to strengths and limitations. Basically, both are specialized to short range combat. Cannons have more pros and less cons than the Frag cannons in that context. So again... Research says that fragment cannons are ultimately less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

So... community... please... tell me I'm missing something. Tell me what I'm doing wrong with railguns. Or how to make heat-seekers viable. Or... tell me that there are new weapons and classes coming in 1.2. Or...tell me something other than... "The first weapon set up that is effective and affordable, beams and multi-cannons, is the best (and almost ONLY) viable setup for combat at all levels of the game."
Thanks in advance... and let me remind everyone... I love this game. I'm not trolling.

 

[Acarin]

FD have said that they want to release a wider range of weapons options, but that's all the detail we have. Speculation could lead us to: particle beams, other plasma weapons (plasma torpedoes, for example), perhaps power-draining missiles (aka leeches)? Likely to be some way down the line, however.

 

[malkythealky]

What ED needs is something more than just the basic class/rating system. It needs different makes and types too. Doing this could mean that certain types of missiles would be more effective against different types of shields, or be more/less resilient against certain countermeasures.

This would make choosing your load out much more involved and more fun.

 

[Hadron-Higgs-Boson]

It would certainly be nice to have a much deeper ship 'stats' game to get immersed in, I remember the JTL expansion of SWG which was amazing and had people devoting huge amounts of time to locate that perfect component and get the optimum turn rate. ED could build an amazing layer of detail and complexity over the lego block ship loadout system in place currently

 

[InMemoriamSirocco]

Yes, it's the end all.

 

[malkythealky]

It would certainly be nice to have a much deeper ship 'stats' game to get immersed in, I remember the JTL expansion of SWG which was amazing and had people devoting huge amounts of time to locate that perfect component and get the optimum turn rate. ED could build an amazing layer of detail and complexity over the lego block ship loadout system in place currently

This.

I often feel that Elite has so much more potential for detail, in almost everything. Missions, Ship configuration, Trading tools, Exploration tools (e.g. plotting routes, comparing routes, calculating routes that detour through particular systems, etc). This isn't a moan, i'm sure we'll start to see things getting more complex as they should be. Not sure if we'll see them get as complex as we'd wish theey could be though.

 

[robbyp]

Hmmm.. Your right. Fixed beams + MCs on an Asp is a pretty evil loadout. Railguns.. hmm to slow except against a large target for me. Dumbfires used to be fun but not tried them since 1.1.

 

[Galafrey]

I want to start by saying that I love this game. I paid $75 for the beta a while back and have never regretted it. I'm not trolling. I'm not trying to incite a yelling match. I am genuinely very pleased with this game.

But... Weapons.

I've been researching for some time and I know that this is a well trod topic, but I have a specific question. Actually, I just want to be wrong... my answer is frustrating.

First, some quick background. I started in the beta. I had a hard drive crash and only recently re-installed and started playing again. I started bounty hunting with the freagle, eventually started rare routes in the type 6, and I'm currently doing a little bit of each with my ASP (I change loadouts depending on my desired playstyle for the time I have available). I'm up to around 11m in net worth and have been exploring upgraded weapons.
Here's my great, huge, colossal, gargantuan, epic frustration: I can't find ANY reason to use anything except beam lasers and multicannons. I have plenty of money to kit out my ASP or completely load out a viper... and there doesn't seem to be any point to using anything except the weapons (and even class of weapon) I've been using since I started upgrading my freagle.

This frustrates me. Please, tell me I'm wrong. Based on what I'm reading and from my own in-game tests... I already have the best set up, and there isn't a reason to upgrade weapons. None. DPS, Cost, overall effectiveness... What I'm reading and experiencing tells me that I would be best served, against all targets, with 2 beams and 4 multi-cannons.. or POSSIBLY cannons if I'm doing the anaconda hunting missions.
Missiles: I love missiles in every game I've ever played. But heat seekers are too easily defended by larger ships and totally unnecessary and cost prohibitive against smaller ships. Dumbfire only work against slow large ships... and ultimately are less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

Railguns: I'm pretty accurate, but I'm not seeing this "Shred the subsystems" effect when I use them. Recently fought a 'conda with double railguns. Targeted the power plant the entire battle. Generally, I hit the box. In fact, I'd say more than 50% of my total hits against the ship were double railgun hits to the box. When the hull of the 'Conda collapsed, the powerplant was still around 90%. Like I said, I'm pretty accurate. I have no problems hitting the box (or very, very close to it). I can indefinitely paint fast ships with my beam lasers while in an evasive turn battle. If this mythical shredding of the subsystems requires more accuracy than I have... sheesh. Oh... and the 31 shots thing. Which leads me back to the research that says... just pull down the shields and fire gimballed cannons or multicannons into the hull. Lather, rinse, repeat. Research says that Railguns are ultimately less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.
Particle Accelerator: Slow. High temp. Slow fire rate. Same damage as the railgun but less specialized. I'll skip straight to this: Research says that Particle Accelerators are ultimately (much) less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

Torpedoes: nope.

Fragment cannons: read a great post on r/EliteDangerous (I'm looking for it, and can't find it again) which detailed how the Fragment cannon and the cannon serve the same combat purpose due to strengths and limitations. Basically, both are specialized to short range combat. Cannons have more pros and less cons than the Frag cannons in that context. So again... Research says that fragment cannons are ultimately less effective (from a damage and cost standpoint) than cannons.

So... community... please... tell me I'm missing something. Tell me what I'm doing wrong with railguns. Or how to make heat-seekers viable. Or... tell me that there are new weapons and classes coming in 1.2. Or...tell me something other than... "The first weapon set up that is effective and affordable, beams and multi-cannons, is the best (and almost ONLY) viable setup for combat at all levels of the game."
Thanks in advance... and let me remind everyone... I love this game. I'm not trolling.

I use 2 class 2 beams, 2 class 1 multi cannons and 2 class 1 dumbfires on my Asp. Try it, you'll fnd it very useful!

 

[PotatoOverdose]

I use 2 class 2 beams, 2 class 1 multi cannons and 2 class 1 dumbfires on my Asp. Try it, you'll fnd it very useful!

Rails were awesome - got nerfed.
Plasma Cannons were awesome - got nerfed.
Scatter cannons were extremely lethal up close - got nerfed.
Seeker missiles were very good against small ships - got nerfed.
Dumbfires were low capacity, highly lethal weapons - got nerfed.
Large multicannons existed in beta - removed in time for gamma.

You know what's funny? Beams were almost nerfed into uselessness with the more extreme heat changes in the Beta of the 1.1 build - they got dialed back before release, but beams were *almost* made useless.

There isn't a problem with a lack of weapon variety. There are plenty of weapons to choose from. They all just get nerfed into obscurity.

 

[Lyandritz]

I dont use missiles because they are too expensive with a few ammo.
That's why i use Cannons or Multi-Cannons.

I don't like Beam laser

PS : The prices of ammo should have been reduced with the nerfs. They didn't that's why some weapons are never used.

 

[Darth Ender]

It doesn't matter if the weapons got nerfed. The idea is for a fight to last more than 15 seconds, if the weapon being yielded basically makes it a "I Win" if you manage to hit your target before they hit you then that makes for an overall poor gameplay experience. The fight should require much more than who's weapon does the most DP.

Currently, i think this is accomplished pretty well and the nerfs have been in the right direction. Fights can be rather short if you are totally hitting above or below your paygrade but a properly matched pairing will make for a drawn out battle. Those are the good fights, where your wrist is sore and your hand hurts from it's death grip on the joystick. Quick fights are boring, so even if the other guy has no skill, it should still take longer than the FSD cooldown time to boom him.

I find use in Cannons and pulse lasers and beam lasers on my viper. If i had a bigger ship, I'd replace cannon with plasma accelerator and have a mix of turrets to handle maneuverable ships.

Your weapon choice is very much dependent on the style of your flying and the ship you have. There is no useless weapon in the game thus far, it really depends on what you have experience using and your skill at using it.

 

[Britannkic]

How you load out your lone ship vs loading out your ship as part of a wing is imo very different

If a wing is 4 ships say, then it would be pretty unsophisticated if all ships were the same and had same loadout

A wing should choose its loadouts to compliment each other and enable the whole to be greater than the sum of the parts

like most parts of this game, the player dynamic is still developing. Beams and MC was the big thing but will be surpassed soon enough. Cannons are much better now and my asp has four instead of the four MC

 

[Daffan]

How you load out your lone ship vs loading out your ship as part of a wing is imo very different

If a wing is 4 ships say, then it would be pretty unsophisticated if all ships were the same and had same loadout

A wing should choose its loadouts to compliment each other and enable the whole to be greater than the sum of the parts

like most parts of this game, the player dynamic is still developing. Beams and MC was the big thing but will be surpassed soon enough. Cannons are much better now and my asp has four instead of the four MC

wat

if everyone uses the best weapons you'l have the highest dps, especially if its the easiest to apply.

I get what you're saying, but there is not enough variety or reason to do it yet.

 

[Dbrn47]

I don't consider it the end all, but they do seem to be the most efficient for longer battles, like what's happening the combat community goal.

 

[nimh]

Rails were awesome - got nerfed.
Plasma Cannons were awesome - got nerfed.
Scatter cannons were extremely lethal up close - got nerfed.
Seeker missiles were very good against small ships - got nerfed.
Dumbfires were low capacity, highly lethal weapons - got nerfed.
Large multicannons existed in beta - removed in time for gamma.

You know what's funny? Beams were almost nerfed into uselessness with the more extreme heat changes in the Beta of the 1.1 build - they got dialed back before release, but beams were *almost* made useless.

There isn't a problem with a lack of weapon variety. There are plenty of weapons to choose from. They all just get nerfed into obscurity.

The list certainly highlights how reactive Frontier has been with regard to development. And what's interesting is that they don't seem interested in revisiting it, just adding another patch or nerf to the system. It seems they've painted themselves into quite a pretty corner, and by their own design.

IL2 had wholesale changes to the way the flight model worked for many years after the initial release, as well as weapon strength and effectiveness. If something wasn't right they changed it, for better or worse sometimes. With Frontier.. we can have any thrusters we want.. but the ship goes the same speed anyway. It's just one example, but it reflects a lot of the design decisions made in the game.

 

[Darth Ender]

highest dps weapons have other drawbacks that make just stocking your ship to the brim with them either unfeasible or detrimental. Every ship is going to do better with certain weapons vs others. Whether it be due to power constraints, mass, or thrust abiltiy. This is aside from player skill and situation and general roll of the ship at that particular time.

There is variety, and FD should be very careful about adding more weapons. The more weapons you, the less strategy is involved with player's choosing a particular weapon as what makes them different becomes less significant.

 

[Britannkic]

wat

if everyone uses the best weapons you'l have the highest dps, especially if its the easiest to apply.

I get what you're saying, but there is not enough variety or reason to do it yet.

Best for what though?

id imagine a viper laser-boat paired with a viper missile-boat would be more effective than a pIr of laser/missile loaded ships against a big ship

similarly adding rails or plasma to a particular ship in your wing to do a specific job on bigger ships makes sense.

 

[DizzyRonson]

i think the idea of diffrent makes and models of similar weapons would be fun.
and if there were similar components with diffrent stats like heat and power draw.
there could be rare weapons and components from diffrent parts of the galaxy..

imagine you go 60000ly and found a backwater station wich had some crazy special weapons sold only there..
wich have stats and visuals that make them worth the trip. would be fun..

 

[Darkwolf]

FD have said that they want to release a wider range of weapons options, but that's all the detail we have. Speculation could lead us to: particle beams, other plasma weapons (plasma torpedoes, for example), perhaps power-draining missiles (aka leeches)? Likely to be some way down the line, however.

We don't need a wider range of weapon options. We need for the options we have to be more effective relative to each other. And this doesn't mean nerfing beams and multicannons - it means buffing the other "junk" weapons that nobody uses.

 

[Darth Ender]

my junk weapon list:

fragment cannon.
mine launcher
burst laser

Everything else has it's place and does a fairly decent job at it depending on play style, ship, and skill.