Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Federation Shipyards (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=218)
-   -   Engines: What the Galaxy-X needs... (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=218694)

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Engines: What the Galaxy-X needs...
 
I saw the devs have shown an interest in adding consoles or things like the Connie Retrofit phasers.

After speccing, gearing and testing my Galaxy X, IMHO they have done a lot to improve it...

However, to make decent use of cannons, I think what it needs is its own special engines, on the order of the Connie Retrofit phasers.

IMHO, what's needed is:

Combat Impulse Engines [Turn]x2
Scales with level.
Allows travel at Warp 13 in Sector Space.

The lack of engines with multiple turnrate boosts is the big thing keeping this ship from its potential. Speccing into it and using 4 RCS consoles helps and it's a fun little power house once you've optimized the gear/spec/power adjustments but it really needs engines tailored to its role and the lack of Double Turnrate engines in-game is a big drawback. (Meanwhile, Warp 13 in SS would bring it into line with canon and be a fun little boost.)

Otherwise, people will tend to avoid cannons, which is half the point of the ship.

Heck, I might go a step further and suggest that the third nacelle be tied to the engine like the visual item sets we have, since the reason it could go Warp 13 was that third nacelle.

So if you remove the engine, you'd get something more closely approximating the Odyssey and if you put that engine on another ship, you get the nacelle on that ship.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Well... there are a few problems with this idea.

First off, the third nacelle is part of the refit of the ship. Having it removed with a piece of hardware would be like ripping off your leg to take off a shoe. This presents the problem, also, of not being able to equip full sets onto the Galaxy X while still keeping it the familiar Galaxy X. The Aegis wouldn't be able to have its Reactive Shielding, the Borg wouldn't get their Tractor Beam, and the Breen wouldn't get their Energy Dampeners.

Second, if you remember, the Pasteur did Warp 13, and I didn't see any third nacelle on that ship. Heck, that was Olympic-class! That's a Commander-level Science Ship! Nothing special about warp 13. Plus, the Borg engine allows warp 14, so that point is kind of moot.

Third, why only 2 Turn mods? Why not 3? I find it odd, actually... you decide to try and invent an auto-scaling version of the engine I already HAVE on my Galaxy X. It makes no sense.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

what struck me most was why you would want it to be a combat impulse engine at end game levels. the way they have engines work, the power levels you should have at end game make combat engines useless. plus, if you tried to divert all power to engines to evasive out of harms way, you couldn't. that alone makes them useless at end game. you would be surprised how quick cruisers can move when needed.

oh and the whole warp 13 thing i think is just a rebalance of the warp scale, like they changed war 9.9 into warp 10, 9.99 into war 11 etc...

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

I wouldn't mind seeing the tier 2 Connie with the Wrath of Khan phasers. Its odd seeing phaser strips on her hull.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mindmage (Post 3562959)
I wouldn't mind seeing the tier 2 Connie with the Wrath of Khan phasers. Its odd seeing phaser strips on her hull.

thats nice...

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord-Ice
Third, why only 2 Turn mods? Why not 3? I find it odd, actually... you decide to try and invent an auto-scaling version of the engine I already HAVE on my Galaxy X. It makes no sense.

I'd be in favor of the Pasteur also getting Warp 13 engines and the Excelsior Transwarp ability being tied to the engines. I figure the Pasteur Engines would be Efficient Engines [Speed]x2.

The reason for x2 instead of x3 as I'd previously suggested is that special promo items tend to be blue quality and level scaling. I figure [Turn]x3 would come without the Warp 13 ability and be craftable, non-scaling.

To fit [Turn]x3 into the budget of a blue quality scaling item, the engines would probably need a negative stat like -30% hull because blue items are only scaled for two active bonuses.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Although... -Hull on a blue item with three bonuses to Turnrate would reinforce the fact that this is using a ship in an unintended way, kinda hotwiring a cruiser to be more like an escort.

As far as engine power, the build I have for my Galaxy-X is based around the idea of hotwiring a cruiser to be more Escort-like and the result is weapons and engines pretty close to full power with shields and aux at minimum since turnrate is tied to engine power now. I think it actually provides some balance and makes some sense to pick the special engines for this based around the assumption that people will be running the engines at a high power level.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

they just need to give fed cruiser a klingon cruiser like turn rate and be done with it. currently its pointless to run with less than 8 beams, not just because of FAW, but the turn rate is so bad nothing else is usable.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dontdrunkimshoot (Post 3563460)
they just need to give fed cruiser a klingon cruiser like turn rate and be done with it. currently its pointless to run with less than 8 beams, not just because of FAW, but the turn rate is so bad nothing else is usable.

I think it risks making escorts redundant if you do that unless you also introduce a feature on par with Battle Cloak.

Overall, I just think having engines that specialize more in turnrate would help, particularly if there's some kind of tradeoff with engines that offer more distinct benefits but have less turnrate.

Archived Post 06-09-2011 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leviathan99
I think it risks making escorts redundant if you do that unless you also introduce a feature on par with Battle Cloak.

Overall, I just think having engines that specialize more in turnrate would help, particularly if there's some kind of tradeoff with engines that offer more distinct benefits but have less turnrate.

escorts redundant? really? not with that huge lack of tactical stations cruisers have. i'm just asking for something that would make fed cruisers almost as good as klink cruisers. they shouldn't need some item to get to that level ether.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:03 PM.