Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Star Trek Online General Discussion (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=128)
-   -   Why do the Feds have no carriers? (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=252868)

Archived Post 02-06-2012 08:40 PM

Why do the Feds have no carriers?
 
Ok, I do not know much about star trek history, so there might be some star trek logic answer, but it just seems odd that the feds don't have a carrier. Our Flagship is the Enterprise, I ship that got its name from the legendary CV 5 Enterprise aka the Big E or Lucky E. Yes there were other enterprise ships and the World war 2 enterprise was the first to be an aircraft carrier but everyone thinks ethier ww2 CV5 or star trek when they here enterprise.

Now, just so we are clear I am not asking that the Enterprise G that we hopefully won't see for a while should be a carrier, but why can't we have a Hornet or a Yorktown? For gods sake we even have the fighters for the carriers allready ingame, the little 2 seater P(won't even try to spell it) Fighters. Maybe have they launch a small fleet of those fighters.

Archived Post 02-06-2012 08:52 PM

I think it is stupid that the UFP doesn't have carriers of their own. It's a poor strategist that does not make sure you can at least EQUAL your enemy in battle.

The KDF has 4 ship types.
The UFP has 3.

However, the UFP does have 4x the amount of content, so I guess that's where the balance equals out.

Oh, an just so you know, OP, Threads about the UFP getting a carrier often go up in flames.

Archived Post 02-06-2012 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainQuirk (Post 3998561)

Oh, an just so you know, OP, Threads about the UFP getting a carrier often go up in flames.

*Hides the matches behind his back*

I have no idea what you're talking about...

On topic, I beleive the point is to give the KDF something different and unique because story content sure isn't a reason to play them. Also, do the Feds really need a carrier? Though I may think that because I dont liek carriers and think NPC spam is a cheap and lazy way to play PvP...

Also, drawing on WW2 to justify the necessity of STARSHIP carriers in the 24th century is a bit like clutching at straws without the straws...

Archived Post 02-06-2012 09:16 PM

In my own opinion I think it is due to sensitivity to losses and fighter pilots on their first combat op having a life expectancy measured in 10's of seconds.

18 years to give birth to and raise a child from infant to adulthood and then 2+ years at the academy.. All for maybe 30 seconds of pew pew prior to being popped.

I think you would have better odds of surviving a round of Russian roulette over surviving a single combat op in a fighter in STO. At least you have a 1 in 6 chance of death with only a gun to your head.. Where a single fighter op is almost a sure thing in my opinion.

With all that said a kitty carrier would still be spiffy.

:)

Archived Post 02-06-2012 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainQuirk (Post 3998561)
The KDF has 4 ship types.
The UFP has 3.

Actually, the KDF has five:

1. Cruiser
2. Science
3. Escort
4. Carrier
5. Raider (BoP)

Archived Post 02-06-2012 09:59 PM

The Feds are getting a Caitian Carrier it's just a matter of time for it to get here.

Archived Post 02-06-2012 11:05 PM

Oh here I go, what are you going to carry with your carrier that a starship cant accomplish with its multitude of various torpdoes, beams, mines and other weapons of mass destruction? The power of single small craft to deliver crippling blows to heavily shielded warships is no greater than mines or torpedos and the might of beam weapons is beyond such small vessels as well. So small ships could be suicide runners I suppose splatting like bugs on the windshield. If they overload their small engines before impact I suppose they could inflict some damage.

Battlestar Galactica or its counterpart Cylon base stars are not the same precedent as they never had this kind of shielding capability. Star Wars has deflectors but still not the same defense as Star Trek shields.:p

Archived Post 02-06-2012 11:05 PM

LolFedCarrier

Archived Post 02-06-2012 11:42 PM

It kind of does make sense within the context of the Star Trek Universe. Starting from Picard's era going forward, the nature of Starfleet has been kind of schizo. It's part Diplomatic Corps, part Scientific Exploration Organisation, part Military, and part Intelligence Agency; and most of their mid-large sized starships appear to be expected to carry out the functions of all four roles. It's no wonder why something as large as a Galaxy or Odyssey class starship can't work as a carrier. It's too filled with stellar cartography, sensor, engineering, lab, and weapon equipment to fit anything more than a handful of shuttles in a couple of bays! :p

Not only that, but Starfleet is terribly PC and seems ashamed of their military role. They can call a Defiant or Maelstrom an Escort all they want, but they're dedicated destroyers. I'm actually surprised that they call Sovereigns "Assault Cruisers" in this game in lieu of something like "Deterrence Cruiser" or something similarly deceptive. :p

Archived Post 02-06-2012 11:44 PM

*SLAPS your hand away from KDF cookie jar* Those aren't for you!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:32 AM.