View Single Post
Captain
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 688
# 482
03-07-2014, 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by captaind3 View Post
If that was the case then I can appreciate the reasoning to an extent, and also the secrecy. But I can't get past the dreadnaught designation, the tactical focus, but without the tactical seating.

I can understand the standard Assault Cruiser getting the Lt-ens tac seating. It fits perfectly with original design. It's branching. The Assault Cruiser is a cruiser with engineer focused seating. It's tactical because it has two Tac boffs on deck, but not incredibly powerful ones. The Star Cruiser has two science boff seats but not incredibly powerful ones. These are ships that have a primary and a light flavor of a secondary skill set. That's fine, Science ships and escorts have the exact same variation. You can get an engineer flavor patrol escort or a science flavored advanced escort. A tactical flavored Recon Science vessel, or an engineer style Deep Space science vessel.

That's fine and it all makes sense.

I think the Galaxy-R is attempting to stay in the same design philosophy as the long range retrofit, the Voyager-R with its ablative hull armor, which has 3 science boffs. But low level science abilities are more useful in general. And don't have as much overlap. The Defiant-R is the same with three tactical boffs. That's how they've set up the TNG era "hero" ships.

But the Dreadnaught is a different animal. There isn't actually a parallel in the other classes it's a unique ship. That said, it could probably parallel with the Advanced Research Retrofit, the Nebula, which is a science ship with a LtCdr engineer slot, a commander science, an ens science, a Lt tac and a Lt Universal. That's an incredible cruiser science hybrid right there. It's rather sad that the equivalent of that is the layout what the Avenger got. Heck an ens engineer-commander engineer with a Lt Tac and an Lt Universal would've worked out better than the current one. It's not really an update to current standards.

Giving it the Avenger's boff layout wouldn't have made them identical. The Avenger has higher mobility less tankiness in the ship's base stats and there would be a difference between five cannons vs the Phaser lance. Actually just take off the dual cannon ability for the G-X and they're different.




Terrifying thing. I did 30k crit with a BO3 on a Dual Beam Bank three mk XI phaser relays (one purple two blue). I'm not even kidding.

The Lance should consistently outperform a BO3 otherwise what's the point.
The Kumari wing cannons do 30k crits not including the R-Type platforms output. And with slight modifications they could be turned INTO a lance weapon for the dreadnought.

Check out my post here.