View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
07-12-2011, 06:11 AM
Originally Posted by
I am fairly sure Cryptic has no plans at this time to introduce light sabers, either.
Yes, light sabers would be silly. If this were a thread dedicated to light sabers I would have more to say on the subject
This game already has too many Carriers. I really like Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica, but they are their own franchises with different rules, and there Fighters are standard and make sense.
You know, I even agree with you here. The fighters in STO make no sense and I'd sooner see carriers scrapped all together. But since that's not going to happen, fighters are going to stay in the game, and pointing out how the entire concept doesn't make sense is not likely to make this issue go away. The very existence of carriers in the game validates the preposterous notion that carriers and lightly armed fighters are an effective military strategy in a universe with computer targetted computers and significant ship shielding. So while you and I are in agreement others are going to continue to disagree for good reason.
Another topic that often comes up is Full 3D Space Combat, and Cryptic isn't interested in doing that either.
This might be interesting to see and it would certainly add a new element to space combat. But unlike Light Sabers and Carriers, I seem to recall Cryptic definitively saying they'd never allow this because it would contradict the IP. If this were a thread dedicated to Full 3D Space Combat, I'd have more to say on the subject.
Now, you've provided one point of feedback that, while negative, was on topic and productive. You've provided two other points, one was ludicrous and the other was, I believe, definitively answered, but both were totally off topic, why mention them here?
And just to keep things in perspective, the post I was replying to was...
Originally Posted by
Good lord, would someone stop using Voodoo to bringing this zombie back to life..
There have been several other posts just like this and the answer has been no everytime.
This post tried to discourage other subscribers and users from giving honest feedback. Now, if the posters premise were correct and Cryptic had at any point given a hard no to this idea, he'd still be wrong to try to prevent others from giving honest feedback but at least his frustration with opinions held by a number of others would be understandeable. But his premise was wrong, they haven't given a hard no and they certainly haven't given a hard no multiple times like he suggested.