View Single Post
Survivor of Remus
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 318
# 17
02-20-2013, 08:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
On the forums players have said since launch: "ohh a ships' turn is determined by its' size"...no it's the decks...then it was its metric ton...then it was its width..(and the arguments made to actual navy ships) were quite impressive,...but now after 3 years...the real answer seemingly is....lockboxes? That's the Dev answer? Really?? I mean..really?? At least relative size would have been understandable.

Can you further elaborate Dee? I'm having a difficult time wrapping my brain around this.
Again, you're missing where the disconnect here is: The handling stats of ships are based, mostly, on their CLASS, not their PHYSICAL SIZE. Forget physical size. It has no relevency here. Physics have no relevancy here. Naval ship handling characteristics have no place in space let alone STO. Don't think of STO as a simulation, think of it as a game first and it makes more sense. At no point has a ship's physical size ever been the determinator in its overall handling in the context of STO. It has always been the ship's class first and foremost.


Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
I fail to see why Devs would create Science ships designed to have a superior turn rate (even if it's mammoth in size) That, [to me] makes no sense...but I guess the Devs like to fool themselves into making it sensible?
Because you're not approaching STO from a game designer mentality. Cryptic decided to create player roles and determined basic ship handling characteristics and abilities for those roles BEFORE deciding which ships went into them. What ships occupied what roles were then determined by workshopping or the like. The Galaxy and Nebula, though being roughly comparable in physical size and mass were assigned two different roles, so they get vastly different weapons loadouts and handling characteristics. Once this pattern was established, all new ships added to the game were nominally balanced against it.

The question you really should be asking is "Why was this ship assigned this role?".

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
Here's what makes sense to me: Escorts are small, therefore they turn on a dime.
Not all escorts are small. Nor do they need to be. Again, this is a matter of role being the primary determinator of ship handling. The Akira's a respectable-sized, offensively-minded cruiser in Trek canon. It's also been decided that it should be an escort-class ship in the context of STO, so it handles like an escort, not a respectably-sized cruiser.

Look, if it help, remember that the kind of power output that a starship generates means that ANY of them could, theoretically, turn on a dime. It is the strength of the ship's inertial dampeners and structural integrity fields that determine its turn rate. Without them, everyone on board would be smashed into paste and the nacelles would fly off those thin, elegant-looking pylons the moment they tried. Pretend that all escorts, regardless of size, have strong inertial dampeners and cruisers have weak ones. Also they can't upgrade them for some reason.

Probably because of Klingons or Tribbles or something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
How do the Devs explain the turn of the Breen ship??...is it because it's a Tac-oriented ship?
No justification is required. They assigned it the escort role. It turns like an escort, though it's turn rate is comparatively low for an escort. Some of the more nimble science ships turn better. The question should not be "Why does this turn faster than an ambassador". The question should be "Why is this an escort and not a cruiser."