View Single Post
Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 336
# 21
03-25-2013, 05:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by taj2480 View Post
You... can't be serious right?

If you want a different Lt Commander slot and ensign slot... there's a cruiser that does that, its the Odyssey. For all others they're the different flavor of cruiser.. The Ambassador for sci, The Regent or Excelsior for Tac, and Galaxy / Galaxy X for Engineering.

Yes it requires that you either be a ship junkie and have all these if you want to switch around or specialize and stick to a ship. Begging like this is like wanting to have your cake an eat it too.

For you see, a long time ago, universal slots only existed on a small bird of prey...

Now they're all up in most new fed ships -p
Super serious.

Every cruiser would still demand some degree of specialization, as the stations are not 100% interchangeable like on a bird of prey. If you consider everything else that's been going on with other ships, I would say that it's high time that cruisers get an update. Things change; keep up and get with the times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimey2 View Post
I'm quite on the fence about this. On one end, yes, turn rate buff. There's no reason not to give that anymore considering the sheer amount of turn rate pretty much everything else has.

As for the universal spots...I dunno.

It's a bit difficult to say. I mean, even if you switch to Tac and sci skills, at the lower levels, there's still not a huge amount of choices, so you'd still have to be limited in your decisions, though at least that would open it up more.

Honestly, if there were more Ensign and Lt. level (specifically engineering) skills that DIDN'T all just share cooldowns with each other, it wouldn't be quite so bad. Between a few more skills and a turn rate buff, cruisers would probably be a lot better. They're truly gimped due to turn and lack of BOFFs I feel now a days more than anything. KDF cruisers, cannons and cloak or not, still have to deal with the same thing, but at least they usually have the turn to make it work.

Still, just feels like universal slots aren't the way to go.
At this point in time, there's no reason why cruisers should not get a buff in turn rate.

Anyhoo...

There are problems inherent in the way that BOff abilities are set up. Concerning Engineering BOff abilities, I've noticed that a lot of the abilities are poorly suited for cruisers and would work much better elsewhere. For all of its usefulness, Eject Warp Plasma cannot reaching its full potential because cruisers are rather unwieldy; mounting it on a bird of prey expands its uses. Likewise, Directed Energy Modulation is more effective with cannon weapons because the damage is solely determined by weapon power and applied per hit, and Aceton Beam would be better off on a science vessel.

Now as I have mentioned before in my first post, I am concerned that Federation cruisers are falling behind and that some form of intervention is needed to prevent them from becoming completely obsolete. This is one of the reasons why I believe that they should be revised from raw tankers into more versatile, multipurpose vessels. Another reason is that this option seems a lot simpler than fixing Engineering BOff abilities, which I believe would require an overhaul of the entire BOff ability system. With the release of new ships every quarter or so, it is only a matter of time before the limited flexibility and restrictive roles of Federation cruisers leads their designs to a dead-end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by travelingmaster View Post
Fed cruisers don't have a high turnrate because they do not need it. Fed cruiser pilots complaining about turnrates is just funny as hell. KDF cruisers need higher turnrates because they have a different focus and carry DHCs. If people want a cruiser like that, they should play KDF instead of trying to steal yet another KDF concept for the greedy Federation players who want to have their cake and eat it, too.

Otherwise, get used to flying and using the Fed cruisers like you're supposed to fly and use them. Or fly some Romulan cruiser when the faction comes out, I'm sure they'll be slightly more DPS oriented than Federation cruisers.

As for engineering skills, that's an argument I actually agree with. Engineering skills aren't as flexible or all-inclusive. Granted, they're supposed to be focused on tanking skills, but I agree that there should be some more offensive options in there.

Lastly, I disagree with the further distribution of universal slots. As a BoP pilot, it absolutely infuriates me that universal boffslots are being cheapened by their inclusion in Tier 5.5 fleetships, lockbox ships, and lobi ships. The BoP sacrifices stats for a reason, to gain access to not only the battlecloak, but also the universal slots. Yet these new ships do not sacrifice anything for their universal boffslots.
It is not fun to have an escort on your tail and not be able to do anything about it, to float straight into a cloud of Warp Plasma that you thought you could avoid, or to just pass over an ally you wanted to heal because your turn rate screwed up your Z-XY movement. Believe it or not, turn rate is important for reasons that have nothing to do with DHC. Disregarding the mangled parts of your metaphor, Federation cruiser captains (especially Engineers) like myself would like to know why Cryptic knocked the cake out of our hands and hasn't bothered to give us a fresh slice.

On some cruisers, I don't mind nearly as much that my damage can't even do scratch damage. But when it gets to the point that a so-called tactical cruiser has trouble doing so AND tanking, that's where I'm going to put my foot down. Ditching my cruiser in favour of something else is not an option: I want to play Federation, just as much as Klingon players want to see content. That being said, the concerns which prompted me to open this thread lie in a different direction entirely, and are only partially related to the issue of damage. Rather curious how many players speak of flying cruisers how they are supposed to be flied, even though a significant portion of them are not certain of what that entails.

Your assertion that birds of prey "sacrifice" stats to gain access to universal slots or the battle cloak is somewhat questionable. Birds of prey are some of the most agile craft in the game, second only to small craft such as shuttles or fighters. While the battle cloak has something of an offensive function, the ability to cloak while under fire seems to indicate that it is just as much of an escape mechanism. I'm not sure why the type has been singled out to be the only craft with full universal BOff slots, but I do not think this has anything to do with having to fit a specific niche. That being said, you are being rather petulant about this.

Last edited by eraserfish; 03-25-2013 at 05:15 AM.