I make this post without expecting a whole lot in the form of intelligent or relevant replies, and when this thread fades into oblivion without such a response, I will smile a little. But maybe I'll be proven wrong, lets find out.

The consensus on the forums has been, at least in a broad nonspecific sense, that this game needs two distinct factions. Not just distinct in the "WoW" mold where the differences are cosmetic and lore related but where each player can find access to every class and playstyle in both factions. No, the consensus here has been that we need both factions to have exclusive ship classifications and unique play styles.

Now, on the Klingon side we all know what ships you want to remain exclusive. No need to fill this thread with the usual "no fedcarriers" or even "no fedbops" arguments. There are many many MANY threads where you can voice those opinions on the Federation shipyard forum. What I want is an intelligent, introspective look at the other side of the equation. We know you, as proud Klingon players, do not want the Federation to have what we have. So, what does the Federation have that you don't want?

TLDR: So, what does the Federation have or what can the Federation be given that you don't want?

They are quite welcome to their flimsy evening gowns and suits as we really do not wish to dress like them.

They are welcome to all their inter specie 'relationships' and the results of those.

The main thing is if they get new technology, we should have a means of being able to counter or defend against it. In most MMO's which have different factions one always has an advantage which is offset by their opponents, ie you have stronger weapons and your opponents get better armour.

But really we would just like to have something every now and then which is useful.

Removed snark, there's no reason for this thread to turn hostile before I get a serious response.

...but, you got a serious response. To wit, Feds can have anything, so long as it doesn't involve a game-mechanic advantage that the KDF doesn't have a counter for (and I'm assuming the inverse would hold as well). I'd also add that the Feds can keep their advantage in SF-specific PvE content, so long as the KDF sees good-faith efforts to smooth the KDF levelling curve and introduce more customization options.

But to be honest, I'm a bit confused about your question:
Are you asking for options to develop the Federation side further? In the Klingon forum? Forgive me, but the question, its context, and the tone of your post in general do not seem exactly geared towards encouraging calm and reasoned debate... Would you be willing to restate your question in another way?

I apologize, I will rephrase my question. People, mostly on the Federation Shipyard board and usually in response to FedCarrier requests, present "Faction Diversity" as a reason for disallowing FedCarriers. In essence they say that the game would suffer in some way if both factions had the same types of ships.

So I'm asking the opposite question. People want Carriers and Birds of Prey to be exclusive to the Klingon faction for the good of the game. So, what do you want in the game to be exclusive to the Federation faction for the good of the game?

And no, cosmetic outfits are not a serious response.

I know alot of ppl want better sci ships while lvling , but your faction the fed faction has nothing I want.Except for the player base I want more of your players.

Ah, in terms of ships. One of my "pet" ideas was to let the Feds have a Battleship, something designed specifically to fend off small fighting craft. I'm not sure how this would be handled in practice - maybe an intrinsic "Fire at Will" ability with a long cooldown, or maybe even the ability to mount weapons (including cannon!) on the broadside as opposed to just fore and aft. Though the latter would probably involve much more coding.

Feds already have an anti-cloak ship, and a battleship concept could complement it really well.

If this were pre-launch, I'd also suggest that Escorts be exclusive to the Feds, let Raptors be re-skins for battlecruisers, and give slight boosts to BoP defense and BC turn rates to compensate for the gap. But that can't happen now of course.

For me, it's about establishing different ship design philosophies. The KDF would be about primary assault, hence BoPs and Carriers, whereas SF would design reactively to survive assault strategies, with Escorts having the job of protecting larger, slower ships from faster, more maneuverable raiders.

If that's all you read, you missed more than half of Dirlettia's post. :p

What I mentioned when we first discussed the Fed carrier thing:
The anti-carrier.
Back then you said you did not like it without even looking at the stats...
Anyway here's the thread:

http://forums.startrekonline.com/sho...d.php?t=199398

The Feds can keep their MAVM and awesome Science Ships... they have no place in the KDF.

@BearClaw,KBFLordKrueg Hey, lets not be hasty. I imagine you both want more ship variants with bridge officer arrangements currently exclusive to the Federation. You know, ships like the Guramba, Marauder or Varanus picked up officer arrangements that previously made the Federation unique. But this post isn't about deciding what you want, it's about outlining what you'd be willing to never ask for in the name of faction diversity.

@Kolikos,mister_dee So, one ship? A cruiser designed around the concept of countering an unpopular ship choice in a minority faction? That is all it takes to give the Federation a 'unique feel' completely separate from the KDF? We can discuss how to make it a viable game idea later, but first I want to make sure this is your answer.

@Kolikos individually She also mentioned inter-species relationship, a roleplaying based nonresponse. Finally she mentioned that whatever new tech Starfleet received the KDF should have a counter for, which is fair enough since that's just good game design. It was not the information I asked for. Like I said, not a serious response. I take some of the blame for that, clearly my writing was unclear and I'd be happy to see a serious response from her add to the discussion.

@BobO369 Thank you. Your idea is measured, generous and provides the Federation with a playstyle wholly their own. I would be remiss if I didn't atleast point out that apparently competitive PVP on the KDF side suffers for lack of viable sci-heal vessels so you may find many disagree with you.