Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,360
# 411
10-25-2013, 01:51 PM
Screw healing people. If my science guy gets an aura, I want it to be the "exothermic induction field."

Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 810
# 412
10-27-2013, 09:41 PM
Hmmm, so I noticed the Chel Grett isn't flagged for Cruiser Commands... which is odd because that is originally the "Breen Cruiser" in-game. Mind you, stats wise that thing is much more a Battle Cruiser than a true Cruiser, but... weird.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwecaptainsmirk View Post
That's what they tell me. God I hope that is what it results in. ~CaptainSmirk
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
I do enjoy my bread and circuses, Cryptic.
Sure it's out of context, and I don't work for Cryptic... but thanks!

Last edited by breadandcircuses; 10-27-2013 at 09:47 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 710
# 413
10-27-2013, 10:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by breadandcircuses View Post
Hmmm, so I noticed the Chel Grett isn't flagged for Cruiser Commands... which is odd because that is originally the "Breen Cruiser" in-game. Mind you, stats wise that thing is much more a Battle Cruiser than a true Cruiser, but... weird.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Breen_Chel_Grett_Warship destroyer bro. cruisers have cmdr engineering boff slots, the chel grett has a cmdr tac.
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,987
# 414
10-27-2013, 10:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by breadandcircuses View Post
Hmmm, so I noticed the Chel Grett isn't flagged for Cruiser Commands... which is odd because that is originally the "Breen Cruiser" in-game.
[...]
"This page is for the NPC ship. For the playable starship, please see Breen Chel Grett Warship."
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 810
# 415
10-28-2013, 01:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophlogimo View Post
"This page is for the NPC ship. For the playable starship, please see Breen Chel Grett Warship."
I'm aware of the difference... you're missing the point of the question. Why is there a difference? Since the ship was originally implemented as a cruiser, and has the stats of a battle cruiser with a tad more turn rate and a tad less engine power, why is it a destroyer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwecaptainsmirk View Post
That's what they tell me. God I hope that is what it results in. ~CaptainSmirk
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
I do enjoy my bread and circuses, Cryptic.
Sure it's out of context, and I don't work for Cryptic... but thanks!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 710
# 416
10-28-2013, 01:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by breadandcircuses View Post
I'm aware of the difference... you're missing the point of the question. Why is there a difference? Since the ship was originally implemented as a cruiser, and has the stats of a battle cruiser with a tad more turn rate and a tad less engine power, why is it a destroyer?
"Cruiser" would imply a Commander (AKA: 4 BoFF power slotting) for Engineering. As you so pointed out, the Breen Chel Grett has in it's stead a Commander for Tactical. As far as classification is concerned, I'll go even farther and call it an Escort by dint of Commander Tactical Boff seating, the ability to equip dual heavy and dual cannons, and the fact that it has a +10 power bonus to weapons. (Nevertheless, I would call the Chel Grett "The ship that tries to do too much with too little".)
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 810
# 417
10-28-2013, 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
"Cruiser" would imply a Commander (AKA: 4 BoFF power slotting) for Engineering. As you so pointed out, the Breen Chel Grett has in it's stead a Commander for Tactical. As far as classification is concerned, I'll go even farther and call it an Escort by dint of Commander Tactical Boff seating, the ability to equip dual heavy and dual cannons, and the fact that it has a +10 power bonus to weapons. (Nevertheless, I would call the Chel Grett "The ship that tries to do too much with too little".)
Okay... so by the same reasoning, why would the Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser be a battle cruiser? It is the only battle cruiser in the game with no weapon power boost, and it has a Universal Commander seat instead of an Engineering seat, the turn rate of an actual cruiser, and the Sensor Analysis of a Science Vessel. Going the other way around, why isn't the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier considered an Escort, since it has a Commander Tactical seat, a Weapon power boost, 4 Tactical Console slots, and a 4/3 payload?

My argument is simply that it was a cruiser that could already use dual cannons (see the original NPC version), made into a battle cruiser for use by players. Dual cannons, +10 Weapons power, 4/4 payload, 3 device slots, 4 Tactical consoles... all part of a battle cruiser. Tactical orientation of boff seating is available on the oddball Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser, so that doesn't exclude the ship either. So... why did they change the designation when it carried over from NPC to PC version?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwecaptainsmirk View Post
That's what they tell me. God I hope that is what it results in. ~CaptainSmirk
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
I do enjoy my bread and circuses, Cryptic.
Sure it's out of context, and I don't work for Cryptic... but thanks!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 710
# 418
10-28-2013, 09:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by breadandcircuses View Post
Okay... so by the same reasoning, why would the Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser be a battle cruiser? It is the only battle cruiser in the game with no weapon power boost, and it has a Universal Commander seat instead of an Engineering seat, the turn rate of an actual cruiser, and the Sensor Analysis of a Science Vessel.
you, my friend, are very confused. This is the Tal Shiar Battle Cruiser, the D'deridex Borgified if you will: http://sto.gamepedia.com/Tal_Shiar_A...Battle_Cruiser
If you will care to look closely, it does indeed have the new cruiser commands.

Quote:
Going the other way around, why isn't the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier considered an Escort, since it has a Commander Tactical seat, a Weapon power boost, 4 Tactical Console slots, and a 4/3 payload?
Technically, it is an Escort. HOWEVER do note that it has 2 full hangars, the associated carrier commands, and a +10 to aux. By that reasoning, it is a Carrier before it is an escort as it's 2 hangars are the main point for the Jem'hadar Dreadnaught.

Quote:
So... why did they change the designation when it carried over from NPC to PC version?
Most likely for balancing reasons. Then again, nobody knows what goes on in the ship builder's head...
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ

Last edited by a3001; 10-28-2013 at 09:39 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 810
# 419
10-31-2013, 06:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
you, my friend, are very confused. This is the Tal Shiar Battle Cruiser, the D'deridex Borgified if you will: http://sto.gamepedia.com/Tal_Shiar_A...Battle_Cruiser
If you will care to look closely, it does indeed have the new cruiser commands.
That was sort of my point. It has a good number of things about it that are not part of a battle cruiser's "definition", and yet the Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser is both considered and named a battle cruiser. Thus my wondering why it is a battle cruiser and a Chel Grett is not a battle cruiser under the same design theory. The Chel Grett definitely has a good portion of its specifications in common with current battle cruiser designs, as listed above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
Most likely for balancing reasons. Then again, nobody knows what goes on in the ship builder's head...
This, however, definitely wins the debate. My hat off to you sir
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwecaptainsmirk View Post
That's what they tell me. God I hope that is what it results in. ~CaptainSmirk
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
I do enjoy my bread and circuses, Cryptic.
Sure it's out of context, and I don't work for Cryptic... but thanks!
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:15 AM.