Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
11-28-2010, 11:51 PM
Magnis, I do agree with many of your points, and although I personally don't want a federation battleship, as mentioned previously, the fact remains that the federation is currently in conflict with several enemies . . . What happened in the history of naval vessels? Well, we started out with exploration and trading ships, the same as with land exploration, but what was the first thing most nations did when they found an enemy, or a potential enemy, they created warships, battleships, weapons to defend themselves with. Thinking down this route then, what would humanity's natural instinct be when faced with this many conflicts? Particularly when they are against some pretty powerful forces? I reckon the federation creating a battleship class wouldn't be quite that far fetched as some die hard fans might believe it to be.

However, given that this is the federation, such a vessel would be made, knowing that it had a limited lifetime as a battleship, once the need for it disappeared, they would either retire them, or more likely refit them for exploration, or some other purpose. Just because it hasn't happened before, doesn't mean it can't happen, at the end of the day, the game is writing the canon now, and as far as I remember, I don't think the federation has had this many enemies at once before.



That said, I would prefer a fleet support vessel as I mentioned previously, it fits the image of the federation better, they don't send single vessels in to deal with threats, they send small fleets that can combat most threats to defend an area. Or they send a single vessel that is capable of defending itself against most small threats to explore new areas. It just isn't the right feel for the federation to have a carrier type vessel, or something that is the equivalent of a Borg cube. Sure, in STO single vessels can take on borg cubes alone, it's difficult, but it's possible. But watch First Contact and you'll see that Borg cubes used to be a pretty big threat, that required tactical thinking and a fleet to defeat. And to be perfectly honest, I can't think of any other vessels out there that really fit the battleship description within Star Trek, it just isn't the feel of the series to have vessels like that, shoving a sovereign into contested territory is enough to get most races antsy about whether you're preparing for a conflict, let a lone a full blown battleship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
11-29-2010, 01:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaQogh
Now I'm all for a REAL dreadnought for the feds. Eventually the carrier haters will realize that a big ship with no turn rate is not the best thing out there and quit whining.
Quit whining? When did this ever happen?

We'll just ask for a REAL REAL dreadnought that combines superior firepower with good maneuverability. If I don't beat up a Borg Cube within 5 seconds and win 15:0 in FvK (as Fed), the ship isn't good enough.

Seriously, dreadnought or battleship is meaningless. It has to be balanced against all other tier 5 ships. If you want more firepower, you have to take away survivability and support abilities, or you just created a ship that's overpowered.

The best thing Cryptic could do is fix the existing Galaxy Dreadnought. Add a weapon slot or reduce the Phaser Lance cooldown, and they might have a ship that's fully comparable to other tier 5 ships, but feels more focused on battle.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43 not so
11-29-2010, 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valdore66 View Post
Magnis, I do agree with many of your points, and although I personally don't want a federation battleship, as mentioned previously, the fact remains that the federation is currently in conflict with several enemies . . . What happened in the history of naval vessels? Well, we started out with exploration and trading ships, the same as with land exploration, but what was the first thing most nations did when they found an enemy, or a potential enemy, they created warships, battleships, weapons to defend themselves with. Thinking down this route then, what would humanity's natural instinct be when faced with this many conflicts? Particularly when they are against some pretty powerful forces? I reckon the federation creating a battleship class wouldn't be quite that far fetched as some die hard fans might believe it to be.

However, given that this is the federation, such a vessel would be made, knowing that it had a limited lifetime as a battleship, once the need for it disappeared, they would either retire them, or more likely refit them for exploration, or some other purpose. Just because it hasn't happened before, doesn't mean it can't happen, at the end of the day, the game is writing the canon now, and as far as I remember, I don't think the federation has had this many enemies at once before.



That said, I would prefer a fleet support vessel as I mentioned previously, it fits the image of the federation better, they don't send single vessels in to deal with threats, they send small fleets that can combat most threats to defend an area. Or they send a single vessel that is capable of defending itself against most small threats to explore new areas. It just isn't the right feel for the federation to have a carrier type vessel, or something that is the equivalent of a Borg cube. Sure, in STO single vessels can take on borg cubes alone, it's difficult, but it's possible. But watch First Contact and you'll see that Borg cubes used to be a pretty big threat, that required tactical thinking and a fleet to defeat. And to be perfectly honest, I can't think of any other vessels out there that really fit the battleship description within Star Trek, it just isn't the feel of the series to have vessels like that, shoving a sovereign into contested territory is enough to get most races antsy about whether you're preparing for a conflict, let a lone a full blown battleship.

like i said before the federation did not have battleship because of ideals. The borg is and has always been the most dangerous threat to the federation beyond all other threats. I understand you wanting to compare the federation to us. but thats the wrong mind set. we are not the federation. two different sides of the coin. think out of the box rather then trying to build large ships. the federation is not about large ships but ships with purpose. after the defiant look how the federation became agile and modern. They didnt want big ships but ships with a surpose and survivability. a big ship means a big huge target. easy to assimilate and give massive drones. the galaxy has a capacilty of 1000 persons. Think about it people. the larger the ship the more persons you need and that is not something starfleets wants or needs.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
11-29-2010, 05:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lariat
Just for the hell of it, if you are curious take a look at the profile of people (claydermunch) who say "No" to carriers or battleships or any other sort of Federation upgrade. Hit, "search for more posts." Then take a look at what the neigh sayer has been discussing. Usually the neigh sayers are involved in multiple threads of such topics, with the consistent theme of "no, we don't want any." Looks like attempts to drown out helpful suggestions.

Sorry bub, but you ain't "we" no matter how many times you chime in.
No amount of posts will change these 2 facts:


- Pet spam is a nuisance to many, both in terms of UI related problems (targeting) and in terms of performance issues.

- Giving the federation a pet spammer itself does not only NOT help the above, but it also does not help the perceived imbalance aspect.
Both sides having carriers does not mean its balanced. Its not like one carrier can negate the presence of another. You just have 2 pet sources ruin the day for many people. The pets system needs only a few tweaks, not a totally blunt, misplaced hammer blow. (the pets basically do way to much kinetic damage, resulting in almost instant death once your shields buckle. THAT needs to be addressed.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by UFP-Magnis View Post
like i said before the federation did not have battleship because of ideals. The borg is and has always been the most dangerous threat to the federation beyond all other threats. I understand you wanting to compare the federation to us. but thats the wrong mind set. we are not the federation. two different sides of the coin. think out of the box rather then trying to build large ships. the federation is not about large ships but ships with purpose. after the defiant look how the federation became agile and modern. They didnt want big ships but ships with a surpose and survivability. a big ship means a big huge target. easy to assimilate and give massive drones. the galaxy has a capacilty of 1000 persons. Think about it people. the larger the ship the more persons you need and that is not something starfleets wants or needs.


sigh... The Federation always had battleships. They never called them Battleships, but they were there. Remember how often Kirk got into fights? If he only had some lamearse science ship he would have gotten pwned hard so many times. The Enterprise stood up to the FINEST IN WARSHIPS that the Klingons and romulans could field.
The finest. Dedicated warships. And The Constitution reigned over em all.

The Federation does not build single purpose warships, yes, but it builds warships capable of science work. There is absolutely no argument against the fact that while the Federation likes peace more than war, it IS very well capable of waging war. We could observe that on TV. Klingions, romulans, cardassians, minor powers (zenketi), they ALL tried to chew on the Feds at one time or another. And they all got rebuffed - not because diplomacy but because of the iron fist that starfleet CAN be.

The Federation has already proven that its capable of building superior vessels, and it has proven that they WILL build single purpose ships as required.


Quote:
Originally Posted by UFP-Magnis View Post
They didnt want big ships but ships with a surpose and survivability. a big ship means a big huge target. easy to assimilate and give massive drones. the galaxy has a capacilty of 1000 persons. Think about it people. the larger the ship the more persons you need and that is not something starfleets wants or needs.
wrong. Size does not go in hand with crew requirements. clever Design can reduce the need for people.

As for size and huge targets:

Welcome to space. Where being a huge hunk of MASS can serve you well.


Look at the galaxy.
Its sheer bulk give it some resilience. You would have to punch through several layers of decks to hit critical systems. Just remember how Akiras, warbirds, Excelsiors got their faces smashed in in the invasion of chintoka, while the Galaxys that were hit kept on trucking without slowing down...
Or The initial engagement between the USS Odyssey and the 3 jem'hadar ships. The jem hadar gave the odyssey a pummeling but the ship still was capable to make its escape, since the damage it has taken, so far, was superficial. (Seeing as the Odysses shields were useless and its weapons somehow not being effective, its actually quite a feat for the ship to being able to leisurely swing around to warp out.).

The thing that finally got the Odyssey were several hundred thousand metric tons of jem hadar ship crashing into the Odyssey at impulse speeds (aka: really friggin fast) and the subsequent warpcore explosion of said jem'hadar ship (and the impulse reactors, and weapon on board).

A bigger ship also means more room for power generation, more redundant systems, more room dedicated to offense and defense.

Size, as they say, does matter. And it matters a lot especially in star trek.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
11-29-2010, 10:28 AM
What id like to see instead of a carrier is a battle ship which does everything the carrier does minus the pet spam. So as trade off of not having pets maybe the fed battle ship can have better shielding than a carrier or more hull..either or. Or maybe it can have 5 forward weapons slots and 5 rear weapson something that will make up the DPS that our current cruisers lack in comparison to a carrier.

Also dont give us a BO layout the same as the SC, give us something similar to the carrier or something along those lines.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
11-29-2010, 08:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerubian_Assasin1
What id like to see instead of a carrier is a battle ship which does everything the carrier does minus the pet spam. So as trade off of not having pets maybe the fed battle ship can have better shielding than a carrier or more hull..either or. Or maybe it can have 5 forward weapons slots and 5 rear weapson something that will make up the DPS that our current cruisers lack in comparison to a carrier.

Also dont give us a BO layout the same as the SC, give us something similar to the carrier or something along those lines.
so.. a ship that replaces all other fed ships then? huh?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
11-30-2010, 03:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFP-Magnis
if you watched star trek
I do watch star trek.

Im not one of those people who watch star trek day in and day out, I do have work (Unlike some), you know.


On a another note, isnt public bashing of someone not allowed on the forums?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
11-30-2010, 05:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFP-Magnis View Post
... a big ship means a big huge target. easy to assimilate and give massive drones. the galaxy has a capacilty of 1000 persons. Think about it people. the larger the ship the more persons you need and that is not something starfleets wants or needs.
If i remember correctly and see straight, there is a piece of information in the loading screens about how "holographic crew members are now implemented" which would explain the "tribblelike-breeding" of the crew count on starships. If that were the case only the captain and the main officers would be real living creatures, which would negate the borgs ability to assimilate thousands of real crew members which makes sense i think.

In light of that, Vote Typhoon and maybe undine too =P
Possible Loadout of Phoon (quote POSSIBLE so calm down flammers)
-4 fore weapons
-3 aft (maybe 4)

Boff's
-LT Tac
-COM Engy
-LTC Universal (maybe)
-LT Sci

and maybe a ensign something if there wasnt a universal or only 3 weapons aft
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
11-30-2010, 07:17 PM
Given a choice between a carrier or a battleship I'd have to vote for the battleship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
11-30-2010, 09:53 PM
i vote for feds to get their weak battleship

i also vote for klingons to get their proper illegal in the federation weapons of mass destruction like mass drivers biological weapons and sun exploding torpedoes. the kdf wasnt so short sighted as the federation, we didnt ban these weapons research and developement.
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 02:15 PM.