Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 471
01-22-2011, 03:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepidox View Post
snix, please apply the gravity well fix to tyken's rift - it makes no sense that when the target of the Rift dies, the Rift itself dies, the same logic has been applied to gravity well, so can you do the same for Rift?
Zero said it's incoming - it just wasn't in the build we tested earlier.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 472
01-22-2011, 03:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intrepidox View Post
snix, please apply the gravity well fix to tyken's rift - it makes no sense that when the target of the Rift dies, the Rift itself dies, the same logic has been applied to gravity well, so can you do the same for Rift?
On a related note, it would be real nice if the tac teams did not vanish after a few seconds of none combat or if the PC goes down. They should until they are killed or the PC sends them away.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 473
01-22-2011, 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by .Spartan View Post
On a related note, it would be real nice if the tac teams did not vanish after a few seconds of none combat or if the PC goes down. They should until they are killed or the PC sends them away.
I agree wholeheartedly
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 474
01-22-2011, 03:45 PM
What about +15 to aux and +5 to shields for Science Vessels?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 475
01-22-2011, 05:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burninnapalm View Post
if anything, Escorts and sci ships should have their power bonus REDUCED to a total of plus ten. that way the expanded warp core of cruisers is more obvious. but if you were to bring the escorts and sci vessels up to a +20 total, then why would anyone play a cruiser? their "big advantage" with their warp core is gone. and they sure and heck not gonna boost cruisers to a +25 (or even worse... a +30)

to counter act the movement buff to the escorts, they should have +5 go from their weapons to their engines.

SO you have

ESC +10 weaps, +5 ENGS
SCI +15 aux
CRZ +10 sheilds, +5 aux, +5 weapons

that would balance the game more with these proposed changes than giving escorts and sciences vessels and aditional +5
AFAIK, Cruisers don't necessarily have more warp power than escorts (in universe), ESPECIALLY when many of the components in such vessels are commonly shared. (The Defiant class actually has its thrusters ripped from the galaxy class, for instance).

I'd like to see Cryptic just get rid of the power generation differences, and give every class the same, divided differently. There was no in-universe reason that cruisers had more energy (they didn't), and as it stands, the game is already becoming Cruisers Online.

The various nerfs to escorts have me worried as well. Escorts are already rare, and reduced to hit and run solo ships most of the time.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 476
01-22-2011, 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pliskin View Post
The various nerfs to escorts have me worried as well. Escorts are already rare, and reduced to hit and run solo ships most of the time.
I guess we can start calling ourselves "The Few, The Proud, the exploded.... the Escorts"

On that note, does anyone else think escorts need some kind of innate always-on ability to heavily discourage focus firing on them?

Sci has their various crowd control abilities and Cruisers tank like mess, so why can't we have some way to cope with everyone's unsolicited high voltage attentions?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 477
01-22-2011, 06:17 PM
Cruisers are only bigger because they carry many more crew and their families, same with sci ships. Escorts on the other hand are purpose built war machines with no other purpose like exploring and have only crew aboard.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 478
01-22-2011, 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thlaylie View Post
Cruisers are only bigger because they carry many more crew and their families, same with sci ships. Escorts on the other hand are purpose built war machines with no other purpose like exploring and have only crew aboard.
Now now, me and my crew explore...

...Just usually places that require alot of shooting and very little shaking of the hands.

If we see anything truly deep and thought provoking we can always send for an intrepid. :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 479
01-22-2011, 08:04 PM
LOL Awesome!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 480 Why the hate for carriers?
01-26-2011, 12:29 PM
Ok devs, what have the KDF Carrier captains done to deserve this massive nerfing? Is this because the feds have been complaining about getting beaten in pvp? All this is going to do is make a lot pf players retire their carriers and go back to flying cruisers (Like I was)

Reducing the max number of fighters in the air from 24 to 18 on a Vo'Quv?
That might sounds like a 25% drop in fighter strength but it's actually more like half for the following reasons;
The fighters (at least on my setup) have a hull of just over 3700. During the battle, a few are usually destroyed. After an enemy is destroyed, they don't turn and immediately return home or go to their next target. Some of them are always caught in the enemy warp core blowing (Because they swarm the target at close range), usually half of them. If the enemy is destroyed close to the carrier, they stay in the area and are all destroyed. You make it sound like we can keep 24 in the air but that's the impossible dream. After an encounter I'm lucky if half the fighters I launched survived at all. And then the rest disappear a few seconds after my red alert status goes away so you're left at square one for the next battle.
It's a constant task to keep 12 to 16 in the air as it is, and you want to make it more difficult?

All of this applies to pvp and pve as well. In addition, the pvp feds see a carrier and they do three things-
1. They launch a spread of torpedoes that outright destroys what you've launched.
2. When you launch your next wave, a fed captain uses gravity well on you which sucks you and all your pets (usually fighters) together, destroying them all AND causing the carrier significant damage. This isn't crowd control, it's insta-death for all the pets within range of the well, due to the cascading explosions.
3. All the feds usually beeline straight for the carrier and destroy it in record time because the carrier is weak on engineering abilities.

I don't use BoP's because they suck, period. They do an impressive strafing run then they swing way out before coming in for another pass. They spend at least half their time looping around instead of attacking. That's why they suck and that's why the only play they typically get is in pvp specifically to avoid being destroyed by the methods I just mentioned.

If you want to shut down pvp, you've gone a long way with these changes. Klingons aren't going to play carriers in pvp much because of this, and I don't know of many that are going to Qo'nos or Genalda to switch to a cruiser just for pvp reasons. When the feds start whining that they're waiting for hours for enough klingons to show up, remember- You heard it here first.


The tactical team buff changes? Here's an idea- REVERSE-GIMP Reverse Shield Polarity. I understand that having a 15 second duration on it back in the day made it too much of a good thing. But making it a 6 second duration weakened it too much! Put the automated-shield distribution power on RSP and leave it at the 6 second duration! It's an engineering feature anyway, why are you attaching it to Tactical Team?

Shield Strength Reduction- ok where is this coming from? Perhaps none of you fly a carrier as a professional. In case you haven't noticed, the carrier is WEAK on Engineering BO SLOTS! It's not like we're a cruiser with a ton of BO slots to devote to shield heals and hull regens. Once something sets its mind to destroying us, we don't last long because we can't do much to save our ships and carrier maneuverability sucks, so it's difficult to turn and get another shield facing towards the opponent! Our pets don't dynamically switch targets anymore according to the AI you've implemented. Once they're on a target they stay there until either they or the target is down.

Auxiliary Power Levels, Launch Bay times, Shield Resists (Now tied to Shield Power Setting)-
You want a carrier captain to lock up 40% of his power to maintain 100 aux power just so he can launch pets at the time he's been accustomed to for a year now? And your only compensation is an increase of 5 to the auxiliary system? What about if his auxiliary system goes offline? Does that mean the pets we have in the air will disappear?
What about your shield power changes? Not only have you reduced the resists that shield heals give (and a carrier only has 2 or 3 Eng BO slots to begin with), but now you expect a carrier captain to have another big chunk of his power allocation stuck in his shield grid so they'll actually stay up for a decent time?
After all that is done, what's left for his weapons? Even with gear bonuses and well-spent skill points, he'll be lucky to have his weapon power top out at 75. And then when he starts firing, his damage output is going to be less than that of his fighters (Not that he'll have many in the air, thanks to the changes you've proposed).

Your passive sensor analysis ability sounds like a nice addition but I don't see where it's going to begin to offset the big negatives you're introducing.
The way I see it, you're basically reducing our practical fighter strength by half by reducing the amount we can launch at a time, taking into account how fragile they are in the first place.
You're reducing the carrier's damage output by at least half, if not more, because of the massive power requirements that auxiliary and shields will now demand just to maintain what we have now.

And all you're adding to offset this is a stacking damage debuff? How fast is it going to stack? How long will it last? You seem to be pretty specific on what you're taking away, but a little thin on the details of what you're giving.

Leave the carriers alone! They're doing fine as they are right now, even with the inherent weaknesses that we've learned to live with. As it is, I barely pvp any more because I'm always the first death of a match. The npc's I fight are not dying in 5 seconds when I engage them. If these changes go into effect, expect to see a lot of carriers retired because you've made them weaker than they were when the game first came out. Remember those days? You could only keep 8 fighters in the air, so most of the damage had to be done by the carrier itself? The battles were long and drawn out and a pain in the rear. That's why I retired my carrier in the first place.
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 08:11 AM.