Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
07-12-2011, 08:01 AM
I see no reason for Feds to not have a Carrier similar to that of the Klingons. Feds will built anything if they see a need for it. I hope Cryptic does add one in the near future, if not, then keep posting about it until they do.

As for the hostility is usually from those who do not like when people come up and pose old or new ideas that would change the game from what it already is or what it already favors. I would just suggest ignoring it and if it really get bad then reporting it. There will always be some people or groups that think they know better or are not nice to new people.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
07-12-2011, 08:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
I am fairly sure Cryptic has no plans at this time to introduce light sabers, either.
Yes, light sabers would be silly. If this were a thread dedicated to light sabers I would have more to say on the subject

Quote:
This game already has too many Carriers. I really like Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica, but they are their own franchises with different rules, and there Fighters are standard and make sense.
You know, I even agree with you here. The fighters in STO make no sense and I'd sooner see carriers scrapped all together. But since that's not going to happen, fighters are going to stay in the game, and pointing out how the entire concept doesn't make sense is not likely to make this issue go away. The very existence of carriers in the game validates the preposterous notion that carriers and lightly armed fighters are an effective military strategy in a universe with computer targetted computers and significant ship shielding. So while you and I are in agreement others are going to continue to disagree for good reason.

Quote:
Another topic that often comes up is Full 3D Space Combat, and Cryptic isn't interested in doing that either.
This might be interesting to see and it would certainly add a new element to space combat. But unlike Light Sabers and Carriers, I seem to recall Cryptic definitively saying they'd never allow this because it would contradict the IP. If this were a thread dedicated to Full 3D Space Combat, I'd have more to say on the subject.

Now, you've provided one point of feedback that, while negative, was on topic and productive. You've provided two other points, one was ludicrous and the other was, I believe, definitively answered, but both were totally off topic, why mention them here?

And just to keep things in perspective, the post I was replying to was...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TFO-OptimusPrime View Post
Good lord, would someone stop using Voodoo to bringing this zombie back to life..

There have been several other posts just like this and the answer has been no everytime.
This post tried to discourage other subscribers and users from giving honest feedback. Now, if the posters premise were correct and Cryptic had at any point given a hard no to this idea, he'd still be wrong to try to prevent others from giving honest feedback but at least his frustration with opinions held by a number of others would be understandeable. But his premise was wrong, they haven't given a hard no and they certainly haven't given a hard no multiple times like he suggested.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
07-12-2011, 08:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermbot View Post
This post tried to discourage other subscribers and users from giving honest feedback. Now, if the posters premise were correct and Cryptic had at any point given a hard no to this idea, he'd still be wrong to try to prevent others from giving honest feedback but at least his frustration with opinions held by a number of others would be understandeable. But his premise was wrong, they haven't given a hard no and they certainly haven't given a hard no multiple times like he suggested.
See thats where your incorrect, that question had been asked in a previous months Ask Cryptic entries and Dstahl said that Feds would NOT be recieving carriers. Plus there are already threads pretaining to this exact topic, this one for example going 19pages and on the first pace there is a post by Mister_Dee with more links to the topic of Fed Carriers. So as I stated, this is a zombie post and should be closed off, the OP should have atleast search the forums to see if their topic already had a thread going.

http://forums.startrekonline.com/sho...d.php?t=213958
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
07-12-2011, 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cavilier210 View Post
This



Seriously, of all things in the game, why must people beg and plead for something so silly?
LoL, i was thinking exactly the same thing.

I think the majority of Star Trek fans is clear about that.

THIS IS STAR TREK there is no need to get a carrier ship type in Starfleet, KDF maybe because they seek death (AND NOT RUN AWAY BTW.) in battle but not starfleet.
If you want to fly a carrier then defect to KDF.
Let the Klingons a bit of distinction by having Battle Cloak (which would fit more to romulans IMO.) and Carrier ships.

I my opinion there should be much MORE different ship classes on each faction.
Klingons should have the majority of escort classes in the game, just like the FED has sci ships.

Live long and prosper.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45 Not on the cards right now
07-12-2011, 10:08 AM
Quote:
Carriers
Some people love them, some people hate them. Some people think they are reasonable in the IP, some don't. For the forseeable future we do see a role for them to play in the KDF. Similarly, we do not currently have any plans to give carriers to the Federation.
This was said by Heretic directly in his thread regarding

Fleetyard R & D: Carriers
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
07-12-2011, 10:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TFO-OptimusPrime View Post
So as I stated, this is a zombie post and should be closed off, the OP should have atleast search the forums to see if their topic already had a thread going.

http://forums.startrekonline.com/sho...d.php?t=213958
I honestly don't expect from newbies to start searching for topics of interest. They are quite possibly highly motivated and enthusiastic and just want to share that, and first searching the forums with various search terms is not on their mind.

It would be nice and often helpful if they did, but hey, let them have their enthusiasm for a while before they become as jaded of repeated topics as the rest of us.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
07-12-2011, 11:58 AM
Why should fed's not have a carrier:

Considering the amount of complaining Feds have about KDF carriers in PvP there should be absolutely no reason for them to want to have one. I mean why double the population of something you seam to hate? Or could it be that once you get the ability to do something you see as unfair you'll think its fair then? Or will it be fair for you to do it but not fair for us? Hmmm, one must ponder these things.


On a more serious note the Feds shouldn't have a carrier because it doesn't fit with their Modus Operandi. See the KDF have two particular types of ships. Big, heavy battlecruisers who slug it out in combat with the enemy, and light fast attack ships like the Raptor and the BoP. The Carrier supports those last two, even houses facilities to repair, refuel, and launch one of them.

Starfleet however relies heavily on cruisers and science vessels. This is because Starfleet is a scientific and exploratory organization. It is not an offensive organization like the Klingon Empire. Carriers do not fit in with this style of operation. Even their smaller ships, the Escorts, can support themselves for periods of operation without aid. A carrier is fluff, an unnecessary expenditure in an organization not designed to operate with them. Even the Peregrine Attack Fighter is sufficiently sized to operate from cruisers.


Now! This topic has been beat to death, dozens of times and then some. It's not going to happen anytime soon and likely not at all.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
07-12-2011, 12:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TFO-OptimusPrime View Post
There have been several other posts just like this and the answer has been no everytime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TFO-OptimusPrime View Post
See thats where your incorrect, that question had been asked in a previous months Ask Cryptic entries and Dstahl said that Feds would NOT be recieving carriers.
Now some would see this as a blatant attempt to forget what you had actually said in order to argue a logically sound position. I prefer to think of it as you retreating into the realms of reality and applaud it as progress.

Quote:
Plus there are already threads pretaining to this exact topic, this one for example going 19pages and on the first pace there is a post by Mister_Dee with more links to the topic of Fed Carriers. So as I stated, this is a zombie post and should be closed off, the OP should have atleast search the forums to see if their topic already had a thread going.
Except as I already explained to Nemessis on this same thread, this is a feedback forum, this is not a discussion forum. As such, if a different person wishes to provide their own personal feedback and a thread regarding the topic is not readily apparent, he is free to either create a new thread or 'necro-raise' a thread that already exists. Because these forums are here for every player to provide their feedback, there's not really any requirement that the feedback be unique. That is why this thread has not been closed off and why your feigned frustration at more and more people asking for Federation carriers is not just childish, but out of line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alastor_Forthright View Post
Why should fed's not have a carrier:

Considering the amount of complaining Feds have about KDF carriers in PvP there should be absolutely no reason for them to want to have one. I mean why double the population of something you seam to hate? Or could it be that once you get the ability to do something you see as unfair you'll think its fair then? Or will it be fair for you to do it but not fair for us? Hmmm, one must ponder these things.
Okay, so because "Feds" complain about KDF carriers being an unfair in PVP they should not have them? That seems kind of like backwards logic, hmmm, I must ponder if you really gave this line of reasoning any real thought.

Quote:
On a more serious note the Feds shouldn't have a carrier because it doesn't fit with their Modus Operandi. See the KDF have two particular types of ships. Big, heavy battlecruisers who slug it out in combat with the enemy, and light fast attack ships like the Raptor and the BoP. The Carrier supports those last two, even houses facilities to repair, refuel, and launch one of them.
Oh, you were joking. Sorry, your throwaway joke argument sounded so much like every other bad argument made against the idea I had no idea. I would start explaining that the Federation also has "big heavy cruisers who slug it out in combat with the enemy" but I get the feeling I'm going to find out in your next paragraph that you were joking.

Quote:
Starfleet however relies heavily on cruisers and science vessels. This is because Starfleet is a scientific and exploratory organization. It is not an offensive organization like the Klingon Empire. Carriers do not fit in with this style of operation. Even their smaller ships, the Escorts, can support themselves for periods of operation without aid. A carrier is fluff, an unnecessary expenditure in an organization not designed to operate with them. Even the Peregrine Attack Fighter is sufficiently sized to operate from cruisers.
Oh, you weren't joking... Starfleet is a military organization in the middle of a war who historically have always made ships LARGER than the KDF, look at a size comparison between a Constitution and it's Klingon Contemporary, the K'Tinga just as an example. Between the Borg, the Undine, the Iconians and, yes, newly fired hostilities with the Klingon Empire, Starfleet has never faced such a dire military situation before. So, if there is a sound tactical reason to have carriers, starfleet will make carriers. Maybe they'll be decommissioned later when Starfleet is able to refocus their effort on science and exploratory tasks exclusively, maybe they'll be repurposed, who knows. Your argument is not compelling enough to justify the restriction of play and fun.

Quote:
Now! This topic has been beat to death, dozens of times and then some. It's not going to happen anytime soon and likely not at all.
And it will likely continue to be kicked around by new and old players alike for a number of reasons. One, the arguments against it tend to be weak. Two, players for some reason find the ideas of carriers to be exciting. Three, Cryptic has never said no, they've always said 'not now.' If you believe there is nothing else interesting to say on the topic, I would recommend directing your attentions elsewhere.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
07-12-2011, 12:44 PM
I've never really posted here before on the forums, but I do read daily. Just never found I had much to say... until now.

I've been playing this game since day one (actually, before on a different account, but whatever). This game is rife with a lot of very anti-Federation things, some anti-Star Trek things, and things that just don't make sense in any way, shape or form with Star Trek canon. I personally ignore these things because I realize it's an MMO, and certain concessions will need to be made in aspects of the story to make it fun and interesting.

Yet, all of you enjoy playing this game and draw the line at the Federation having... carriers? Am I the only one who realizes how ironically, er... how do I put this nicely... dumb? That comes across as.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
07-12-2011, 01:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeylasRamar View Post
I've never really posted here before on the forums, but I do read daily. Just never found I had much to say... until now.

I've been playing this game since day one (actually, before on a different account, but whatever). This game is rife with a lot of very anti-Federation things, some anti-Star Trek things, and things that just don't make sense in any way, shape or form with Star Trek canon. I personally ignore these things because I realize it's an MMO, and certain concessions will need to be made in aspects of the story to make it fun and interesting.

Yet, all of you enjoy playing this game and draw the line at the Federation having... carriers? Am I the only one who realizes how ironically, er... how do I put this nicely... dumb? That comes across as.
Well, you've got to understand. There are alot of disappointed expectations on the Klingon side of things and there isn't a single forum going Klingon player who doesn't remember Dstahl saying that development on the Klingon faction would be limited because of their low population numbers. This creates a situation where any loss of Klingon uniqueness becomes a loss of draw to that faction, which snowballs into even less development than they get right now. And the KDF needs development, it doesn't need it as badly as the RSE does, but the KDF still needs every scrap of attention it gets.

Plus the 'barn doors already open' argument is rationally a nonstarter. Yes, there's already Trek dubious parts of this game but that's no reason to give up and accept more.
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 07:53 AM.