Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Shipyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
07-17-2011, 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
I think the retrofit ships are too attractive to use over the base T5 ships. These are supposed to represent the pinnacle of Starfleet tech, yet the Sovereign is overshadowed by the Excelsior, the DSSV and RSV are overshadowed by the Intrepid, and so forth.

So here is my proposal for the non-retrofit T5 ships:

Assault Cruiser: Remove tactical Ensign, convert tactical Lieutenant into tactical Lt. Cmdr.
Star Cruiser: Remove science Ensign, convert science Lieutenant into science Lt. Cmdr.

Advanced Escort: Remove science Ensign, convert science Lieutenant into science Lt. Cmdr.
Fleet Escort: Remove engineer Ensign, convert engineer Lieutenant into engineer Lt. Cmdr.

Deep Space Science Vessel: Remove engineer Ensign, convert engineer Lieutenant into engineer Lt. Cmdr.
Reconnaissance Science Vessel: Remove tactical Ensign, convert tactical Lieutenant into tactical Lt. Cmdr.

This would turn the base T5 ships into the advanced 25th century ships they're supposed to be.


...But wait, I'm not finished yet! I also think the Galaxy-R, Intrepid-R and Defiant-R need a refit. I think they are far too specialised when they might be better with a little more versatility thrown in. Bear with me on this one.

All retrofit ships: Change Ensign boff to universal.

Galaxy-R: Add tactical console slot, make saucer separation a removable engineering console.
Defiant-R: Add science console slot, make cloaking device a removable tactical console.
Intrepid-R: Add engineering console slot, make ablative armor generator a removable science console.

Now the retrofit ships are unique in their ability to mimic the current configuration of the stock T5 ships, with a real drawback to their primary mission focus if they use their special ability. The Galaxy-R can now match the base damage of the Sovereign or Excelsior - but if you want to turn like an escort, you'll have to sacrifice some tanking ability. The Intrepid is now slightly tougher, but if you want the ablative armor, your science powers won't be quite as strong as they otherwise would be. Ditto for the Defiant and cloaking vs weapon damage.

But what about the Excelsior, Nebula and D'Kyr class?

I think the Excelsior is pretty well balanced as it is. It's as tough as any T5 cruiser, but far more agile and its combat ability would still be on par with the Sovereign if the change above were made. But its tanking wouldn't be quite as effective, and it has the agility and transwarp as a tradeoff.

I think the Nebula class needs a boost in the form of a 4th Forward weapon slot. This would make it truly unique amongst all science ships without resorting to making it like the others with a different skin.

The D'kyr is an excellent science ship, doing for Science what the Excelsior does for combat. I think it should remain unchanged.

I'd really appreciate feedback from everyone on this idea, but I hope the Cryptic staff see it too and say something about it.
Just pick up a retrofit its free no big deal
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
07-18-2011, 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
You also fail to remember that Tier 3 boff abilities outside your main profession have to be bought from the exchange or trained by others, meaning they won't be everywhere.
I have not failed to remember anything, do you honestly not have a friend (or friends) in game who could either train any skill for you or serve as middle-man while you trade a BO to an alt for appropriate training?

Profession based top-tier skills are everywhere for a very good reason, and there is no excuse for not having the best abilities for the appropriate ships since they implemented BO trading over a year ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
"No thanks" is a meaningless comment. Please think for a little while and come back with an actual criticism.

Come back with a valid criticism. Stop using the words "no thanks" because they have no value in any discussion anywhere.

So I gather that your main criticism is that all the standard T5 ships would be overpowered. You haven't really explained how or why they would be. And even if they were, doesn't the fact that you say they'd all be equally overpowered mean that they might just be balanced with each other?
Ok, for starters you mention nothing about Klingon ships but lets ignore that for now.

Let's say that Cryptic does as you request, and each ship has two Lt. Cmdr (assuming that's what you're going for given that you didn't say it wasn't while you were busy saying that I wasn't making my arguments) slots for their given role/purpose.
--For the Cruisers-classes that translates to Star Cruiser class ships becoming super tanks, Assault Cruisers gaining bust on top of their tanks, and the Exploration-Cruiser getting shafted and left behind by all but those who play for the love of the class.
--For the Science-classes that means that the DSSV becomes the best of the Sci-healers and a potentially vicious combatant, the LRSV (Intrepid) goes the way of the Galaxy, and the RSV becomes the single meanest ship in the game during group fighting and protracted combat.
--For the Escorts that translates into both the Adv. gaining a nasty tank or a PSW, etc (we see it already with the MVAM) to go with the full punching power of a standard escort; the Fleet Escort would also gain a serious tank and things like EWP; the only appeal of the Defiant would then be the cloak.

So how would this play out in game when they faced off?
--Star Cruisers and Exploration Cruisers would not be capable of killing any half-decent players on their own; their fire support might tip the balance but along they would simply not posses the needed buffs to punch through the tanks; on the flip side any half decent Star Cruiser pilot would basically never die. This would mean that Assault Cruisers and Excelsiors would be the only cruisers with a shot at killing things due to the potential of utilizing burst power to overwhelm a player's defenses.
--Escorts would be relegated to burst builds (far more so than now) because they would have to quickly overwhelm Cruiser defenses or they would be drawn into a stalemate where they would not likely die to the cruiser, but without an alpha strike they wouldn't punch through one either. Then with Science ships, they would handily beat intrepids, and be in stand-offs with the DSSVs; it would be more tricky with the RSV as it would posses the buff power, short-term tank, and science powers to seriously the escort.
--With Science ships, as I said above, the DSSV would have access to E-Team 3 or EWP 1 (among other things) to go with a full science load, meaning that it would be a BEAST of a healer and group support package all rolled into one; it wouldn't be able to kill much on it's own, but then again that wouldn't be what people used it for anyway. The RSV would be a match changer as it would be the only ship that could realistically take on any escort or science ship with a real chance of winning due to the science combined with the tactical buffs (a tac in a RSV would become a vicious combo do to the captain-profession skills).

Basically, it would be over quickly, or not over at all.....


Now if you did NOT mean to suggest that there would be two Lt. Cmdr, and that the Lt. Cmdr station was basically being moved around then things would be more reasonable, but still thrown out of whack.
-The Assault Cruiser would be just like the Excelsior, except it would lose the tank appeal vs. the turn rate (I need to look, I can't remember the Excelsior's turn rate off the top of my head). The Star Cruiser would lose burst healing/tanking power; and the exploration cruiser would probably become more popular for healers.
-The Escorts would suffer a dps hit across the board in favor of tanking (Defiant excluded)
-The RSVs would lose strength of Science, and therefore become less potent as they need their sci powers to make up the difference of only having six weapon slots.

I'm sorry dude but the 2-Lt. Cmdr idea is about as bad as having 2 Cmdr stations for the T5 (which was tried and quickly changed when the Retrofits were in testing on Tribble, the original version of the Intrepid had 2 Cmdr science slots and was unstoppable). Moving the Lt. Cmdr slot around is, as I said, more reasonable but it still poses problems that would need to be worked out; it's not perfect but it's still much more reasonable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
This is pure nonsense. How do universal ensigns alter the design purposes of the retrofit ships? Explain how. How does it change the reason to use the retrofit ships? You have not made any sense whatsoever.
Dude you've been around these forums for as long as I have, and that means you've played the game for that long; how could you not have realized that there is a real difference in the ships from where the ensign slot is that effects how you play the ship; they fill a role of focus.

Now yes, everything would be changed if your idea were to be implemented, but tell me what would be the appeal of a ship with a universal ensign slot vs. a ship with two-Lt. Cmdr slots (or a heavier design focus)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
One extra beam array? Are you joking? Please tell me you're joking because nobody with a basic grasp of space combat would claim an extra weapon slot would unbalance the whole game "drastically".
Ok, mind that the escort and the raptor and the Kar'fi all have 7 slots, and I know that you're thinking that they're able to run dual-cannons and w/e, but that doesn't matter. The fact is that with a 7th weapon slot on a Nebula, a cannon-heavy build becomes VERY viable and a tactical officer in a Nebula would have a nasty alpha strike and the universal Lt. would greatly help any profession. Even if you didn't go heavy with the single-cannons then you'd still have enough beams for a mean broadside (which is how cruisers with eight slots do their heavy damage).

Again, if your changes went in then things would need to change to keep the Nebula viable, but that would not be the way.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
07-18-2011, 01:20 AM
I agree..

If KDF ships get the same treatment..

Mmm...

Vor'Cha with LtC Tac
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
07-18-2011, 03:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sivar View Post
Stuff
Thankyou for taking the time to explain why you think this idea would be bad. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the gist of your concern is that ships with a second Lt. Cmdr in the secondary role (example: Star Cruiser with Lt. Cmdr science boff) would unbalance combat. And that the addition of a Lt. cmdr boff ability is all it would take to unbalance a ship. Is this correct?

If so, could you please explain why you think a single Lt. Cmdr boff ability is so much more powerful than it really is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MelineAaele View Post
I agree..

If KDF ships get the same treatment..
Yes of course.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
07-18-2011, 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sivar View Post
I have not failed to remember anything, do you honestly not have a friend (or friends) in game who could either train any skill for you or serve as middle-man while you trade a BO to an alt for appropriate training?
Well, actually no. I do not for example. Most of my friends have retired from the game, or don't play in one case.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
07-18-2011, 06:34 AM
I can see where the OP is coming from, to a certain extent, but I can't fault Sivar's logic, the proposed changes would IMHO make some ships seem a litle redundant. Also, assuming the same changes were applied KDF side for balance sake (although there's no garauntee with the way this dog n' pony show's run), there'd no longer be any reason to fly a BoP. The one selling point of the BoP is that you can mix and match to have high tier powers from two disciplines, the BoP sacrifices an ensign power for this. Essentially, these ships are sacrificing nothing for the same flexibility.


A few examples:
The RSV would be capable of BOIII or HYTIII, HYTIII would be especially nasty since with a shield stripper build you wouldn't even need that much weapons power to finish the job yourself.

The FE needs no retrofit, it's already hard as a coffin nail in the hands of a good engineer. With a Lt cmdr engineering as well as it's tactical bofs being arranged as they are, I feel it's toughness would be too great considering it's agility and firepower relative to other ships.

Speaking of the FE's toughness, with a universal ensign slot you'd be able to run the Defiant just like a current FE. Only more nimble, and with a cloaking device. I don't see this as being particularly balanced myself. I can't see where the tradeoff would be either.

And I feel the some ships being redundant would become far worse with this proposed roster of altered ships. I can't think of a single reason I'd fly any of the science ships over the RSV with it's ltcom tac AND science. It also leaves the Excelsior seeming a bit pointless IMHO, the transwarp is't something that should come into play when judging how good it is, because it has no bearing on combat. It's a convenience tool, nothing more.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
07-18-2011, 06:45 AM
the 2 ltcom station idea is always shouted down as a horrible idea every time anyone brings it up, and for good reason. loosing an ensign power to gain a lt commander powers is like trading a nickle for a quarter. the only way that would be fair is for every single ra/va ship to have 2 lt commander powers, which honestly if every ship had would just be to many good powers
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
07-18-2011, 07:39 AM
The issues I have with this are well the Advanced already got its retrofit so its not necessary. It does indeed now have a version with a Lt. Commander science slot which I find totally ridiculous considering there are no T-5 cruisers (ships with larger more advanced science facilities than escorts) with a slot on par with that. Given its offensive capability, its ability to become three offensive vessels, and the science abilities it can use, its an OP'd set up right now with nothing truly coming to par on a stock level.

the other issue I have is with you making the abilities all consoles in tune with the retrofits class Cloak being tactical, separation being engineering. While I can understand it'd make sense on some level for the ability consoles to match the ships class and intended purpose but on an IP level each ships special ability is an engineering ability. An engineer not a Tactical officer would maintain a cloak, as an engineer would maintain the separation capabilities, or the hull generators. My proposition for this is that the ability consoles be 'universal'.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
07-18-2011, 07:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
The Gal-X is a bit of a quandary as it has already been buffed. It has the Galaxy-R's tank with a cloak and a special weapon, and yet players still say it's underpowered.
Thats probably because the phaser lance is underpowered from what was show on screen in All Good Things.

As seen here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UspfD7SW5Ns
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
07-18-2011, 12:29 PM
All cruisers should have a lt comm tac slot.
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 03:07 AM.