Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
06-03-2012, 11:11 AM
The Escorts vastly outnumber the cruisers
Cruisers being the standard starfleet design
Thus something is wrong.

If Tactical cruisers massively outclassed escorts then escorts would be less common.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
06-03-2012, 11:56 AM
Quote:
If Tactical cruisers massively outclassed escorts then escorts would be less common.
another idea would be to call escorts, "tactical cruisers"
And even if it did, would there be a point in playing something else then?

Quote:
The Escorts vastly outnumber the cruisers
on the other hand i really doubt that there are more escorts around than cruisers. Atleast not in any PVP, STF's i join. But what do i know, i only play this game for more than 1 year.
It seems to me there are allways 2 cruisers, 2 escorts and 0,5 sci vessels.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
06-03-2012, 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
The Escorts vastly outnumber the cruisers
Cruisers being the standard starfleet design
Thus something is wrong.

If Tactical cruisers massively outclassed escorts then escorts would be less common.
So your Logic is that to make sure Cruisers are the preferred choice we should make them so they outclass Escorts of the same Tier? Completely destroying game balance? This has a horrible backfire coming. BoPs are more Common to the Klingons, to make them more desirable we're upgrading the BOFFs and adding an innate DPS Boost, we're also removing the cooldown from Battle Cloak to make it a toggle.

Where is it proven that Cruisers are the standard Starfleet Design? TOS? TNG? DS9? Voyager? Movies? All irrelevant because that is in the past, the games timeline is 2409 and the war with the Klingon Empire and the Borg Incursions could see Starfleet wanting more Escorts. Maybe Escorts are cheaper to build?

What this sounds like is you want few Escorts so people should be forced or coerced into taking Cruisers.

What shall we make it that you can only have one person in an Escort for every three Cruisers in the game? Sorry can't leave ESD in that Ship, you need to take a Cruiser because Sollvax said so.

You have said some things I don't agree with, but I could respect your opinion. Here not in the slightest, your saying Cruisers should be the most powerful ships in the game so that no other ship is a viable choice. (See red highlight in the quote, if somebody has a different Definition of Massively Outclassed I'd like to hear it). If you don't like the game, the way it works or how the ships are balanced than perhaps you'd be happier finding a different game to play. Me? I like this one, it's got it's flaws but I enjoy playing it sometimes in an Escort sometimes in a Cruiser and occasionally a Science Vessel, sometimes I even fly a Shuttle.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
06-03-2012, 02:05 PM
All im suggesting is SHOWING how much a cruiser already outclasses an escort
by giving it the Name "battleship" or "tactical cruiser"

but hey Im an Admiral so anyone lower ranking than me should obey my orders right??
Kidding fly what you like

just remember your escort is fragile and can be zeroed in multi ship combat (destroyed by someone ELSE blowing up your target when you are near it)

Cruisers are not made of tissue paper.

Note these are opinions
Thats all any of us have
you included
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
06-03-2012, 09:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Reclassify these vessels as battleships for players
upgrade their Tac boff slots by at least one rank and make them visibly better than tougher than carriers so everyone KNOWS
Just to quote you here, your asking for more hull and more BOFF powers than other ships without giving anything up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
All im suggesting is SHOWING how much a cruiser already outclasses an escort
by giving it the Name "battleship" or "tactical cruiser"

but hey Im an Admiral so anyone lower ranking than me should obey my orders right??
Kidding fly what you like

just remember your escort is fragile and can be zeroed in multi ship combat (destroyed by someone ELSE blowing up your target when you are near it)

Cruisers are not made of tissue paper.

Note these are opinions
Thats all any of us have
you included
And now here your changing your tune to Cruiser are fine, I just wish more people flew them. Escorts are the Glass Cannons of the game, I'm not saying their kings of the stars. But I am saying the game is mostly balanced. A Good Escort will unload everything in the opening five seconds, and with any luck the opponent will no longer be there. A good Cruiser will survive everything and still be there.

I'm not being Pro-Escort here, I'm being Anti-Unfair Advantage. As for renaming them why? Because you really want the word Battleship to apply to a Player craft in this game?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
06-04-2012, 12:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
The Escorts vastly outnumber the cruisers
Cruisers being the standard starfleet design
Thus something is wrong.
Oh really? Ok if you say so then it must be true. On the other hand...

All we ever saw in TOS was the Constitution + this freighter thing in the Remastered. It was said there are about 12 of them. You really think TOS Starfleet was able to fulfill all its tasks with 12 ships and the lack of diversity was not just because of budget reasons?

In the movies we suddenly started to see other vessels like the Miranda and Oberth, later the Excelsior came up. Oh joy now we have Light Cruisers (or maybe only Frigates?) and sci ships.

We never really saw what happend in the era between the Excelsior and the Galaxy, but I bet because Starfleet likes cruisers, the Ambassador and Constellation were the only new designs in these 60 years.

TNG. Well we have the Galaxy and Sovereign, but lets not forget about all the others: Nebula, Saber, Norway, Steamrunner, Defiant, Intrepid, Prometheus, Akira. Definitly not only cruisers in here, specially after Starfleet began to move away from the big multi-role idea after the Galaxy. Since the smaller and more specialized ships already came up before the Dominion War and now, a couple decades later, Starfleet is again at war, it is of course absolutly impossible that the bigger part of Starfleet consists of more specialized vessels with the bigger buddies being a bit outnumbered.

Oh hey, lets not forget about Enterprise, you know the series where CGI made it easier to show starships. We saw 4 different Earth ships designs there, not even counting the freighters and it's debatable if even 1 of them can be considered a cruiser. Ok maybe the NX.

Edit: Maybe to make my point a bit clearer for you. The reasons why we saw as many big ships were a) because they are hero ships aka the main ships in a series or an important part of a main characters background (like the Constellation for Picard) and b) because of business reasons aka you have to build all those different ship models to just show them in a scene or even worse use them in big battles. This has been tuned down later with the Defiant or the Intrepid and large scale battles where we saw a lot more smaller ships (getting destroyed ). Yes there always were the big cruisers in the middle of the fight holding the line, but they were definitly not alone or outnumbered everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
All im suggesting is SHOWING how much a cruiser already outclasses an escort
by giving it the Name "battleship" or "tactical cruiser"
Starfleet never was big on militaristic naming. But we already have Battleships, it's jut that they are NPC vessels like the Typhoon. You want more aggressive naming? We already have that: Assault Cruiser, Dreadnought, Odyssey Tactical Cruiser.

If ever a Cruiser is able to easily outgun escorts, game balance will be completly gone, but I guess that's not really your concern, right? Cruisers are mainly ankers, but it's already possible to get a good amount of damage with them, specially with the already mentioned and already properly named Dreadnought, Tactical Cruiser, Assault Cruiser or the Excelsior.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
06-04-2012, 01:36 AM
Right slight clarification im suggesting the Typhoon and similar ships become player available
and have high level tac slots (probably commander and Lt)
and that they be shown to visibly outclass carriers

AND that the dreadnaught be renamed a battleship
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
06-04-2012, 06:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Right slight clarification im suggesting the Typhoon and similar ships become player available
and have high level tac slots (probably commander and Lt)
and that they be shown to visibly outclass carriers

AND that the dreadnaught be renamed a battleship
I highlighted a word

This is the word that you keep using that annoys me, Carriers are meant to be balanced, if you want something that Outclasses a carrier than you want something that outclasses everything. If it Outclasses other Cruisers and Carriers than it's got an advantage and having that advantage is unfair to everyone who doesn't have it.

Game Balance comes before yours mine and that guys Ego.

Nothing is to stop you from calling it a Battleship, please call your ship a Battleship and let's all move on.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
06-04-2012, 06:44 AM
Quote:
Right slight clarification im suggesting the Typhoon and similar ships become player available
and have high level tac slots (probably commander and Lt)
and that they be shown to visibly outclass carriers

AND that the dreadnaught be renamed a battleship
i would say that having a tactical commander on a cruiser wouldn't make it outgun an escort or carrier. You are still stuck with low turnrate, and no dual cannons.
I think you expect too much of a commander BOFF slot.
I mean, i have a oddy with LTcmdr tactical and a Ltd...and i don't come anywhere near an canon escort dmg wise.
But since we can't test it, it is yet to be determined.

Quote:
This has been tuned down later with the Defiant or the Intrepid and large scale battles where we saw a lot more smaller ships (getting destroyed ). Yes there always were the big cruisers in the middle of the fight holding the line, but they were definitly not alone or outnumbered everything.
due to the use of CG for all space sceens. I think DS9 used CG from season 4 on until the end, because it became more cost efficient than models and more versatile ofcourse.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
06-11-2012, 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
The Escorts vastly outnumber the cruisers
Cruisers being the standard starfleet design
Thus something is wrong.

If Tactical cruisers massively outclassed escorts then escorts would be less common.
Imho thatīs kinda exaggerated.

Iīve been keeping track of the ingame statistics of my STFs (being a bit of a statistics buff) for the past 2 months, and so far Iīve counted 286 Fed cruisers (Galaxy (7), Galaxy X (32), Odyssey (111), Excelsior (14), Star Cruiser (34), Sovereign (88)) compared against 221 Escorts (Defiant (53), Fleet (59), MVAP (109)).

If anything the carriers are currently too popular, being a non-Star Trek design, while Fed science vessels - very numerous in the series - are vastly underrepresented.

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 10:18 AM.