# 21
09-26-2012, 05:04 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tebsu
no they dont. the heavy cruiser is just awesome. and if you think you are turning too slow, there are always escorts to protect you
 |
Cruisers are the iconic ships of star trek, not escorts.
For the devs, cruisers are good to make $$, because they are popular, but thats all.
Escorts are still the devs favorite ships. They get any advantage the devs can find, that just makes me sick.
Seeing Cruisers so disadvantaged and useless, shows how careles the devs are when it comes to ships. They just want their escorts get every advantage, why dont you just give them some more extra weapons power (+50) or some additional Cmdr. Enigneering BOFF?
Is it so hard to understand that in Star Trek cruisers are not just tanks, they are the biggest, and most powerful and dangerous ships. Escorts are just some small special ships that can generat high burst damage for a short time, but they aren't good on their own. Cruisers shouldn't need protection of escorts, it's the other way round.
Giving Escorts even more maneuverability shows the devs haven't understood anything about star trek at all. (or they just don't care, and want to boost their favourite ships even more)
Seriously i'm really infuriated about this.
CRYPTIC, please give us Cruisers that do not feel like a punishment, starting with the Galaxy Class:
enhanced exploration cruiser retrofit 3 pack
very little work for you + 50$ from me = a huge leap in our friendship!
# 22
09-26-2012, 07:16 AM
# 23
09-26-2012, 07:18 AM
# 24
09-26-2012, 07:25 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by futurepastnow
Should be N.S.P. That's what Vulcan ships use.
|
But yes, that too would be nice in addition to the new registry!!!
# 25
09-26-2012, 08:18 AM
# 26
09-26-2012, 08:30 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drkfrontiers
Whats up with the continual (cough) buffing of only Fed ships in this (cough) game.
|
)
# 27
09-26-2012, 08:33 AM
Nice patch, will be great to see more diversity.
Also, how are we gonna recognise the NPC Azura and Vov'wI from the player ones?
Not saying escorts are underpowered or something, but I'm liking flying cruisers much more. Also, I perform better in them than I do in other ship types. Therefore I see no reason to consider them "disadvantaged and useless". Also, there's loads of them (on FED side, anyway). So I see no specific reason for the devs to focus on them.
_________OK, to make it clear, what ensues is a signature__________Also, how are we gonna recognise the NPC Azura and Vov'wI from the player ones?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by yreodred
Since escorts get everything anyway so why don't they get rid of cruisers completely?
Cruisers are the iconic ships of star trek, not escorts. For the devs, cruisers are good to make $$, because they are popular, but thats all. Escorts are still the devs favorite ships. They get any advantage the devs can find, that just makes me sick. Seeing Cruisers so disadvantaged and useless, shows how careles the devs are when it comes to ships. They just want their escorts get every advantage, why dont you just give them some more extra weapons power (+50) or some additional Cmdr. Enigneering BOFF? Is it so hard to understand that in Star Trek cruisers are not just tanks, they are the biggest, and most powerful and dangerous ships. Escorts are just some small special ships that can generat high burst damage for a short time, but they aren't good on their own. Cruisers shouldn't need protection of escorts, it's the other way round. Giving Escorts even more maneuverability shows the devs haven't understood anything about star trek at all. (or they just don't care, and want to boost their favourite ships even more) Seriously i'm really infuriated about this. |
TOIVA, Toi Vaxx, Toia Vix: Bring in the Allegiance class
Toi'Va, Ti'vath, Toivia: Design those long promised Tier 5 C-Store Klingon ships
Btw: Still lots of things to fix in these new forums.
# 28
09-26-2012, 09:19 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zer0niusrex
Systems:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontdrunkimshoot
what happened to the 20 turn rate? by how small it is, it should at least get 18. its only got 6 weapons, and is very fragile, and doesn't even have a cloak like a bop
|
Seriously, do you not want to sell the Aquarius to a broader audience than will likely buy it?
This ship is the worst of the worst, a turn rate of 20 would have made it serviceably bad but not laughably bad. Now it remains in the latter category.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drkfrontiers
Whats up with the continual ******* buffing of only Fed ships in this **** game.
|
I'll just quote myself.
(Due to several ships having different shield mods than was actually listed, it's possible parts of this are inaccurate - please feel free to correct me.)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ussultimatum
I think you missed a few things.
1) Aquarius Base Turn = 17 vs. Hegh'ta Base Turn = 21 2) Hegh'ta gets innate Enhanced Battle Cloak vs. Aquarius gets Nothing 3) Aquarius Shield Mod = 0.66 (regular) & 0.72 (Fleet) vs. RA Hegh'ta Shield Mod 0.8 4) Hegh'ta completely universal BOFF stations including Commander & Lt Commander vs. Aquarius with Uni Lt & Ensign. 5) Hegh'ta 120k dilithium or free choice at level up vs. Aquarius at 2K Z points and T4 Fleet Shipyard. The Aquarius is a Hegh'ta with no battle cloak and no special ability at all with even less shields than the Hegh'ta and FOUR POINTS lower base turn rate. Battle cloak, which grants both an offense bonus as well as a defense tool to compensate for poor survivability is no where to be found on this ship, nor is any equivalent ability of comparable power. EDIT: The only thing the Aquarius gets in comparison is 1 more console slot for the Fleet version and 1 ensign power. The design of this ship fails on multiple levels, on top of that it costs 2k Z points for ONE character and requires a T4 Fleet ship yard! |
I'm not saying this ship needs to have a Battle Cloak - but it certainly needs to have something so it isn't one of the worst examples of a noob trap available.
Last edited by ussultimatum; 09-26-2012 at 09:22 AM.
# 29
09-26-2012, 09:26 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ussultimatum
Seriously, do you not want to sell the Aquarius to a broader audience than will likely buy it?
This ship is the worst of the worst, a turn rate of 20 would have made it serviceably bad but not laughably bad. Now it remains in the latter category. I'm not sure how anyone can look at the Aquarius and say that it does not need a buff with a straight face. I'll just quote myself. (Due to several ships having different shield mods than was actually listed, it's possible parts of this are inaccurate - please feel free to correct me.) I'm not saying this ship needs to have a Battle Cloak - but it certainly needs to have something so it isn't one of the worst examples of a noob trap available. |
VA Digital Media, PvP Boot Camp | Editor, PvP Boot Camp Companion Guide
# 30
09-26-2012, 09:27 AM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by elandarksky
Well the ships, (escort, fleet escort, and escort retrofit) and (aquarius) are all very flimsy federation ships, i thought the +1 turn rate was BECAUSE they are too flimsy? (just my best guess
) |
VA Digital Media, PvP Boot Camp | Editor, PvP Boot Camp Companion Guide
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:07 AM.