Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Shipyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 750
# 11
01-25-2013, 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by latinumbar View Post
By your argument then, ALL other ships should have their turn rates increased, not just cruisers.
Sure. +1 won't make all escorts or science ships even more overpowered. The Jem'Hadar Escort Carrier is getting a +1 to turn rate and that's cool. For a ship that already has a high turn rate, it's only a tiny percentage more.

Examine the Defiant:
17 turn rate increased to 18 = 5.6% turn rate increase.

Examine the Galaxy:
6 turn rate increased to 7 = 14% turn rate increase.

The bigger ships get the benefit they need and the small fast ships get a benefit that really doesn't do a heck of a lot.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 987
# 12
01-25-2013, 04:29 PM
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies. ~kalecto

Last edited by kalecto; 02-01-2013 at 08:06 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 750
# 13
01-25-2013, 04:29 PM
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies. ~kalecto

Last edited by kalecto; 02-01-2013 at 08:06 AM.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 14
01-25-2013, 04:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulleatherjacket View Post
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies. ~kalecto
What agenda did his post carry? That the dominion may have had better impulse engines?
I think his is not the only agenda being propogated in here.

And before you call me an escort lover ( for I have loved many in life) take a good look at the cruisers threads where I have supported a turn buff.

Last edited by kalecto; 02-01-2013 at 08:07 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 356
# 15
01-25-2013, 04:38 PM
Gotta agree, I also noticed the dreadnought turns faster than the Vo'quv, even if 1 degree per second. I'm shocked that thing got a turn rate north of 3. There's nothing in canon (including the episode Valiant where an escort went up against it) that supports a turn rate like that.

Despite all that, basically there's two reasons this won't happen:
  • Cryptic and PWE have repeatedly demonstrated they don't give a damn about canon, which is why non-Dominion crews are flying these ships in the first place. The canon argument doesn't hold much weight in a game where a Starfleet Admiral can go on sanctioned Starfleet missions using a starship of Jem'Hadar, Cardassian, Breen, Ferengi, Tholian, or Future manufacture (and let's not even get started on the Mirror Universe ships) any of which bear a Starfleet commission. These people would put in Cylon Basestars if players would open lock boxes for it.
  • They want to sell lock boxes and Lobi -- this is likely their primary source of revenue now (note we're getting these roughly every quarter). Brandon was out yesterday in an pseudo-"community event" getting people to queue up for Fleet Actions where, you guessed it, there were Lock Boxes dropping. They're selling a ship and they want you to open the boxes at all costs. And I do mean ALL COSTS. To you, that is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jengoz View Post
Silly Rabbit, the Devs don't play the game. That's why they have no idea about the problems.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 750
# 16
01-25-2013, 04:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
What agenda did his post carry? That the dominion may have had better impulse engines?
I think his is not the only agenda being propogated in here.
Okay, try to follow this train of logic:

He said playability is the issue. I did not suggest nerfing the dreadnought, so its playability would remain the same with my idea. Don't tell me he's simply thick in the head, and that he assumed I wanted to nerf the dreadnought's playability when I said nothing of the sort.

So whose playability is diogene0 referring to? Cruiser captains? He wants cruisers to remain as they are, so it's unlikely that he's suggesting a slightly higher turn rate would make cruiser playability worse. That would be asinine.

What does that leave him with? Escorts and science ships. He is afraid that a boost to the playability of Cruisers will threaten either one or both. I know he flies a Vesta which is a science/escort hybrid, and I doubt he wants the viability of that threatened by anything.

And also, he seems to think all cruisers should be doing is healing teams in pvp and little else, because "that's their role". As if an increased turn rate would ruin that role or the roles of the other ship classes.

Oh, looky. He thinks the best Fed cruiser is the one with a turn rate of 10 that isn't Fed at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
And before you call me an escort lover ( for I have loved many in life) take a good look at the cruisers threads where I have supported a turn buff.
I already have seen those posts, Roach. I had no intention of besmirching you unfairly. I only do it fairly, to guys like diogene0.

Last edited by fulleatherjacket; 01-25-2013 at 04:52 PM.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 818
# 17
01-25-2013, 04:52 PM
YEAHHHHHH, go on cryptic, very good!!!
a ship MORE than twice the side of my gal x have the SAME turn rate.... yeah everything is good and logic in a perfect world.
and people said that i wanted a god ship when i suggest a 0.5 degree boost of the galaxy dreadnought base turn rate,but don't find anything wrong with the jem dreadnought.

nothing wrong with the breen ship also, everything is cool, we absolutly not favor some ship against another... what could i said
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,202
# 18
01-25-2013, 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulleatherjacket View Post
This is one of the more fatuous responses I've seen on this forum. Realism isn't the issue, playability is. Most Fed cruisers have the agility of a paralysed manatee.
And they also have incredible tanking abilities. This carrier obviously doesn't. This could explain why the inertia/turnrate is higher. I know it's a major complaint from people flying cruisers, they want DPS, tanking and maneuvrability, which won't be added in this game for obvious reasons.

BTW the original complaint comes from the compared sized of ships.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 19
01-25-2013, 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulleatherjacket View Post
Okay, try to follow this train of logic:

He said playability is the issue. I did not suggest nerfing the dreadnought, so its playability would remain the same with my idea. Don't tell me he's simply thick in the head, and that he assumed I wanted to nerf the dreadnought's playability when I said nothing of the sort.

So whose playability is diogene0 referring to? Cruiser captains? He wants cruisers to remain as they are, so it's unlikely that he's suggesting a slightly higher turn rate would make cruiser playability worse. That would be asinine.

What does that leave him with? Escorts and science ships. He is afraid that a boost to the playability of Cruisers will threaten either one or both. I know he flies a Vesta which is a science/escort hybrid, and I doubt he wants the viability of that threatened by anything.

And also, he seems to think all cruisers should be doing is healing teams in pvp and little else, because "that's their role". As if an increased turn rate would ruin that role or the roles of the other ship classes.

Oh, looky. He thinks the best Fed cruiser is the one with a turn rate of 10 that isn't Fed at all.



I already have seen those posts, Roach. I had no intention of besmirching you unfairly. I only do it fairly, to guys like diogene0.

Whatever agenda you attribute the "escort fanboy" your agenda is clearly that of raising the turn rate of cruisers. One must conclude you command a cruiser and in doing so are rather adamant regarding your agenda. Therefore, it is also safe to conclude you are a "cruiser fanboy" and your posts be viewed in such light. You continue to make such statements regarding other players while obfuscating your own proclivities.
All cloaks should be canon.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 20
01-25-2013, 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulleatherjacket View Post
Okay, try to follow this train of logic:

He said playability is the issue. I did not suggest nerfing the dreadnought, so its playability would remain the same with my idea. Don't tell me he's simply thick in the head, and that he assumed I wanted to nerf the dreadnought's playability when I said nothing of the sort.

So whose playability is diogene0 referring to? Cruiser captains? He wants cruisers to remain as they are, so it's unlikely that he's suggesting a slightly higher turn rate would make cruiser playability worse. That would be asinine.

What does that leave him with? Escorts and science ships. He is afraid that a boost to the playability of Cruisers will threaten either one or both. I know he flies a Vesta which is a science/escort hybrido, and I doubt he wants the viability of that threatened by anything.

And also, he seems to think all cruisers should be doing is healing teams in pvp and little else, because "that's their role". As if an increased turn rate would ruin that role or the roles of the other ship classes.

Oh, looky. He thinks the best Fed cruiser is the one with a turn rate of 10 that isn't Fed at all.



I already have seen those posts, Roach. I had no intention of besmirching you unfairly. I only do it fairly, to guys like diogene0.
Im just saying his first post held none of the villiany that you attributed to it.
I know villiany, it had none.

As to playabilty, I agree. The Cruisers do need a buff to turm and enertia to make them more enjoyable. Among other things.
My point was not to attack you iether, just to point out what I saw as an injustice as others have done to me when I have acted so myself at times. Frankly, I often put the ass on assume

Last edited by bitemepwe; 01-25-2013 at 05:14 PM.
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 06:39 PM.