Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 319
# 21
04-05-2013, 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelingmaster View Post
Part of the point of the Defiant and Gal X having to use a console is so they have to give another console up for the cloaking ability. In the case of the Defiant (especially the Fleet Defiant), this is definitely needed. . .since the KDF counterpart, the raptors, don't turn quite as well (especially the free Qin, which I believe is still borked in turning axis) and have slightly less hullpoints and hull mod, it's a fair tradeoff.

All I'm seeing here is more Federation greed for stuff they're not even supposed to friggin have. Just shush up and work with what you've got.
I think KDF Cruisers need another console too
Rihannsu
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 258
# 22
04-05-2013, 10:03 AM
The people who think Feds should have cloak on all of their ships will think that no matter what's done with it on the Defiant and Galaxy.

The entire concept of "Enjoy these ships because this is special" is lost on people who want to fly a cloaking Jem Bug or Odyssey.

The only solution to it is to hit them on the nose with a rolled up news paper and say "Bad Fed! Bad! Bad!"

If some one wants cloak on most of their ships, they can play KDF (or when LoR hits, Romulan/Fed).
Rihannsu
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 258
# 23
04-05-2013, 10:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by general1devon View Post
yeah but the cloak shouldnt be a console, it isnt on the KDF side, and its only useable on the Defiant/ galaxy X so there is no ****ing reason it should be a console
Your mistake is thinking that if they get rid of the console, you'll get to keep the extra console slot. You won't.

Your attempt to get a buff through trickeration isn't working, so let it go.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,879
# 24
04-05-2013, 10:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by general1devon View Post
I think KDF Cruisers need another console too
I could actually get behind this idea with some KDF Cruiser-type ships, esp. since as things stand, once you de-cloak on a KDF cruiser, you're pretty much stuck out of cloak until either you die, or you don't have any enemies in range.

Usually (most often) the former vs. the latter.

Unlike a Dready or Defiant, where the Latter is more often the case than the former, unless their team can't coordinate.

just sayin'...
"when you're out of Birds of Prey, you're out of ships."

Look into Vanilla PvP if you're tired of the endless pursuit of grind, utterly unbalanced selections of geardo-inspired traits, and generally unbalanced and careless 'development' made mostly to turn this game into a second job.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 319
# 25
04-06-2013, 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickngo View Post
I could actually get behind this idea with some KDF Cruiser-type ships, esp. since as things stand, once you de-cloak on a KDF cruiser, you're pretty much stuck out of cloak until either you die, or you don't have any enemies in range.

Usually (most often) the former vs. the latter.

Unlike a Dready or Defiant, where the Latter is more often the case than the former, unless their team can't coordinate.

just sayin'...
Part of this Confused me, But I do agree that once you de-cloak, whether a KDF Cruiser or a Dread, your pretty much uncloaked until the enemy is destroyed, especiallay if your soloing, I suppose its easier with the Defiant but I dont have one of those so IDK, but I think the overall bigger problem is Cruisers are becoming the masters of none, while Escorts in both factions are becoming heavily favored by Dev's except for their Oddy. But right now I'd just like to see something to give the Dread, and even some of the KDF cruisers, an edge
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
# 26
04-08-2013, 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by general1devon View Post
... But right now I'd just like to see something to give the Dread, and even some of the KDF cruisers, an edge

I believe most people's confusion about the Dreadnought Cruiser comes about from not being able to fly it as aggressively as they would like. This is because of the Cruiser class archetype being focussed on tanking, rather than damage-dealing, resulting from the games core balancing scheme. It is widely acknowledged that this balance is not a perfect representation of Trek lore, but does strive to get as close as possible.

That said, if I had the opportunity to redesign the Dreadnought Cruiser, I would do so by adjusting the BOff layout to the following:

* Commander Engineering
* Lt. Engineering
* Lt. Com. Tactical
* Lt. Science
* Ens. Universal

This layout provides enough flexibility that the Dreadnought will be able to more damage through Tac abilities, particularly a Lt. Com. Tac ability such as Beam Overload 3, Torpedo High Yield 3, or Cannon Rapid Fire 2. The universal Ensign slot allows for customisation depending on the player's preference.

I would also add a one more Tactical or Science console (the realm of 5x Eng consoles can be left for Fleet Galaxy Retrofit) to bring this in line with the latest generation of 10-console ships (which cost the same amount of Zen as the Dread, coincidently). Alternatively, these stats alongside a 10% hull/shield boost, would work well as a Fleet Dreadnought Cruiser. Its current turn rate should be kept as a balancing factor.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 135
# 27
04-08-2013, 03:19 AM
Option 1:

The cloak gets integrated without loosing a console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate and hit points

All Klingon ships with a cloack gain +1 Tac console slot


Option 2:

Cloak gets integrate with loss of console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate, hit points and a tac concolse slot


Option 3:

No changes.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 283
# 28
04-19-2013, 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the1tigglet View Post
I actually agree with you OP. IT would make it far simpler wouldn't it.

I personally would like this done as I sometimes jump on my Sao Paulo Defiant just for kicks and adding the consoles I need as a sci captain can be troublesome.

I'd also like to see the cloak for these ships be allowed to cloak in battle. It makes sense because they did it throughout the DS9 series.
What? So you want a free battle cloak then? And an extra console? It's an attack oriented ship, it isn't really meant for science, that's what you give up by not flying a science ship :\ .

@sechserpackung, if the cloak is in the ships' science slots why are you trying to penalize their tactical slots?
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 484
# 29
04-24-2013, 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sechserpackung View Post
Option 1:

The cloak gets integrated without loosing a console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate and hit points

All Klingon ships with a cloack gain +1 Tac console slot


Option 2:

Cloak gets integrate with loss of console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate, hit points and a tac concolse slot


Option 3:

No changes.

Funny how all your options focus on making the klinkers even more potent, despite them already having he best cruisers, while simultaneously nerfing the Fed ships.


Odd.


That aside: the Cloack-is-a-console thing actually meshes well with cannon.
Both ships on the fed side that employ cloaks had the cloaks added way later. The cloak was not part of the core design. Unlike klinker ships that were build with cloaks from the get go.


So you "adding" a cloak via console actually comes closest to trek lore this game has ever got.




That aside:

All cloaks should be battle cloaks - differing in stealth strength and cooldown based on race and ship.#

Feds and klinkers cruisers get the longest cooldown.
Romulan gets the 2nd best cooldown and best stealth.
Klinker bops get the best cooldown and 2nd best stealth.#

done.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 319
# 30
04-30-2013, 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starblade7 View Post
I believe most people's confusion about the Dreadnought Cruiser comes about from not being able to fly it as aggressively as they would like. This is because of the Cruiser class archetype being focussed on tanking, rather than damage-dealing, resulting from the games core balancing scheme. It is widely acknowledged that this balance is not a perfect representation of Trek lore, but does strive to get as close as possible.

That said, if I had the opportunity to redesign the Dreadnought Cruiser, I would do so by adjusting the BOff layout to the following:

* Commander Engineering
* Lt. Engineering
* Lt. Com. Tactical
* Lt. Science
* Ens. Universal

This layout provides enough flexibility that the Dreadnought will be able to more damage through Tac abilities, particularly a Lt. Com. Tac ability such as Beam Overload 3, Torpedo High Yield 3, or Cannon Rapid Fire 2. The universal Ensign slot allows for customisation depending on the player's preference.

I would also add a one more Tactical or Science console (the realm of 5x Eng consoles can be left for Fleet Galaxy Retrofit) to bring this in line with the latest generation of 10-console ships (which cost the same amount of Zen as the Dread, coincidently). Alternatively, these stats alongside a 10% hull/shield boost, would work well as a Fleet Dreadnought Cruiser. Its current turn rate should be kept as a balancing factor.
See I dont look at the Dread as just a crusier, to me it is a tactical cruiser, like an oddy, only with less slots and configured like a Eng cruiser, though I like your reworked layout.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sechserpackung View Post
Option 1:

The cloak gets integrated without loosing a console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate and hit points

All Klingon ships with a cloack gain +1 Tac console slot


Option 2:

Cloak gets integrate with loss of console slot.
Gal-X and Defiant loose turn rate, hit points and a tac concolse slot


Option 3:

No changes.
Wow, I can almost smell the KDF FTW in this post man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by greendragon527 View Post
What? So you want a free battle cloak then? And an extra console? It's an attack oriented ship, it isn't really meant for science, that's what you give up by not flying a science ship :\ .

@sechserpackung, if the cloak is in the ships' science slots why are you trying to penalize their tactical slots?
I would kind of have to agree the Defiant is not a sciencey ship, however it should be a Tactical Orientated ship as it is one of the Federation's only real warships, the other being the Dread of course.
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 02:21 PM.