Going through the threads, I would like to hit each point. I will start off by saying I have no proof one way or the other if either side is more powerful, just would like to point out the points on both sides.
1) Kingons only have pvp so we are better at it and that is the only reason you Feds lose.
So, that claims that klingons have no advantage in game other than skill. If that is so, then there is no problem with the devs making sure to balance out the ship power.
2) Klingons only have PvP, so we should have more powerfull ships.
When you do get a fair amount of PvE, you will probably get nerfed and then there will be a mighty outcry.
If you had started out with balanced ship power, you would not have complained about it.
3) If 3 Feds would just gang up on one ship at a time, you would win.
If this is balanced, then I am the King of America.
4) Klingons must be more powerful, they have cloaks.
Most klingons are probably better at pvp than feds, becaue that is all they do. Or it might also have to do with the ships as well. I don't know.
Klingons may have different powers, like speed and cloaks, but we might have more hull points or shields. Again, no real proof.
What I do know is there needs to be a real balance from both sides if pvp will work long term. Not exact ships, but some real balance.
I'm not saying to nerf Klingons. I'm not saying to nerf anything. What i am saying is, it would not be a bad thing for some internal testing to see what is fair for everyone.
If you have a problem with this, please share your wisdom.