Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 71
03-23-2010, 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cavilier210 View Post
So theres another faction in the game with carriers thats playable? Geez wish I knew of this fabled lost faction. O my, why are we sitting here discussing the merits of spending Dev time on federation carriers in the game when another faction besides the klingons have them. Think they'll get nerfed with the klingon one too? Or was it just not OP enough to warrant a nerf bat beating?

:p
You're reading it wrong...

They're not asking for a carrier.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 72
03-23-2010, 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by claydermunch View Post
Not a cruiser of any sort.

A Battleship.
Why are people only talking about Federation Carriers? Seems like a lot of people forgot OP's post.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 73
03-23-2010, 12:37 PM
It seems that along the way to this point people in favor of the idea of a fed carrier got in here and steered the conversation towards the idea that a fed carrier would be better than a fed battleship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 74 Forget all of that..
03-23-2010, 09:54 PM
Why not just ask for a Borg cube that launches Drones instead of torpedo's into the cow level?

I mean.. Im theory if we all ask for it then we actually have a % chance to get it right?



But really, I want the dev's to play Fed side Tac officer and Eng Officer on RA level from perhaps secret accounts..... Just a few hours till you get some feeling out of it.
Seriously, you will really begin to understand why some of us are really frustrated sometimes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 75
03-24-2010, 05:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YellowPaint
Why are people only talking about Federation Carriers? Seems like a lot of people forgot OP's post.
because obviously not everyone shares the OPs opinion, the vast majority want a Carrier and dstahl (developer, engineering reports guy) said this could be on table later this year which is great news.

http://forums.startrekonline.com/sho...&postcount=159
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Okay you WW2 space junkies...you want war...lots of it and I understand that because there are not ANY combat themed Vid games available....but just for argument's sake how about some serious writing and get some great away mission story arcs done sooo...so that maybe oh I don't know, MAYBE..some of the real Star Trek fans could have an immersive Star trek stlyed universe where a little Federation science, and first contact missions were made..with all the Prime Directive soul searching thrown in for good measure...hmmmm...how about that? Oh. you want things to blow up...okay..I understand.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 77
03-25-2010, 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idlewind View Post
here we go, we need something like this.

http://screenshots.filesnetwork.com/...s2/83418_5.jpg

I believe that's BC's "Excaliber" Class. THAT's a beautiful ship!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 78
03-26-2010, 07:25 PM
I have to agree with everyone saying Federation Carriers are absolutely silly. I don't they make any sense in the context of the Star Trek universe, canon or no-canon. I don't even like Klingon Carriers. I could repeat what everyone's said to debunk the topic, but it would be a waste of text -- I'll just remark on the major parts I find particularly damaging.

1) Fighters are utterly ineffective in the way space-battles are fought. Shields render such tiny ships and their extremely weak weapons utterly null -- you need the fire power of a true starship to break through the shields.

2) It was mentioned earlier that its equally silly to compare space ship-combat to modern day naval warfare... the medium is simply not the same. Fighters are effective in modern day naval battles because they FLY... they can span the distance much quicker, and don't have to take the slow way (as in, through water). In space... it's just space... the true advantage is completely null because all ships move through space, fighter or no, and at effectively the same speeds.

On the topic of battleships... uhm, Tier 5 cruisers are already battleships. Ever fight the Mirror Universe? Ever fight the Federation (NPCs) as a Klingon? It's just these ships are labeled as cruisers officially because that's what Starfleet calls all of their large star ships. Battleship is just a generic term, same as dreadnought.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 79
03-27-2010, 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillingMeSoftly
I have to agree with everyone saying Federation Carriers are absolutely silly. I don't they make any sense in the context of the Star Trek universe, canon or no-canon. I don't even like Klingon Carriers. I could repeat what everyone's said to debunk the topic, but it would be a waste of text -- I'll just remark on the major parts I find particularly damaging.

1) Fighters are utterly ineffective in the way space-battles are fought. Shields render such tiny ships and their extremely weak weapons utterly null -- you need the fire power of a true starship to break through the shields.

2) It was mentioned earlier that its equally silly to compare space ship-combat to modern day naval warfare... the medium is simply not the same. Fighters are effective in modern day naval battles because they FLY... they can span the distance much quicker, and don't have to take the slow way (as in, through water). In space... it's just space... the true advantage is completely null because all ships move through space, fighter or no, and at effectively the same speeds.

On the topic of battleships... uhm, Tier 5 cruisers are already battleships. Ever fight the Mirror Universe? Ever fight the Federation (NPCs) as a Klingon? It's just these ships are labeled as cruisers officially because that's what Starfleet calls all of their large star ships. Battleship is just a generic term, same as dreadnought.

Exactly this.

Let them have a Carrier if they want but IMO they are useless.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 80
03-27-2010, 05:15 AM
meh the carriers is what makes the klingon empire worth playing.. giving it to the feds is a no no... unless its on the C-Store for 1000000 Cryptic points.. then im all for it
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 08:36 AM.