Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
I ran a search on this but found no hits...

To Cryptic:

I noticed that current Federation ships only have fast + heavily armed escorts, lumbering cruisers, or precision-aiming science vessels. Why not introduce a T5 hybrid of the above, namely a battleship?

I envision a battleship as a tactical captain's heavy cruiser, with more emphasis towards tactical bridge officer abilities and less towards engineering. Proposed specs would be as follows:

4 Weapons Slots front
4 Weapon Slots rear

1 Cmdr Tactical station
1 Ensign Tactical station
1 Lt. Cmdr Engineer station
1 Lt. Engineer station
1 Lt. Science station

4 Engineering Console slots
2 Science Console slots
4 Tactical Console slots

-Can mount Cannons

Other specs would be in-line with the Sovereign or other T5 cruisers.



Of course, the above is just brainstorming to try to get more ship variety into the game. Essentially, this is an attempt to meld escort firepower in a cruiser frame without tossing game balance. Can such a ship class work in STO? All constructive comments / suggestions are welcome.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
08-24-2010, 03:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shar487
I ran a search on this but found no hits...

To Cryptic:

I noticed that current Federation ships only have fast + heavily armed escorts, lumbering cruisers, or precision-aiming science vessels. Why not introduce a T5 hybrid of the above, namely a battleship?

I envision a battleship as a tactical captain's heavy cruiser, with more emphasis towards tactical bridge officer abilities and less towards engineering. Proposed specs would be as follows:

4 Weapons Slots front
4 Weapon Slots rear

1 Cmdr Tactical station
1 Ensign Tactical station
1 Lt. Cmdr Engineer station
1 Lt. Engineer station
1 Lt. Science station

4 Engineering Console slots
2 Science Console slots
4 Tactical Console slots

-Can mount Cannons

Other specs would be in-line with the Sovereign or other T5 cruisers.



Of course, the above is just brainstorming to try to get more ship variety into the game. Essentially, this is an attempt to meld escort firepower in a cruiser frame without tossing game balance. Can such a ship class work in STO? All constructive comments / suggestions are welcome.
aye & the klingons can have 3 of those please but just to annoy the feddybears give the klingon version the same hull & shields + universal BO slots
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
08-24-2010, 04:51 PM
Ummm commander engineer and tac... Me thinks not...

How about a Commander Tac and a Commander Sci... and the same loadout as the new Klingon Carrier.
Then feds too can juggle their aux power. Dual Commander Eng and Tac is too easy mode.

In fact I hear the Enterprise J is on the menu.... seems like a good candidate to get one slot for a pet shuttle, and a carrier loadout.


EDIT sorry I read your post wrong you didn't say dual eng and tac commanders... however I still think a mirror of the Klings new carrier would be fine... and give the feds a carrier they have been crying for.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
08-24-2010, 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husanak View Post
***SNIP***


EDIT sorry I read your post wrong you didn't say dual eng and tac commanders... however I still think a mirror of the Klings new carrier would be fine... and give the feds a carrier they have been crying for.
I did keep the bridge officer specs in-line with other T5 ships, namely 1 Cmdr Console + 1 Lt. Cmdr + 2 Lt's + 1 Ensign, so the above doesn't violate any current T5 standards. Also, Klingons ships and the Galaxy-X can already mount cannons, so there's nothing special there either.

The primary function of the proposed battleship class is to place a Commander tactical station in a heavy cruiser sized frame, thereby trading some durability for extra fire power. Battleships can easily be implemented for both Feds and Klingons without too much difficultly.

I will say that the Galaxy-X should have been a battleship instead of a dreadnought since its current set-up is worse than a T5 Galaxy-refit it supposedly replaces. The latter scenario makes no sense whatsoever.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
08-24-2010, 07:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shar487
I ran a search on this but found no hits...

To Cryptic:

I noticed that current Federation ships only have fast + heavily armed escorts, lumbering cruisers, or precision-aiming science vessels. Why not introduce a T5 hybrid of the above, namely a battleship?

I envision a battleship as a tactical captain's heavy cruiser, with more emphasis towards tactical bridge officer abilities and less towards engineering. Proposed specs would be as follows:

4 Weapons Slots front
4 Weapon Slots rear

1 Cmdr Tactical station
1 Ensign Tactical station
1 Lt. Cmdr Engineer station
1 Lt. Engineer station
1 Lt. Science station

4 Engineering Console slots
2 Science Console slots
4 Tactical Console slots

-Can mount Cannons

Other specs would be in-line with the Sovereign or other T5 cruisers.



Of course, the above is just brainstorming to try to get more ship variety into the game. Essentially, this is an attempt to meld escort firepower in a cruiser frame without tossing game balance. Can such a ship class work in STO? All constructive comments / suggestions are welcome.
4/2/4 consoles? T5 ships have a 4/3/2 setup, so you're asking for a bonus one?

You want cannons on a ship that can't effectively use them, and at no cost? Cannons are primarily what set Escorts apart and why people choose Escorts and they can make good use of them due to their turn rate. Cruiser turn rates can't really support them, which is why you don't see them on any Galaxy Xs... except maybe those captained by people who don't know any better.

You're asking for the Commander and Lt. Commander BO stations to be broken up, giving the ship more versatility than virtually any other ship that isn't the Bird-of-Prey (which is made of tinfoil to compensate for that fact).

Although a hybrid class would be a nice idea... your suggestion toward that end doesn't work.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
08-24-2010, 08:20 PM
If I were to make a counter suggestion for a "middle ground" ship it would be something more like this:

Hybrid Class, T5:

Hull 35,000
Shield Modifier 95%
Fore Weapons - 4
Aft Weapons 4
No cannons.
Crew 500
Tactical Consoles - 3
Engineering Consoles - 3
Science Consoles 2
Turn Rate 10
Impulse Modifier - .20
Device Slots 3
Inertia 35
Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. BO Slot: Engineering, Science
Ensign BO Slot: Engineering

***

Or, to break that down...

Hull 35,000

Slightly lower than the T5 Battle Cruiser. Lower than T5 Cruisers. Much higher than T5 Escorts. A veritable middle ground between Cruisers and Escorts.

Shield Modifier - 95%

Whereas the T5 Cruisers have 100% effectiveness from Shields, and Escorts only have 75%, the hybrid would clock in at 95%, taking a slight hit but still possessing enough durability to be viable. Essentially these are the levels possessed of the Stardrive section of a separated Retrofit Exploration Cruiser.

Fore Weapons - 4
Aft Weapons 4
No cannons.

No change from the T5 Cruisers, resulting in one more weapon than found on similar Tier Escorts, at the cost of cannon use.

Crew 500

Half of a Galaxy Retrofit or Star Cruiser, more than twice a T5 Escort. Enough for a decent repair rate.

Tactical Consoles - 3
Engineering Consoles - 3
Science Consoles 2

One Engineering console sacrificed from a typical Assault Cruiser, or one Tactical Console from a Fleet Escort. In short, the ship is down one console.

Turn Rate 10

Much higher turn rate than an Assault Cruiser (6), and slighlt higher than a Battle Cruiser (9) though significantly lower than your standard T5 Escort (15), though without the use of cannons, turning at that rate wouldn't be required.

Impulse Modifier - .20

Equal to a T5 Escort, Bird-of-Prey or Raptor.

Device Slots 3

One less than a Cruiser, one more than an Escort, equal to a Battle Cruiser.

Inertia 35

On a par with the Deep Space Science Vessel. Much better than T5 Cruisers, but much worse than T5 Escorts.

Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. BO Slot: Engineering, Science
Ensign BO Slot: Engineering

The exact load out on a Fleet Escort.

In a nutshell: A Tactical ship that is smaller and faster than a Cruiser, and much more durable than an Escort with a few minor sacrifices made to account for it's increased versatility and to offset it moving away from the Achilles' Heels that the Cruisers and Escorts possess (the Cruiser's lack of manoeuvrability, and the Escorts lack of durability)

More of a "Destroyer" perhaps than a "Battleship," but a more realistic compromise.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
08-24-2010, 09:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyHappyJoyJoy View Post
4/2/4 consoles? T5 ships have a 4/3/2 setup, so you're asking for a bonus one?
You bring up a good point... how about 4/1/4? Battleships are meant for combat, so an extra science console should be tossed out in favor of maximum engineering and tactical consoles.

Quote:
You want cannons on a ship that can't effectively use them, and at no cost? Cannons are primarily what set Escorts apart and why people choose Escorts and they can make good use of them due to their turn rate. Cruiser turn rates can't really support them, which is why you don't see them on any Galaxy Xs... except maybe those captained by people who don't know any better.
You are correct -- cruisers and other large capital ships don't actually have the turn rates to support fixed cannon mounts. The cannon mounts simply reflect the battleship's combat-oriented role as opposed to Starfleet's present cruisers. All Klingon ships can already mount cannons at no penalty, while the Fed's have the Galaxy-X. It is possible to give battleships expanded cannon arcs, but I'm sure many would oppose the latter.

Quote:
You're asking for the Commander and Lt. Commander BO stations to be broken up, giving the ship more versatility than virtually any other ship that isn't the Bird-of-Prey (which is made of tinfoil to compensate for that fact).

Although a hybrid class would be a nice idea... your suggestion toward that end doesn't work.

There's nothing wrong with breaking up the Commander and Lt.Cmdr BO. Yes, it adds versatility -- this is intentional since the battleship is a hybrid vessel. No, it won't match a T5 BoP's universal consoles since the battleship stations are still fixed. Also, the T5 BoP's battle cloak makes it very had to kill once it decides to run.

Still, thanks for the feedback... this thread needs more interested parties
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
08-24-2010, 09:50 PM
Cruiser tank + Escort firepower = nuh uh.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
08-24-2010, 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyHappyJoyJoy View Post
If I were to make a counter suggestion for a "middle ground" ship it would be something more like this:

Hybrid Class, T5:

Hull 35,000
Shield Modifier 95%
Fore Weapons - 4
Aft Weapons 4
No cannons.
Crew 500
Tactical Consoles - 3
Engineering Consoles - 3
Science Consoles 2
Turn Rate 10
Impulse Modifier - .20
Device Slots 3
Inertia 35
Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. Commander BO Slot: Tactical
Lt. BO Slot: Engineering, Science
Ensign BO Slot: Engineering

***

***SNIP***
This is a good start. As mentioned above, how about changing the console set up to 4 engineering, 1 science, and 4 tactical. A battleship is intended as a heavy combat vessel, so science consoles are largely out of place in such a design.

Given the ship's slower turn rates, cannons will only see extremely limited use, but given how the Galaxy-X and all Klingon ships already have cannon access, I don't see why battleships can't do the same.

I still believe the Commander and Lt. Commander stations need not match. We already see this in NPC ships like the Romulan Deridex cruiser / battlship using Viral Matrix, but everything else you've mentioned looks good.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
08-24-2010, 10:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadlyShoe
Cruiser tank + Escort firepower = nuh uh.
How well does a cruiser tank without an Engineering Commander station?
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 03:11 AM.