Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Federation Attack Craft
10-28-2010, 07:49 PM
I had an idea for a new federation ship. It is half meant as a counter against carriers, but is not meant as a direct counter.

The idea is an upgraded Peregrine or Federation attack fighter. The ship would be able to summon two 'wing-men' (support fighters). These wing-men could be set to defend or attack a certain target. They would function similar to bridge officers on the ground.

On stats itself, I think it should be conservative.
3 front slots 2 rear
2 Engineer consoles
2 Science consoles
2 Tactical consoles
I would like to see three bridge officer universal slots or perhaps one of each specialty, as that fits the style of federation ships.

Each support fighter should mount a single beam array and a single torp launcher. They are meant to be more survival-able than other deploy-able attack craft but are limited in number. Perhaps it would be possible to assign a bridge officer to them, giving them an ensign ability perhaps.

The goal is to create a unique ship for those who don't want massive ships but still want to be able to survive. Honestly I love the smaller ships, they just feel more personal.

The pvp part is that the support fighters can be tagged to other ships to cover them. When the tagged ship is attacked, the support fighters swing into action to defend them. This frees the true escorts to tackle the enemy capital ships. If facing only capital ships, the fighters would be able to team up and attack together.

Canon reference is here:http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federation_attack_fighter
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
10-28-2010, 08:44 PM
nifty idea kinda like "galaxy wings" maybe?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
10-28-2010, 09:49 PM
Nice idea, almost identical to the one I mentioned earlier today and posted in the '4th federation class' thread.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
10-29-2010, 05:04 AM
It is very similar, and honestly I just love the idea. It gives the fed a bit of a hand in the numbers game without displacing the spike damage of escorts or copying the carrier.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
10-29-2010, 10:26 AM
As already posted in the thread Kaiser mentioned, I do like the general idea. It's "fresh" and unique.

Peregrines, though, I could see work in T1 or maybe T2, but it'd be weird to have three shuttles stand up to high-end capital ships like the Negh'var. However, what if you take this idea, but instead of courier ships you fly a squadron of Centaur-frigates? The PvE already makes use of groups of three Centaurs to create an encounter balanced to a single ship of greater capacity. Plus it could be a funny "comeback" for an old friend from your days of Tier 1 and would seem less suicidal.

To quote myself:
Quote:
If your lead ship explodes, you don't respawn right away, you "switch" into one of the Centaurs that is still alive. And you have an ability with which you can "summon" a replacement frigate to warp in and join your formation (cooldown starts when the "slot" becomes vacant to prevent instant reinforcements). Only when all your frigates were destroyed do you have to wait for respawn.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
10-29-2010, 10:44 AM
It's a nice idea...

but on second thought, do we really want to fix the problem by creating more spam targets? Oh boy... what a pickle cryptic has made
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
10-29-2010, 11:07 AM
My original intention was to consider a 'pet class' for Star Fleet that does not enrage half of the cononists, who like me, find no place in Star Fleet for a carrier. It is an alternative slant on the notion; providong what some players want, namely 'pets'.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
10-29-2010, 11:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEONHART View Post
but on second thought, do we really want to fix the problem by creating more spam targets? Oh boy... what a pickle cryptic has made
Well, to be honest, the real "problem" is Feds often lacking teamwork and experience with that class of ship. Most people treat the carrier like any other ship - which is wrong (to be fair, you first encounter it in T5 and it did receive a big update just a couple days ago, so it's understandable). Also, escorts not doing their job.
Check the carrier sub-forum for some good anti-carrier tactics should you still need them.

A new ship won't solve these underlying issues - but who knows, maybe this one would encourage more people to go after the pets rather than the carrier, which is the better tactic when encountering one.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9 indeed
10-29-2010, 12:24 PM
A new ship wont solve the function of a klingon carrier. Klingons love to sacrifice themselves so thats why they have carriers. thats easy. fed do it when its mandatory and needed. Perhaps making what we fed have in BO powers more useful against a certain type of ship "fighter, shuttle". The smaller the ship the easier it is to be crushed by the BO abilities rift, or photonic shockwave, or gavametric wave. but thats scienceabilities. for engineering we can use warp plasma and for tactical it is mining distributed mining attributes. mines tend to go towards one target instead of multiple targets when a few targets are around.

A new ship is just to easy of an answer and has to many variables to deal with. Also yes you are right the federation did not have carreirs but we do know certain ships can carry a number of fighters and shuttles. The canonist just say to have those ships utilize that function rather then make a new ship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
10-29-2010, 12:36 PM
Now that you mention it, here is my shuttle proposal!

Imo, that's what is really missing from the game. :p
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 02:56 AM.