Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
11-03-2010, 06:26 AM
I am going to break character because some of the things I have to say just won't work.

I like the idea and conept of this ship. I would fly one. However, the "gunships" are way underpowered as currently implemented. Pets work in either two fashions. They are really strong ie the carriers BOP or there are a ton of them. Currnelty this has neither. Your starting point is excellant. Given the small size of the ship you have to go with strong. Realize this is the Federation and sending peope to die is not an easy thing for Starfleet Captain to do. They won't do it unless its unavoidable or they can increase the odds of survival. With the limited numbers of "gunships" you have to find a way to improved survivability. I tried to give it survivability by incorporating both a mask energy signature and a jam sesnsor power. I think those are the bare minimum that needs to be added. The rear mounted turret is also a nice additon and not really overpowering but we can debate that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
11-03-2010, 08:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
Sounds like a T5 Excelsior with a weaker hull and a launchable pet. Why not just fly an Excelsior in that case?
'Cause its more nimble and it has pets. I LIKE pets and I like going fast, so its more entertaining (to me) than an Excelsior in every way .

(though since I also enjoy single-cannon based cruisers, the Exclesior's Lt Cmdr tac seat IS calling to me. Just not to the tune of 1200 points... yet.)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
11-03-2010, 08:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitzy
Ideally a federation 'carrier/interceptor' should use the same materials already in the game, IE the fighters.
Well, this is mostly an exercise in game balance - if it actually came to scavenging graphical assets to make it playable on LIVe, I'd assume the gunships would steal the appearance of the runabouts, though possibly scaled up about 50%.

I keep thinking the T5 would look a lot like the Dauntless (yes, I know that's not actually a Federation ship). I just like the sharply pointed saucers for ships that 'go fast'. An updated Yeager would be cool for the tier 2 or 3.

Quote:
I suggested back when this was biggish in the beta that they create a light carrier. Essentially a nerfed science ship with 2 pets. The science ship would loose some a console and some crew in exchange for the pets.
Sounds like we're basically on the same page after starting from different places. That's a good sign.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
11-03-2010, 08:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore_Stipe
I am going to break character because some of the things I have to say just won't work.

I like the idea and conept of this ship. I would fly one. However, the "gunships" are way underpowered as currently implemented. Pets work in either two fashions. They are really strong ie the carriers BOP or there are a ton of them. Currnelty this has neither. Your starting point is excellant. Given the small size of the ship you have to go with strong. Realize this is the Federation and sending peope to die is not an easy thing for Starfleet Captain to do. They won't do it unless its unavoidable or they can increase the odds of survival. With the limited numbers of "gunships" you have to find a way to improved survivability. I tried to give it survivability by incorporating both a mask energy signature and a jam sesnsor power. I think those are the bare minimum that needs to be added. The rear mounted turret is also a nice additon and not really overpowering but we can debate that.
I'm looking into the peformance of the Klingon fighters now. My intital expectatin is being borne out - while I don't want to heavily upgrade the firepower of the gunships since they are balanced around the idea of "worth a weapon slot", I did want them to have the shields and hull to be basically 5-8 times as hard to kill as a fighter (scaling up with the number of crew being drawn). Seeing as how a single flight of fighters includes 4 fighters, making a gunship 8 times as tough actually fits pretty well. Killing gunships should be an option, not the no-brainer solution to beating an interceptor engagement. If they were to still be getting habitually smashed first by enemies, then adding a jam sensors skill would be a good step toward tweaking them further. Unfortunately we'll never see them in playtest to make that sort of fine adjustment .

The other thing I'm seeing is fighters (and Terran runabouts) do mount a torpedo launcher. Adding a torpedo launcher to the gunboats is probably fair - on the basis the gunboat doesn't have skills to amplify their weapon's effectiveness, while a weapon slot aboard the Interceptor would benefit from such effects. I'll update the intial post with these thoughts.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
11-03-2010, 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikeOnline View Post
I'm looking into the peformance of the Klingon fighters now. My intital expectatin is being borne out - while I don't want to heavily upgrade the firepower of the gunships since they are balanced around the idea of "worth a weapon slot", I did want them to have the shields and hull to be basically 5-8 times as hard to kill as a fighter (scaling up with the number of crew being drawn). Seeing as how a single flight of fighters includes 4 fighters, making a gunship 8 times as tough actually fits pretty well. Killing gunships should be an option, not the no-brainer solution to beating an interceptor engagement. If they were to still be getting habitually smashed first by enemies, then adding a jam sensors skill would be a good step toward tweaking them further. Unfortunately we'll never see them in playtest to make that sort of fine adjustment .

The other thing I'm seeing is fighters (and Terran runabouts) do mount a torpedo launcher. Adding a torpedo launcher to the gunboats is probably fair - on the basis the gunboat doesn't have skills to amplify their weapon's effectiveness, while a weapon slot aboard the Interceptor would benefit from such effects. I'll update the intial post with these thoughts.

Excellant I shall contineu to monitor.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
11-04-2010, 05:00 PM
I like the idea of a ship surviving based on speed and pets. This is a very good idea.

I think your line of thinking on the mines/torps in the rear is to dissuade someone from following the ship, allowing it to get out of range. I know a turret doesn't really allow that.

A change I would make is to make the um... forgot the word... well, fighters be out of the ship perpetually (ie. you launch them and they don't come back) or they stay out for 5 ish minutes each. That way you don't have the long build up a carrier does to get the firepower out.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
11-04-2010, 05:36 PM
Something you might try Nike, fire off a PM to one of the system or content designers asking what they think, maybe even suggest they put a mock up together for their internal server if they can find the time to see if the concept hold water in game. they wouldn't need all new art assets and such to do so, just throw in an escort, code the basic stats and add a button to launch runabouts with approximate stats for your gunships. A mockup like that at least in my mind doesn't sound like it would take long, a few hours to a day maybe. Hell they may even like the idea enough to send it further up the chain of command.

Course they may just ignore the PM, or it could take longer than I would think and never gets looked at past the idea on paper. Still its a thought you might attempt.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
11-04-2010, 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatness View Post
Something you might try Nike, fire off a PM to one of the system or content designers asking what they think, maybe even suggest they put a mock up together for their internal server if they can find the time to see if the concept hold water in game. they wouldn't need all new art assets and such to do so, just throw in an escort, code the basic stats and add a button to launch runabouts with approximate stats for your gunships. A mockup like that at least in my mind doesn't sound like it would take long, a few hours to a day maybe. Hell they may even like the idea enough to send it further up the chain of command.

Course they may just ignore the PM, or it could take longer than I would think and never gets looked at past the idea on paper. Still its a thought you might attempt.
Posts like this make me wish we had a "like" button
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-04-2010, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatness View Post
Something you might try Nike, fire off a PM to one of the system or content designers asking what they think.
I did send a note to Dstahl, but I'm sure he gets pestered a lot. I don't know who the correct Dev is for ship combat/ship concepts, but if I find out I'd be happy to ping them also .

Quote:
maybe even suggest they put a mock up together for their internal server if they can find the time to see if the concept hold water in game. they wouldn't need all new art assets and such to do so, just throw in an escort, code the basic stats and add a button to launch runabouts with approximate stats for your gunships. A mockup like that at least in my mind doesn't sound like it would take long, a few hours to a day maybe. Hell they may even like the idea enough to send it further up the chain of command.
Actually my goals for this round are a lot more modest - some designer feedback on where and how the Interceptor line's stats do not fit with their design philosophies and maybe suggestions on how to better format ship proposals in the future. That will help me refine future efforts.

Quote:
Course they may just ignore the PM, or it could take longer than I would think and never gets looked at past the idea on paper. Still its a thought you might attempt.
In the interim I would really like for folks who enjoy this concept to suggest how they would train their bridge offices to run one, and how they might arm and equip the ship to maximize it's strengths.

For example I see polarized hull as a must since getting snared by a tractor beam would cripple the defensive strengths of being able to run away. I'm also curious how people might leverage the unique arangment of many lower level tactical ability slots. I had hoped that they might be able to mix some lower rank beam and mine skills...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
11-05-2010, 01:46 AM
Personally for the tier 5 BO layout you proposed I'd use omega 1 rather than polarise hull for tractor evasion since it would also allow for speed and manoeuvrability boost along with a little damage increase. I'd likely have two copies of HYT 2 and use the ensign tac slots for Beam overload, or have a rank 1 and 2 of each skill. possibly swap out one or both Beam overloads for fire at will.

For engineering, ET 1 x2, EPtW2, EPtS3 and either Sif 3 or EWP 3. might swap one of the emergency power skills for inertial dampeners, I've come to really love that skill on my cruisers and with its speed and turn boost it would fit the concept well I think.

Science I would fiddle with but the ensign slot at least would have HE 1.

I'd have a beam array and torpedos at both fore and aft and probably put the breen cluster topedo in the front as well.
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 04:56 AM.