Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 51
11-20-2010, 06:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRicky View Post
Yes for this Federation Carrier... its called "Archer Class" and deploys deadly Beagle Class Fighter
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 52
11-20-2010, 06:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lariat
So to be clear, there is an argument here against the Federation having another ship option? From, ostensibly players who say that Federation doesn't need one. Do you really expect us to believe all you guys are turning down a new ship, just because it doesn't fit your idea of canon?

Seriously, how many of you guys are really Klingon players who don't want to face Federation Carriers?

C'mon.. its ok, we understand that Carriers are scary and you might want Federation not to have them so you can dominate PvP. But, I don't believe for one minute the anti-carrier crowd here are Feds. I'm pretty sure its obvious to most of the rest of the players here too.

For example the argument against canon is laughable. How many Klingon fighters have appeared on any Star Trek movie or Television show? Zero? Ok, so then the argument is that Federation does not have Carriers even if they do have fighters. Akira. Next? Oh, then there is the argument that Federation doesn't need another shiny new ship. Heh. Ok. Is that all the anti-carrier group can say? Really?

Let us Feds play with our toys, you Klinks play with yours. K?
And how many folks who demand a Federation carrier have never played one or are Federation supremacists who think Klingons are too dumb to develop such a ship and cannot stand the idea of Klingons having something the Federation does not?
See, wildly accusing someone of something is very easy no matter how close or how far away from the truth it actually is.
Sorry but even though I'm for a Federation ship that can carry fighters simply saying that someone has a hidden agenda when he's against it is nonsense.
And calling someone a "Klingon" because he's against it and saying that everyone who's "Fed" must be for it is also terribly wrong.
What's next?
Will you say it's the patriotic duty of all Feds to think it is righ to get one and demand a carrier because otherwise the terror...err I mean the Klingons win?
I am more of a Klingon than a Federation player and I'm for a Federation ship with fighters, but I am against a carbon-copy of the Klingon models because carbon-copies are BOOORING!
And I also think the Akira is the wrong ship for it because if we actually believe she does have those 15 torpedo launchers she's supposed to have the large amount of launchers (with appropriate ammunition) and the supposed fighter capabilites are mutually exclusive.

But please stop trying to put people into categories that do not exist or accuse them of something they are not.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 53
11-20-2010, 08:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Conrad
Can we get around to getting a Federation Carrier? I'm getting tired of the unbalanced combat. If you design one, can we get one that ends up looking like a Battlestar with a Federation style? That would not only be awesome, but would potentially bring Battlestar fans into the game. Just a suggestion. Hope it happens soon cause I would like to add some new type of ship to my fleet.
+1

Interested in a Carrier Varient for Federation; but am also interested in a Science Vessel Variant for Klingons.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 54
11-20-2010, 09:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaine8123 View Post
btw i agree...i want ice cream too
This is like so TRUE you dig? Ice cream is where the money's at! Now... what was this thread about again? I forgot...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 55
11-20-2010, 09:54 AM
Quote:
This is like so TRUE you dig? Ice cream is where the money's at! Now... what was this thread about again? I forgot...
A Federation Ice Cream "Carrier", I think. Think ice cream truck, but with 2 warp nacelles and a cone-shaped "saucer".

Nom Nom Nom.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 56
11-20-2010, 12:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
And how many folks who demand a Federation carrier have never played one or are Federation supremacists who think Klingons are too dumb to develop such a ship and cannot stand the idea of Klingons having something the Federation does not?
See, wildly accusing someone of something is very easy no matter how close or how far away from the truth it actually is.
Sorry but even though I'm for a Federation ship that can carry fighters simply saying that someone has a hidden agenda when he's against it is nonsense.
And calling someone a "Klingon" because he's against it and saying that everyone who's "Fed" must be for it is also terribly wrong.
What's next?
Will you say it's the patriotic duty of all Feds to think it is righ to get one and demand a carrier because otherwise the terror...err I mean the Klingons win?
I am more of a Klingon than a Federation player and I'm for a Federation ship with fighters, but I am against a carbon-copy of the Klingon models because carbon-copies are BOOORING!
And I also think the Akira is the wrong ship for it because if we actually believe she does have those 15 torpedo launchers she's supposed to have the large amount of launchers (with appropriate ammunition) and the supposed fighter capabilites are mutually exclusive.

But please stop trying to put people into categories that do not exist or accuse them of something they are not.
Not accusing. Just using common sense. Who turns down a ship option for their race, really? Fighters are canon. Ergo, Carriers are too. It is not logical to have one without the other. That is common sense. As to the Akira, its designer even admitted he intended it as a through deck carrier in an interview. Look it up.

Anyways, whether or not the Federation gets a carrier or not is not up to us. That is a decision made by the devs and will be based on issues such as game balance and playability. The point of my comment is just that people shouting down others may have less than altruistic reasons, as I cannot think of any good reason not to want your own faction to have a new ship type. If you don't want to fly a carrier, guess what? You don't have to. So, let those that do, have their fun.

Am I going to get drawn into a online flame war over it? No. But not every Federation player dislikes the idea of a carrier, so quit trying to shout us down and play your game, I'll play mine.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 57
11-20-2010, 12:13 PM
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Akira_class

So you don't need to look it up.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 58
11-20-2010, 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by P_Sutherland
no


/10chars
We just lost our allegedly unique science ship we should get a carrier in return, or a raider (ie BOP) in return.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 59
11-20-2010, 12:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Why do Startrek fans hate Startrek?

They dont really but if you stick 10 trek fans in a locked room together you will get a 10 way argument over what is and isnt cannon, when what they should be discussing is why are they in the locked room and how do they get out.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 60
11-20-2010, 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentStryder
We just lost our allegedly unique science ship we should get a carrier in return, or a raider (ie BOP) in return.
lol i dont know now... suppose it could be fun for the feds to have a carrier class and the klinks to get a science class... either way.. its just another target for the klinks
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 10:08 AM.