Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 31
11-26-2010, 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTheJourny
Then how the hell is it temporary?






Pffffffffffffft....
This is what happens if you don't have an editor.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 32
11-27-2010, 04:00 PM
back to the subject at hand what do you guys think about the Federation getting a,''Kick the Klingons back to Qro'nos Battleship!''
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 33
11-27-2010, 07:20 PM
A battleship would be nice, but as others have said, it would be hard to differentiate it from the T5s we already have. Personally, I'm more interested in the support vessel. It could have some sort of support fleet abilities, for example it can call in an AI ship of a specific class, either a cruiser, escort or science vessel, but only one at a time, with a large shared cooldown. This would make it similar to the carrier class, but would fit with it being somewhat of a Command and Control vessel, rather than a dedicated combat vessel (though it would have to have respectable defences to keep it safe during battles. The difference from the klink carrier would be that it is one relatively strong vessel, maybe something T3 or a couple of T2, possibly randomise it a bit so that they each balance out, but it can be anything from a small group of T1 ships to a single T3 ship in support, give it a time limit, or just have it permanent until destruction, whichever is more balanced.

The different class options would give the ship different abilities, related to the obvious captain choices (Sci for science, eng for cruiser etc.) Allowing the ship to have a reasonable impact on the course of a battle, and perhaps letting you deal with those carriers a bit more easily, if you've got a minimum of two for the price of one in a battle, then you're doubling the targets you can deal with in a set length of time, and with more, but weaker vessels, then you can take the whole bunch out over a slightly longer period of time, whilst confusing their choice of targets.

Add in the transwarp idea to allow team members to quickly warp to the instance, and you've got yourself a rapid reaction force worthy of Starfleet. Obviously balance would have to be looked at, and I would suggest giving the gates a timer as well as the ability to be destroyed, because if the ship is creating something like that under battle conditions, it isn't going to be massively stable . . . An make it some sort of channeling needed to create it, if it's even possible within the engine! It's not going to be something quite as easy as dropping one out of the cargo hold, and any damage taken during the process of creating it would severely hamper the efforts. Maybe make it so that the support abilities mentioned above are only able to be used if there is an active gate in the system as well, to stop people just warping in and calling on a ship mid-battle when things are going a bit wrong, and give it a time delay before the vessel actually arrives, ships aren't always close enough to arrive the instant you call them :p


So anyway, that's my rambling on the topic, hope it makes sense to at least one person out there, as I'm not entirely certain it would make sense to me on a re-read!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 34
11-28-2010, 01:32 PM
Just for the hell of it, if you are curious take a look at the profile of people (claydermunch) who say "No" to carriers or battleships or any other sort of Federation upgrade. Hit, "search for more posts." Then take a look at what the neigh sayer has been discussing. Usually the neigh sayers are involved in multiple threads of such topics, with the consistent theme of "no, we don't want any." Looks like attempts to drown out helpful suggestions.

Sorry bub, but you ain't "we" no matter how many times you chime in.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 35
11-28-2010, 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lariat
Usually the neigh sayers are involved in multiple threads of such topics, with the consistent theme of "no, we don't want any."
And this is different from the majority of yaysayers ... how?

I'm sorry, but the truth is that this topic has been discussed over and over already. Suggestions such as these are anything but new. And both sides of the argument have some people who attempt a constructive discussion, just like both sides have people who just say yes/no without any intention to truly discuss their opinion. Demonizing either side doesn't help.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 36
11-28-2010, 04:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager235 View Post
ok,here's what im thinking, in order to stop the Klingons whining...i say we scratch the Federation Carrier idea and put the idea of a Federation Battleship up on the board.
Um we klingons aren't the ones spaming the forums with FED Carrier posts. And we Klingon's simply repeat what the devs have posted repeatedly regarding the ideal of a fed carrier. So who is whining?

Now I'm all for a REAL dreadnought for the feds. Eventually the carrier haters will realize that a big ship with no turn rate is not the best thing out there and quit whining.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 37
11-28-2010, 06:11 PM
Quote:
Now I'm all for a REAL dreadnought for the feds. Eventually the carrier haters will realize that a big ship with no turn rate is not the best thing out there and quit whining
/Agreed.

In my opinion The federation should get some sort of support vessel / command centre vessel
It'd be fun to see what it could do and the special ability(s)it would get.

But it seems like there determined on getting a dreadnought/battleship that wouldn't be anything different (other than size) to a star cruiser or something.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 38 Official Communication
11-28-2010, 06:25 PM
From : Vice Admiral Magnis
To: All Starfleet operations Admirals

PRIORITY ONE MESSAGE INDEX:

while i know some of you admirals wish to just be a klingon in a federation suit, Starfleet did not build battleship. They have not built them for one particular reason. While majority of you are not star trek fans or even understand the concept of the federation. Ill lay it out for you. The federation is not a war like race. Starfleet is and has been then peace keeping armada since its creation. They do not start wars but they know how to finish them. Starfleet did not want to build battleships mainly because those ships are built for war and only war. That is against the federation mandate. So while some of you just dont get it. Its real simple. stop with the lossing carrier suggestion and battleship suggestion. Come up with something that is actually worth while and shows you can be creative. This is not to insult you guys but just keep you in line.

While STO has made mistakes on ship terminology in the past, they wont really go for building battleships for the federation. What would be the point in having a big ship. Then all of you will complain oh this ship cant turn. or its shields are to week, or even worse it doesnt have enough powers, lol Their is no purpose for a battleship in the federation. it has been proven time and time again. bigger is not always better or the winner.

why not add some spice to the federation such as research and development sections for the samples. build on that. so we can make tough skin for our ships. or weapons that knock out systems better. think out of that box.

That Is all
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 39
11-28-2010, 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFP-Magnis View Post
Wall of text(s)
The federation usually avoids the term battleship for reasons that I do not know
Example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memory Alpha
The Defiant-class was sometimes referred to as a battleship. (VOY: "Drone")

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federat...arship_classes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 40 foolish
11-28-2010, 09:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTheJourny
The federation usually avoids the term battleship for reasons that I do not know
Example.




http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federat...arship_classes
the defaint was never refered to as a battleship but sometimes a warship jess.

Defiant-class Escort / Warship 24th century

they do not use this term because their ships where not meant for war but defense and exploration. If you actually watched star trek you would know this right off the back but this is what happens when people who dont know about the show just up and display links with out reading them carefully
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 04:07 PM.