Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
01-21-2011, 07:55 PM
The initial wave of pets will be out before any aux attack happens. So even if you go after the carrier's aux setting, his pets will be going to work on you. If you focus on his pets then his aux never gets diminished. So to slow the hanger recharge rate really only affects the carrier if his pets are dead. But his pets wont die if your busy attacking the carrier. Simplified I know, but I'd like to see other options.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
01-21-2011, 08:16 PM
First, I don't see the need for Fed Carriers...allow Multi-vector modes be exclusive to the Feds. The multiple "vehicles" is similar, but doesnt copy and paste the Carrier role...and the multiple vehicles provide a unique asset for countering Carrier and their pets.

Also, if one can be allowed to negativly affect the ability of another ship's weapons (debuff), there should be away for Carriers to buff their pets...meaning, we should have a means to increase re-launch rates over standard.

As mention in the past, no other ship has to worry about its primary weapon system being utterly eliminated, with no readily available method of getting it back online outside of a cool down timer.

The Feds and KDF a like, would be furious if their weapon systems were one-shotted out of operation repeatedly, and had no other option but wait for a 30 sec or longer timer to expire before they could get them back. A Carrier's pets are basically its primary weapon system(s), don't forget that just because they are detached and fly about.

No other ship has a primary weapon system that can be "killed". Please do not be heavy handed with allowing others to have so much more "impact" on the viability of that weapon system when such "interference" would be deemed too much with respect to the other weapon systems modeled.

By being too heavy handed, you essentially force a level of sub-system damage(with no repair option) that is non-existant for any other weapon system...any system period, in game.

You might as well start looking into allowing us to beat down anothe ship's propulsion, or destroy their sensors, or disable their warp engines. Let us destroy their primary environmental controls, let us take their warp cores off-line...and then leave them that way for a 30 sec cool down timer while thier crew repairs it...with no ability to bringit back faster than the cool timer allows.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
01-21-2011, 08:16 PM
I actually see this as a tactical ability like all the other "target" skills.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
01-21-2011, 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cocoa-jin View Post
First, I don't see the need for Fed Carriers...allow Multi-vector modes be exclusive to the Feds. The multiple "vehicles" is similar, but doesnt copy and paste the Carrier role...and the multiple vehicles provide a unique asset for countering Carrier and their pets.

Also, if one can be allowed to negativly affect the ability of another ship's weapons (debuff), there should be away for Carriers to buff their pets...meaning, we should have a means to increase re-launch rates over standard.

As mention in the past, no other ship has to worry about its primary weapon system being utterly eliminated, with no readily available method of getting it back online outside of a cool down timer.

The Feds and KDF a like, would be furious if their weapon systems were one-shotted out of operation repeatedly, and had no other option but wait for a 30 sec or longer timer to expire before they could get them back. A Carrier's pets are basically its primary weapon system(s), don't forget that just because they are detached and fly about.

No other ship has a primary weapon system that can be "killed". Please do not be heavy handed with allowing others to have so much more "impact" on the viability of that weapon system when such "interference" would be deemed too much with respect to the other weapon systems modeled.

By being too heavy handed, you essentially force a level of sub-system damage(with no repair option) that is non-existant for any other weapon system...any system period, in game.

You might as well start looking into allowing us to beat down anothe ship's propulsion, or destroy their sensors, or disable their warp engines. Let us destroy their primary environmental controls, let us take their warp cores off-line...and then leave them that way for a 30 sec cool down timer while thier crew repairs it...with no ability to bringit back faster than the cool timer allows.
Don't carriers have weapons slots like all other ships? Don't they have bridge officer slots like all other ships? The hangers aren't your primary weapons systems. They are secondary ones that pack one heck of a punch. Klingons say that the carriers are your science ships. Fed sci ships have similiar weapons slots and bridge officer slots but have no hangers. They are all almost identical in stats. Almost. Fed sci ships hulls have a highest rating of 30,000 . The carriers lowest is 33,000, and thats the Varanus Support Vehicle. All this skill would do is make the sides a bit more even. That's it. In all ways it is a very fair thing to do, except in the eyes of a klingon carrier captain.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
01-21-2011, 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
I could see this implementation working, as a dedicated 'target hangers' is just too limited.

I also like the tie in to Aux level affecting recharge rate of launching pets. You can slow a carrier's launch rate with an Aux attack, and disable their launch capability with Aux Offline. Note that other powers that take Aux Offline (Viral Matrix, Boarding Party) would then also affect the carrier's launch rate.

Thoughts?
-snix
Cool. I didn't have to type it. I like it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
01-21-2011, 09:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
I could see this implementation working, as a dedicated 'target hangers' is just too limited.

I also like the tie in to Aux level affecting recharge rate of launching pets. You can slow a carrier's launch rate with an Aux attack, and disable their launch capability with Aux Offline. Note that other powers that take Aux Offline (Viral Matrix, Boarding Party) would then also affect the carrier's launch rate.

Thoughts?
-snix
sending shuttles to carriers making it more difficult to launch fighters? yeah it makes perfect sense
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
01-21-2011, 09:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren_Kitlor
The idea itself is awesome and makes sense.
I agree 100%
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
01-21-2011, 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
I could see this implementation working, as a dedicated 'target hangers' is just too limited.

I also like the tie in to Aux level affecting recharge rate of launching pets. You can slow a carrier's launch rate with an Aux attack, and disable their launch capability with Aux Offline. Note that other powers that take Aux Offline (Viral Matrix, Boarding Party) would then also affect the carrier's launch rate.

Thoughts?
-snix
I got dev quoted!
I'm honored!


Quote:
Originally Posted by cocoa-jin View Post
First, I don't see the need for Fed Carriers...allow Multi-vector modes be exclusive to the Feds. The multiple "vehicles" is similar, but doesnt copy and paste the Carrier role...and the multiple vehicles provide a unique asset for countering Carrier and their pets.
I like that way of thinking about it.
It makes sense too given the varied mentalities of the two sides.
Good call indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cocoa-jin View Post
No other ship has a primary weapon system that can be "killed". Please do not be heavy handed with allowing others to have so much more "impact" on the viability of that weapon system when such "interference" would be deemed too much with respect to the other weapon systems modeled.

By being too heavy handed, you essentially force a level of sub-system damage(with no repair option) that is non-existant for any other weapon system...any system period, in game.
See below, to adress the first part.
As to the rest, carriers are fairly good for tankage. I think with sci-team and all their heal and support functions that they can afford to have their main weapon made vulnerable like everyone elses already is (again see below)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cocoa-jin View Post
You might as well start looking into allowing us to beat down anothe ship's propulsion, or destroy their sensors, or disable their warp engines. Let us destroy their primary environmental controls, let us take their warp cores off-line...and then leave them that way for a 30 sec cool down timer while thier crew repairs it...with no ability to bringit back faster than the cool timer allows.
Well, I have been tric-stunned, jammed, scrambled, viral'd, phaser procced, beam target sub-sys'sd, Tractored, gravity welled, tykened, boarded, sub-nuked, and photo-shockwaved enough to tell you that this is already very real :p

So its actually unfair that there is no way to attack carrier's main weapons short of dealing with the pets themselves.

Also remember that if aux is tied to re-launch rate then boosting aux with skills abilities and consoles could lead to faster than normal re-launch times and thus also be a boon to carriers.

In closing, another point this brings up is that to be fair if the Feds ever get MVAM then targeting or proccing or debuffing aux on a Prometheus should also prevent the ship from splitting temporarily if its currently integrated.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
01-21-2011, 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
I could see this implementation working, as a dedicated 'target hangers' is just too limited.

I also like the tie in to Aux level affecting recharge rate of launching pets. You can slow a carrier's launch rate with an Aux attack, and disable their launch capability with Aux Offline. Note that other powers that take Aux Offline (Viral Matrix, Boarding Party) would then also affect the carrier's launch rate.

Thoughts?
-snix
Sounds great. Before I say what I am about to say here, I need to first say that I hate Carriers with a passion. IMO they should have never been brought in to the game, they do not belong. But alas they are here and I do not nor will I ever captain a Cruiser. (Carrier) *FIXED*

That being said...I do think the Carriers should be granted some type of immunity to this once used on them to prevent them from being entirely useless. Otherwise I foresee people building certain builds designed specifically to negate Cruisers all together, and then keeping the debuffs stacked on them to prevent them from playing any role in a PvP Match.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
01-21-2011, 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraiven View Post
Sounds great. Before I say what I am about to say here, I need to first say that I hate Carriers with a passion. IMO they should have never been brought in to the game, they do not belong. But alas they are here and I do not nor will I ever captain a Cruiser.

That being said...I do think the Carriers should be granted some type of immunity to this once used on them to prevent them from being entirely useless. Otherwise I foresee people building certain builds designed specifically to negate Cruisers all together, and then keeping the debuffs stacked on them to prevent them from playing any role in a PvP Match.
Fairs fair....

...perhaps emergency power to aux could also provide a large negative percent chance of anti-aux procs or powers affecting it the same way shield powers help increase shield resistance?

Bonus: sci ships get the same defensive helpfulness.

This would also make for some interesting strategy because you'd need to time your use of the defensive power to coincide with launchings or important recharge cycles.

On the other hand the attacking ship(s) need to carefully time their use of anti-aux powers.
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 03:43 AM.