Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
03-11-2011, 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Certainly there are times when you would want multiple smaller ships, but in most circumstances, you're better off concentrating your firepower.
And in those situations, you don't send a Prometheus. It isn't a multimission explorer, it's a special operations ship like the Defiant. The Defiant was built to get in, accomplish objectives, and GTFO in one piece (against bigger ships they usually didn't even fight their way out, just got the job done and ran). The Prometheus was only actually seen in action once, but it was tailor built for to do what it had to for the episode: To deliver and remove what basically amounts to a light assault wing.

From a writing standpoint it was pretty much built just to fight the Romulans - all three of their canon ships of the period were big Warbirds that would be vulnerable against that kind of attack group, but were easy matches against big Federation cruisers in head to head combat. The Klingons, Dominion, and Cardassians all had light ships of their own to combat that strategy.


A few of Mojo's other points: No matter how imperfect power distribution is, each section is powered independently and takes its power source with it. Even if the ship was a ramshackle mess of inefficiency and power leaks, all systems would stay at their combined power levels.

And each section has less firepower than the whole, but the sections don't operate independently. The firepower of a space ship is strictly limited by the available surface area to mount weapons. MVAM substantially increases surface area. All of the standard weapons are still there, and any mounted between the hulls become available once separated as well.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
03-11-2011, 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liandras
People seem to forget indeed that each section has its own warpcore and that these cores are actual combined far to powerfullf or the vessel and not used at top capssity when the ship is joined.
Why not build a ship with 3 warp cores and use them all for best effect in that ship?

It's not like you couldn't slap on a few extra phaser banks on the outside of the Prometheus instead of hiding them away in the center. Or just put stronger banks there that can use more power.
Where was it ever established that "multi-vector "would be more effective in Startrek? It seems it is better to pump all energy in one shield facing to break through that and then break trough the hull armor there.

No, MVAM is there for one reason: Too look cool. And that it does well. I am looking forward to flying the ship on Holodeck at some point.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
03-11-2011, 02:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
It sounds like the op wanted a solo wtfpwnmobile and didn't realise that such a thing is detrimental in a MMO.

MVAM is far superior to the Galaxy-R's saucer separation. Anyone who has a complaint about it needs to stop, think for a little bit, and then shut up.
wow, first of all i wasnt looking for a uberpownage blah blah blah, it would have been like a phaser lance or something. there is no room for someone who is simply looking to troll like you are in my posts.. and plz dont tell anyone to shut up. were all friends here discussing a new toy in the game...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
03-11-2011, 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Putnam
wow, first of all i wasnt looking for a uberpownage blah blah blah, it would have been like a phaser lance or something.
Your initial complaint sure does sound like it contradicts that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Putnam
what i was hoping for was instead of having another form of combat pet (like the sacer sep, or holo ships or whatever else) that it was going to be manuevers that did a devastating attack (like in the show).. basically youd seperate, all three would swarm the target, concentrate fire with three beam overloads, and do a good amt of dps..
See? Sounds like you want an uberwtfpwnattack. Any ship that had it would be an uberwtfpwnmobile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Putnam
there is no room for someone who is simply looking to troll like you are in my posts.. and plz dont tell anyone to shut up. were all friends here discussing a new toy in the game...
You know accusing someone of trolling is considered by Cryptic as an act of trolling in itself and a reportable offense. Please try to avoid it.

I wasn't trying to tell a specific person to shut up. My message was that people with complaints around MVAM need to think first and consider their complaints may very well be unjustified. I personally think such complaints are indeed unjustified(and I use your description above of what you want as evidence). I'd like to see evidence that MVAM is too weak if anyone can produce some. I should have worded it better, so I apoogize for that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
03-11-2011, 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Why not build a ship with 3 warp cores and use them all for best effect in that ship?

It's not like you couldn't slap on a few extra phaser banks on the outside of the Prometheus instead of hiding them away in the center. Or just put stronger banks there that can use more power.
Where was it ever established that "multi-vector "would be more effective in Startrek? It seems it is better to pump all energy in one shield facing to break through that and then break trough the hull armor there.

No, MVAM is there for one reason: Too look cool. And that it does well. I am looking forward to flying the ship on Holodeck at some point.
Because you are ever so smart to partially quote what I said, the other key factor is creating small and highly manoeuvrable targets which makes them hard to hit and perfectly suitable to bring that hard punch to bear on the weakest part of the enemy. A big cruiser general only has the option to fire what what she is facing, a prometheus in MVAM would easily fly over the target and attack it from the rear without the target being able to respond.

Also even though each section is slightly weaker (and no much) you still have to take out 3 vessels to disable her fully, where a lucky hit on a weakened cruiser can shut down her weapons, on a prometheus it would only shut down 1 section others would continue.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
03-11-2011, 02:31 AM
The work on MVAM is both impressive and innovative since you can effectively take control of 3 different sections with different flavoured roles. Perhaps the overall result looks less impressive than the one observed on the show but then so do many things in the interest of game balance.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
03-11-2011, 02:32 AM
personally, i like the fact that you can decide to recombine when you want... thats a nice touch.

as for the galaxy saucer seperation in canon, well..

all starfleet ships could seperate like that, with the saucer acting as a "life raft" but the galaxy was the first to show it being re-combined. the fact that Picard had Riker do it manually suggests by that point it was a fairly "normal" operation.

and given that it was somewhat effective when used as a combat technique, why wouldnt you develop it as a potential weapon? splitting your enemy's focus between targets and/or being able to out-flank your opponant are all military tactics that are as old as the hills.

I just dont see what all the fuss about it being a "bad idea" is..
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
03-11-2011, 02:41 AM
One only has to look at the Battle of the Omarion Nebula to see why a large group of smaller ships unleashing their combined firepower from multiple vectors is far better than a handful of big fat powerful ships that move and turn slowly and cannot bring their firepower to bear as effectively.

The Tal Shiar/Obsidian order fleet composted roughly 20 ships, and only 5 or 6 were actual warbirds. They had impressive firepower for hitting a planet... and then they faced 150 Jem Hadar Fighters. They didn't have a prayer.

Later, even the Dominion only tentatively brought in its big battlecruisers and dreadnoughts and that was only when they had them in such force that they had double the numbers against the Federation ships during the events of Operation Return.

One big ship equals one big target. Three small ships with the firepower of one big ship equal victory.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
03-11-2011, 02:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liandras
A big cruiser general only has the option to fire what what she is facing
Federation cruisers had pretty much total phaser coverage, and the Negh'var had good side coverage, so not really in general...

But then there were the Romulan ships. In that time frame there were only three Romulan ships seen on screen. I don't think they had any warships except the D'derix in TNG or DS9, with a couple Mogais and one Scimitar in Nemesis. They all pretty much had this shortcoming to some degree or another. They were easily a match for the big Federation cruisers, but the Jem'haddar fighters managed to rip them apart on a regular basis because they were built for big cruiser-on-cruiser slugfests.

The writers pretty much designed the ship to kill a Warbird, and even in context it makes a lot of sense to have a weapon that specifically exploits a weakness of a powerful and unpredictable neighbor. Also makes a lot of sense for the Romulans to be very interested in the ship if you think about it that way, too.


Edit: Also have to be careful about confusing game mechanics with Star Trek ones - in the game it might be a handicap to split your damage accross three shield facings, but in the shows it was a clear advantage, just about every heavy ship in DS9 proved vulnerable to Jem'haddar attack fighters using the same basic strategy as MVAM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
03-11-2011, 03:36 AM
Bleah. Only thing that disappoints me is there's no way to get a discount non-MVAM AE with the LtC sci slot. :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 02:31 PM.