Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
04-09-2012, 08:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husanak View Post
This is a joke though right... I mean I'm laughing... so it has to be right?
Some things are difficult to parody...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
04-09-2012, 10:49 AM
Funniest thread I have read in a long time on here, keep it up guys!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
04-09-2012, 12:31 PM
Yeah I used to try that trick too, and sometimes I still do, but not for long. Backing away from an enemy has a very good strategic advantage for ships that like to have a forward facing. you can keep your big guns trained on your target far more easily than flying forwards.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
04-09-2012, 03:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolikos
Once upon a time, you could travel in reverse at will. However, that gave a significant tactical advantage for ships with high turn rates (e.g. escorts, raptors, BoPs, even science ships). Made it so much easier to keep those narrow-cone, high-damage weapons on target. I remember someone quipping once that STO stood for "Space Turrets Online," because small ships would so often just sit and spin. I did it myself in PvE - though I quickly learned not to in PvP.

That's why Cryptic put it in. The alternatives were to nerf the heck out of narrow-cone weapons or small-ship turn radii.

If you really want to sit and spin, you still can - just go stationary for a split second once in a while, and you can avoid the debuff completely.
It just makes life for a Cruiser more MISERABLE though because we drift a few MILES in the wrong direction and cannot pull our rears back or use reverse to turn our own giant rear ends around. It makes no sense in anything remotely canon and it is NOT a unique advantage to cannon boats or escorts. Also if you do this in PvP (Sitting mostly still) you go POP real fast so it is nothing that requires being nerfed or in any way tinkered with.

What you say just tells me that some Noobs cried like kittens because they could not out DPS a DPS ship with their Cruiser and Cryptic decided to listen to that vocal minority instead of listening to many of the actually GOOD suggestions we give them.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
04-09-2012, 03:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkuu_Akagan

What you say just tells me that some Noobs cried like kittens because they could not out DPS a DPS ship with their Cruiser and Cryptic decided to listen to that vocal minority instead of listening to many of the actually GOOD suggestions we give them.
but isnt this how it always was and is? Its always the few whiners who ruin the game, the lazy asses who are not willing to chnage their setup or think about new strategies. So they start whining on the forum and want everything nerfed cuz their 3 yr old stuff isnt really the bringer anymore. Last best example was, what happend to the MACO shieldcap.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
04-09-2012, 03:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by papragu
Last best example was, what happend to the MACO shieldcap.
Wat? I thought the problem was that it was bugged such that only 10% of damage was counted (thus 90% resisted) instead of 10% resisted - a pretty obvious bug.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
04-09-2012, 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkuu_Akagan
It just makes life for a Cruiser more MISERABLE though because we drift a few MILES in the wrong direction and cannot pull our rears back or use reverse to turn our own giant rear ends around.
But you can, though. A couple of people have told you how in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkuu_Akagan
Also if you do this in PvP (Sitting mostly still) you go POP real fast so it is nothing that requires being nerfed or in any way tinkered with.
Yes. I know. It wasn't nerfed for PvP. Interesting, isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinkuu_Akagan
What you say just tells me that some Noobs cried like kittens because they could not out DPS a DPS ship with their Cruiser and Cryptic decided to listen to that vocal minority instead of listening to many of the actually GOOD suggestions we give them.
My impression was that the devs didn't want ships built for speed to park it and twirl in place. And I don't recall seeing anyone ever actually complain about people doing so - maybe someone more willing to dig can find something - but I do recall it was something "fast" boats very often did, at least in PvE.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
04-09-2012, 05:16 PM
Going in reverse is antithetical to Star Trek combat. (Which episode or movie did the Enterprise go in reverse during combat? I can't think of one offhand.)

While it was possible in the SFB boardgame, when the 'simpler' version, Federation Commander, came out, they made going in reverse an inefficient use of power to avoid the tactic except in specific situations.

The power penalty is the same. While you *can* go in reverse, it's inefficient to do so in combat and you'd only want to in very specific situations.

So, if you want to avoid the penalty, don't go in reverse. And, to the OP - Enemy ships aren't doing this to you, you're doing it to yourself.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
04-09-2012, 05:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destinii
Going in reverse is antithetical to Star Trek combat. (Which episode or movie did the Enterprise go in reverse during combat? I can't think of one offhand.)

While it was possible in the SFB boardgame, when the 'simpler' version, Federation Commander, came out, they made going in reverse an inefficient use of power to avoid the tactic except in specific situations.

The power penalty is the same. While you *can* go in reverse, it's inefficient to do so in combat and you'd only want to in very specific situations.

So, if you want to avoid the penalty, don't go in reverse. And, to the OP - Enemy ships aren't doing this to you, you're doing it to yourself.
Well, which Enterprise?
If you just wish one.
Kirk went full reverse to get away from the Romulan plasma torpedo in their first encounter with it. Where they learned it dissipated over distance.-Balance of Terror.(thanks to Google for the name)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
04-09-2012, 05:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destinii
Going in reverse is antithetical to Star Trek combat. (Which episode or movie did the Enterprise go in reverse during combat? I can't think of one offhand.)

While it was possible in the SFB boardgame, when the 'simpler' version, Federation Commander, came out, they made going in reverse an inefficient use of power to avoid the tactic except in specific situations.

The power penalty is the same. While you *can* go in reverse, it's inefficient to do so in combat and you'd only want to in very specific situations.

So, if you want to avoid the penalty, don't go in reverse. And, to the OP - Enemy ships aren't doing this to you, you're doing it to yourself.
And SFB has nothing to do with canon, Trek on-film or TV... let alone STO.

Bleck
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 10:33 PM.