Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 38
# 11
06-28-2012, 12:04 PM
I would love to be able to have the ktanko viable at General level again. I do love that little ship.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 76
# 12
06-28-2012, 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ussultimatum View Post
<Insert obligatory rant about Faction B desiring Faction A's new special snowflake uniqueness, use words that describe opposite faction poster's behavior as if they were born into that faction in real life, and use rhetoric that insinuates they are infants.>


<Prepare for rebuttal on Faction A having first stole Faction B's unique uniqueness and how Faction A's uniqueness is a copy. Insist Faction A's copy of uniqueness is now it's own uniqueness and be prepared to repeat this as Faction B poster will most likely repeat the stolen uniqueness argument.>
<Witty comment about the poster's lack of understanding of the issue, incorporating suggestions he lacks the intelligence to understand the game mechanics and that his particular interpretation of the lore suggests that he would have difficulty identifying is parentage.>
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,416
# 13
06-28-2012, 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremlin View Post
I would love to be able to have the ktanko viable at General level again. I do love that little ship.
You know, your comment got me thinking that given everyone wants lower-tiered ships viable at end-game, perhaps instead of C-store ships, Cryptic revises the ship system that it levels up with you.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,789
# 14
06-28-2012, 12:17 PM
The KDF already has superior variety in carriers, they have no need for an Armitage analog.

However, should the Federation get yet another carrier vessel (God forbid, two is enough), I will happily throw the above statement out the window. If carriers can't be unique to the KDF, they can at least retain a wider selection of them.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 807
# 15
06-28-2012, 01:44 PM
Enough with all the carriers. They don't belong into Trek in the first place. Bad enough that we have several in game. Let them fade into obscurity instead of making each new ship one.

-= ISE: 12:19 -=- CSE 12:41 -=- KASE 11:59 -=- HSe 8:06 total =-
-= KAGE 5:43 =-
[7:07] [Combat (Self)] Your Dual Disruptor Banks - Overload II deals 123086 (41096) Disruptor Damage(Critical) to Assimilated Carrier.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,032
# 16
06-28-2012, 02:20 PM
I'm agreeing with others that don't think the KDF need another Flight deck cruiser/escort.
The K'tanco is a Battle Cruiser, and should stay as such.

K'tanco Battle Cruiser - Retrofit BG/MG
Boff: 1 Ensign Eng, 1 Lt Eng, 1 Com Eng, 1 Lt Sci, 1 LtCom Tac
Consoles: 4 Eng, 2 Sci, 3 Tac
Impulse Mod: .15
Turn Rate: 13
Hull: 34500
Crew: 400
Weapons: 4 Fore, 4 Aft
Device: 3 slots
Non-Battle Cloak
+10 weapons power
+10 engine power
Special Console: something cool.
Handle: @kirian_darkstar
Registered: Oct/2009 , LTS : Feb/2011
Fleets: Warriors of the Phoenix, Kirian Industries
Three years and still no Captain Klaa hair...

Last edited by darkstarkirian; 06-28-2012 at 03:47 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,296
# 17
06-28-2012, 02:39 PM
The K'tanco is a light cruiser (its a D6), but I've been saying for the last couple weeks it should be refitted as a T5+ destroyer, like a true Klingon version of the Garamba.
KBF Lord MalaK
Awoken Dead

You're gonna upgrade my Chel Grett for FREE but charge me $30 to upgrade my Kamarag ?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 368
# 18
06-28-2012, 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkstarkirian View Post
I'm agreeing with others that don't think the KDF need another Flight deck cruiser/escort.
The K'tanco is a Battle Cruiser, and should stay as such.

K'tanco Battle Cruiser - Retrofit
Boff: 1 Ensign Eng, 1 Lt Eng, 1 Com Eng, 1 Lt Sci, 1 LtCom Tac
Consoles: 4 Eng, 2 Sci, 3 Tac
Impulse Mod: .15
Turn Rate: 13
Hull: 34500
Crew: 400
Weapons: 4 Fore, 4 Aft
Device: 3 slots
Non-Battle Cloak
+10 weapons power
+10 engine power
Special Console: something cool.
And you don't think combining those with cannons on a Cruiser is going to be... problematic?
________________
You'll have to forgive the Zeroes and Lowercase... Perfect World stole my Oh's and Capitals.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,789
# 19
06-28-2012, 03:41 PM
Nerf the turn rate and drop an aft weapon slot and you might have something there.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,032
# 20
06-28-2012, 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyhappyj0yj0y View Post
And you don't think combining those with cannons on a Cruiser is going to be... problematic?
Now more problematic than the existing Battle cruisers, since it is based off the Vorcha.
Sacrificed Hull for Turn
Significantly lower Crew than other T5 BCs/Cru
Boffs: Sacrificed Resiliency for Tac capability

note: i fixed an error, it's supposed to be a BG ship
Handle: @kirian_darkstar
Registered: Oct/2009 , LTS : Feb/2011
Fleets: Warriors of the Phoenix, Kirian Industries
Three years and still no Captain Klaa hair...
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 10:35 AM.