Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,395
# 11
08-10-2012, 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drkfrontiers View Post
I don't know exactly, but thats because it is considered a console-power and not "pets" per say?

Also, the MVAM isn't a carrier.

If you reduced the timer on that, you would beed to reduce the timer all other c-store ships abilities.
I should probably make another topic on this because I don't want to clog up the OP's thread, but I guess my point is less that the MVAE should be considered a carrier and more that the threat of spammable pets doesn't really make sense when some ships are designed solely around that premise.

It also already has one of the longest cooldowns (if not the longest?) in the game at 10 mins per section.

Basically I'd be happy if they simply kept the feature that pets died permanently until the cooldown was up again, but if you die you stay in the mode you entered until you explicitly leave it. I think that's a fair compromise

Sorry again for talking about this here, carry on!
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,538
# 12
08-10-2012, 08:53 AM
To be truly consistent with canon, there should be no distinction between battle and standard cloaks. It's a gameplay mechanic meant to give one class of ships a different gameplay style.


Edit: Also, to the above poster, MVAM shouldn't be considered a carrier because separating ships function differently. Their pet deployment is more limited, in number (only one separating ship can deploy two pets at once) and frequency (carriers can replenish lost fighters immensely more readily than a separated ship can recombine and redeploy), their pets are a higher class than fighters and frigates, and separating alters the base ship's stats. We don't really have a formal definition of separating ship, but we also have a pretty loose definition of carrier as well.

Last edited by hevach; 08-10-2012 at 09:01 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,123
# 13
08-10-2012, 09:17 AM
I fly a Tactical Escort Retrofit, and I, for the sake of balance, think the BOFF layout and cloak are fine.

I have no use for the 3rd Tactical Ensign skill and I do use cloak.

I've come to accept the Tactical Escort Retrofit's weaknesses and adapt to them.

The ships need to have some sort of disadvantage, otherwise everyone would have the same ship.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 14
08-10-2012, 09:22 AM
The Defiant class does not have a cloaking device. Only the Defiant herself* had one, borrowed/loaned from the Romulans with the promise it would only be used in the Gamma Quadrant. I'm pretty sure that promise was broken at some point, but the Romulans let Sisko keep the device.

So, no, it wouldn't be canon to put a cloaking device on every Defiant class starship. The only one that had it was Deep Space Nine's Defiant.


*I don't remember if the second Defiant (renamed from the Sao Paulo) had one or not, or if the Sao Paulo is from a book or the show.
Demons run when a good man goes to war.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 131
# 15
08-10-2012, 09:26 AM
I've been flying the BoPs far more than raptors and escorts(when on fed) and while I'm not exactly all that into the idea of feds getting a battle cloak I feel that the BoP is the best representation of the raptor/escort weight class. A true glass cannon as all dps classes should be.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 855
# 16
08-10-2012, 09:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by majesticmsfc View Post
No battlecloak for the Federation, there really should be no cloak period for the Federation but many complained and got it, same with the carriers too. I don't use the cloak console on my Defiant, it's a waste better used for something else like a neutronium or sif generator.

Just because something was in the show doesn't mean it has to be in the game. If the Dev's just went by the Show, there would be no Orions, Letheans, Saurians, Ferengi, Pakleds etc on the Federation/KDF factions.

"Canon is a poor excuse for lack of imagination."

And the matter of fact the BOP that has the Battlecloak is so nerfed to make up for it, that if the Defiant did get one it's stats would have to be reduced by a large number to accommodate this and make it somewhat balanced. I'm sure you don't want this. Oh and only the USS Defiant had the cloak not any other Defiant, even the second Defiant in late season 7 didn't have one. It was a one time use so the Federation players whining about the Defiant should have one, are just blowing things out of proportion.
I'll level some "canon" on you, to justify the existence of Cloaks on Federation ships;

The USS Defiant (Defiant Class), was the first Federation ship to officially have a cloaking device. It was on loan from the Romulan Empire, in exchange for any and all information about the Gamma Quadrant. It was to be used ONLY while in the Gamma Quadrant. Prior to the Dominion War however, it was used sporadically while in the Alpha Quadrant, and for those few occasions, the reasoning was justified.

The Federation signed a treaty with the Romulans (Treaty of Algeron), which strictly prohibited the Federation from developing their own cloaking device. With the fall of the Romulan Senate in 2378, and the subsequent collapse of the Romulan Empire, the treaty became null and void, thus allowing Starfleet to both develop AND equip their ships with cloaking devices.

An unauthorized, and highly experimental "Phase Cloak", was developed by operatives within Starfleet Intelligence, possibly with the assistance of Section 31. The usage of the Phase Cloak was later covered up, and the technology was never utilized in greater scale.

-------------------------

Now, I personally think that ALL Cloaking Devices should be "Battle Cloak"-enabled, allowing players to cloak/decloak while in combat. The usage of the cloaking device while in combat, comes with the risk of immediate destruction, since you are vulnerable with lack of shields until made invisible by the cloak. I'd suggest dropping the "Battle" from the Battle Cloak name, and simply overwriting the non-combat "Cloak".

The Bird of Prey Retrofit "Enhanced Battle Cloak" would similarly be renamed to "Enhanced Cloak", and still provide the added benefit of being able to fire while cloaked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by velktra View Post
The Defiant class does not have a cloaking device. Only the Defiant herself* had one, borrowed/loaned from the Romulans with the promise it would only be used in the Gamma Quadrant. I'm pretty sure that promise was broken at some point, but the Romulans let Sisko keep the device.

So, no, it wouldn't be canon to put a cloaking device on every Defiant class starship. The only one that had it was Deep Space Nine's Defiant.


*I don't remember if the second Defiant (renamed from the Sao Paulo) had one or not, or if the Sao Paulo is from a book or the show.
Your forgetting thou, that Canon in STO includes 40 years of Star Trek history PLUS the written content of the "Path to 2409" series. I forget which entry it was, but I know that "STO Canon" allows cloaking devices to be used on Federation ships, since the Romulan Empire collapsed (after the destruction of Romulus).
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,538
# 17
08-10-2012, 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by velktra View Post
*I don't remember if the second Defiant (renamed from the Sao Paulo) had one or not, or if the Sao Paulo is from a book or the show.
The Sao Paulo hadn't appeared before. It was a new ship completed around or after the massacre at Chin'toka. It didn't have a cloak in the show. It got one in a couple books as a renewal of the same deal with the Romulans that got one on the first Defiant, but didn't have it anymore in another book set literally days afterward supposedly in the same continuity.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 426
# 18
08-10-2012, 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by meurik View Post
Your forgetting thou, that Canon in STO includes 40 years of Star Trek history PLUS the written content of the "Path to 2409" series. I forget which entry it was, but I know that "STO Canon" allows cloaking devices to be used on Federation ships, since the Romulan Empire collapsed (after the destruction of Romulus).
No, I know all that. The OP's justification was "the Defiant had one in the show", so I was responding to that.

Even with the restriction lifted, they still wouldn't put it on every single ship, not even every ship of a single class. That takes time and resources, both of which would be in short supply because of the constant state of war in this game.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hevach View Post
The Sao Paulo hadn't appeared before. It was a new ship completed around or after the massacre at Chin'toka. It didn't have a cloak. It got one in a couple books as a renewal of the same deal with the Romulans that got one on the first Defiant, but didn't have it anymore in another book set literally days afterward supposedly in the same continuity.
I knew someone would know this. Thank you. Also, the books never follow continuity with each other, sometimes even books by the same person don't have the same continuity, so that part doesn't surprise me at all.
Demons run when a good man goes to war.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,045
# 19
08-10-2012, 09:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by meurik View Post
I'll level some "canon" on you, to justify the existence of Cloaks on Federation ships;

The USS Defiant (Defiant Class), was the first Federation ship to officially have a cloaking device. It was on loan from the Romulan Empire, in exchange for any and all information about the Gamma Quadrant. It was to be used ONLY while in the Gamma Quadrant. Prior to the Dominion War however, it was used sporadically while in the Alpha Quadrant, and for those few occasions, the reasoning was justified.

The Federation signed a treaty with the Romulans (Treaty of Algeron), which strictly prohibited the Federation from developing their own cloaking device. With the fall of the Romulan Senate in 2378, and the subsequent collapse of the Romulan Empire, the treaty became null and void, thus allowing Starfleet to both develop AND equip their ships with cloaking devices.

An unauthorized, and highly experimental "Phase Cloak", was developed by operatives within Starfleet Intelligence, possibly with the assistance of Section 31. The usage of the Phase Cloak was later covered up, and the technology was never utilized in greater scale.

-------------------------

Now, I personally think that ALL Cloaking Devices should be "Battle Cloak"-enabled, allowing players to cloak/decloak while in combat. The usage of the cloaking device while in combat, comes with the risk of immediate destruction, since you are vulnerable with lack of shields until made invisible by the cloak. I'd suggest dropping the "Battle" from the Battle Cloak name, and simply overwriting the non-combat "Cloak".

The Bird of Prey Retrofit "Enhanced Battle Cloak" would similarly be renamed to "Enhanced Cloak", and still provide the added benefit of being able to fire while cloaked.



Your forgetting thou, that Canon in STO includes 40 years of Star Trek history PLUS the written content of the "Path to 2409" series. I forget which entry it was, but I know that "STO Canon" allows cloaking devices to be used on Federation ships, since the Romulan Empire collapsed (after the destruction of Romulus).
No, in fact "The Path to 2409" supports the exact opposite:

Starfleet Security admitted that the U.S.S. Kelso was testing a Federation cloaking device. The Romulans then ejected all Federation diplomats and ships from their space in protest, and Chancellor J'mpok recalled the Klingon ambassador to the Federation back to Qo'noS for "strategic discussions."
After the revelation that Starfleet was testing a cloaking device, tensions between the Federation, Romulans and Klingons were at their highest point since the destruction of the Romulan homeworld in 2387. After a full inquiry, six members of Starfleet Security were court-martialed.
It took three months for Federation President Aennik Okeg to convince the Romulans and the Klingons to send representatives to a summit to discuss the situation. When the meeting finally began, Okeg made the Federation's position clear. He apologized for the experiments into cloaking technology, and said that he had signed an executive order banning all research into or creation of Federation cloaking technology.
"The narrow legal view may be that the Treaty of Algeron ended when Romulus was destroyed," Okeg said. "The Romulan Star Empire we knew is gone, and you are a new people. What has not changed is the Federation's commitment to peace."
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,642
# 20
08-10-2012, 10:04 AM
Well I guess the disagreement is mute - I don't think Cryptic will make any changes to the cloak in the game

They prefer the road they are on which is just to let the KDF bleed out over time and eventually once it is so small deal the final death blow then
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 02:46 PM.