Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 855
# 221
10-01-2012, 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmaster View Post
Or perhaps you have to come to terms that most MMOs have set classes that balance out different traits. The cruisers fit into the tank class. NOT doing the most damage, but taking most of the damage. This class is slow and lumbering but withstands the attacks so that nimble, lesser defended, classes deal the damage to stop the enemy.

Healer, attacker, tank. In this game it's not the tank that needs to be turned into the attacker.

That is precisely what you are requesting.

If you want the tank ability, you suffer the lumbering nature. That's how it works. It's not based on your perceived interpretation of what "canon" is. In no ST movie or show has the Enterprise been portrayed as anything but massive and slow. Look at the DS9 footage showing the Defiant in combat. You can't have that on a cruiser.

You can't turn the tank into an attacker. So stop whining and whinging about it nonstop. 22 frakking pages of this nonsense.
Bolded part. That's where you are wrong. Sure, the Enterprise is massive, but it's also rather nimble, for it's size. And it's been shown as such many times over.

Second, who says we need to conform to the "traditional" Tank/Healer/DPS combo? Why can't all ships have a relatively "equal" balance, with Cruisers having Higher hull, and Escorts having Higher dps? Why does it automatically have to be that the "massive ships are nothing more than lumbering bricks" ? If I were to install a V8 engine into a Model-T Ford (assuming the two are remotely compatible), the Model-T wouldn't be a "lumbering brick" anymore. Why couldn't the same idea be applied to starships? If you have a high power output, and advanced engines, both of which should be capable of compensating for the large mass. After all, in Newtonian physics, an object in motion, tends to stay in motion. Mass has very little difference in space.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,028
# 222
10-01-2012, 12:54 PM
LOL you haven't got a leg to stand on, either in ST semantics or in MMO setups.

Stop whining about it. You're trying to destroy the basic class setup in the game. If you make a cruiser as nimble as an escort (your end goal) nobody flies escorts anymore, nobody does anything but these new overpowered cruisers.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,690
# 223
10-01-2012, 01:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by meurik View Post
Second, who says we need to conform to the "traditional" Tank/Healer/DPS combo? Why can't all ships have a relatively "equal" balance, with Cruisers having Higher hull, and Escorts having Higher dps? Why does it automatically have to be that the "massive ships are nothing more than lumbering bricks" ? If I were to install a V8 engine into a Model-T Ford (assuming the two are remotely compatible), the Model-T wouldn't be a "lumbering brick" anymore. Why couldn't the same idea be applied to starships? If you have a high power output, and advanced engines, both of which should be capable of compensating for the large mass. After all, in Newtonian physics, an object in motion, tends to stay in motion. Mass has very little difference in space.
Yes, this is 100% right, Star Trek is not DPS/Healer/Tank. The problem is that not enough people oppose this set up, if this was an accurate representation then yes tacs would push more damage but cruisers and science would still be competant
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,545
# 224
10-01-2012, 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by meurik View Post
Bolded part. That's where you are wrong. Sure, the Enterprise is massive, but it's also rather nimble, for it's size. And it's been shown as such many times over.

Second, who says we need to conform to the "traditional" Tank/Healer/DPS combo? Why can't all ships have a relatively "equal" balance, with Cruisers having Higher hull, and Escorts having Higher dps? Why does it automatically have to be that the "massive ships are nothing more than lumbering bricks" ? If I were to install a V8 engine into a Model-T Ford (assuming the two are remotely compatible), the Model-T wouldn't be a "lumbering brick" anymore. Why couldn't the same idea be applied to starships? If you have a high power output, and advanced engines, both of which should be capable of compensating for the large mass. After all, in Newtonian physics, an object in motion, tends to stay in motion. Mass has very little difference in space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmaster View Post
LOL you haven't got a leg to stand on, either in ST semantics or in MMO setups.

Stop whining about it. You're trying to destroy the basic class setup in the game. If you make a cruiser as nimble as an escort (your end goal) nobody flies escorts anymore, nobody does anything but these new overpowered cruisers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
Yes, this is 100% right, Star Trek is not DPS/Healer/Tank. The problem is that not enough people oppose this set up, if this was an accurate representation then yes tacs would push more damage but cruisers and science would still be competant
So how is any of this arguing even remotely related to the OP asking for an increase in turn rate?

Meurik, mass actually does affect what goes on in space.

Rodentmaster, we aren't asking for the mobility of escorts, just to be able to get our butts around a little more easily.

Adam... well you already know what I have to say to you lol (been in too damn many threads together XD).
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Tired of Wasting EC and Time trying to get Superior Romulan Operative BOffs? Here's a cheap and easy way to get them, with an almost 100% chance of success.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,360
# 225
10-01-2012, 01:11 PM
I'm sure by now someone has already mention DS9, Defiant vs Lakota, mirror Defiant vs. mirror Negh'var. Thread should have ended with that. Weight is irrelevant in space, but mass and inertia are not. Cruisers are just not going to turn like escorts, period. You will never get the indestructible tank cruiser you're dreaming about that turns well enough to keep cannons trained on a smaller target, nor should you.

If your tactics as a cruiser captain involve juking and turning like you're in a dogfight, YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG.

Last edited by hanover2; 10-01-2012 at 01:14 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,690
# 226
10-01-2012, 01:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereticknight085 View Post
Adam... well you already know what I have to say to you lol (been in too damn many threads together XD).
Hey, we're still asking for the same thing right?
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,306
# 227
10-01-2012, 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanover2 View Post
I'm sure by now someone has already mention DS9, Defiant vs Lakota, mirror Defiant vs. mirror Negh'var. Thread should have ended with that. Weight is irrelevant in space, but mass and inertia are not. Cruisers are just not going to turn like escorts, period. You will never get the indestructible tank cruiser you're dreaming about that turns well enough to keep cannons trained on a smaller target, nor should you.

If your tactics as a cruiser captain involve juking and turning like you're in a dogfight, YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG.
I agree.
I have yet to see the episode or movie where the Enterprise nimbly dodges around in combat like a vessel with a quarter of its mass.
I've seen plenty where the Enterprise acted just like the big massive vessel it was and moved accordingly in combat.

Asking for a Turnrate increase is fine if all vessel all equally given a better quality of gameplay buff but the bulk of this thread is asking for the Cruiser to also be the Escort or Science vessel as well which may fit with the Scripts of the episodes but is nothing but unbalanced and fan driven drivel in the game.
He who laughs last thinks slowest.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,545
# 228
10-01-2012, 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
I agree.
I have yet to see the episode or movie where the Enterprise nimbly dodges around in combat like a vessel with a quarter of its mass.
I've seen plenty where the Enterprise acted just like the big massive vessel it was and moved accordingly in combat.

Asking for a Turnrate increase is fine if all vessel all equally given a better quality of gameplay buff but the bulk of this thread is asking for the Cruiser to also be the Escort or Science vessel as well which may fit with the Scripts of the episodes but is nothing but unbalanced and fan driven drivel in the game.
Meh. Many of the peeps who posted in here are asking for that. But the suggestion you made earlier about giving an all around turn bonus to both fed cruisers and kdf bcs was fine by me. Give both sides a +2 to turn rate, maybe a little bit more bite with weapons (at least for fed whales), and I would be happy(er).

EDIT: Also I would like to point out that fed cruisers could never become like escorts, simply due to console layout. Too much sci and engi to get the needed tac.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Tired of Wasting EC and Time trying to get Superior Romulan Operative BOffs? Here's a cheap and easy way to get them, with an almost 100% chance of success.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
# 229
10-01-2012, 02:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
Asking for a Turnrate increase is fine if all vessel all equally given a better quality of gameplay buff but the bulk of this thread is asking for the Cruiser to also be the Escort or Science vessel as well which may fit with the Scripts of the episodes but is nothing but unbalanced and fan driven drivel in the game.
your imagining things, i haven't seen a claim more outrageous then mine, asking for +2 to fed cruisers. fed cruisers with +2 more turn would still be well below escorts and science ships, and less then a match for kdf cruisers. is odysseys, galaxys, and even bortasqus turning at 8, a threat to cannon wielding escorts and kdf cruisers, or ever nimble sci ships?

how about star and assault cruisers turning at 9, merely as well as the great big negvar? oh but then there is the excelsior and fleet heavy cruiser, it would turn at 10! and be unable to exploit that trun rate half as well as even a vorcha R could for dealing damage.

there are several turn rate tiers in this game, 20+ is bop and bug territory, 17-15 is escort territory, 14-11 is sci ship territory, and 11-9 is kdf cruiser territory. oh but then at the non carrier bottom theres fed cruisers with 8-6, were no turn console can help you, no skill based multiplier can save you, and everything that deals damage can easily stay glued to a single shield faceing.

there shouldn't be such a different tier of turning between fed and kdf, there should simply be a cruiser tier. fed cruisers will continue to not be able to deal damage like a kdf cruiser, they will simply not be anti fun to fly.
______________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordlalo View Post
I just wanted to say, I've never seen a more disturbing avatar
the pvp build and help thread
gateway links(should actually work now) -->Norvo Tigan, Telis Latto Ruwon, Sochie Heim, Solana Soleus

Last edited by dontdrunkimshoot; 10-01-2012 at 02:32 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,051
# 230
10-01-2012, 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontdrunkimshoot View Post
your imagining things, i haven't seen a claim more outrageous then mine, asking for +2 to fed cruisers. fed cruisers with +2 more turn would still be well below escorts and science ships, and less then a match for kdf cruisers. is odysseys, galaxys, and even bortasqus turning at 8, a threat to cannon wielding escorts and kdf cruisers, or ever nimble sci ships?

how about star and assault cruisers turning at 9, merely as well as the great big negvar? oh but then there is the excelsior and fleet heavy cruiser, it would turn at 10! and be unable to exploit that trun rate half as well as even a vorcha R could for dealing damage.

there are several turn rate tiers in this game, 20+ is bop and bug territory, 17-15 is escort territory, 14-11 is sci ship territory, and 11-9 is kdf cruiser territory. oh but then at the non carrier bottom theres fed cruisers with 8-6, were no turn console can help you, no skill based multiplier can save you, and everything that deals damage can easily stay glued to a single shield faceing.

there shouldn't be such a different tier of turning between fed and kdf, there should simply be a cruiser tier. fed cruisers will continue to not be able to deal damage like a kdf cruiser, they will simply not be anti fun to fly.
I think most of us certainly could live with a change like that.
I am ok that cruisers are much slower than escorts or even slower turning as smaller Science ships, but some cruisers turn rate are just not acceptable.
Your suggestion surely wouldn't break any "balancing" issues, but it would make the game a bit less boring. Especially when flying a cruiser.

I see the Federation/Klingon Cruiser turning problem similar like you, their low level turning rate just can't be overcomed without radically diminishing their other (very little) advantages.

Once a enemy Escort has weakend one of your shield facings there is little chance to get rid of it. Of course you can run 2x Tac team, but it would leave some cruisers without ANY offensive powers at all!
Does the same apply to escorts? Do escorts have to sacrifice all of their survivability powers just to be able to generate enough attack power to servely damage an enemy?

I'm not asking to give Cruisers Dogifighting abilities, but they should be able to be maneuverable enough to present a different shield facing to their enemy by default.

I stopped doing PvP for a long time by now and as someone who prefers to play PvE missions and STFs i can say that having a Cruiser with a bit more maneuverability would be much less annoying.
Most of the time i would spend cursing and being annoyed about that "elephant on Ice".

Adding +2 to their maneuverability would make all Cruisers much more attractive and much less annoying to fly.


Thank you for reading.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 07:13 AM.