Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 434
# 11
01-26-2013, 03:32 PM
The KDF Vet ship really screwed the pooch for balance arguments. No one seems to think that broke anything and it isn't that far off from the Defiant-R. I do see a tougher argument for giving a Cruiser Battle Cloak, even if it is the Galaxy-X.

Should the KDF lose science ships and Feds lose Carriers?

An Adapted Battle Cloak console for the only two Federation ships that might be capable of using it would also include negative modifiers to shields and hull (percentage based so that the cruiser would have a bigger reduction). It would be fixed to a console slot, rather than universal. Provided it was executed carefully, they could even make an Update Battle Cloak console for other KDF ships capable of Normal Battle Cloak.

Then again, slightly off topic, all of these lock box/p2w consoles should have come with negative modifiers, fixed console slots, and even system based cool down interactions.

I'm just saying worse things can, will and have happened. I was totally against this for the longest time but I don't really see the problem anymore. Point of fact, Battle Cloak is fun.
__________________________________________
Foundry: Yet Another Borg Mission
It's terrible but easy, and these Borg are way cooler than the mess STO and Voyager left us.
May not actually be "way" cooler or even "slightly" cooler.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,228
# 12
01-26-2013, 04:30 PM
If the devs felt that the the Defiant or the Fleet Defiant needed BC, it would have had it by now.

In terms of what it has been given, no matter how you try and spin the argument, there is absolutely no justification for it to have the BC on top of everything it has got.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,475
# 13
01-26-2013, 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehale View Post
The KDF Vet ship really screwed the pooch for balance arguments. No one seems to think that broke anything and it isn't that far off from the Defiant-R. I do see a tougher argument for giving a Cruiser Battle Cloak, even if it is the Galaxy-X.

Should the KDF lose science ships and Feds lose Carriers?

An Adapted Battle Cloak console for the only two Federation ships that might be capable of using it would also include negative modifiers to shields and hull (percentage based so that the cruiser would have a bigger reduction). It would be fixed to a console slot, rather than universal. Provided it was executed carefully, they could even make an Update Battle Cloak console for other KDF ships capable of Normal Battle Cloak.

Then again, slightly off topic, all of these lock box/p2w consoles should have come with negative modifiers, fixed console slots, and even system based cool down interactions.

I'm just saying worse things can, will and have happened. I was totally against this for the longest time but I don't really see the problem anymore. Point of fact, Battle Cloak is fun.
The KDF Vet is a very good ship, no doubt. But, it doesn't have an escort's turn rate. It doesn't have the 5th Tac console (in general it's lacking in console space). It does have a flexable boff layout, I think of it as a destroyer/raider hybrid and what the Fleet Raiders should have been in terms of overall thought process. They could have given up a univeral Boff station or 2 for the rear weapon mount and specialized console layout options, eg there should be a fleet raider w/a 4th sci console. Anyway, it's not an escort and giving the best dps potential escort a BC is over the top.

Besides once every 10 minutes every ship will have an EBC w/the T5 rep reward for 5 seconds anyway.

Or use the annoying placate proc w/KHG shields. Have a teammate use 3 part KHG for the MEF defense/MES like boosts.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,228
# 14
01-26-2013, 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehale View Post
The KDF Vet ship really screwed the pooch for balance arguments.
How so?

Its a 9-console ship with 4-TAC consoles. If you are going to say, but yeah its got the BC, then I just need to point out all the Fed ships like the Armitage, Vesta's, and Steamrunners and Fleet Defiant & Fl. MVAM for fair comparison.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 434
# 15
01-26-2013, 05:56 PM
The Vet ship is an Escort. It's 3 points of turn lower, a little bit more speed, higher hull and .5ish lower shield mod, it has universal slots, and battle cloak doesn't cost a thing. One additional Tac console isn't going to kill anyone (pun intended). When it was just the BoP I liked it that way but as someone else already said... it's a start. That the KDF doesn't have a Raptor ("true escort") that can Battle Cloak is just a matter of time.

I'm not saying it's a simple change but the argument against it gets more and more flimsy everyday.

As for the "If the dev's" argument, well, things wouldn't be in the condition they are currently in "if the dev's"...
__________________________________________
Foundry: Yet Another Borg Mission
It's terrible but easy, and these Borg are way cooler than the mess STO and Voyager left us.
May not actually be "way" cooler or even "slightly" cooler.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 16
01-26-2013, 06:07 PM
Actually Cryptic's so-called Battle Cloak is regular cloak. This other atrocity they label cloak is not canon and does not exist. All ships, that goes for the two Federation vessels also, with a cloaking device should operate a canon cloak. The only vessels with cloak that should have anything other than this are the C-Store and Fleet versions of General Chang's B'Rel.
All cloaks should be canon.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,475
# 17
01-26-2013, 06:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehale View Post
The Vet ship is an Escort. It's 3 points of turn lower, a little bit more speed, higher hull and .5ish lower shield mod, it has universal slots, and battle cloak doesn't cost a thing. One additional Tac console isn't going to kill anyone (pun intended). When it was just the BoP I liked it that way but as someone else already said... it's a start. That the KDF doesn't have a Raptor ("true escort") that can Battle Cloak is just a matter of time.

I'm not saying it's a simple change but the argument against it gets more and more flimsy everyday.

As for the "If the dev's" argument, well, things wouldn't be in the condition they are currently in "if the dev's"...
It's a heavy destoyer it's turnrate is inbetween battle cruisers and escorts. It doesn't have escort inertia either. The KDF Vet ship takes a heavy hit to shield mods especially in tactical mode compared to the Fed Vet ship let alone fleet ship shield mods, the main cost of the BC. It only has 2 uni slots an Ens and a Lt Commander. It only has +5 to a weapon's power system depending on its mode, though it does get +30 to a shield skill or +30 to targeting skill.

The defiant has one of the highest turnrates in the game for escorts. It has an additional Tac console. With it's "normal" cloak the 5 tac console slot has more damage potential than the Bug ship ...
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 270
# 18
01-26-2013, 07:02 PM
All ships to have battle cloak imo. The B'rel can keep its special cloak but I don't see much of a problem with a Defiant/GalX cloaking in the middle of battle. Maybe Feds will finally realize that battle cloak isn't as IWIN as it seems.
K'eg/T'lol/Dude/Yak
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,764
# 19
01-26-2013, 09:06 PM
i dunno, with my experience with the kdf vet ship, battle cloaks on more durable cloaking ships would be overpowered.

when a real escort wants to kill a vet ship, its proboly going to be able to do it. its an RA level ship, and its turn rate does not allow it to duel very well. plus its only got 8 console slots to work with, 4 of which are tactical, and its not blessed with the then best turn like the defient R was in its similar position back in the day. the shield mods are paper thin vs modern escorts, wile also being handily out maneuvered. it can easily be spiked to death with just cannons.

unlike the kdf cruisers that i also fly, that are even slower, they can tank all day. they just need 1 opportunity every 15 seconds or so to be effective. vet ships, wile getting out maneuvered the whole time, can not do any of that tanking. the kdf vet ship proboly has the worst escort tanking ability of any modern escort. it does have access to good mitigation and heals, but much damage can be caused in a single pass, it generally cant save itself. the fed vet ship is noticeably tankier, the slightly better shield mod makes a huge difference in spike soak.

anyway, battle cloak on the kdf vet ship has saved me from certain death 100 times, if my ktinga had battle cloak it would probably cease to be killed all together. even on the extreamly fragile kdf vet ship, i think its a bit op, more competent and maneuverable 10/10 and 11/10 escorts having bc? scarey thought to me.

i kinda like the jem heavy escort, it looks to have near kdf cruiser tanking potnetial, with the vet ship's best station setup.


oh, and the fleet qin not having 5 tac consoles is a sick joke. or not having universal stations, like the ENS and one of the LT or something is as well. such a large tactical ship with the lower 15 turn should have a more diverse setup. actually, it should be the counterpart to the fleet MVAM, with a LTC eng and 5 tac consoles. so much redundant and wasted potential on the fleet ships, so many could have been cool as hell.
gateway links-->Norvo Tigan, Telis Latto Ruwon, Sochie Heim, Solana Soleus
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 20
01-27-2013, 01:00 AM
Considering devs are DS9 fanboys, I wouldn't be surprised if there will be battlecloak fed console soon, most likely in some lock-box with universal consoles instead ships...
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 11:44 AM.