Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,760
# 51
02-12-2013, 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cidstorm View Post
The Ambassador class actually has a mass larger than the sovereign class. It needs a slight inertia nerf imo.
both the ambassador and sovereign have less mass then a galaxy class saucer! the inertia is so all over the place.
gateway links-->Norvo Tigan, Telis Latto Ruwon, Sochie Heim, Solana Soleus
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,395
# 52
02-12-2013, 08:15 PM
I quite like both of these ships... however

1) What on Earth is the point in flying a Gal-R?
2) How exactly is the Kamarag's marginally stronger damage potential balanced against the Ambassador? They could both fill the exact same healing role if they wanted to, so what does the Amby gain over the Kamry in comparison?
3) Even on an Engie, beams are still not really viable for these ships...

vids and guides and stuff

[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 873
# 53
02-12-2013, 08:21 PM
I was looking forward to c-store variants of these ships but they are only getting refits for the fleet shipyard.

Does fleet shipyards mean the end of the c-store?
I drink, I vote, and I PvP!
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,077
# 54
02-12-2013, 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubblygumsworth View Post
Does fleet shipyards mean the end of the c-store?
How long ago was the Vesta 3-pack?
The Regent?
Steamrunner?
Atrox?

What's the next Z-Ship?

How many lockbox/lobi/fleet ships will have come between the last and next Z-Ship?

Hrmmm, there does appear to be that trend....
Vice Admiral Geist, Klingon Science Officer
V.S.S. Oracle, D'Kyr-class Science Vessel
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 597
# 55
02-12-2013, 08:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeuxidemus001 View Post
Now if PSW1 was something usable(worth a hill of beans)... This Kamarag with a romulan set would be nasty.
who says psw1 is not worth it?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,553
# 56
02-12-2013, 09:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by p2wsucks View Post
Seriously more spam and sensor analyis on Cruisers?

You know there are already more ship types fed side w/hangars than KDF?

Feds already have sturdy support ships w/sensor analysis. They're called Sci Ships and Feds are far better than KDF options.

There are Cruiser/Sci ships crossovers. Look for the 1s w/Commander Sci Lt Commander Eng or Commander Eng Lt Commander Sci Boff layouts. Look @ the Oddy Sci varient w/Sensor Analysis already in the game.

There are Cruiser Escort Crossovers (destoyers and Heavy Escort Carrier).

At this point I'd rather people just buy the ship that fits their style, (it's likely already in the game) then ask for Hologram skins of their favorite ship.
I'm not suggesting this just for Fed side.

Really, the way I see it, an ideal balancing method would be -- and this is purely on the backend:

Strip Escorts/Sci/Cruisers down to core components and values in a fairly balanced state on a whiteboard to take a look at.

Whenever possible, treat non-ship class abilities (ie. cruisers with cannons), high turnrates, exotic stat buffs, battle cloak, and special abilities as bonuses.

Try to equalize out the bonuses.

From there, I'd probably also look at shuffling around which powers are on a given ship's console and making consoles usable on every ship.

So, for example: The Defiant and the Galaxy-X. You don't want their cloaks to be usable on other ships, naturally. So you eliminate their cloak consoles. You make cloak an innate power of each ship. In place of this, you lower the Defiant's turnrate down to 15 (standard escort turnrate) and make the Defiant's special console a "+2 to base turnrate console." The Galaxy-X's console instead becomes a phaser lance console (which only triggers the full special animation on the Galaxy-X but which is usable on any ship).

Shuffle things around so that anything that must be exclusive to a ship is an innate bonus (one of the two or three that any ship gets) and, instead, the special consoles from all ships are fair game for all ships, like the lower tier consoles are.

I think ships would be considerably more balanced if they subdivided the innate specials (ie. cruiser with cannons, high turnrate, hangar) off from the base stats and treated those as one or two bonuses that every ship gets.

Then you look at a ship like the Galaxy or Ambassador, which is pretty darned vanilla. And you look at giving them two to three of the standard bonuses (non-class bonus ability, cloak, innate power, hangar pet, higher turnrate than the norm for the class). So that every ship (C-Store and Fleet tier anyway) is, on the whole, a vanilla ship with two to three of those extra perks.

And don't count hull as a factor in that consideration.

So, for example:

Boost the Vor'cha hull by 4k. But as it has Cloak, Cannons, and +4 Turnrate, you find 2-3 things to add to the Galaxy like maybe 2 hangar slots and subsystem targeting.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 57
02-12-2013, 09:38 PM
For Spocks sake, I love the Galaxy, but giving it hangars is horrible idea. That's like peeing on the legacy of that ship. I'm sure Cryptic will eventually sell more spam...i mean flight deck cruiser, but in a brand new design.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,553
# 58
02-12-2013, 09:47 PM
Basically, what I'm saying is that when designing a ship, I think they should start off by balancing hull, base turnrate, and shield modifier.

Then every ship should get three "design extras" from a pool which includes +4 base turnrate, cloak (for cruisers), battlecloak (for escorts/sci), hangar pet, cannons (cruiser/sci), subsystem targeting (cruiser/escort), universal station, etc.

So let's take where I think the Aquarius should be, balanced entirely for turnrate. (Keep in mind, numbers here are just my guesstimates.)

A vanilla escort gets 0.9 shield mod, 31k hull, 15 turnrate.

Aquarius gets a 0.66 shield mod (+2.4 turnrate), 24k hull (+6 turnrate), 15 turnrate...

ADD THAT UP:

Aquarius has a 0.66 shield mod, 24k hull, 23.4 turnrate...

ADD THREE MODS (that's two universal stations, so +4 turnrate):

Aquarius has a 0.66 shield mod, 24k hull, 27.4 turnrate...

INSTEAD OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE, which is the unimpressive:

Aquarius has a 0.66 shield mod, 24k hull, 17 turnrate...

Effectively, this is just a way of balancing ships in a combat forward, active way by first balancing stats and then balancing bonuses.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,553
# 59
02-12-2013, 10:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalnar83 View Post
For Spocks sake, I love the Galaxy, but giving it hangars is horrible idea. That's like peeing on the legacy of that ship. I'm sure Cryptic will eventually sell more spam...i mean flight deck cruiser, but in a brand new design.
I'm not sure I see it. The turnrate proportional to other ships isn't going up. It does equip shuttles and was a military transport in Yesterday's Enterprise, which suggests the frame is right for the task.

The Vor'cha's hull loss isn't an appropriate penalty for the three extras it gets, which is why I say get rid of the hull penalty and look at the Galaxy getting three buffs comparable to (but not identical to) the +4 turnrate, cloak, and cannons. (And doing similar with the Ambassador, keeping us on topic.)

I could see several Galaxy configurations pretty easily.

Two hangars and subsystem targeting. (YE's Galaxy Warship.)

Cloak, Cannons, Hangar. (Dreadnaught. With lance as a console add-on instead of cloak.)

Subsystem Targeting, Universal Station, Universal Station. (Vanilla Galaxy.)

Hopefully, you can at least see where the basic idea comes from. Base balancing of shields/turn/hull/maybe crew (with other stats like inertia resulting from those). Then three bonuses similar to the Vor'cha.

You can even get into negative bonuses for modded ships. For example, Galaxy saucer with nacelles attached starts as escort balanced. Remove cannons (class power). Gets standard three bonuses plus fourth bonus as compensation for removal of cannons.

The point is combat oriented RPG balance.

Looking at the Ambassador, she has one universal, which is one special mod but is not significantly overtuned against the fleet star cruiser in other ways so she needs a couple of more bonuses stacked on to hit three bonuses.

That could take any number of forms.

One would be +4 turnrate and subsystem targeting.

I'd urge you not to compare this TOO readily to different tiers of ship or between classes because this approach would probably mean buffing a LOT of the less played T5 ships around the Battle Cruiser model, with the proviso that hull becomes a step 1 balancing process (weighed against turnrate/shield mod, which means buffing the Vor'cha's hull) and step 2 is focused around combat novelty balance. This would mean buffing almost all but the most popular ships.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 491
# 60
02-13-2013, 12:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 View Post
<Aquarius rant about horrid shield modifier>
Check Tribble, the Aquarius shield mod has been fixed, shield mod is 0.85 for the regular version and 0.94 for the fleet version. All the fleet only retrofits and fleet ships based on them have been fixed as well.

As for the fleet Ambassador, nice ship but no better or worse than the current batch, just a bit different. Nice for those that like the power of Science.

The problem with the Galaxy isn't the ship itself, it is the fact that unlike tactical, 99% of the engineering consoles are useless, the ones that work have nasty diminishing returns and way too many engineering bridge officer powers share the same cooldowns to make the extensive engineering slots useful. Also it turns like a pregnant whale and then add the general suckage of beam arrays and related powers... The fact that the ship and the saucer separation animation still has graphic bugs do not help either.

The Galaxy could be fixed, as far as combat goes by something that follows the canon of the ship like...
Quote:
Extra Large Beam Array Collectors: up to three beam arrays of the same energy type installed on the Galaxy on each facing are grouped into a virtual single beam array that does the added damage of the entire group. This is a toggle.
So DPS would stay the same, beam spam would decrease due to less beams being used, but it would make the Galaxy dangerous by increasing burst damage by 3 times. Also Beam Overload would be nice for a change...
Join Unrepentant!

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 11:23 PM.