Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,429
Hello, I've been thinking for about a month now especially with the current state of the game that our ships just aren't that competitive and so after giving it much though I've come up with a radical redesign which I know is never going to happen. I'm leaving out allied designs like the Orions, Gorn and Nausicans.

I thought I would toss it out there and see what people think.

Mirror ships
Mirror ships should be available in Fleet Versions when the Mirror is different like the Vo'Quv but not for hull swaps like the Assault & Star Cruiser.

Battle Cruisers & the Vo'quv
You know what I actually don't think anything here needs to change at all.

Raptors
This is going to be one of the biggest changes.

Raptors as seen in the TV series Enterprise where scout ships, so I propose that Raptors become Sci ships.

The Qin would become Commander & Lt Sci, Lt.Com and Ensign Tac with a Lt Eng. The Mirror of course trades the Ensign to Engineer. It would have Sensor Analysis and Subsystem Targeting, a 4/2 Weapon layout, it stats would be brought more inline with a Science Vessel and of course like all Klingon Vessels it would have Cloak and Dual Cannon Compatibility.

For Lower Tiers you would Prioritise 1st Science, 2nd Tactical, 3rd Engineering, 4th Science & 5th Tactical.

Klingons are aggressive and would have an aggressive Science ship. Instead of the BoP as a Starter we'd give you the basic Raptor. For a more Fed style Sci ship you'd get a Gorn ship.

Looking at the bonuses that come with C-Store Raptor refits both the Bio-Neural Warhead and the Graviton Generator work on a Sci ship just as well as a Tactical ship.

Birds of Prey Raider
This is the one that's going to hurt some people.

Battle Cloaking is the Bird of Prey's bread and butter, and it would keep it. But this ship would get redesigned into more of an Escort and except for a C-Store variant or at T5 would lose it's Universal BOFF layout (See Below).

It gains a boost in Hull and shields, 4/3 Weapons configuration and focus on a more Tac/Eng BOFF layout. This BoP would lose some speed and turn and become more like the current T'Varo.

The Hegh'tha would be a Standard Escort design, they'd be faster than your Fed Scorts but much slower than they are now. Commander & Lt.Com Tactical, Lt & Ens Engineering with a Sci Lieutenant. There would be quite a few variations but. Lt.Com Sci versions, One which has the current Qins layout.

Birds of Prey Patrol
Now this is our Traditional Bird of Prey, smaller, lighter, faster. 4/2 Weapons and Universal BOFFs.

Splitting the Bird of Pray line sounds unusual but these ships are the workhorses of the Klingon Fleet I argue 70% to 80% of the Fleet is Birds of Prey.

Enhanced Battle Cloak Bird of Prey
This is a T5 only ship much like now, it would be tougher than the Patrols and Weaker than the Raiders a Middle ground if you will. It would be Universal BOFFs but it would have a 4/2 weapon layout.

Final thoughts
I didn't stat out each ship at each tier, I'm making suggestions more in the way of design concepts than stated out ships designs. Once again I know this will never ever happen. This idea isn't about more power it's about a more balanced Fed/KDF, a more logical and Canon use of the ships we have. KDF ships should have more Hull and Less shields than their Fed Counterparts.

So Feedback, Comments thoughts are Welcome. Trolls are not but inevitable this is after all an opinion posted on the Internet.

PS:
K'Vort
This would be a Destroyer style ship, an extra large BoP so Tactical (Commander & Lieutenant) but Engineering Heavy (Lt.Com & Ensign) and yes it would Battle Cloak but maybe to counteract a bigger badder BoP battle cloaking it takes longer to fade.

PPS:
I'm fully 100% aware this will never happen, it's merely an exercise in "What if"
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Commander
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 314
# 2
11-01-2013, 09:41 AM
These are some intriguing ideas that I fear will never get explored, because it feels like the Devs prefer the KDF to occupy the role of punchline to the joke.

Let's say I ate a bad pickle with my lunch, fell asleep, and woke up in a Mirror Universe where a plan like this got the green light. How would you handle the situation of players owning ships that got changed? For instance, one of my guys commands a Qin, and there would be certain components whose locations get invalidated (I'm specifically thinking of consoles and bridge stations). Is there any precedent for those parts of a ship changing? If so, how was it handled?

Thanks for the intriguing what-if.

Gen
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 309
# 3
11-01-2013, 10:12 AM
I like the idea to re-purpose Raptors, hits 2 birds with one stone (lack of need for raptor, lack of sci vessels), and such an aggressive science ship still manages to sound klingon.

Now, changing BoPs I'm not sure about. Their do anything BOff layout is 90% of their charm.

Generator88, I think in the past when Cryptic changed a console the game auto unequipped them for you.

Last edited by mreeves7a; 11-01-2013 at 10:21 AM.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 39
# 4 Another Fantasy
11-01-2013, 10:50 AM
.

This will never happen as there is too much recreating from scratch and complete rework to do.

As we are going on the topic of ship designs ...


Each side should have a reason for playing them, for example Romulans: single powers, tactical focused ships (most have 3+ tactical consoles).

Klingons do not have a vast number of different ship types, over time they improve them. This could be combined with crafting and rep rewards to give them flexibility and a sense of improvement overtime.

I choose to play as a Klingon and I decide to start off with the Bird of Prey, I go to crafting and choose what "slot" I want, say I go tactical this gives me a ensign tactical slot + tactical console and a +weapon damage bonus. I play some maps and on the next rank I decide that I need a bit more survivability, so I improve my ship by adding an engineering slot, which gives me ensign engineering, engineering console and +shield bonuses, +damage res (or whatever).

Science could improve stealth and hull and give the relevant console and BOFF slot. When I add a second slot to one of my existing ones, for example tactical it moves from a ensign to Lt. skill.

They could change the stats to vary (BoP would have a faster turn rate, but lower hull/shields).

The Rep system could be used to make available different types of [proc] and weapon damage type, which would tie into the crafting side.


-- Bit off topic from ships --

Choosing a profession could allow you access to selected abilities to train onto that BOFF. We can even follow the improvement track and bring BOFF into this, I start off with common BOFF and send them to a training camp (fighting for tactical) and build up their traits and skills. Once they complete a few training sessions they move from common to uncommon. I send them off to become beam specialist and they then can train abilities into that area.

With the above the ships can slot a mixed set of weapons (cannons + beam) and its the BOFF and the way that I have created my ships that allow me to survive/damage.

-- on topic --


With the above ships and $$ ... well buying a ship would be getting the look, so any ship is playable, from the start.

This will give the KDF a unique way of playing and a real choice, do I go FED, ROM or KDF ... and what does each side offer.


I know there are lots of issues/balancing and this may not be to everyone's liking ... It's just my 2 cents on KDF and ships
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,045
# 5
11-01-2013, 12:29 PM
I like that people try to explore new possiblities of how ships could work instead of "more dakka"

Though I'm afraid any kind of chance that the "factions" in this game play out differently is long gone. Originally each side should have vastly different ships with different specialties.

For instance, instead of talking about BOFF layouts I'd begin with limiting weapon types. Starfleet for example should not use any form of cannon except for quads on the defiant (unique weapon). Instead, Starfleet ships would excel in the use of beam arrays and also have a heavy variant of them. Klingons should, on the other hand, no beam *arrays* at all (but single emitters are fine, would be new weapon tye). Heavy cannons would only fit in limited number on large battlecruisers but overall ships are highly specialized in torpedo technology. Romulans could mount super heavy fore cannons on their warbirds etc.

Of course this would require a completely new gameplay but that is what I would imagine. To me it would have been important to not even out everything in this game but to have each faction have unique strengths and weaknesses that had to be compensated by different means and if you would want to experience B while doing A you could always give another faction a try.

The same goes with skills and abilities. Why should klingon "science" be the same as federation "science"? I can see KDF using "Aceton beams" and radiation in combat, but I can't the Starfleet employing those tactics etc.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
Captain
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 557
# 6
11-01-2013, 08:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrytarg View Post
Of course this would require a completely new gameplay but that is what I would imagine. To me it would have been important to not even out everything in this game but to have each faction have unique strengths and weaknesses that had to be compensated by different means and if you would want to experience B while doing A you could always give another faction a try.

The same goes with skills and abilities. Why should klingon "science" be the same as federation "science"? I can see KDF using "Aceton beams" and radiation in combat, but I can't the Starfleet employing those tactics etc.
I think any idea that changes ships people already have is a bad idea. Keep in mind that a lot of people paid money for these ships. You simply cant shrug your shoulders and say "ehh they'll get over it". Same thing goes for changing boff abilities. Is it worth changing mechanics around just so you will find it more interesting when it could potentially cause XXXXX amount of players to quit?

With the ships you could at least roll out new ships that fit into the KDF must only have cannons and Fed will have beams and leave old ships untouched. You wont piss people off by changing something they have already spent money on. But then again you may piss them off anyways cause you are changing the choices they have for future ships that they may want to buy.

But back to BoFFs, this is a tricky one. There is a lot of potential here for player QQ. The other factions abilities are too OP/unfair, my abilities are too weak/they suck. Isnt this happening now with faction specific consoles? some consoles or doffs would get rolled out for one faction but the other faction would QQ because they didnt get an equivalent. BoFF abilities would be treated the same way. This was happening in SWTOR when it first came out. Despite classes between factions being mirrors with abilities being mirrored and only animations being different, people complained. They complained because on one ability listed as instant cast damage was immediate...but the mirror of that ability on the other faction, due to animation differences was instant cast but the damage was lagging behind by a half second or so. The devs acknowledged it as a legit issue and they fixed the timing on the animation/damage to match up with the other factions mirror ability. That was with mirror abilities meant to work the same, but only animations were different and look at the issues it caused.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,429
# 7
11-01-2013, 09:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by generator88 View Post
How would you handle the situation of players owning ships that got changed? For instance, one of my guys commands a Qin, and there would be certain components whose locations get invalidated (I'm specifically thinking of consoles and bridge stations). Is there any precedent for those parts of a ship changing? If so, how was it handled?
Since the BoP Raider replaces the Qin, you'd find yourself in a Hegh'tha or another BoP with the Qin's layout.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stonewbie View Post
I think any idea that changes ships people already have is a bad idea. Keep in mind that a lot of people paid money for these ships. You simply cant shrug your shoulders and say "ehh they'll get over it". Same thing goes for changing boff abilities. Is it worth changing mechanics around just so you will find it more interesting when it could potentially cause XXXXX amount of players to quit?
You are 100% right here, as I said I know this will never happen. This is a re-imaging of KDF ships that I think would have been better since day 1.

Oh and mreeves7a remember there are Patrol BoPs with Universal Layouts and larger Tactical BoPs with fixed layouts. The goal is to see 4 BoPs to any other Klingon ship.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,045
# 8
11-03-2013, 02:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonewbie View Post
I think any idea that changes ships people already have is a bad idea. (...)

I know, but we are just having a theoretical conversation here I assumed? I mean your post was written in a very civil and sensible manner, often on these forums people get downright hostile when others just push around some ideas concerning the game as if they would kick down people's doors and take something away from them

I personally don't think STO will experience any kind of major change for the rest of it's existence. At some point the games' design (based around power creep and lockboxes) will burn out and maybe another company will get the license and create another game that works differently. But everything that is in the game is there to stay, I don't want and I can't take anything away from anyone.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,197
# 9
11-04-2013, 11:57 AM
I could see with some redesigning putting raptors as science ships. Be a good use for them.Though IMO KDF needs either sci or engineering carriers for tiers 2-4. And non CC bought either.
Captain Marrik Steele, USS Nike(Avenger)
Captain Lunamaria Hawke, IKS Eclipse(Varanus)
Commander Altair RRW Anduril(Ak'rif Warbird)
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 09:39 AM.