test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
New ship class: Super Dreadnaught
hakon007
Member Posts: 15 Arc User
s2.postimg.org/6qglwiayh/Cobra_class.png
This is my idea for a new class of ship, the super dreadnaught, a warship so massive it requires 2 members from a fleet to co-operatively fly it.
Inspiration is pretty self explanatory for any sci-fi buff.
Since it requires 2 members to fly, it has double the shields, double the weapons, double the warp cores, but can be easily outnumbered in a 2 on 2 situation.
And with only 1 ship it means only 1 member can fly it.
So 1 person has control over fore and aft weapons and shields as well as being in charge of supplying power to engines.
the other person has control over ship movement, port and starboard weapons and shield control and auxiliary
This results in the following combat advantages/disadvantages:
1) communication is required between the 2 admirals to ensure the fore bridge supplies the mid bridge the required power to manoeuvre the hulking mass, and that the mid bridge ensures that the fore bridge has enough power to conduct auxiliary orders.
2) it gives a slight advantage to damage resistance as the shields being fed power from any 1 warp core are on opposite facings.
3) double the admirals means double the officers to give orders 2
4) 1 ship between 2 means any debuffs on the ship effects 2 players.
Thoughts?
This is my idea for a new class of ship, the super dreadnaught, a warship so massive it requires 2 members from a fleet to co-operatively fly it.
Inspiration is pretty self explanatory for any sci-fi buff.
Since it requires 2 members to fly, it has double the shields, double the weapons, double the warp cores, but can be easily outnumbered in a 2 on 2 situation.
And with only 1 ship it means only 1 member can fly it.
So 1 person has control over fore and aft weapons and shields as well as being in charge of supplying power to engines.
the other person has control over ship movement, port and starboard weapons and shield control and auxiliary
This results in the following combat advantages/disadvantages:
1) communication is required between the 2 admirals to ensure the fore bridge supplies the mid bridge the required power to manoeuvre the hulking mass, and that the mid bridge ensures that the fore bridge has enough power to conduct auxiliary orders.
2) it gives a slight advantage to damage resistance as the shields being fed power from any 1 warp core are on opposite facings.
3) double the admirals means double the officers to give orders 2
4) 1 ship between 2 means any debuffs on the ship effects 2 players.
Thoughts?
0
Comments
o.O
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
This suggestion will never be realized because it is beyond the technical possibilities of the game engine.
If the developers ever get flying from your ship's bridge operational then go for it and submit a similar design, but currently it is not possible.
As to worst ship in the game, I'm thinking of it being a fleet controlled ship, the extra size and weapons requires more players to fly it, making it a useful weapon to bring to fleet operations but not something you could do missions with.
Large raids would be where you would see this ship brought out of space dock.
Would be up to game designers if it was able to be used in pvp.
If it works with a ship thats about 1.3 times larger and 5 x more massive then a jem hadar battle cruiser then we could then go even bigger down the track and have ships so big it takes 4 or 5 admirals (players) to operate it.
you wouldn't need to fly from the bridge, player 1 pivots around the centre of the ship (his bridge) and combat works the same as normal, only he can't control engine power or any forward or aft weaponry and shields.
player 2 pivots his camera around the front bridge, he can't control the movement of the ship but still controls his bridge officers and fore and aft weaponry, he has no control over port or starboard weapons and shields and no control over auxiliary power.
There isn't enough power to sensibly run 16 beams at once, which in itself would be self defeating. It wouldn't be able to play the role of the epic tank because it couldn't sustain the dps needed to keep NPCs off more threatening targets and in pvp, put an escort behind it and you're laughing. Although I suspect the side arc would be safer.
Having two persons flying 1 ship is the same principle as flying from your ship's bridge.
For the controls one map is needed while the action takes place elsewhere. It's quite basic and something the game engine cannot handle.
I couldn't quite pin down why I thought this was a terrible idea, then reading this quote made it click for me. This is about multiplayer crews (which questerius, to the cat's credit, was getting at, too), a concept that was either only briefly explored or discarded out of hand when STO was still on the drawing board for being wildly impractical and, frankly, not all that fun. Trying to justify it with an exclusive, oversized ship doesn't answer those problems.
@Questerius it would be no different to current controls, except that 1 person has control of the ships movement and side weapons and side shields and his own set of officers as normal, however his front and rear shield is greyed out and he can't see the front or rear weapons.
The other player has no control over the movement, he is effectively on a roller coaster ride, but other wise his controls are normal except for the greyed out side shields as he has no control over them.
@adamkafei there are 2 warp cores so double the power,
1 warp core has front/rear weapons, front/rear shields, and 2 x engine power
the other warp core has port/starboard weapons, port/starboard shields and 2 x auxiliary power
You could make it each person has a normal power grid if thats too complex, but i think having people rely on others energy manipulation helps to create a better feeling of team work.
When you think about it due to 2 x warp cores it really means the shields have double the energy as 1 warp core only needs to provide shield energy for 2 shield facings instead of 4.
This means this ship is a fleets tank. to stop it being over powered with the 16 beam arrays, there is a draw back:
6 of the weapons (3 port and 3 starboard) are limited to 45 or 90 degree arc weapons only.
this stops the vessel being too over powered.
that means a "beam boat" would consist of 4 beams forward, 4 beams aft, and 2 beams mid, with 6 dual beam banks.
thats a broadside which can at most 9 beams and 3 beam banks onto the target. this is a lot of fire power but when weighed against having 2 ships with 16 beams on target, it is actually a little weaker.
Its strength comes from having those double strength shields and a single target with double the health of a standard ship, however that being said that ship is one target so anything that effects 1 ship will effect both players (with the exception of attacks which disrupt the warp core, as in this case it can only effect 1 warp core not both).
A ship like this has a huge weakness, in that players who go for the beam boat style have left them selves vulnerable to front and rear attacks, due to the lack of torpedoes, at best they can have 6 phasers fore or aft, maybe 7 on one facing if they have a 360 array, but ships who stay in that front or rear arc can fight this vessel and take out 2 players if they can weaken a single facing of double strength shields. compare that with 2 ships which can put down 8-10 beams on a front or rear facing and its very under whelming.
This ship is designed to be the opposite of a glass cannon, its an adamantine spartan shield, it can kill you if you get hit by it, but its not that hard to keep your distance.
It was effectively a Star Trek game where each player was a differant bridge officer manning a station on a single ship. One player was 'captain', one 'tactical' and so on. I forget what it was called, but it might be worth looking into of that's the kinds of game your after.
***********************************************************
Windows 10 Pro
Intel Core i7-5700
RAM 32 GB
2 Titan GTX 980M GDDR5 8 GB
***********************************************************
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
That would be ARTEMIS Bridge Simulator
http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/10052253
Why are you not rejoicing?
I was just thinking that the Galaxy, and Oddessy, had terrible turn rates. I would rather stack armor, than invest in a pile of mega RCS consoles for a pitiful turn rate.
That monster torpedo magnet, won't be capable of getting out of it's own way.
so what you are saying is that because of the lack of power my scimitar will never receive its:
52 pulse disruptor cannons;
27 photon torpedo launchers;
Like it really does have, awwwww i am sad now
Oh, so you're telling me I should just dualbox my computer, which can handle it, so that I can have a ship twice as powerful as anyone who can't dualbox? Sounds like a great idea, I don't see any powercreep coming from this. Nor do I see any potential engine issues with this in any way shape or form...
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
First, I don't think this ship would even be contemplated by Feds.
Judging by the insanity of it, I'm going to say it would be a joint venture between the Roms and KDF because the Scimitar and Bortasqu can both be tagged as being concept models.
I do like the 2-person control concept, though.
I don't think it will work the way you want it to.
1 flies and fires the main weapons and the other fires what is essentially a turret or is like a tank commander.
RIP KDF and PvP 2014-07-17 Season 9.5 - Death by Dev