No, it proves that this game is and always has been designed to appeal to Joe Normaldude, Casual Fan. (Thank you, PF.) Anything that gets in the way of fun (for the most) and profit will be justified or simply ignored.
I'm not doing this to defend Cryptic or the path I'm certain they're going to (continue to) take. They don't need defending. Rather, I'm simply trying to communicate to my fellow Serious Fans that this is the reality, and they either need to accept this or move on.
There is if you want to retain some consistency in the setting. The setting would dictate that it would be out of the ordinary to see, say, the NX-class doing anything but dying horribly against even a Constitution-class, never mind a Sovereign.
Okay! Now that is a different and very logical argument that's harder to explain away. It's still subjective, but consistency of expectations is a better argument than imaginary design principles. Now if only all of the shows were consistent, that would be the strongest argument of all.
The TOS Connie was created and allowed in the game.
I've always felt that, due to the sheer iconic nature of that particular model, some lee-way could be allowed for it. Plus, it was initially a ship restricted to a very small subset of people who purchased at a certain time.
I think most of this problem is just due to the leveling/skill/item system they created that really does not fit well at all, and the retrofit system is just a really poor band-aid on one of the problems it generates.
I think the best solution is for Cryptic to put some rules around how each class of ship should scale and stick to it. If those rules already exist, it would help if we understood them.
Within each class, there should be some kind of designation that roughly corresponds to the size and power of the ship: perhaps Light, Medium, and Heavy? A ship's base stats should fall firmly within established parameters for that subclass. There will probably be exceptions, but balancing ships that stay within their subclass will be easier.
Upgrades should be able to enhance a ship's base stats above the established range, but only in a limited way.
If, for example, the TOS Connie were classified as a Light Cruiser, then there is no way it will ever match a Heavy Cruiser even with upgrades. At best, you might get it up to match a low-end Medium Cruiser. If a Constitution should be classified as a Medium Cruiser, then at best you might upgrade it to match a low-end Heavy.
Most KDF designs are centries old. Most are are updated on interior and look the same on exterior. Look at the 7 and the bird of prey and the raptor. All are good ships and most out class there federation counter parts in combat. I hate to tell you but sometimes older is better. They where designed for a klingon, fed cold war. As time moved on the feds made there ships very comfortable, and more reliant on shields.
I think the best solution is for Cryptic to put some rules around how each class of ship should scale and stick to it. If those rules already exist, it would help if we understood them.
Within each class, there should be some kind of designation that roughly corresponds to the size and power of the ship: perhaps Light, Medium, and Heavy? A ship's base stats should fall firmly within established parameters for that subclass. There will probably be exceptions, but balancing ships that stay within their subclass will be easier.
Upgrades should be able to enhance a ship's base stats above the established range, but only in a limited way.
If, for example, the TOS Connie were classified as a Light Cruiser, then there is no way it will ever match a Heavy Cruiser even with upgrades. At best, you might get it up to match a low-end Medium Cruiser. If a Constitution should be classified as a Medium Cruiser, then at best you might upgrade it to match a low-end Heavy.
This would defeat the purpose of a Tier upgrade. Why would you upgrade a ship and NOT improve the stats?
This whole upgrade thing is kinda of mute, seeing as it inst a upgrade of a old ship, but a brand new vessel.
The community has been asking for this type of system since closed beta. Eventually we will get it in game, and people just have to realize, they are fighting/flying a brand new class of ship, with latest tech, that just looks like a old design.
Not sure why this is such a huge argument amongst the player base tbh.
This would defeat the purpose of a Tier upgrade. Why would you upgrade a ship and NOT improve the stats?
Perhaps because "improving" the stats is not an improvement?
Going from a Tier 3 Cruiser to a Tier 4 Cruiser does not "improve" your turn rate. It is a trade off. You get better hull and crew (because it's a bigger ship) but lose manueverability. I wouldn't be opposed to keeping some of that manueverability in exchange for some of the hull in my upgrade. (And no increase in crew at all)
Also, I think there are quite a few people who would like to "refit" a lower level ship so that they can continue to fly it, but wouldn't mind if it isn't QUITE as good as a ship at that Tier. It just isn't at that lower Tier any more. I would love to fly my Nova or Sabre in some missions still, and in fact I still fly my Stargazer because I just simply can't stand the Defiant/Vigilant no matter how I mix and match the skins, but the latter is still playable, while the former simply aren't any more.
Perhaps because "improving" the stats is not an improvement?
Going from a Tier 3 Cruiser to a Tier 4 Cruiser does not "improve" your turn rate. It is a trade off. You get better hull and crew (because it's a bigger ship) but lose manueverability. I wouldn't be opposed to keeping some of that manueverability in exchange for some of the hull in my upgrade. (And no increase in crew at all)
Also, I think there are quite a few people who would like to "refit" a lower level ship so that they can continue to fly it, but wouldn't mind if it isn't QUITE as good as a ship at that Tier. It just isn't at that lower Tier any more. I would love to fly my Nova or Sabre in some missions still, and in fact I still fly my Stargazer because I just simply can't stand the Defiant/Vigilant no matter how I mix and match the skins, but the latter is still playable, while the former simply aren't any more.
But its not a retrofit, and its not a 23rd century ship either, its a brand new ship. None of the ships we fly are 100 years old or more, they just look like the old ships. Having them be new ships based off old designs is a way to avoid the balance issues that people will scream about.
I understand what you are saying, you want to "improve the current ship" and i think that is the sticking point for so many of the arguments against it. If we look at it as a new ship of the line, based off of some historical ships appearance, we could most likely move beyond the dissent over the issue.
This to me seems the easiest way to give a huge portion of the player base what they have been asking for since closed beta. This should also should alleviate the worries about getting pawned by a ship that is 2 levels below my current epeen in PVP, because it wouldn't be some ship that i have x amount of upgrade points into and found a exploit or some loop hole.
But its not a retrofit, and its not a 23rd century ship either, its a brand new ship.
It is, and it isn't. The Advanced Heavy Cruiser Refit is not the same ship as the Advanced Heavy Cruiser Tier 3, it is a brand new ship. But 1) it has very similar stats to the original, specifically in the area of turn rate and manueverability, and 2) it has the same selections available for customization.
If there was a customization option that let us make a Advanced Heavy Cruiser Refit look like a TOS Connie, then there probably wouldn't be a discussion here. OTOH, the TOS Connie parts wouldn't really fit the Excelsior frame very well. The model would have to be change. And the performance would be different, the Excelsior is a little bigger and slower than the refit Connie, which is a little bigger and slower than the original Connie. Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 respectively.
You could make the argument that the Tier 2 IS the Tier 1 refit. And the Tier 3 is the Tier 2 refit, being as the Excelsior was based on the Constellation refit technology. Heck the Galaxy is the next Enterprise, the Tier progession for Cruisers basically goes Enterprise, Enterprise-A, Enterprise-B, Enterprise-D, and Enterprise-E. The C is skipped in there somewhere, but it can probably be a special alternate for Tier 4, just as the Advanced Heavy was for Tier 3.
I think the problem that most people have is that Tiers 1 and 2 are just too weak for the Mk of weapon you are able to put in them. You could upgrade them with Mk X technology, but what's the point, when you're limited in Bridge Officers and hull? So you have this huge investment that you are basically tossing out. At least with the refits, you can toss out the ship with an eye towards getting one that LOOKS just like it...
I think the problem that most people have is that Tiers 1 and 2 are just too weak for the Mk of weapon you are able to put in them. You could upgrade them with Mk X technology, but what's the point, when you're limited in Bridge Officers and hull? So you have this huge investment that you are basically tossing out. At least with the refits, you can toss out the ship with an eye towards getting one that LOOKS just like it...
The 1701-C is on the way, that's the ambassador you see mentioned in a bunch of threads.
As far as the Looks just like, that is what a huge amount of people are arguing for (myself included), but we keep getting shouted down that its still "OLD" tech. I guess its just one of those heated things on the interweb thingy and people just don't read complete posts before Rage posting.
A BOP design that has been used for 80 years, took down a Galaxy class starship. A galaxy class starship.
Think about it.
And it still amuses me that the 150 year old K't'inga Cruiser which was running around in Captain Kirk's day and being blown out of space by the "obsolete" original Constitution class (well, okay, more like the refit) is considered *Tier 3*.
Honestly, this comes down to one thing. This Tiering system is really nothing more than an RPG convention to tie a player's level to his capabilities. It stands to reason that a Commander level player in a Tier 3 ship should be able to beat a Lt. Cmdr level player in a Tier 2 ship every time. But put two Admiral level players in a Constitution and a K't'inga, and you should probably see something closer to the even matches in the Star Trek movies.
Yeah, because of poor writing, nothing more and nothing less. :rolleyes:
But it is just as valid a point as all of the techno-hoops everyone else is jumping thru. And there are plenty of examples in the real world of the outclassed side winning against a superior foe. You chalk it up to bad writing - I chalk it up to a visit from the historical irony monster. We may both be right.
but back to the topic....
Think about this - you are arguing that something shouldn't happen to make-believe space ships based on your understanding of the make-believe science of the make-believe future. I think when you look at it from that perspective, 200 year old make-believe ships being retrofitted with 200-year-in-the-future innerds doesn't seem so unrealistic. Since none of this is real, anyway.
Sorry if your immersion suffers, but your immersion is strictly your own problem. Cryptic will give the majority what they want (scaling hero ships..retrofittable personal favorites...whatever) as long as it makes financial sense for Cryptic to do so.
But it is just as valid a point as all of the techno-hoops everyone else is jumping thru. And there are plenty of examples in the real world of the outclassed side winning against a superior foe. You chalk it up to bad writing - I chalk it up to a visit from the historical irony monster. We may both be right.
but back to the topic....
Think about this - you are arguing that something shouldn't happen to make-believe space ships based on your understanding of the make-believe science of the make-believe future. I think when you look at it from that perspective, 200 year old make-believe ships being retrofitted with 200-year-in-the-future innerds doesn't seem so unrealistic. Since none of this is real, anyway.
Sorry if your immersion suffers, but your immersion is strictly your own problem. Cryptic will give the majority what they want (scaling hero ships..retrofittable personal favorites...whatever) as long as it makes financial sense for Cryptic to do so.
You Sir, are on par with A. Einstein. You have cut to the chase of the matter, and reduced it to the basics, thank you.
I wish i had thought of stating it that way, damn you.
Comments
I'm not doing this to defend Cryptic or the path I'm certain they're going to (continue to) take. They don't need defending. Rather, I'm simply trying to communicate to my fellow Serious Fans that this is the reality, and they either need to accept this or move on.
Okay! Now that is a different and very logical argument that's harder to explain away. It's still subjective, but consistency of expectations is a better argument than imaginary design principles. Now if only all of the shows were consistent, that would be the strongest argument of all.
How DARE you?!
Okay, how about a TOS-style skin for various tier ships? Make what's already there all retro-cool looking (blue phasers and all).
Z
I've always felt that, due to the sheer iconic nature of that particular model, some lee-way could be allowed for it. Plus, it was initially a ship restricted to a very small subset of people who purchased at a certain time.
I think most of this problem is just due to the leveling/skill/item system they created that really does not fit well at all, and the retrofit system is just a really poor band-aid on one of the problems it generates.
Within each class, there should be some kind of designation that roughly corresponds to the size and power of the ship: perhaps Light, Medium, and Heavy? A ship's base stats should fall firmly within established parameters for that subclass. There will probably be exceptions, but balancing ships that stay within their subclass will be easier.
Upgrades should be able to enhance a ship's base stats above the established range, but only in a limited way.
If, for example, the TOS Connie were classified as a Light Cruiser, then there is no way it will ever match a Heavy Cruiser even with upgrades. At best, you might get it up to match a low-end Medium Cruiser. If a Constitution should be classified as a Medium Cruiser, then at best you might upgrade it to match a low-end Heavy.
Easy, because they are based on entirely different design philosophies and engineering principles.
So, they can both fly through space and technology doesn't miniaturize over time?
This would defeat the purpose of a Tier upgrade. Why would you upgrade a ship and NOT improve the stats?
This whole upgrade thing is kinda of mute, seeing as it inst a upgrade of a old ship, but a brand new vessel.
The community has been asking for this type of system since closed beta. Eventually we will get it in game, and people just have to realize, they are fighting/flying a brand new class of ship, with latest tech, that just looks like a old design.
Not sure why this is such a huge argument amongst the player base tbh.
Perhaps because "improving" the stats is not an improvement?
Going from a Tier 3 Cruiser to a Tier 4 Cruiser does not "improve" your turn rate. It is a trade off. You get better hull and crew (because it's a bigger ship) but lose manueverability. I wouldn't be opposed to keeping some of that manueverability in exchange for some of the hull in my upgrade. (And no increase in crew at all)
Also, I think there are quite a few people who would like to "refit" a lower level ship so that they can continue to fly it, but wouldn't mind if it isn't QUITE as good as a ship at that Tier. It just isn't at that lower Tier any more. I would love to fly my Nova or Sabre in some missions still, and in fact I still fly my Stargazer because I just simply can't stand the Defiant/Vigilant no matter how I mix and match the skins, but the latter is still playable, while the former simply aren't any more.
But its not a retrofit, and its not a 23rd century ship either, its a brand new ship. None of the ships we fly are 100 years old or more, they just look like the old ships. Having them be new ships based off old designs is a way to avoid the balance issues that people will scream about.
I understand what you are saying, you want to "improve the current ship" and i think that is the sticking point for so many of the arguments against it. If we look at it as a new ship of the line, based off of some historical ships appearance, we could most likely move beyond the dissent over the issue.
This to me seems the easiest way to give a huge portion of the player base what they have been asking for since closed beta. This should also should alleviate the worries about getting pawned by a ship that is 2 levels below my current epeen in PVP, because it wouldn't be some ship that i have x amount of upgrade points into and found a exploit or some loop hole.
Think about it.
You do realize that far from all technology miniaturizes over time right?
It is, and it isn't. The Advanced Heavy Cruiser Refit is not the same ship as the Advanced Heavy Cruiser Tier 3, it is a brand new ship. But 1) it has very similar stats to the original, specifically in the area of turn rate and manueverability, and 2) it has the same selections available for customization.
If there was a customization option that let us make a Advanced Heavy Cruiser Refit look like a TOS Connie, then there probably wouldn't be a discussion here. OTOH, the TOS Connie parts wouldn't really fit the Excelsior frame very well. The model would have to be change. And the performance would be different, the Excelsior is a little bigger and slower than the refit Connie, which is a little bigger and slower than the original Connie. Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 respectively.
You could make the argument that the Tier 2 IS the Tier 1 refit. And the Tier 3 is the Tier 2 refit, being as the Excelsior was based on the Constellation refit technology. Heck the Galaxy is the next Enterprise, the Tier progession for Cruisers basically goes Enterprise, Enterprise-A, Enterprise-B, Enterprise-D, and Enterprise-E. The C is skipped in there somewhere, but it can probably be a special alternate for Tier 4, just as the Advanced Heavy was for Tier 3.
I think the problem that most people have is that Tiers 1 and 2 are just too weak for the Mk of weapon you are able to put in them. You could upgrade them with Mk X technology, but what's the point, when you're limited in Bridge Officers and hull? So you have this huge investment that you are basically tossing out. At least with the refits, you can toss out the ship with an eye towards getting one that LOOKS just like it...
Yeah, because of poor writing, nothing more and nothing less. :rolleyes:
The 1701-C is on the way, that's the ambassador you see mentioned in a bunch of threads.
As far as the Looks just like, that is what a huge amount of people are arguing for (myself included), but we keep getting shouted down that its still "OLD" tech. I guess its just one of those heated things on the interweb thingy and people just don't read complete posts before Rage posting.
And it still amuses me that the 150 year old K't'inga Cruiser which was running around in Captain Kirk's day and being blown out of space by the "obsolete" original Constitution class (well, okay, more like the refit) is considered *Tier 3*.
Honestly, this comes down to one thing. This Tiering system is really nothing more than an RPG convention to tie a player's level to his capabilities. It stands to reason that a Commander level player in a Tier 3 ship should be able to beat a Lt. Cmdr level player in a Tier 2 ship every time. But put two Admiral level players in a Constitution and a K't'inga, and you should probably see something closer to the even matches in the Star Trek movies.
But it is just as valid a point as all of the techno-hoops everyone else is jumping thru. And there are plenty of examples in the real world of the outclassed side winning against a superior foe. You chalk it up to bad writing - I chalk it up to a visit from the historical irony monster. We may both be right.
but back to the topic....
Think about this - you are arguing that something shouldn't happen to make-believe space ships based on your understanding of the make-believe science of the make-believe future. I think when you look at it from that perspective, 200 year old make-believe ships being retrofitted with 200-year-in-the-future innerds doesn't seem so unrealistic. Since none of this is real, anyway.
Sorry if your immersion suffers, but your immersion is strictly your own problem. Cryptic will give the majority what they want (scaling hero ships..retrofittable personal favorites...whatever) as long as it makes financial sense for Cryptic to do so.
You Sir, are on par with A. Einstein. You have cut to the chase of the matter, and reduced it to the basics, thank you.
I wish i had thought of stating it that way, damn you.
its the same arguments over and over again