I skimmed through this thread and one thing I think is the problem is that the OP is taking the idea of the uniqueness of Fed ships far too narrowly.
And thank you for your time. You have miscorrectly identified the problem and your subsequent arguments based off of this incorrect conclusion are of no interest to me. What you have skimmed through is an exchange between myself and two other posters. You see, unlike you, they had actually read the original post and were actually attempting to answer the question it raised. They had agreed that Faction uniqueness could be maintained by the Federation having exclusive access to the ships already in their fleet. I was trying to determine the parameters of the their position. One poster refused to set parameters and has since left the thread, the other poster happily agreed that no others ships that share the same bridge officer layout as current Federation ships should be added to the KDF.
Now, maybe you'd say that the Siege Destroyer, the Varanus and the Maurader are wholly and completely unique ships from the Fleet Escort, DSSV and, is it Exploration Cruiser? that they are widely considered to be the equivalent of, I don't know, more importantly, I don't care. I consider them to be functional copies of eachother, slight differences in hull strength and special abilities not-with-standing. The person I was discussing this with apparently agreed.
Now please, show the thread and the other posters the respect of either reading the posts before you respond, or not responding.
Personally, I'd love to see the following added or changed to the KDF..
New, Futuristic, ships. The Kar'fi and Carriers were a good start. But I'd like to see different Ideas out there other then re-hashing older designs.
An actual internal struggle between the House Duras and House Martok beyond just PVP KvK maps and a few small PVE content. It feels like there could be a great story told there. But there's nothing.
More indepth war with the Federation. Which I know is going to be coming in the form of Zone clashes in Open PVP like zones in the different Sector blocks. But I'd still like to see something additional.. Like System Captureing games, and the like instead of just "Klingons attack a Cargo shipment" type Open PVP.
More Special items. They gave us that Bat'leth, but I'd love to see other things as well. Like maybe a new Disruptor, or something else to help define the Klingon Empire in the game.
Maybe even some kind of "Diplomacy" system, one that deals with the high council. It doesn't have to be actual Federation Diplomacy, but it would be interesting if our characters could directly affect who sits on the council, or even which house becomes more dominant.
Personally, I'd love to see the following added or changed to the KDF..
New, Futuristic, ships. The Kar'fi and Carriers were a good start. But I'd like to see different Ideas out there other then re-hashing older designs.
An actual internal struggle between the House Duras and House Martok beyond just PVP KvK maps and a few small PVE content. It feels like there could be a great story told there. But there's nothing.
More indepth war with the Federation. Which I know is going to be coming in the form of Zone clashes in Open PVP like zones in the different Sector blocks. But I'd still like to see something additional.. Like System Captureing games, and the like instead of just "Klingons attack a Cargo shipment" type Open PVP.
More Special items. They gave us that Bat'leth, but I'd love to see other things as well. Like maybe a new Disruptor, or something else to help define the Klingon Empire in the game.
Maybe even some kind of "Diplomacy" system, one that deals with the high council. It doesn't have to be actual Federation Diplomacy, but it would be interesting if our characters could directly affect who sits on the council, or even which house becomes more dominant.
Those would be great, except you're likely to be branded as a heretic if you are so much as thought to be besmirching the rustic beauty of the older designs.
So, what is your view on faction diversity, and if you think it's something worth pursuing, what mechanics, ships or game elements would you like to see reserved for the Federation?
And thank you for your time. You have miscorrectly identified the problem and your subsequent arguments based off of this incorrect conclusion are of no interest to me. What you have skimmed through is an exchange between myself and two other posters. You see, unlike you, they had actually read the original post and were actually attempting to answer the question it raised. They had agreed that Faction uniqueness could be maintained by the Federation having exclusive access to the ships already in their fleet. I was trying to determine the parameters of the their position. One poster refused to set parameters and has since left the thread, the other poster happily agreed that no others ships that share the same bridge officer layout as current Federation ships should be added to the KDF.
Now, maybe you'd say that the Siege Destroyer, the Varanus and the Maurader are wholly and completely unique ships from the Fleet Escort, DSSV and, is it Exploration Cruiser? that they are widely considered to be the equivalent of, I don't know, more importantly, I don't care. I consider them to be functional copies of eachother, slight differences in hull strength and special abilities not-with-standing. The person I was discussing this with apparently agreed.
Now please, show the thread and the other posters the respect of either reading the posts before you respond, or not responding.
Not only is this a fine case of pot calling the kettle black, but you proved my conclusion was correct.
Now had you read the rest of my post, you'd see that I did in fact answer the question posed in the original post. However since you refuse to accept that ships are more than the sum of their BOff slots, despite the fact that the question and historic debate revolves around the special abilities of the KDF ships mentioned (carrier pets/battle cloak), not as much their unique BOFF layouts, there is zero reason to waste time trying to argue the point with you.
The Federation battle dynamic is very different from the KDF dynamic because of the KDF cloaking and battle cloaking, and the prevalence of BOPs compared to cruisers as the preferred ships in either faction. Both sides already do play differently. If one actually played both sides, one would see this. The Feds don't need to be given anything else to compensate, especially considering the massive amount of extra stuff the Federation already has that the KDF doesn't even approach, from uniforms to content.
Not only is this a fine case of pot calling the kettle black, but you proved my conclusion was correct.
Now had you read the rest of my post, you'd see that I did in fact answer the question posed in the original post. However since you refuse to accept that ships are more than the sum of their BOff slots, despite the fact that the question and historic debate revolves around the special abilities of the KDF ships mentioned (carrier pets/battle cloak), not as much their unique BOFF layouts, there is zero reason to waste time trying to argue the point with you.
The Federation battle dynamic is very different from the KDF dynamic because of the KDF cloaking and battle cloaking, and the prevalence of BOPs compared to cruisers as the preferred ships in either faction. Both sides already do play differently. If one actually played both sides, one would see this. The Feds don't need to be given anything else to compensate, especially considering the massive amount of extra stuff the Federation already has that the KDF doesn't even approach, from uniforms to content.
You're right, I stopped caring about what you had to say when I realized that you skimmed through an argument, got the details wrong, and then felt entitled to comment on it. That you continue to ignore my clarification so you can assert your view of my position is the correct one shows that we are now doing the forum equivalent of talking over each other and that's not productive. So, thank you for your input, I think we're done here.
I got stuck with some other stuff and could not even properly formaulte my idea as well I wanted to.
So here goes:
My proposal would be to give both factions ships with command functions bat make them fundamentally different.
Starfleet would go for large ships that can support an entire theater with their advanced sensor and communications capabilites.
I'm thinking about some kinf of command center function that could easily be implemented on ships like the Galaxy class, where we've seen something similar in episodes like "Yesterday's Enterprise" where the conference room was obviously not a conference room any more.
The Federation version would work like "Dampening Field" by buffing the ships around the Command vessel.
The could gain a bonus to their accuracy for example, benefiting from the enhanced sensors the command vessel has and possibly also a slight defense bonus since the command ship could use its sensors to provide a bit of "white noise jamming" to the fleet.
The "Anti-carrier" ship stats could be used as a basis and that ship could be use altogether when the proposed special function were replaced the this command bonus idea.
In contrast I don't think the Klingons would put such functions on their larger ships (the upcoming flagship or the carriers) but got for a squad approach.
Given they operate in "Wolfpacks" and probably have more faith in their commanders to react to a fluid battle situation since they are litereally closer to the issue they'd put such functions on a different vessel, leaving more room on their larger ships for more firepower and armor.
So my idea would be to create a variant of the Raptor with enhanced sensors and comminucations systems allowing it to provide leadership functions to thos around it.
Radius would be enough for 5 ships in addition to the lead ship (I call "King Raptor") to be affected.
Unlike other buffs like "Dampening Field" I offset it to the rear (I hope something like that is possible) so the lead ship is at the front of the formation.
Please keep in mind that space and buffs are 3-d meaning there would be a ship "above" and another "below".
So for this to work a Raptor would have to be physically modifed to contain the systems required.
I presume the Klingons might consider such a system after the problems Starflllet encountered in the Battle for DS9 where the Dominion jammed the Starfllet ships.
This solution would allow the lead ship to at least punch through jamming at close range and therefore advise and buff ships in immediate proximity.
Physical alterations would be simple: a wider neck section to contain the new systems.
C
hanges to the ships combat stats would be
+10 to weapons, +10 to Aux
a minro increase in hullpoints
different inertia (50?)
a reduced turnrate (2 points)
turnrate not entirely offest by the increase in HP
This has several reasons:
Balance (paying in agility rather than a console)
accounting for the added load
and the simple fact that when the leader turns, the others have to be able to react and keep in formation so they need to be a bit more maneuverable to do so
Bonus on the Klingon side would be plus to critical chance and critical severity.
In case of both ships, the bonus would be depending on Aux power.
Klingon bonus would have a smaller AoE but greater effect on allies
Starfleet version would encompass a greater area (meaning more ships) while bringin less bonus
Versatility has nothing to do with variety or one faction's advantages over the other. Versatility is all about being able to do many things at once... and the Feds have that in spades.
So... Faction Versatility all boils down to ships?
I do in fact favor starships with distinctive capabilities, some of which ought to be reserved for factions.
There is more to this game than just ships, but this discussion seems to center mostly around ships.
Maybe we could broaden the topic just a bit?
If I had the time, I'd elaborate... maybe later.
The harsh truth of the matter is that on the ground the difference between the two factions is...cosmetic.
In some cases (Federation Klingon) even the stats are identical.
That leaves very little to make the two factions in any way different.
So right now: yes it's ships because some of the ideas discussed to give the two factions different skills (I don't think the Klingons would produce cover shields for example) have been totally ignored.:(
Versatility has nothing to do with variety or one faction's advantages over the other. Versatility is all about being able to do many things at once... and the Feds have that in spades.
Yes, I meant to type diversity but thinking now I think divergence would have been a better word still. As for the Federation having versatility in spades, as a faction I'd say the Klingons are currently more versatile.
So... Faction Versatility all boils down to ships?
I do in fact favor starships with distinctive capabilities, some of which ought to be reserved for factions.
There is more to this game than just ships, but this discussion seems to center mostly around ships.
Maybe we could broaden the topic just a bit?
If I had the time, I'd elaborate... maybe later.
Well, you raise an interesting point. A discussion of noncosmetic ground combat changes restricted to one side or the other could be fascinating, but I'm not able to think of anything I'd feel comfortable keeping from one side or the other.
Mission mechanics would be fascinating too. In fact, I suspect that the KDF faction could find alot of that much needed draw if their missions could be made to have a significantly different texture and interaction. Even something as simple as taking a Ferengi barkeep into a back room and having to figure out the right order to break his bones in order to get him to talk would be a nice change of pace from fixing his replicators.
I hear talk of a 'marauder system' for the KDF to match the Federation's diplomacy system, but I don't see any mention of it on any of the engineering reports. When/if it gets developed I'd love to see it introduced with a range of marauder missions and opportunities that appeal to a distinctly different play philosophy than Diplomacy missions or First Contact events.
Unfortunately these suggestions require adding something to the game, and for them to be Klingon exclusive, they would involve adding something to the game ONLY for Klingons. Given population sizes and the size of the development company, it just seems more likely to me that faction divergance will be reached and maintained by not adding something to one side to match what is on the other.
And at mister_dee, the King Raptor and Anti-Carrier command ship concepts would certainly add an interesting element to play. Likewise it would encourage, especially on the Klingon side, a certain amount of regimenting and coordination. I could easily envision this creating entirely new strategies at the highest level of play involving a tractor beams, repulsors, warp core plasma or even a simple targetting of the engine system in order to break the formation and return the advantage to the Fedball. On the other hand, I generally don't enjoy formation combat. Yep, confession here, I'm "that guy." The guy who plays the game to enjoy it on his terms and so is generally a detriment to well coordinated planning and leaves hardcore PVPers looking for a guild just so they don't get stuck with me in a PUG.
Comments
And thank you for your time. You have miscorrectly identified the problem and your subsequent arguments based off of this incorrect conclusion are of no interest to me. What you have skimmed through is an exchange between myself and two other posters. You see, unlike you, they had actually read the original post and were actually attempting to answer the question it raised. They had agreed that Faction uniqueness could be maintained by the Federation having exclusive access to the ships already in their fleet. I was trying to determine the parameters of the their position. One poster refused to set parameters and has since left the thread, the other poster happily agreed that no others ships that share the same bridge officer layout as current Federation ships should be added to the KDF.
Now, maybe you'd say that the Siege Destroyer, the Varanus and the Maurader are wholly and completely unique ships from the Fleet Escort, DSSV and, is it Exploration Cruiser? that they are widely considered to be the equivalent of, I don't know, more importantly, I don't care. I consider them to be functional copies of eachother, slight differences in hull strength and special abilities not-with-standing. The person I was discussing this with apparently agreed.
Now please, show the thread and the other posters the respect of either reading the posts before you respond, or not responding.
New, Futuristic, ships. The Kar'fi and Carriers were a good start. But I'd like to see different Ideas out there other then re-hashing older designs.
An actual internal struggle between the House Duras and House Martok beyond just PVP KvK maps and a few small PVE content. It feels like there could be a great story told there. But there's nothing.
More indepth war with the Federation. Which I know is going to be coming in the form of Zone clashes in Open PVP like zones in the different Sector blocks. But I'd still like to see something additional.. Like System Captureing games, and the like instead of just "Klingons attack a Cargo shipment" type Open PVP.
More Special items. They gave us that Bat'leth, but I'd love to see other things as well. Like maybe a new Disruptor, or something else to help define the Klingon Empire in the game.
Maybe even some kind of "Diplomacy" system, one that deals with the high council. It doesn't have to be actual Federation Diplomacy, but it would be interesting if our characters could directly affect who sits on the council, or even which house becomes more dominant.
Those would be great, except you're likely to be branded as a heretic if you are so much as thought to be besmirching the rustic beauty of the older designs.
So, what is your view on faction diversity, and if you think it's something worth pursuing, what mechanics, ships or game elements would you like to see reserved for the Federation?
Not only is this a fine case of pot calling the kettle black, but you proved my conclusion was correct.
Now had you read the rest of my post, you'd see that I did in fact answer the question posed in the original post. However since you refuse to accept that ships are more than the sum of their BOff slots, despite the fact that the question and historic debate revolves around the special abilities of the KDF ships mentioned (carrier pets/battle cloak), not as much their unique BOFF layouts, there is zero reason to waste time trying to argue the point with you.
The Federation battle dynamic is very different from the KDF dynamic because of the KDF cloaking and battle cloaking, and the prevalence of BOPs compared to cruisers as the preferred ships in either faction. Both sides already do play differently. If one actually played both sides, one would see this. The Feds don't need to be given anything else to compensate, especially considering the massive amount of extra stuff the Federation already has that the KDF doesn't even approach, from uniforms to content.
You're right, I stopped caring about what you had to say when I realized that you skimmed through an argument, got the details wrong, and then felt entitled to comment on it. That you continue to ignore my clarification so you can assert your view of my position is the correct one shows that we are now doing the forum equivalent of talking over each other and that's not productive. So, thank you for your input, I think we're done here.
I got stuck with some other stuff and could not even properly formaulte my idea as well I wanted to.
So here goes:
My proposal would be to give both factions ships with command functions bat make them fundamentally different.
Starfleet would go for large ships that can support an entire theater with their advanced sensor and communications capabilites.
I'm thinking about some kinf of command center function that could easily be implemented on ships like the Galaxy class, where we've seen something similar in episodes like "Yesterday's Enterprise" where the conference room was obviously not a conference room any more.
The Federation version would work like "Dampening Field" by buffing the ships around the Command vessel.
The could gain a bonus to their accuracy for example, benefiting from the enhanced sensors the command vessel has and possibly also a slight defense bonus since the command ship could use its sensors to provide a bit of "white noise jamming" to the fleet.
The "Anti-carrier" ship stats could be used as a basis and that ship could be use altogether when the proposed special function were replaced the this command bonus idea.
In contrast I don't think the Klingons would put such functions on their larger ships (the upcoming flagship or the carriers) but got for a squad approach.
Given they operate in "Wolfpacks" and probably have more faith in their commanders to react to a fluid battle situation since they are litereally closer to the issue they'd put such functions on a different vessel, leaving more room on their larger ships for more firepower and armor.
So my idea would be to create a variant of the Raptor with enhanced sensors and comminucations systems allowing it to provide leadership functions to thos around it.
Radius would be enough for 5 ships in addition to the lead ship (I call "King Raptor") to be affected.
Unlike other buffs like "Dampening Field" I offset it to the rear (I hope something like that is possible) so the lead ship is at the front of the formation.
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6364/klingonleaderformation.jpg
Please keep in mind that space and buffs are 3-d meaning there would be a ship "above" and another "below".
So for this to work a Raptor would have to be physically modifed to contain the systems required.
I presume the Klingons might consider such a system after the problems Starflllet encountered in the Battle for DS9 where the Dominion jammed the Starfllet ships.
This solution would allow the lead ship to at least punch through jamming at close range and therefore advise and buff ships in immediate proximity.
Physical alterations would be simple: a wider neck section to contain the new systems.
C
hanges to the ships combat stats would be
+10 to weapons, +10 to Aux
a minro increase in hullpoints
different inertia (50?)
a reduced turnrate (2 points)
turnrate not entirely offest by the increase in HP
This has several reasons:
Balance (paying in agility rather than a console)
accounting for the added load
and the simple fact that when the leader turns, the others have to be able to react and keep in formation so they need to be a bit more maneuverable to do so
Bonus on the Klingon side would be plus to critical chance and critical severity.
In case of both ships, the bonus would be depending on Aux power.
Klingon bonus would have a smaller AoE but greater effect on allies
Starfleet version would encompass a greater area (meaning more ships) while bringin less bonus
I do in fact favor starships with distinctive capabilities, some of which ought to be reserved for factions.
There is more to this game than just ships, but this discussion seems to center mostly around ships.
Maybe we could broaden the topic just a bit?
If I had the time, I'd elaborate... maybe later.
The harsh truth of the matter is that on the ground the difference between the two factions is...cosmetic.
In some cases (Federation Klingon) even the stats are identical.
That leaves very little to make the two factions in any way different.
So right now: yes it's ships because some of the ideas discussed to give the two factions different skills (I don't think the Klingons would produce cover shields for example) have been totally ignored.:(
Yes, I meant to type diversity but thinking now I think divergence would have been a better word still. As for the Federation having versatility in spades, as a faction I'd say the Klingons are currently more versatile.
Well, you raise an interesting point. A discussion of noncosmetic ground combat changes restricted to one side or the other could be fascinating, but I'm not able to think of anything I'd feel comfortable keeping from one side or the other.
Mission mechanics would be fascinating too. In fact, I suspect that the KDF faction could find alot of that much needed draw if their missions could be made to have a significantly different texture and interaction. Even something as simple as taking a Ferengi barkeep into a back room and having to figure out the right order to break his bones in order to get him to talk would be a nice change of pace from fixing his replicators.
I hear talk of a 'marauder system' for the KDF to match the Federation's diplomacy system, but I don't see any mention of it on any of the engineering reports. When/if it gets developed I'd love to see it introduced with a range of marauder missions and opportunities that appeal to a distinctly different play philosophy than Diplomacy missions or First Contact events.
Unfortunately these suggestions require adding something to the game, and for them to be Klingon exclusive, they would involve adding something to the game ONLY for Klingons. Given population sizes and the size of the development company, it just seems more likely to me that faction divergance will be reached and maintained by not adding something to one side to match what is on the other.
And at mister_dee, the King Raptor and Anti-Carrier command ship concepts would certainly add an interesting element to play. Likewise it would encourage, especially on the Klingon side, a certain amount of regimenting and coordination. I could easily envision this creating entirely new strategies at the highest level of play involving a tractor beams, repulsors, warp core plasma or even a simple targetting of the engine system in order to break the formation and return the advantage to the Fedball. On the other hand, I generally don't enjoy formation combat. Yep, confession here, I'm "that guy." The guy who plays the game to enjoy it on his terms and so is generally a detriment to well coordinated planning and leaves hardcore PVPers looking for a guild just so they don't get stuck with me in a PUG.