test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
MVAM/AE equivalent BOP wanted.
System
Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
No more full univeral stations,
4x Tactical consoles
Same setup as AE/MVAM
Hull 33K (To compensate for battlecloak.)
Why? because normal BoPs suck unless you go with Sci TRIBBLE,
And the raptors are inferior to even the defiant..
4x Tactical consoles
Same setup as AE/MVAM
Hull 33K (To compensate for battlecloak.)
Why? because normal BoPs suck unless you go with Sci TRIBBLE,
And the raptors are inferior to even the defiant..
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Why not have it as a Raptor instead? A Raptor should be equal to the Advanced Escort. Instead of multi-vector, it can cloak.
While we're discussing this, I want a Klingon Excelsior equivalent. The Klink cruisers are pretty nice, but not having that LC Tac slot really gimps their DPS.
It took almost 2 years for the Klingons to get any new ships at all.
And those are all unobtainable ingame unless you pay extra for them.
We're also still waiting for the mythical "Klingon Flagship" that was supposedly in works months ago...
If the Klingons really need something at this point, I'd say it's MISSIONS, not more ships.
I'm happy with the damage of both my tac/bop & sci/bop - and they don't even use tractors & PSW. When I feel like it, I go on my klink with a raptor. I miss the LtC Sci slot, but it's a concession to have more boff powers; plus I can run both APO & PH that way to avoid all the tractors that others use.
We Fed's need something that keeps us sexy.
Or was that just pillow talk?
Pillow talk I think!
*looks at whamhammer's avatar*...*looks a second time*...
how about some tanks?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSBKZPNsK74
Missed the point...of the thread.
It's not about the MVAM capability, it's about a BoP with a fixed BO setup, the same setup as the MVAE.
I recommend you actually read the OP before answering next time.:)
I read it, but yeah, missed its premise since I'm multi-tasking here at work
Here was the OP:
If the stations are going to be the fixed / locked variety, then as another post previously mentioned, a science-modeled raptor is a better equivalent.
The MVAM AE's have 5 BO-stations: 1 Ensign, 2 Lt's, 1 Cmdr, and 1 Lt.Cmdr, but no Battle Cloak.
BoP's only have 4 bridge stations total: 1 Cmdr, 1 Lt. Cmdr, 2 Lt's. -- This is part of the price they pay to get the Battle Cloak.
Wasn't that the music from the Kelley's Heroes soundtrack???
*SIGH* I wonder what's wrong with reading the OP today.
You're now the second one who responded but missed the purpose of the thread.
Noone said anything about MVAM capability for Klingon ships, it's about a BoP
with a fixed BO- and different console setup.
Never gonna happen, brony.
If feds dont get carriers, you definitely wont get mvam.
Locked stations on a refit BoP would be nice if it meant getting back some of the things it lost. Maybe it shouldn't get everything back. Lower hull and shields might just be tied to the Battle Cloak while giving up some universality away could earn back a weapon and tactical console (at the expense of one of the others since 9 is the maximum).
Taking it further, a locked Engineering Commander Station would earn it more cruiser like characteristics like power levels, a Commander Science might have higher Aux Power, while a Tactical Commander could split a bonus to Weapons and Engines. The profession of the locked Commander station should really have a greater impact on the over all stats of the BoP refit without taking away too much of the stuff that makes them unique and fun.
It's a Caitian, isn't it?
A T5 retro with the quad wings of the T3 refit would be nice.
Number three who didn't read.
Because I prefer a BoP model over a Raptor any day
And high turnrate like MVAM's beta part on a raptor just looks silly
I just ment having a BoP with Static/fixed Bridge officer stations comparable or equivalent to a MVAM or AE (There could be 1 universal station here at work, so that u can switch from AE to MVAM bridge officer setuo)
This would mean u dont have the 'luxury' to take a full sci bop or something, but at the expense of that u will gain some extra's. (BoP has less total stations atm)
So it will be a full worthy tactical ship like the MVAM/AE is now.
I take my BoP's mostly to use with the ordinary Tactical station setup without all kind of Sci TRIBBLE, but because i still HAVE the universal stations it also means i lose an extra station even if i really dont utilize them to make a specialized Engineering/Science build. Just the mvam/ae layout.
Another idea would be just to have fixed Commander/Lieutenant Commander Bridge OFficer stations, and then 3 additional universal stations like Lieutenant/Lieutenant/Ensign.
For my sakes just give it 2 Engi consoles, 3 Sci (Or reversed) and 4 tact stations. MVAM has 2 pet ships which phaser procs can be devastating, so this BoP gets a cloak in return, Beta part of mvam is the most dangerous and tactical worthy of them, it gets around 35K hull, well ok... give this BoP a hull of 33K (Between mvam beta part and the heghta hull)
Tada
As soon as the MVAM acronym is mentioned, the thread pulls off into a different tangent. If the title had been "Klingons need a science-based Raptor," then I believe we'd have fewer knee-jerk responses.
One problem I do notice is that Battle-Cloak equipped T5 ships only run only 4 BO stations as opposed to the Fed's standard 5. Yes, making them static would probably be a fair trade-off, but such a ship would most likely be modeled after a raptor given Cryptic's current ship class standards.
I see.:)
After misunderstanding a few posts myself I gave that up.;)
You won't believe how often I asked for a sci variant of the Raptor (even though my idea went into the direction of a Sci Comm and a Tac LTC) as a proper military scout.
Of course it would have reduced armament and some toher changes.
Too bad noone except a handful of people liked the idea.
Well, the T5 BoPs have six characteristics that set them apart from other ships, three good and three bad.
-highest turnrate
-universal stations
-special cloak
-lowest hull
-least armament of all ships with +15 power to weapons bonus
-one less boff slot
of course one can create various permutations of "this good counters this bad" however I find it reasonable to assume the reduced boff slot is offset by something actually related to that: the universal stations.
In case of the B'rel they tried to offset the enhanced cloak as well as the minor increase in turnrate with the only thing they could adjust without overcompensating: even less hull.
CM Tac LC Sci, LT Tac, LT Eng.
The only thing you sacrifice is one Ensign Tac, which IMO is pretty useless when you have CM and LT.
On my MVAE the Ens Tac is FAW... and that's only there for fighter/mine spam management. It's only useful in very certain situations.
Yes, thats my Security Cheif...
If someone can't think of a useful alternative to FAW in an ensign tactical slot then as Jorf would say, they are doing it wrong. The BoP gives up significantly more than just a bridge officer slot which is in and of itself a pretty big trade off in a game so dominated by abilities.
I've already got a Tac Team, Already got two beam overloads, got APO, got torp high yield and spread. Don't use cannons so no need for rapid fire or scatter volley. Really isn't much else there to do.
Ens BOffs are just about useless in T5 ships... as there are only 2 or 3 Ens level powers in each branch (tac/sci/eng) worth using... and that's only if they aren't on shared cooldown with other powers.
Three ensign engineer abilities are useless though.
Some possible 3 tac ensign setups:
Cannon/Torps 1: CRF3, THY3, CRF1, THY1; APO1, APB1, TT1; TT1
Cannon/Torps 2: APO3, THY3, APB1, THY1; CRF2, CRF1, TT1; TT1
Cannon/Beams 1: APO3, BO3, APB1, BO1; CRF2, CRF1, TT1; TT1
Cannon/Beams 2: CRF3, BO3, CRF1, BO1; APO1, APB1, TT1; TT1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 1: APO3, BO3, CRF1, TT1; THY3, CRF1, TT1; THY1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 2: CRF3, BO3, CRF1, TT1, APO1, APB1, TT1; THY1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 3: APO3, BO3, APB1, TT1; CRF2, CRF1, TT1; THY1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 4: APO3, BO3, CRF1, TT1; BO3, CRF1, TT1; THY1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 5: CRF3, BO3, CRF1, TT1; BO3, APB1, TT1; THY1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 6: CRF3, THY3, CRF1, TT1; THY3, APB1, TT1; BO1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 7: CRF3, THY3, CRF1, TT1; APO1, APB1, TT1; BO1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 8: APO3, THY3, CRF1, TT1; THY3, CRF1, TT1; BO1
Cannon/Beams/Torps 9: APO3, THY3, APB1, TT1; CRF2, CRF2, TT1; BO1
Notice that there are never more than two items that share a cool down at the same time. It's best not to have a science team with this though. If you have only two sci powers available as an escort, it's best just to have HE1, TSS2 or PH1/TSS2 anyway, and just evasive out of the fight if scrambled or nuked. With 1 LtC Sci, I run PH1, HE2, TSS3 instead.
I think your problem may be that you are not using cannons on an escort. It's the only ship class that can normally run them, so take advantage of this ability for some quick kills. If not, you can try some beam target powers, but that will probably give you at least three beam boff powers, TRIBBLE with your cool downs.
edit: except for a negligable less amount of turn rate.
its Shield HP is only 700 more (with covariant shields). While the raptor gets 3000 more hull, and a crew that is 300% larger to repair the hull.. I wouldn't say thats a fair tradeoff