still i think something like the Yorktown class from Legacy might be a great refit and template for some new Dreadnought ship with 3 drone gunship slots kinda like the D'Kyrs settup but with tactical ships instead imagine the Yorktown Class with 6 Nacelles and Converted Runabout Gunships....screams Power and nothing Screams power like a Dreadnought.
this needs to replace the current Gal-X
Now I think you're just being silly.
You know anything from Legacy is a no-go, and I think we've already gone down the road of why pets aren't a viable combat strategy for Starfleet (or for the KDF or the Romulans, for that matter).
eh had to say it, personaly I dont see the Gal-X as a dreadnought but a slight refit of the old enterprise in All good Things but since that universe no longer exists I dont count it as a still valid ship, so i thought the yorktown class would be a good idea. as for the pets...i really dont care either way but still would love something new.
again what are your thoughts on my idea for the freebuild ship power and such from the previous posts?
eh had to say it, personaly I dont see the Gal-X as a dreadnought but a slight refit of the old enterprise in All good Things but since that universe no longer exists I dont count it as a still valid ship, so i thought the yorktown class would be a good idea. as for the pets...i really dont care either way but still would love something new.
again what are your thoughts on my idea for the freebuild ship power and such from the previous posts?
Oh, believe me, I know how you feel about the Gal-X, I was against them putting it in the first place way back in the day because of the same timeline issue you have.
But I do agree with your power systems customization Idea, in fact, I was just waiting for you to make a separate thread so we could go into it a bit deeper without taking this thread too far off topic. Shall we?
yea certainly gonna make a new thread on it now, but first, I do belive the Yorktown class should be a more enhanced platform for the Dreadnought but with a spin.
the Jupiter Class would make a great Carrier, btw confirmed the Mirror Universe Jupiter class did launch runabouts back before ESD was changed. though it being a carrier for the federation is unknoiwn and doubtful.
yea certainly gonna make a new thread on it now, but first, I do belive the Yorktown class should be a more enhanced platform for the Dreadnought but with a spin.
the Jupiter Class would make a great Carrier, btw confirmed the Mirror Universe Jupiter class did launch runabouts back before ESD was changed. though it being a carrier for the federation is unknoiwn and doubtful.
Well, there's a few problems with the Yorktown:
1. It's over two hundred years old. The NX replica was brought into the game, but it was a T1, bringing in the Yorktown as a T5 Dreadnought is pushing credulity beyond the breaking point.
2. If we're still talking about Runabouts as the "spin".. Well, you know how I feel about that.
3. If we want a Dreadnought with a spin, how about a Dreadnought with strong Hull, high turn rate, and low shields and no power bonus'? An Escort-ish Dreadnought?
4. I'm not nearly as enamored with the Jupiter Class as some.. I could see it as a large NPC Research Vessel, or Transport, but I have no desire for it as a playable ship.
still, for some reason I would think something in the template design of the Yorktown class would be a good Dreadnought, one thing is for sure though, the dreadnought has to be big.
also on another note Im not going to let this thread die, there are way too many carrier threads out there and each eventualy dwindle, it would be good to have one central thread so they dont keep popping up.
but in truth I think there needs to be a Yorktown Class in the game maybe as a retrofit Cruiser/Escort as it was inteded to be in lore.
yea i always picked it in TOS fights, loved how they had the blue phasers and photon torps. loved the way they worked really...they had great survivability solo in Legacy, I imagine with a third nacell it would make a new Dreadnought easy.
but in truth TOS had a different style in the past, that much is obvious to the asthetic sense but its canon and lore was much different than TNG, I belive we can justify the Dreadnought Class from the TOS Era to be the Yorktown and have it as an obtainable ship which has integrated blue phasers and blue torps, with a speecial ability, high rate torpedos, kind of the Yorktown classes phaser lance but more...TOS
yea i always picked it in TOS fights, loved how they had the blue phasers and photon torps. loved the way they worked really...they had great survivability solo in Legacy, I imagine with a third nacell it would make a new Dreadnought easy.
but in truth TOS had a different style in the past, that much is obvious to the asthetic sense but its canon and lore was much different than TNG, I belive we can justify the Dreadnought Class from the TOS Era to be the Yorktown and have it as an obtainable ship which has integrated blue phasers and blue torps, with a speecial ability, high rate torpedos, kind of the Yorktown classes phaser lance but more...TOS
Again.. Legacy was a video game from another company, and as such, nothing from it can be used in STO.. You know that.
Actualy the Yorktown class was used in Legacy as the first time it was integrated via media, it was a concept drawn up for TNG and paramount owns it solely not the video game production company, you can even see it in the 2009 Star Trek before they all warp to vulcan.
Actualy the Yorktown class was used in Legacy as the first time it was integrated via media, it was a concept drawn up for TNG and paramount owns it solely not the video game production company, you can even see it in the 2009 Star Trek before they all warp to vulcan.
Uh.. No. All the Starfleet ships seen in the 2009 Star trek are original works made for that movie. They may be JJ-fied versions of other Trek ships (like the JJ-prise is a JJ-fied Constitution)..
..But the JJTrek isn't covered by the IP usage rights Cryptic has from CBS & Paramount.
Regardless Paramount owns the rights to the Yorktown Class Design and if Im not mistaken so does CBS if i get IP licesneing right.
but now back to the topic, the Klingon Carrier isnt actualy a carrier in classificaion though it is often reffered to as one. the Klingon Vo''Quv is a Dreadnought, though I belive these Dreadnoughts are labled in Star Trek as Ships which can be a fleet undo themselves and the Gal-X is not classified as such it cannot hold as a fleet unto itself.
so why not just make a new Dreadnought for the Federation which would implement something like a point defense console or something like a launch platform which would launch a set of platforms which are integrated into the dreadnought like escape pods but with phaser arrays and stuff....the Gal-X has to be removed as a Dreadnought classification one way or another.
Why are you so hellbent against the gal-x? Its fine as a dreadnought. Each klingon carrier gets 6 fighter squadrons to work with. For all I know, the carriers are being flown wrong by them, well maybe not. Definitely not the sane as a federation carrier should function.
I believe a federation carrier would have to be a ship away from the fray, and probably suffer having reduced tac ability, like having only one ensign tac ability. 4 weapons, and extended range for its abilities (unique ability anyone? ) .
As if right now, I don't believe there is a true carrier in the game. I really don't see the tactics the klingons use with their carriers as rlthat of a true carrier.
Regardless Paramount owns the rights to the Yorktown Class Design and if Im not mistaken so does CBS if i get IP licesneing right.
but now back to the topic, the Klingon Carrier isnt actualy a carrier in classificaion though it is often reffered to as one. the Klingon Vo''Quv is a Dreadnought, though I belive these Dreadnoughts are labled in Star Trek as Ships which can be a fleet undo themselves and the Gal-X is not classified as such it cannot hold as a fleet unto itself.
so why not just make a new Dreadnought for the Federation which would implement something like a point defense console or something like a launch platform which would launch a set of platforms which are integrated into the dreadnought like escape pods but with phaser arrays and stuff....the Gal-X has to be removed as a Dreadnought classification one way or another.
The 2009 Trek license is separate from the other other "prime time line" movies. Long ago there was a concerted effort to get the JJ-Prise into the game, the Devs came right out and said they can't use anything from the JJ-verse in STO.
As to the Gal-X, I didn't want it since it's not from this timeline, but I have no problem with the ship itself. An exploration vessel up-armored and up-armed for better survivability? Yeah.. I can definitely see that as being the direction a peacekeeping and scientific organization like Starfleet would take in a war.
And do we really have to go back and cover the usefulness of small deployables in Trek again?
Small, weak, deployables are only good with overwhelming numbers, which these carriers the klingons have don't really have. The carriers in game week like tanks that barge in and the fighters supplement the carriers main armament. That's not a carrier . But I was talking about the hell bentness of lockers lol
Im not against the Gal-X but it just doesnt seem like a dreadnought, more like a normal 30 yr old ship which was refitted just for that one ship not ment to be a dreadnought classification,
also I used my klingon carrier today and soloed a good chunk of PvE, the carrier had sufficient hull shields etc and the fighters did a considerable ammount of continuing damage, took out 3 cubes 10 spheres with fighters alone and the carrier itself or wrather the klingon dreadnought itself didnt fire as often as it should have.
the fighters were launched 2 times each time and the borg rarely targeted my ship. I also tried multiple combinations like BoP and fighters, just BoP, Siphons with fighters bop combos etc. stillt hey did the job and I still say it is a viable combat use as well as protection and support.
I used the repair shuttles to keep a friend alive as well as provide cover spam...it did nicely in tests. though even I have to admit a Federation "Carrier" would not be able to fit that role well, but a multirole capital Ship would be able to do well in a tactical and healing support standpoint if it is a good counter to the klingon dreadnought
Im not against the Gal-X but it just doesnt seem like a dreadnought, more like a normal 30 yr old ship which was refitted just for that one ship not ment to be a dreadnought classification.
Well, that's the beauty of the refit process, older ships are refitted, but new ships of that class are built with the upgrades. Look up the history of the Excelsior (newly built but upgraded over time) and the Enterprise-B (built with all improvements to date from the start).
The (normal and Retrofit) Galaxy Class ships we see are the older model, most of the Dreadnoughts are going to be new builds.
also I used my klingon carrier today and soloed a good chunk of PvE, the carrier had sufficient hull shields etc and the fighters did a considerable ammount of continuing damage, took out 3 cubes 10 spheres with fighters alone and the carrier itself or wrather the klingon dreadnought itself didnt fire as often as it should have.
the fighters were launched 2 times each time and the borg rarely targeted my ship. I also tried multiple combinations like BoP and fighters, just BoP, Siphons with fighters bop combos etc. stillt hey did the job and I still say it is a viable combat use as well as protection and support.
I used the repair shuttles to keep a friend alive as well as provide cover spam...it did nicely in tests. though even I have to admit a Federation "Carrier" would not be able to fit that role well, but a multirole capital Ship would be able to do well in a tactical and healing support standpoint if it is a good counter to the klingon dreadnought
The thing is, anything can be made to work in a game, they can be buffed or nerfed to be as strong or as weak as the game developers desire. So whether or not it would be effective in the game is not a valid point as to whether a Carrier would be effective in Trek.
And, from the sounds of it, you tested your Carrier and all its pets in PvE, against NPC enemies. PvP, vs other players with their myriad builds and abilities, is a whole different game. I've flown a Vo'Quv in PvP, and believe me, it's not the cakewalk PvE is.
What's more, KDF Carrier Pet Spam is one of the top complaints of the PvP community, how one or two players in Carriers can generate so may pets that the other players get hit with Lag, can't react like they need to, and lose, not because of superior skill, but because of metagaming pet spammers.
The solution to that problem is not more spam, even if it's from a Fed ship instead of a KDF one.
I don't understand why they haven't been put in yet.
because the federation is not into sending pilots to their deaths. however the scorpions are piloted by remans.
also I think the Klingon carrier needs to have its fighters taken down a bit. say instead of 3 per slot just bring it down to 2 and everything will be a little bit better, for those who still lag i recomend turning down the video settings.
because the federation is not into sending pilots to their deaths. however the scorpions are piloted by remans.
also I think the Klingon carrier needs to have its fighters taken down a bit. say instead of 3 per slot just bring it down to 2 and everything will be a little bit better, for those who still lag i recomend turning down the video settings.
Yet I've seen peregrine fighters in NPC Federation groups. :P
because the federation is not into sending pilots to their deaths. however the scorpions are piloted by remans.
also I think the Klingon carrier needs to have its fighters taken down a bit. say instead of 3 per slot just bring it down to 2 and everything will be a little bit better, for those who still lag i recomend turning down the video settings.
You can only turn your settings down so far, imagine five Carriers, all putting out hordes of fighters, even the best systems are going to have trouble rendering 40 ships on screen. Now imagine all you Carrier Fans getting together and having a Carrier on Carrier fight.. 70 ships on screen. Add Mine Spam to that. Add a couple Photonic Fleets to that.. Then assume half of them have Scorpions.. We're talking more than a hundred objects that all those players rigs have to render..
That's just downright scary, like, fry a graphics card scary.
You do see the issue here, right? More Carriers aren't the answer to Carrier created problems.
Yet I've seen peregrine fighters in NPC Federation groups. :P
Yes, but you never see them launched from any of those NPC ships, do you? Peregrines make excellent scouts and couriers, it is only in truly desperate times that they are pressed into combat service, and even then, they are not carried or launched by other ships. They are independent craft in their own right.
Im not against the Gal-X but it just doesnt seem like a dreadnought, more like a normal 30 yr old ship which was refitted just for that one ship not ment to be a dreadnought classification.
Actually I am going to reply in relation to this.
There is no dreadnought classification.
The "dreadnought" is a battleship, the name stuck because of the HMS Dreadnought that was a "all-big-gun" ship and so marked such a difference that the earlier battleships were named of "pre-dreadnought" as the ones that come after, the "super dreadnought" (as the New York class), of course the term pretty much vanished after WW I.
So were does the Galaxy X does not fit in the classification? it can mount dual cannons as well having the Spinal Lance meaning its a "all-big-gun", its also heavy armored unlike escorts that are "glass cannons" and its have the bridge layout of a assault cruiser.
Also I do hope you understand Cruisers evolution was parallel, the armored Cruiser became the Battle Cruiser so I ask you, if you want to be really "technical" about it should they call the Galaxy X that is a modified cruiser a Battle Cruiser? after all the Klingons Cruisers are known as such.
This is the problem with terminology, the term dreadnought refers to a specific Battleship evolution, not a ship classification and so the use the term dreadnought to the Galaxy X is simply that is no longer a cruiser due to its armament.
Yes, but you never see them launched from any of those NPC ships, do you? Peregrines make excellent scouts and couriers, it is only in truly desperate times that they are pressed into combat service, and even then, they are not carried or launched by other ships. They are independent craft in their own right.
Alright so they're versatile, they're independent. They can travel at warp to one destination to the next without needing a craft to carry them. How about missions though that send your star ship into deep space where it could take hours/days before reinforcements arrived, where if you needed additional craft to defend your ship you'd have it available instantly and that's if there were no other alternatives. You have crew members who are expert fighter pilots and you have a wing of fighter craft on board at your disposal. Would you really pass that up? Fighters can be used offensively and defensively. I see no problem with a large ship carrying craft with trained pilots that can serve both as an offense and defensive tool.
If they can be launched from a space station what's the harm of launching them from a ship?
Alright so they're versatile, they're independent. They can travel at warp to one destination to the next without needing a craft to carry them. How about missions though that send your star ship into deep space where it could take hours/days before reinforcements arrived, where if you needed additional craft to defend your ship you'd have it available instantly and that's if there were no other alternatives. You have crew members who are expert fighter pilots and you have a wing of fighter craft on board at your disposal. Would you really pass that up? Fighters can be used offensively and defensively. I see no problem with a large ship carrying craft with trained pilots that can serve both as an offense and defensive tool.
If they can be launched from a space station what's the harm of launching them from a ship?
The space station is immobile and needs interceptors to protect is from slow moving, hard hitting projectiles. A deep-space craft is a) armed to the teeth and highly able to take of itself and b) can perform evasive manneuvers. If your Star Cruiser needs auxilliary craft for missions it comes with a dozen shuttlecraft and maybe one or two runabouts. If it comes to a fight, your cruiser is your defense. Small fighters simply would be fried in no time by weapons used in the Trek-universe. Plus imagine Star Trek's mechanics as naval actions worked in the old days. You have mainly independend, large craft which exchange broadsides hoping to breach another vessels defense. They may be accompanied by frigates and escort craft to scout and somewhat shield them, but a frigate or escort itself should be in absolutely no position to challenge a capital cruiser (the Game STO fails greatly in depicting that. Even the Defiant is no match for an enemy cruiser). Now, the equivalent of using fightrs in Star Trek would be to lower four or five rowing (life)boats from your ship-of-the-line to engage the enemy, shooting with muskets.
Comments
Now I think you're just being silly.
You know anything from Legacy is a no-go, and I think we've already gone down the road of why pets aren't a viable combat strategy for Starfleet (or for the KDF or the Romulans, for that matter).
again what are your thoughts on my idea for the freebuild ship power and such from the previous posts?
Oh, believe me, I know how you feel about the Gal-X, I was against them putting it in the first place way back in the day because of the same timeline issue you have.
But I do agree with your power systems customization Idea, in fact, I was just waiting for you to make a separate thread so we could go into it a bit deeper without taking this thread too far off topic. Shall we?
the Jupiter Class would make a great Carrier, btw confirmed the Mirror Universe Jupiter class did launch runabouts back before ESD was changed. though it being a carrier for the federation is unknoiwn and doubtful.
Well, there's a few problems with the Yorktown:
1. It's over two hundred years old. The NX replica was brought into the game, but it was a T1, bringing in the Yorktown as a T5 Dreadnought is pushing credulity beyond the breaking point.
2. If we're still talking about Runabouts as the "spin".. Well, you know how I feel about that.
3. If we want a Dreadnought with a spin, how about a Dreadnought with strong Hull, high turn rate, and low shields and no power bonus'? An Escort-ish Dreadnought?
4. I'm not nearly as enamored with the Jupiter Class as some.. I could see it as a large NPC Research Vessel, or Transport, but I have no desire for it as a playable ship.
also on another note Im not going to let this thread die, there are way too many carrier threads out there and each eventualy dwindle, it would be good to have one central thread so they dont keep popping up.
but in truth I think there needs to be a Yorktown Class in the game maybe as a retrofit Cruiser/Escort as it was inteded to be in lore.
but in truth TOS had a different style in the past, that much is obvious to the asthetic sense but its canon and lore was much different than TNG, I belive we can justify the Dreadnought Class from the TOS Era to be the Yorktown and have it as an obtainable ship which has integrated blue phasers and blue torps, with a speecial ability, high rate torpedos, kind of the Yorktown classes phaser lance but more...TOS
Again.. Legacy was a video game from another company, and as such, nothing from it can be used in STO.. You know that.
Uh.. No. All the Starfleet ships seen in the 2009 Star trek are original works made for that movie. They may be JJ-fied versions of other Trek ships (like the JJ-prise is a JJ-fied Constitution)..
..But the JJTrek isn't covered by the IP usage rights Cryptic has from CBS & Paramount.
but now back to the topic, the Klingon Carrier isnt actualy a carrier in classificaion though it is often reffered to as one. the Klingon Vo''Quv is a Dreadnought, though I belive these Dreadnoughts are labled in Star Trek as Ships which can be a fleet undo themselves and the Gal-X is not classified as such it cannot hold as a fleet unto itself.
so why not just make a new Dreadnought for the Federation which would implement something like a point defense console or something like a launch platform which would launch a set of platforms which are integrated into the dreadnought like escape pods but with phaser arrays and stuff....the Gal-X has to be removed as a Dreadnought classification one way or another.
I believe a federation carrier would have to be a ship away from the fray, and probably suffer having reduced tac ability, like having only one ensign tac ability. 4 weapons, and extended range for its abilities (unique ability anyone?
As if right now, I don't believe there is a true carrier in the game. I really don't see the tactics the klingons use with their carriers as rlthat of a true carrier.
The 2009 Trek license is separate from the other other "prime time line" movies. Long ago there was a concerted effort to get the JJ-Prise into the game, the Devs came right out and said they can't use anything from the JJ-verse in STO.
As to the Gal-X, I didn't want it since it's not from this timeline, but I have no problem with the ship itself. An exploration vessel up-armored and up-armed for better survivability? Yeah.. I can definitely see that as being the direction a peacekeeping and scientific organization like Starfleet would take in a war.
And do we really have to go back and cover the usefulness of small deployables in Trek again?
also I used my klingon carrier today and soloed a good chunk of PvE, the carrier had sufficient hull shields etc and the fighters did a considerable ammount of continuing damage, took out 3 cubes 10 spheres with fighters alone and the carrier itself or wrather the klingon dreadnought itself didnt fire as often as it should have.
the fighters were launched 2 times each time and the borg rarely targeted my ship. I also tried multiple combinations like BoP and fighters, just BoP, Siphons with fighters bop combos etc. stillt hey did the job and I still say it is a viable combat use as well as protection and support.
I used the repair shuttles to keep a friend alive as well as provide cover spam...it did nicely in tests. though even I have to admit a Federation "Carrier" would not be able to fit that role well, but a multirole capital Ship would be able to do well in a tactical and healing support standpoint if it is a good counter to the klingon dreadnought
Well, that's the beauty of the refit process, older ships are refitted, but new ships of that class are built with the upgrades. Look up the history of the Excelsior (newly built but upgraded over time) and the Enterprise-B (built with all improvements to date from the start).
The (normal and Retrofit) Galaxy Class ships we see are the older model, most of the Dreadnoughts are going to be new builds.
The thing is, anything can be made to work in a game, they can be buffed or nerfed to be as strong or as weak as the game developers desire. So whether or not it would be effective in the game is not a valid point as to whether a Carrier would be effective in Trek.
And, from the sounds of it, you tested your Carrier and all its pets in PvE, against NPC enemies. PvP, vs other players with their myriad builds and abilities, is a whole different game. I've flown a Vo'Quv in PvP, and believe me, it's not the cakewalk PvE is.
What's more, KDF Carrier Pet Spam is one of the top complaints of the PvP community, how one or two players in Carriers can generate so may pets that the other players get hit with Lag, can't react like they need to, and lose, not because of superior skill, but because of metagaming pet spammers.
The solution to that problem is not more spam, even if it's from a Fed ship instead of a KDF one.
I don't understand why they haven't been put in yet.
because the federation is not into sending pilots to their deaths. however the scorpions are piloted by remans.
also I think the Klingon carrier needs to have its fighters taken down a bit. say instead of 3 per slot just bring it down to 2 and everything will be a little bit better, for those who still lag i recomend turning down the video settings.
Yet I've seen peregrine fighters in NPC Federation groups. :P
You can only turn your settings down so far, imagine five Carriers, all putting out hordes of fighters, even the best systems are going to have trouble rendering 40 ships on screen. Now imagine all you Carrier Fans getting together and having a Carrier on Carrier fight.. 70 ships on screen. Add Mine Spam to that. Add a couple Photonic Fleets to that.. Then assume half of them have Scorpions.. We're talking more than a hundred objects that all those players rigs have to render..
That's just downright scary, like, fry a graphics card scary.
You do see the issue here, right? More Carriers aren't the answer to Carrier created problems.
Yes, but you never see them launched from any of those NPC ships, do you? Peregrines make excellent scouts and couriers, it is only in truly desperate times that they are pressed into combat service, and even then, they are not carried or launched by other ships. They are independent craft in their own right.
Actually I am going to reply in relation to this.
There is no dreadnought classification.
The "dreadnought" is a battleship, the name stuck because of the HMS Dreadnought that was a "all-big-gun" ship and so marked such a difference that the earlier battleships were named of "pre-dreadnought" as the ones that come after, the "super dreadnought" (as the New York class), of course the term pretty much vanished after WW I.
So were does the Galaxy X does not fit in the classification? it can mount dual cannons as well having the Spinal Lance meaning its a "all-big-gun", its also heavy armored unlike escorts that are "glass cannons" and its have the bridge layout of a assault cruiser.
Also I do hope you understand Cruisers evolution was parallel, the armored Cruiser became the Battle Cruiser so I ask you, if you want to be really "technical" about it should they call the Galaxy X that is a modified cruiser a Battle Cruiser? after all the Klingons Cruisers are known as such.
This is the problem with terminology, the term dreadnought refers to a specific Battleship evolution, not a ship classification and so the use the term dreadnought to the Galaxy X is simply that is no longer a cruiser due to its armament.
Also:
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Dreadnought
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federation_class
So yes, 3 nacelles=dreadnaught ...
Alright so they're versatile, they're independent. They can travel at warp to one destination to the next without needing a craft to carry them. How about missions though that send your star ship into deep space where it could take hours/days before reinforcements arrived, where if you needed additional craft to defend your ship you'd have it available instantly and that's if there were no other alternatives. You have crew members who are expert fighter pilots and you have a wing of fighter craft on board at your disposal. Would you really pass that up? Fighters can be used offensively and defensively. I see no problem with a large ship carrying craft with trained pilots that can serve both as an offense and defensive tool.
If they can be launched from a space station what's the harm of launching them from a ship?
The space station is immobile and needs interceptors to protect is from slow moving, hard hitting projectiles. A deep-space craft is a) armed to the teeth and highly able to take of itself and b) can perform evasive manneuvers. If your Star Cruiser needs auxilliary craft for missions it comes with a dozen shuttlecraft and maybe one or two runabouts. If it comes to a fight, your cruiser is your defense. Small fighters simply would be fried in no time by weapons used in the Trek-universe. Plus imagine Star Trek's mechanics as naval actions worked in the old days. You have mainly independend, large craft which exchange broadsides hoping to breach another vessels defense. They may be accompanied by frigates and escort craft to scout and somewhat shield them, but a frigate or escort itself should be in absolutely no position to challenge a capital cruiser (the Game STO fails greatly in depicting that. Even the Defiant is no match for an enemy cruiser). Now, the equivalent of using fightrs in Star Trek would be to lower four or five rowing (life)boats from your ship-of-the-line to engage the enemy, shooting with muskets.