1. There is currently no Fleet Vor'cha visible on Tribble.
2. If there was one, it would probably be like a Fleet Assault Cruiser, so no, not a Commander tact/Lt Commander Tact ship, but merely a Com Eng/Lt Com tact ship.
Roll a KDF toon, join a fleet and you could enjoy what you are looking for only a grind and $20.
Though if the feds are going to start taking more concepts from the KDF then I would like to see a Gorn heavy Escort Carrier introduced to the KDF.
I am certainly not alone in that I don't like (as in, find outright disgusting) the notion of "tactical ships must be agile and fragile". So, what if both factions got one of these...
Would you buy one for 2500 Zen? How would you use it? What do you think about the general idea?
Why would I want that when I have the TAC Bortesqu?
Do I support the idea. Not sure where you heading to be honest. I can think is various builds on existing vessels way better than above. Why would someone pay 2500 zen for a ship that does not even compare.
But just so that we are clear and get off to the right footing :0
This is not one of your "sink-trap" posts, where you tell everyone how terribly wrong they are?
Excuse me for my trolling. It sneaks out sometimes
I would much rather the devs be focused on balancing the existing ships than introduce more, to further exasperate the inherent problems of particular ships and their configurations.
All I see is a ship that has inadequate maneuverability, and a ENS/ LT. ENG which will be wholly inefficient for the cruiser, with the turn rate of a V2 rocket.
Cruisers with a Commander ENG station, flown by experienced players get park-'n-pwned regularly. How will this ship do any better?
You mean I could actually think of several different builds for such a ship?
Wow. I must be cool. :rolleyes:
And only be able to use one of any of those abilities at a time on each build you design.
Hardly seems fair to toss the games vessel class balance on its ear just so youcan have the best of being both an Escort and a Cruiser when others have offered ideas (like bluegeek) that maintain the balance but offer what your needs desires.
And only be able to use one of any of those abilities at a time on each build you design.
Hardly seems fair to toss the games vessel class balance on its ear just so youcan have the best of being both an Escort and a Cruiser when others have offered ideas (like bluegeek) that maintain the balance but offer what your needs desires.
Isn't that comment true of any ship with a commander position of any flavor? Based on that argument, there should be no ships with any type of commander Boff....
If the objection is to other things he is asking for, fair enough, but that seemed to be an objection solely to a commander tac postiion, independent of any sacrifices that may or may not be made to obtain it.
and all of those except APO3 can be had at LTC level so i still see no point in the commander tac over the cammander eng in a slow turning "tanky" ship
and all of those except APO3 can be had at LTC level so i still see no point in the commander tac over the cammander eng in a slow turning "tanky" ship
Yes, they can be had at the rank 2 level. That would be the same for escorts though. It would also be the same for any class of ship with any of the top abilities.
I guess commander level Boff positions should be scrapped, since the abilities are all available one rank lesser....
they can be had at 3 just find a tac officer to train or boffs when i fly my defiant i use APB3 as the LTC spot then APO3 as the commander and CSV3 in the second LTC spot
they can be had at 3 just find a tac officer to train or boffs when i fly my defiant i use APB3 as the LTC spot then APO3 as the commander and CSV3 in the second LTC spot
1) No they cannot. APB3 is a commander level ability. Check again as to what your tac can train.
2) You cannot train Boffs for someone else regardless. You have to assign them to a ship to train them, at which point they become bound and can be dismissed but cannot be moved back to the trading pool
1. I am not arguing against bluegeeks or anyone's idea of a tactical ship. But a tactical commander and a tactical Lt Commander are required to make a "damage-dealer bigship" work.
No its not required as others have pointed out in several posts. As well you have dismessed most ideas that do not cling to your need for a Commander+LTC tactical set-up.
Frankly most have found Bluegeeks idea the best balanced for the idea, so why not agree and push it as the idea?
It gives the player a tactical Cruiser and does not encroach into the speciality of the Escort live of vessels.
I like his idea and would gladly see a KDF version put into play.
2. If you think that a few hull hitpoints and a few shield hitpoints and slow maneuverability and 8 instead of 6 or 7 weapons are "the best of a cruiser", then I strongly suggest you get a cruiser and try it. Your posts seem to indicate that you are not familiar with cruisers. Cruisers are best at taking damage not mainly because of the hitpoints, but because of the Engineer defense abilities, and the 8 weapons are just required on a slow ship that cannot (or should not) equip dual heavy cannons.
I've done nothing but fly Cruisers/Battle Cruisers for the last 6 months. I know full well that its possible to build a heavy hitting Cruiser without the Commander/LTC BOffs you desire.
You idea for a Tac Cruiser is not a good one as its just an Escort BOff set-up with slower turnrate and speed and all the Cruiser tankiness.
It appears to have no sacrifice for the Firepower it brings or the Engineering tankiness it has as well.
Take an AE or a FE. Don't specc in to thrusters or engine power boosters. Run engines at minimum setting.
Voila! Slow turning Tac cmdr and ltcmdr gunboat!
Slap on a holo emitter of a bigger ship and you're golden.
I've skimmed most of the thread and I like the ideas I've seen so far.
Liking the idea of broadsides that was brought up, but how to that work in game without making a new class of weapon that can only be used on this one class of ship like the point defense consoles?
One thing that came to mind is the universal console on the Ferengi D'kora with it's two modes one for battle and defense.
Brainstorming here, so bear with me. What if the "Behemoth" had a series of buffs & debuffs to turn rate, hull and or shields in different modes? In flank speed or pursuit mode it runs like a cruiser or carrier better maneuverability but less weapons or defensive power. Then when the time comes she stands & lets loose with the transformation to standoff or siege mode. Maneuverability drops to that of a brick, but weapons, shields and hull plating go up exponentially.
Still the question of the broadside effect? Something like a universal "switching" console like "Broadside Volley Port/Starboard" that drops all but minimal power to the fore & aft weapons AND the shields on the opposite side but sets off a quick torrent attack like a steady cannon rapid or beam fire-at-will.
Nerf or buff whichever modifier ideas seem wrong, throw in whatever console or Boff arrangements seem to fit. Hell maybe even a single hangar bay that can only launch in pursuit mode so she has some defense in siege mode?
Sorry if I've over-simplified or re-hashed what's already been discussed. I just like the idea and wanted to bring something to the discussion without getting caught up in the cross-chatter over what's been called a battleship or dreadnaught in STO or what its' modern maritime equivalent.
As to what's considered canonical or not I think that's moot at this point. It's one thing to argue over what the Fed or KDF factions might design and employ, even though STO has just about tossed that out the window. Don't get me wrong I like the new ships and I think they fit well in the evolution of the 25th century and all (Even if there seem to be too damn many of them! :P)
More to the point Fed's & Klinks aren't the only one's designing warships to fight the Borg or the Tholians, or whatever right? A lot of non allied races out there to work with.
For instance I've been watching a lot of Voyager lately to sort of catch up on where the Dev's may have gotten some of their ideas since I've been more of a TOS/TNG buff and I found myself surprised at how badass the Malon (sp?) garbage haulers were compared to the little Intrepid of legend! In their first encounter in the episode Night; greedy captain jerkface fires off an uber salvo of spatial charges like it's no big deal, then complains about the cost!
I am certainly not alone in that I don't like (as in, find outright disgusting) the notion of "tactical ships must be agile and fragile". So, what if both factions got one of these...
The problem is that the BOFF layout above and a base turn rate of 7 means you are now not agile but are now also relatively fragile.
You are looking solely at the base stats of a ship to determine whether it is "tanky" or not.
There are two major components to a Cruiser's survivability:
Base Stats
BOFF layout
The layout you've posted above is no better than a Fleet Escort, except it has none of the Fleet Escort's maneuverability nor it's higher defense bonus potential.
What you want, approximately, can already be done with the Odyssey class while still remaining more survivable than what you've posted above.
Lt TAC Ltc CMD UNI (TAC) CMD ENG ENS ENG Lt SCI
Any C-store Ody can have that BOFF layout, while having more shields and more hull than what you've posted above.
Is it about a new cruiser with a different boff layout or a change to whatever the Federation Battleship is? (which of course there isnt otherwise I wouldnt be Rawring for the Typhoon)
Of course it is. It must be, for balance reasons. The higher hit point stats merely counter the lower maneuverability... it will still be a tactical ship, and not an engineering ship.
Would you be astonished to learn that this has been brought up before in this thread, and has been answered?
DPS will still hit a lower maximum with only a LtC and Lt Tac. So it cannot "approximately" be done. The Tactical Oddy (or even the Tactical BortasQu, which can do that kind of stuff better) will still be a ship that cannot run APO3, or CRF3, etc.
DPS is done by the weapons,console and power layout... the boffs have nothing to do with DPS.. all they do is give you a choice of skills to use.
What are you talking about? All damage-increasing boff skills will of course increase average DPS of the ship.
This thread is about a new kind of tactical ship besides escorts. There are big fat science ships, there are big fat engineering ships. I just propose to add a big fat tactical ship.
For both factions, by the way.
yeah fair enough, forgot about those.
Big fat tactical ship? do we really need one? the little tactical ships are evil enough.. the big ones would more than likely just take up the roll of cannon fodder.
Liking the idea of broadsides that was brought up, but how to that work in game without making a new class of weapon that can only be used on this one class of ship like the point defense consoles?
That's a great question. The problem is, nobody knows. There was a thread that made the original suggestion, but I'm not sure what Cryptic is thinking about it. There are a few possibilities:
* Special weapon ability that alters the firing arc; not sure how this could work.
* Introduce new side-arc weapon slots; can equip most weapons.
* Special console ability that simulates a broadside weapon; possibly independent of equipped weapons.
* Innate ship ability that alters firing arcs of equipped weapons.
I think side-arc weapon slots would offer the cleanest, most flexible implementation. But it would require new functionality.
One thing that came to mind is the universal console on the Ferengi D'kora with it's two modes one for battle and defense.
Brainstorming here, so bear with me. What if the "Behemoth" had a series of buffs & debuffs to turn rate, hull and or shields in different modes? In flank speed or pursuit mode it runs like a cruiser or carrier better maneuverability but less weapons or defensive power. Then when the time comes she stands & lets loose with the transformation to standoff or siege mode. Maneuverability drops to that of a brick, but weapons, shields and hull plating go up exponentially.
That could work too, but I'd worry about balance. A transform mode that people can switch back and forth from minimizes the balancing effects of any trade-offs.
Still the question of the broadside effect? Something like a universal "switching" console like "Broadside Volley Port/Starboard" that drops all but minimal power to the fore & aft weapons AND the shields on the opposite side but sets off a quick torrent attack like a steady cannon rapid or beam fire-at-will.
Could be.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Comments
Roll a KDF toon, join a fleet and you could enjoy what you are looking for only a grind and $20.
Though if the feds are going to start taking more concepts from the KDF then I would like to see a Gorn heavy Escort Carrier introduced to the KDF.
R.I.P
Why would I want that when I have the TAC Bortesqu?
Do I support the idea. Not sure where you heading to be honest. I can think is various builds on existing vessels way better than above. Why would someone pay 2500 zen for a ship that does not even compare.
But just so that we are clear and get off to the right footing :0
This is not one of your "sink-trap" posts, where you tell everyone how terribly wrong they are?
All those abilities are not possible on the same build with a cpm/ltc tac layout.
R.I.P
I would much rather the devs be focused on balancing the existing ships than introduce more, to further exasperate the inherent problems of particular ships and their configurations.
All I see is a ship that has inadequate maneuverability, and a ENS/ LT. ENG which will be wholly inefficient for the cruiser, with the turn rate of a V2 rocket.
Cruisers with a Commander ENG station, flown by experienced players get park-'n-pwned regularly. How will this ship do any better?
To be fair, he was asked what Commander tac powers could benefit a larger ship. There is no implication that all those would be on the same build.
And only be able to use one of any of those abilities at a time on each build you design.
Hardly seems fair to toss the games vessel class balance on its ear just so youcan have the best of being both an Escort and a Cruiser when others have offered ideas (like bluegeek) that maintain the balance but offer what your needs desires.
R.I.P
Isn't that comment true of any ship with a commander position of any flavor? Based on that argument, there should be no ships with any type of commander Boff....
If the objection is to other things he is asking for, fair enough, but that seemed to be an objection solely to a commander tac postiion, independent of any sacrifices that may or may not be made to obtain it.
Not sure what is even being argued at this point
I just read the last few pages and I'm lost too.....
and all of those except APO3 can be had at LTC level so i still see no point in the commander tac over the cammander eng in a slow turning "tanky" ship
Yes, they can be had at the rank 2 level. That would be the same for escorts though. It would also be the same for any class of ship with any of the top abilities.
I guess commander level Boff positions should be scrapped, since the abilities are all available one rank lesser....
1) No they cannot. APB3 is a commander level ability. Check again as to what your tac can train.
2) You cannot train Boffs for someone else regardless. You have to assign them to a ship to train them, at which point they become bound and can be dismissed but cannot be moved back to the trading pool
R.I.P
Voila! Slow turning Tac cmdr and ltcmdr gunboat!
Slap on a holo emitter of a bigger ship and you're golden.
Liking the idea of broadsides that was brought up, but how to that work in game without making a new class of weapon that can only be used on this one class of ship like the point defense consoles?
One thing that came to mind is the universal console on the Ferengi D'kora with it's two modes one for battle and defense.
Brainstorming here, so bear with me. What if the "Behemoth" had a series of buffs & debuffs to turn rate, hull and or shields in different modes? In flank speed or pursuit mode it runs like a cruiser or carrier better maneuverability but less weapons or defensive power. Then when the time comes she stands & lets loose with the transformation to standoff or siege mode. Maneuverability drops to that of a brick, but weapons, shields and hull plating go up exponentially.
Still the question of the broadside effect? Something like a universal "switching" console like "Broadside Volley Port/Starboard" that drops all but minimal power to the fore & aft weapons AND the shields on the opposite side but sets off a quick torrent attack like a steady cannon rapid or beam fire-at-will.
Nerf or buff whichever modifier ideas seem wrong, throw in whatever console or Boff arrangements seem to fit. Hell maybe even a single hangar bay that can only launch in pursuit mode so she has some defense in siege mode?
Sorry if I've over-simplified or re-hashed what's already been discussed. I just like the idea and wanted to bring something to the discussion without getting caught up in the cross-chatter over what's been called a battleship or dreadnaught in STO or what its' modern maritime equivalent.
As to what's considered canonical or not I think that's moot at this point. It's one thing to argue over what the Fed or KDF factions might design and employ, even though STO has just about tossed that out the window. Don't get me wrong I like the new ships and I think they fit well in the evolution of the 25th century and all (Even if there seem to be too damn many of them! :P)
More to the point Fed's & Klinks aren't the only one's designing warships to fight the Borg or the Tholians, or whatever right? A lot of non allied races out there to work with.
For instance I've been watching a lot of Voyager lately to sort of catch up on where the Dev's may have gotten some of their ideas since I've been more of a TOS/TNG buff and I found myself surprised at how badass the Malon (sp?) garbage haulers were compared to the little Intrepid of legend! In their first encounter in the episode Night; greedy captain jerkface fires off an uber salvo of spatial charges like it's no big deal, then complains about the cost!
The problem is that the BOFF layout above and a base turn rate of 7 means you are now not agile but are now also relatively fragile.
You are looking solely at the base stats of a ship to determine whether it is "tanky" or not.
There are two major components to a Cruiser's survivability:
The layout you've posted above is no better than a Fleet Escort, except it has none of the Fleet Escort's maneuverability nor it's higher defense bonus potential.
What you want, approximately, can already be done with the Odyssey class while still remaining more survivable than what you've posted above.
Lt TAC
Ltc CMD UNI (TAC)
CMD ENG
ENS ENG
Lt SCI
Any C-store Ody can have that BOFF layout, while having more shields and more hull than what you've posted above.
Is it about a new cruiser with a different boff layout or a change to whatever the Federation Battleship is? (which of course there isnt otherwise I wouldnt be Rawring for the Typhoon)
DPS is done by the weapons,console and power layout... the boffs have nothing to do with DPS.. all they do is give you a choice of skills to use.
yeah fair enough, forgot about those.
Big fat tactical ship? do we really need one? the little tactical ships are evil enough.. the big ones would more than likely just take up the roll of cannon fodder.
That's a great question. The problem is, nobody knows. There was a thread that made the original suggestion, but I'm not sure what Cryptic is thinking about it. There are a few possibilities:
* Special weapon ability that alters the firing arc; not sure how this could work.
* Introduce new side-arc weapon slots; can equip most weapons.
* Special console ability that simulates a broadside weapon; possibly independent of equipped weapons.
* Innate ship ability that alters firing arcs of equipped weapons.
I think side-arc weapon slots would offer the cleanest, most flexible implementation. But it would require new functionality.
That could work too, but I'd worry about balance. A transform mode that people can switch back and forth from minimizes the balancing effects of any trade-offs.
Could be.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek