test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Mid Size Hybrid Vessels - Any Interest?

ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
edited October 2012 in Federation Discussion
I'm curious if players have any interest in seeing some Mid-Size hybrid style ships at max level? I know I would like to see some.

If you think about it, we seem to be severely lacking in these options, and the options we do have, are all very specialized or unique looking, which not everyone appreciates those heavily unique looks.

Let's consider modern Naval Vessels for a moment.

Aircraft Carrier (CV)
Battleship (BB)
Submarine (SS*N)
Heavy Cruisers-Missle Cruisers (CA)
Light Cruisers (CL)
Destroyers (DD)


If we were to lump STO's Admiral Level (Rear-Vice) vessels into categories as listed above, in terms of size classifications, it might be as follows:

Carrier: Atrox
Battleship: Odyssey, Sovereign*, Galaxy*, Nebula
Submarine: Luna, Prometheus, Excelsior
Heavy Cruisers: None
Light Cruisers: Armitage, Intrepid*
Destroyers: Defiant*, Blockade Escort

* = Includes all variations thereof

So what's the point? The point is, we don't have many choices in the Mid-Size vessels, and in the Mid-Small size vessels, we don't have much variation. In the step up from Mid-Size, all the ships have very distinguished looks, that if you aren't a fan of those particular ships, you're kinda out of luck.

In the Battleship size category, we have all kinds of choices. Sovies, Galaxies, the new Oddy, plus the several distinct looks that can be achieved via Cryptic's own designs for 2409.

In the Submarine size category, you have 3 ships. One has a funky sensor dome, and nacelles that hang underneath it like legs on a duck (Luna), you have a 4 nacelle ship (Prometheus) and you have an antique (Exclesior).

Getting into the Light Cruisers, if you weren't a fan of Voyager, and not a fan of that single scene in First Contact where you see the Akira, you are really out of luck.

And for the Destroyers, you get Jet aircraft looking ships, or cheeseboxes (Defiant).

Can we start getting some new designs and new visual options, in the Mid-Size category? You know, I like the looks of the Sovereign ok, but I don't want the size of a Sovereign. Is it simply not possible to create a ship, which is about the size of a Prometheus or an Intrepid, but having a similar, but unique style to that of a Sovereign?

What I'm getting at is while I understand people want their canon, seen on the TV screen for 4.21568 seconds in Episode 24, Season 3 of <insert Trek Show here>, is it possible to get back to the whole "It's 2409, this is the future of Star Trek" concept, and get some entirely new designs? Like you did with the Star Cruisers and such at launch?

Let's get some variation and some choices at the upper levels! More mid-size ships, in a variety of styles and builds.

This is something I might like to fly:

Mid Size Border Patrol Cruiser

Length: 415 Meters (same as Prometheus)

Configuration: Vanguard Saucer, scaled down by 50-75%, with an honest to God neck section, like the Excelsior, but not as upright, and 2 swept-back nacelles, like a Sovereign, blended together in a whole new 2409 style.

Hull: 32000

Turn Rate: 11 deg/sec

Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft

Consoles: 3 Eng, 2 Sci, 4 Tac

Bridge Officers:

Cmdr Tac
Lt Cmdr Eng
Lt Tac
Lt Eng
Ens Sci


What makes this ship unique? First of all, it has the style of a cruiser, with 2 nacelles instead of 4 like the Prometheus, without the size and the mass of a Sovereign or Galaxy. You can actually turn this boat, giving you some tactical options. But, if you look at the Hull, while you might be a bit stronger than an Escort or a Science Vessel, you aren't as strong as a battleship, so you need to be cautious. Also, you need to pick your science ability carefully, because you only get one.

Think of this as kind of a "Light Beam Boat" with enough turn rate that you could make use of some dual beam banks for your approach shot before going into your circle formation of broadsides. You get a little bit of the benefit of escorts (reduced turn rate) at the sacrafice of reduced hull, without having to fly a science ship.

I think of this as the kind of ship Starfleet might put out on the border, while the big ships are off fighting the war. It's tough, it can fight, it's just not as big as the capital ships.

Alternatively, you could open up the potential for some other hybrid crossovers. Mid size ships with a Sci/Tac focus, smaller Frigate sized Science ships with a Sci/Eng focus, etc. Lots of possibilities. Heck, alot of people have been wanting a T5 Miranda. Why not build a brand new 2409 type Miranda, in about the size of the Cheyenne class, to be the succsessor to the Miranda, with an Eng/Sci focus?

Plus, if this ship was given a whole new, never before seen look, you could have a launch event surrounding it, just like we had for the Odyssey, which means we could revisit Utopia Planitia.

This is the idea. New ships, new specs, in varying sizes. Let's have some choices Cryptic!


"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Post edited by ccarmichael07 on
«1

Comments

  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    This is what the Criuser is suppose to be used for multi role ship and not all the things you are posting.That is more like Sapce Navey which Starfleet Battles is like.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    age03 wrote: »
    This is what the Criuser is suppose to be used for multi role ship and not all the things you are posting.That is more like Sapce Navey which Starfleet Battles is like.

    So you are implying that cruisers were meant to be massive ships and Starfleet only values massive, slow turning battleships, so that's the only ship they make?

    What I'm asking for is the addition of some mid-sized ships. Sure, we currently have some very limited choices at Vice Admiral in the mid-sized category, but I think we could use some more.

    It would be nice if players could have a bit more choice and more options for what they end up flying.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • dareaudareau Member Posts: 2,390 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    In the "classic forum vein":

    What you're asking for kinda sounds like the Klingon Cruisers, more maneuverable less hull. Guess where you should start spending your time... Heck, you can even put DHCs on the Klingon cruisers instead of being limited to DBBs... :P

    Personally, I'm not up for these ships. Escort weapons on an escort/cruiser hull with cruiser BOffs/consoles almost screams "pick the best of everything for my personal OP ship". Did I miss the part where you asked for the science ship's shield modifiers in there?

    If we were to do "mid sized" ships (almost sounds like a Chevy Malibu in here), I'd be inclined to take a science ship, trade the shield modifier in for more hull, trade the integrated subsystem targetting out in favor of a 4th forward weapons emplacement (yeah, it's escort-level, but I don't necessarily want cruiser-level), and go from there...
    Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...

    To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    I'm curious if players have any interest in seeing some Mid-Size hybrid style ships at max level? I know I would like to see some.

    If you think about it, we seem to be severely lacking in these options, and the options we do have, are all very specialized or unique looking, which not everyone appreciates those heavily unique looks.

    Let's consider modern Naval Vessels for a moment.

    Aircraft Carrier (CV)
    Battleship (BB)
    Submarine (SS*N)
    Heavy Cruisers-Missle Cruisers (CA)
    Light Cruisers (CL)
    Destroyers (DD)


    If we were to lump STO's Admiral Level (Rear-Vice) vessels into categories as listed above, in terms of size classifications, it might be as follows:

    Carrier: Atrox
    Battleship: Odyssey, Sovereign*, Galaxy*, Nebula
    Submarine: Luna, Prometheus, Excelsior
    Heavy Cruisers: None
    Light Cruisers: Armitage, Intrepid*
    Destroyers: Defiant*, Blockade Escort

    * = Includes all variations thereof

    So what's the point? The point is, we don't have many choices in the Mid-Size vessels, and in the Mid-Small size vessels, we don't have much variation. In the step up from Mid-Size, all the ships have very distinguished looks, that if you aren't a fan of those particular ships, you're kinda out of luck.

    In the Battleship size category, we have all kinds of choices. Sovies, Galaxies, the new Oddy, plus the several distinct looks that can be achieved via Cryptic's own designs for 2409.

    In the Submarine size category, you have 3 ships. One has a funky sensor dome, and nacelles that hang underneath it like legs on a duck (Luna), you have a 4 nacelle ship (Prometheus) and you have an antique (Exclesior).

    Getting into the Light Cruisers, if you weren't a fan of Voyager, and not a fan of that single scene in First Contact where you see the Akira, you are really out of luck.

    And for the Destroyers, you get Jet aircraft looking ships, or cheeseboxes (Defiant).

    Can we start getting some new designs and new visual options, in the Mid-Size category? You know, I like the looks of the Sovereign ok, but I don't want the size of a Sovereign. Is it simply not possible to create a ship, which is about the size of a Prometheus or an Intrepid, but having a similar, but unique style to that of a Sovereign?

    What I'm getting at is while I understand people want their canon, seen on the TV screen for 4.21568 seconds in Episode 24, Season 3 of <insert Trek Show here>, is it possible to get back to the whole "It's 2409, this is the future of Star Trek" concept, and get some entirely new designs? Like you did with the Star Cruisers and such at launch?

    Let's get some variation and some choices at the upper levels! More mid-size ships, in a variety of styles and builds.

    This is something I might like to fly:

    Mid Size Border Patrol Cruiser

    Length: 415 Meters (same as Prometheus)

    Configuration: Vanguard Saucer, scaled down by 50-75%, with an honest to God neck section, like the Excelsior, but not as upright, and 2 swept-back nacelles, like a Sovereign, blended together in a whole new 2409 style.

    Hull: 32000

    Turn Rate: 11 deg/sec

    Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft

    Consoles: 3 Eng, 2 Sci, 4 Tac

    Bridge Officers:

    Cmdr Tac
    Lt Cmdr Eng
    Lt Tac
    Lt Eng
    Ens Sci


    What makes this ship unique? First of all, it has the style of a cruiser, with 2 nacelles instead of 4 like the Prometheus, without the size and the mass of a Sovereign or Galaxy. You can actually turn this boat, giving you some tactical options. But, if you look at the Hull, while you might be a bit stronger than an Escort or a Science Vessel, you aren't as strong as a battleship, so you need to be cautious. Also, you need to pick your science ability carefully, because you only get one.

    Think of this as kind of a "Light Beam Boat" with enough turn rate that you could make use of some dual beam banks for your approach shot before going into your circle formation of broadsides. You get a little bit of the benefit of escorts (reduced turn rate) at the sacrafice of reduced hull, without having to fly a science ship.

    I think of this as the kind of ship Starfleet might put out on the border, while the big ships are off fighting the war. It's tough, it can fight, it's just not as big as the capital ships.

    Alternatively, you could open up the potential for some other hybrid crossovers. Mid size ships with a Sci/Tac focus, smaller Frigate sized Science ships with a Sci/Eng focus, etc. Lots of possibilities. Heck, alot of people have been wanting a T5 Miranda. Why not build a brand new 2409 type Miranda, in about the size of the Cheyenne class, to be the succsessor to the Miranda, with an Eng/Sci focus?

    Plus, if this ship was given a whole new, never before seen look, you could have a launch event surrounding it, just like we had for the Odyssey, which means we could revisit Utopia Planitia.

    This is the idea. New ships, new specs, in varying sizes. Let's have some choices Cryptic!

    First off, the Excelsior is a Heavy Cruiser (not a submarine, how do you get any non cloaker as a sub?)

    And most of the stats you suggested for your new design parallel the Armitage class.
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    dareau wrote: »
    In the "classic forum vein":

    What you're asking for kinda sounds like the Klingon Cruisers, more maneuverable less hull. Guess where you should start spending your time... Heck, you can even put DHCs on the Klingon cruisers instead of being limited to DBBs... :P

    Personally, I'm not up for these ships. Escort weapons on an escort/cruiser hull with cruiser BOffs/consoles almost screams "pick the best of everything for my personal OP ship". Did I miss the part where you asked for the science ship's shield modifiers in there?

    If we were to do "mid sized" ships (almost sounds like a Chevy Malibu in here), I'd be inclined to take a science ship, trade the shield modifier in for more hull, trade the integrated subsystem targetting out in favor of a 4th forward weapons emplacement (yeah, it's escort-level, but I don't necessarily want cruiser-level), and go from there...

    Escort Weapons on an Escort/Cruiser hull? Did I mention cannons, dual cannons or DHC in my specifications? I'm pretty sure I only mentioned Dual Beam Banks.

    As for "personal OP ship" this particular spec is not OP. The hull is 2,000 HP higher than a VA Escort, and 7,000 LESS than a VA cruiser. Meanwhile, the turn rate, while higher than current cruisers, is still less than both escorts and science vessels, with a loss of 2-4 deg/sec. This ship is hardly OP. Additionally, you gain a foreward weapon slot (over science vessels) but lose an aft slot (under cruisers).

    The only thing which might be a tad OP is the console layout. However, you notice that it has 3 Engineering consoles rather than 4. This is a big hit to survivability, therefore the 4 Tac consoles can be justified to compensate.

    Essentially, this ship is a "light cruiser" for VA level. It has SOME survivability, though not much more than an escort, and it gains some manueverability, but at the sacrafice of Utility (Science) and Tankability (Full Cruiser). Additionally, because you don't have the cannons, you aren't pulling the alpha strikes of Escorts.

    Seems like a pretty balanced build to me.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    First off, the Excelsior is a Heavy Cruiser (not a submarine, how do you get any non cloaker as a sub?)

    And most of the stats you suggested for your new design parallel the Armitage class.

    The classification of "submarine" for the Exclesior is not based on capability, but rather size.

    The size is the primary factor I'm discussing here. Granted, I get into scope of work but mostly the Naval comparison was on size, and the Excelsior is too small to be a Battleship, and too large to be a Missle Cruiser, when compared to the Oddy/Sovie/Galaxy or the next step down of the Intrepid/Armitage.

    And yes, the spec is similar to the Armitage, but it doesn't have the teeth of an Armitage because it lacks fighters and cannon, but it has the survivability edge on the Armitage thru hull and consoles.

    The Armitage is a nice SIZE of ship, but for the most part, I don't like it's style. I much prefer a more "standard" Starfleet design template. Saucer, Hull, Nacelles that are on pylons up behind the saucer. That's primarily what I'm looking for, without having to take a monster cruiser that can't turn within a lightyear radius.

    I'm looking for a bit more nimble light cruiser type ship, like the USS Port Royal, rather than the Battleship like the USS Missouri.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    The classification of "submarine" for the Exclesior is not based on capability, but rather size.

    The size is the primary factor I'm discussing here. Granted, I get into scope of work but mostly the Naval comparison was on size, and the Excelsior is too small to be a Battleship, and too large to be a Missle Cruiser, when compared to the Oddy/Sovie/Galaxy or the next step down of the Intrepid/Armitage.

    So why not call the Excel' a heavy cruiser then? Isn't that between a battleship and a guided missile cruiser? Submarines live off of a stealth factor.

    And yes, the spec is similar to the Armitage, but it doesn't have the teeth of an Armitage because it lacks fighters and cannon, but it has the survivability edge on the Armitage thru hull and consoles.

    The Armitage is a nice SIZE of ship, but for the most part, I don't like it's style. I much prefer a more "standard" Starfleet design template. Saucer, Hull, Nacelles that are on pylons up behind the saucer. That's primarily what I'm looking for, without having to take a monster cruiser that can't turn within a lightyear radius.

    I'm looking for a bit more nimble light cruiser type ship, like the USS Port Royal, rather than the Battleship like the USS Missouri.


    If you don't like that the Armitage mounts fighters and dhc/dc, don't mount them, use lighter weapons. I can't help you as far as the appearance. Otherwise the Armitage does the exact same job.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Your proposed ship sounds interesting. But i wouldn't like its look tbh. Swet-back Nacelles? No thanks, i never liked that style.

    I would like if they would renew the Galaxy Class - style. Maybe a bit smaller than the Galaxy Class, a much shorter but sturdier neck and the nacelles on the same level as the engineering hull.

    It wouldn't be able to use Cannons and would not be as OP as Escorts or as surviveable as Cruisers, it would be more like something in between those tow ship types.
    Think of it like a (napoleonic) Frigate they where not as powerful as Ships of the line of their times but they where much more capable to operate independent.


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »
    Your proposed ship sounds interesting. But i wouldn't like its look tbh. Swet-back Nacelles? No thanks, i never liked that style.

    I would like if they would renew the Galaxy Class - style. Maybe a bit smaller than the Galaxy Class, a much shorter but sturdier neck and the nacelles on the same level as the engineering hull.

    It wouldn't be able to use Cannons and would not be as OP as Escorts or as surviveable as Cruisers, it would be more like something in between those tow ship types.
    Think of it like a (napoleonic) Frigate they where not as powerful as Ships of the line of their times but they where much more capable to operate independent.


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)

    ^ This guy gets it!

    See, while we disagree on the appearance, it highlights exactly what I'm trying to say, in that more choices and more options are needed for appearance, but regardless of what they look like, some additional classifications of ships are desired as well.

    Some ships that have a more cruiser-like appearance, but with more of the fire-power of a escort, and with the size of a Prometheus or Luna.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Mid Size Border Patrol Cruiser

    Length: 415 Meters (same as Prometheus)

    Configuration: Vanguard Saucer, scaled down by 50-75%, with an honest to God neck section, like the Excelsior, but not as upright, and 2 swept-back nacelles, like a Sovereign, blended together in a whole new 2409 style.

    Hull: 32000

    (Shield mod: 1.0)

    (Impulse mod: 1.1/2)

    (Power mods: +10 to weapons, +5 to shelds ad engines)

    Turn Rate: 11 deg/sec (9/10 deg/sec)

    Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft (4 Fore, 4 Aft)

    Consoles: 3 Eng, 2 Sci, 4 Tac

    Bridge Officers:

    Cmdr Tac
    Lt Cmdr Eng
    Lt Tac (Lt Sci/Uni)
    Lt Eng
    Ens Sci (Ens Tac/Uni)


    I put in brackets things I would prefer about this.

    The extra weapon slot would make it more cruiser like, it gets a slightly lower turn rate to account for this, it's lower hull would allow for more speed capability, I personally would rather the Lt and Ens stations were universal for that extra bit of flexibility which as a border patrol cruiser it would have/need.

    I could see your design although the Excelsior neck really calls for a circular saucer and if the oddy nacelles are anything to go by I'm not a fan of their idea of 2409 nacelle design, I think maybe one of the assault cruiser variants or the regent nacelles on the swept back pylons

    If need be make it a C-store ship, I'd happily farm the dilithium for it
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    I put in brackets things I would prefer about this.

    The extra weapon slot would make it more cruiser like, it gets a slightly lower turn rate to account for this, it's lower hull would allow for more speed capability, I personally would rather the Lt and Ens stations were universal for that extra bit of flexibility which as a border patrol cruiser it would have/need.

    I would have no issue with some universal stations in the design as you outlined. I'm very much a fan of flexibility.
    I could see your design although the Excelsior neck really calls for a circular saucer and if the oddy nacelles are anything to go by I'm not a fan of their idea of 2409 nacelle design, I think maybe one of the assault cruiser variants or the regent nacelles on the swept back pylons

    As for the neck section, it would likely need to be a whole new design. What I was implying was to give it a neck, where many of the 2370-2380 designs had no neck, or integrated neck sections, as evidenced in the Sovereign, Intrepid and Nova designs.

    I would imagine the neck would have some similarity to the Galaxy neck, however it would only be about 1/2 or 1/3 as tall as the Galaxy neck, and instead of a reduced profile at the primary hull connection point, would maintain a width for structural integrity.

    For the nacelles, I wouldn't mind if they were similar in style to the Odyssey, but obviously they wouldn't be nearly as long as what was found on the Odyssey.
    If need be make it a C-store ship, I'd happily farm the dilithium for it

    I would have no problem with it being a C-Store ship either. But with my luck, they'd probably make it a lockbox ship. :rolleyes:


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    I would have no problem with it being a C-Store ship either. But with my luck, they'd probably make it a lockbox ship. :rolleyes:

    they couldn't make that spec a lockbox ship, it's not overpowered in any way and there isn't a P2W console.

    I would go into a lockbox versions specs but then they'd do that instead because of Murphy's law
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • insanerandomnesinsanerandomnes Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    I've got an idea for your idea! How about the PWE guys make a ship with a saucer a hull and two necelles, and an upright yet mildly swept neck. It could be relatively small, and it looks a lot like an updated 2409 version of the original enterprise. And I dunno, they could call it a "Cruiser" it would have a high rate of turn, 8 weapon slots, and fleet like stats.

    Seriously, it sounds like this could be easily adapted too a fleet cruiser. They could even call it an excaliber for all I care.

    And while they're at it, they could add a fleet ship that has a small saucer, long nacelles, and a verticle neck, and call it a fleet excelsior. Oh, and heres another great idea! They could make a big TRIBBLE ship, give it a huge superweapon and a cloak and three necelles. It could even look like a Galaxy or venture class. And they could give it an extra 10% hull and shields, and a tenth console slot, probably in tac consoles. And I dunno, maybe call it a fleet dreadnaught.

    And while they're at it, they could cater too someone who wants too g all warrior on these ships, and make a faction for them! And they could give them some sick abilities and ships, and a fully fledged story and as many ships as the federation. And maybe, just maybe, they could call it the KDF.

    Then I'd start calling this game Star Trek Online again...

    But I doubt they'll listen to us players. Look I get it devs, you don't see these messages. I know I'm wasting my breath, but come on. I even understand the lockboxes. You run a business. But stop focusing on your overhead, and focus on what we want. CCP did that with EVE online, and I'm seriously considering dropping this game and going back too that one. Yeah, it might be spreadsheet online, but there was always something for everyone...

    For this, it's only for that person who loves escorts and has deep pockets...
    I AM THE HARBINGER OF HOPE!
    I AM THE SWORD OF THE RIGHTOUS!


    dark_dreadnaught_by_insane_randomness-d5z6ydl.jpg
  • tymerstotymersto Member Posts: 433 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    After reading the OP, it looks like you kinda got your wish with the 1000-day Vet Reward: Chimera Heavy Destroyer...

    Now granted, it isn't visually in the same vein as a traditional Fed Cruiser design, but it doesn't look half bad either. It's just the way to get it, that's the PITA.

    Thank you for the time...
    STO CBT Player - 400 day+ Vet, Currently Silver
    Cryptic, would you actulaly like me to spend actual Money? It's Simple:
    • Full, Story-driven, select from start 1-50 Klingon Side
    • Scrap current Lock Box & Lobi system for something more reasonable
    • Expand Dil and Rep/Fleet Marks to regular story content
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    tymersto wrote: »
    After reading the OP, it looks like you kinda got your wish with the 1000-day Vet Reward: Chimera Heavy Destroyer...

    Now granted, it isn't visually in the same vein as a traditional Fed Cruiser design, but it doesn't look half bad either. It's just the way to get it, that's the PITA.

    Thank you for the time...

    You are correct. In fact, it's funny that they announced the ship the same day, or a day after I made my original post.

    I really like the stats and specs on the Chimera, and it's size is about what I would like.

    If Cryptic were to put those stats (or the ones I suggested, without the special console) into a more traditional Starfleet cruiser-esque design, in the form of a C-Store ship, I'd be all over that like jelly on peanut butter.

    :)

    Problem is, Cryptic isn't known for "duplicating" their efforts, and sadly, the Chimera may be the only ship of it's kind that we ever see. So basically I can pay $199.00 for an LTS, to get a ship that is similar to what I'd like to have, but looks nothing like I would want to fly, or I can pretty much give up the idea, because we aren't likely to see a conventional Starfleet ship with these kinds of specs anytime soon, if ever again.

    this is one of the big problems I have with Cryptic. They seem to think that every ship they build has to be some prototype special snowflake vessel, and they seem to stay far away from the more standard fair of conventional or "traditional" Starfleet ships.

    Consider the following vessels:

    (Includes all variants)

    Sabre - Looks like a fighter jet mated with a flying saucer
    Cheyenne - 4 nacelles
    Akira - Looks like a duck with it's legs under it's body
    Defiant - Flying brick
    Luna - An Akira duck on steroids, with malignent growths on it's back
    Trident - Looks like a submarine. Makes me think "Seaquest" not "Star Trek"
    Dervish - Another fighter jet wannabe
    Prometheus - Another 4 nacelle ship
    Atrox - Who knows what this looks like, but it reminds me of Romulan design

    Granted, you have canon vessels in there, and Cryptic can't be blamed for that, but now you have the new Chimera added, which once again doesn't follow the "traditional" design of Starfleet vessels, so you either have to learn to love the styles you hate, or you are out of luck.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    I really like the stats and specs on the Chimera, and it's size is about what I would like.

    If Cryptic were to put those stats (or the ones I suggested, without the special console) into a more traditional Starfleet cruiser-esque design, in the form of a C-Store ship, I'd be all over that like jelly on peanut butter.

    :)

    Problem is, Cryptic isn't known for "duplicating" their efforts, and sadly, the Chimera may be the only ship of it's kind that we ever see. So basically I can pay $199.00 for an LTS, to get a ship that is similar to what I'd like to have, but looks nothing like I would want to fly, or I can pretty much give up the idea, because we aren't likely to see a conventional Starfleet ship with these kinds of specs anytime soon, if ever again.

    ...
    I feel exactly the same.
    I never liked that ships in STO are made so ... extreme. Either they can tank (and nothing much else), or they can dish out damage and but can't do much else (in theory), but nothing really balanced.

    What i would like to see are more traditional (multi role) starfleet vessels. In the 25th century maybe they are a bit smaller than the huge Galaxy/Sovereign but much more versatile (i mean more versatile than Cryptics interpretations of those ships).
    More maneuverable (a bit less than a seperated Galaxy Class) but similar armed. Hull HP and shields should be between Cruiser and Escort. No Cannons, MVAM, or other fancy stuff. (this is a Starfleet ship! :))

    Like they did with the Odyssey, they could release several versions of that new ship type.
    (explorer type would sound nice IMO)


    Here is what i would like to see:
    Depending on focus its BOFF stations should consist of:
    1 Cmdr Engineering
    1 Lt.Cmdr (depending on the ships focus Tac, Engineering or Science)
    1 Lt.Cmdr Universal *
    1 Lt. Universal*
    (*i am not so sure about it, maybe it would be better if it where just two Lt. universal?)

    Consoles could be like this:
    Engineering: 3 (4 on engineering variant)
    Science: 3 (4 on science variant)
    Tactical: 3 (4 on tactical variant)

    Weapons:
    4 fore
    4 aft

    Devices: 3

    Energy:
    Engineering version: +5 Engines/Weapons, +10 Shields
    Science Version: +5 Engines/Shields, +10 Aux
    Tactical Version: +5 Shields/Engines, +10 Weapons

    Its ship parts could include some Sovereign and some more Galaxy like design elements.
    (basically one should be able to build the ship you described and the one i was describing previously.)

    What do you think?


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    You are correct. In fact, it's funny that they announced the ship the same day, or a day after I made my original post.

    I really like the stats and specs on the Chimera, and it's size is about what I would like.

    If Cryptic were to put those stats (or the ones I suggested, without the special console) into a more traditional Starfleet cruiser-esque design, in the form of a C-Store ship, I'd be all over that like jelly on peanut butter.

    :)

    Problem is, Cryptic isn't known for "duplicating" their efforts, and sadly, the Chimera may be the only ship of it's kind that we ever see. So basically I can pay $199.00 for an LTS, to get a ship that is similar to what I'd like to have, but looks nothing like I would want to fly, or I can pretty much give up the idea, because we aren't likely to see a conventional Starfleet ship with these kinds of specs anytime soon, if ever again.

    this is one of the big problems I have with Cryptic. They seem to think that every ship they build has to be some prototype special snowflake vessel, and they seem to stay far away from the more standard fair of conventional or "traditional" Starfleet ships.

    Consider the following vessels:

    (Includes all variants)

    Sabre - Looks like a fighter jet mated with a flying saucer
    Cheyenne - 4 nacelles
    Akira - Looks like a duck with it's legs under it's body
    Defiant - Flying brick
    Luna - An Akira duck on steroids, with malignent growths on it's back
    Trident - Looks like a submarine. Makes me think "Seaquest" not "Star Trek"
    Dervish - Another fighter jet wannabe
    Prometheus - Another 4 nacelle ship
    Atrox - Who knows what this looks like, but it reminds me of Romulan design

    Granted, you have canon vessels in there, and Cryptic can't be blamed for that, but now you have the new Chimera added, which once again doesn't follow the "traditional" design of Starfleet vessels, so you either have to learn to love the styles you hate, or you are out of luck.

    You could also get an Armitage, it pretty much has all you are asking for (except for the standard cruiser appearance, but is appearance everything)?
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »
    I feel exactly the same.
    I never liked that ships in STO are made so ... extreme. Either they can tank (and nothing much else), or they can dish out damage and but can't do much else (in theory), but nothing really balanced.

    What i would like to see are more traditional (multi role) starfleet vessels. In the 25th century maybe they are a bit smaller than the huge Galaxy/Sovereign but much more versatile (i mean more versatile than Cryptics interpretations of those ships).
    More maneuverable (a bit less than a seperated Galaxy Class) but similar armed. Hull HP and shields should be between Cruiser and Escort. No Cannons, MVAM, or other fancy stuff. (this is a Starfleet ship! :))

    Like they did with the Odyssey, they could release several versions of that new ship type.
    (explorer type would sound nice IMO)


    Here is what i would like to see:
    Depending on focus its BOFF stations should consist of:
    1 Cmdr Engineering
    1 Lt.Cmdr (depending on the ships focus Tac, Engineering or Science)
    1 Lt.Cmdr Universal *
    1 Lt. Universal*
    (*i am not so sure about it, maybe it would be better if it where just two Lt. universal?)

    Consoles could be like this:
    Engineering: 3 (4 on engineering variant)
    Science: 3 (4 on science variant)
    Tactical: 3 (4 on tactical variant)

    Weapons:
    4 fore
    4 aft

    Devices: 3

    Energy:
    Engineering version: +5 Engines/Weapons, +10 Shields
    Science Version: +5 Engines/Shields, +10 Aux
    Tactical Version: +5 Shields/Engines, +10 Weapons

    Its ship parts could include some Sovereign and some more Galaxy like design elements.
    (basically one should be able to build the ship you described and the one i was describing previously.)

    What do you think?


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)

    Looks like a good build, but without knowing some other specifics, like hull strength, turn rate, etc. it's hard to say for certain.

    If given a hull of about 33-35k, with a turn rate of about 10-13 deg/sec, this would be a fine ship.

    As you pointed out, the Lt. Cmdr. Uni slot might be a bit much, but I think dual Lt. Uni slots would be doable.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • rrincyrrincy Member Posts: 1,023
    edited October 2012
    i agree , having two lt commanders is a bit much really , though downgrade it to a lt and it'd work fine
    12th Fleet
    Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
    U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
  • ccarmichael07ccarmichael07 Member Posts: 755 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    You could also get an Armitage, it pretty much has all you are asking for (except for the standard cruiser appearance, but is appearance everything)?

    In a game based on ships, when you spend the majority of your time looking at the ship, and for someone like me, whose primary interest is ships...yes, appearance is everything.

    This is further evidenced by those who fought the T5 Connie battle for so long. Remember all the proposals for T3 Connies, T3.5 Connies, weak T4 Connies, etc? People were willing to gimp themselves to a certain degree, just for the appearance.

    In a way, my proposal is no different. The specs I laid out are far from OP, but if given the proper appearance, I can say I honestly wouldn't care. Because I'd rather fly around in a ship that may be a bit underwhelming in the pew pew factor, but looks like what I would imagine my officer in command of.

    The Armitage just doesn't do it for me. Too odd looking. I much prefer the "traditional" Starfleet designs.


    "You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
    I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
  • dareaudareau Member Posts: 2,390 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Escort Weapons on an Escort/Cruiser hull? Did I mention cannons, dual cannons or DHC in my specifications? I'm pretty sure I only mentioned Dual Beam Banks.

    As for "personal OP ship" this particular spec is not OP. The hull is 2,000 HP higher than a VA Escort, and 7,000 LESS than a VA cruiser. Meanwhile, the turn rate, while higher than current cruisers, is still less than both escorts and science vessels, with a loss of 2-4 deg/sec. This ship is hardly OP. Additionally, you gain a foreward weapon slot (over science vessels) but lose an aft slot (under cruisers).

    The only thing which might be a tad OP is the console layout. However, you notice that it has 3 Engineering consoles rather than 4. This is a big hit to survivability, therefore the 4 Tac consoles can be justified to compensate.

    Essentially, this ship is a "light cruiser" for VA level. It has SOME survivability, though not much more than an escort, and it gains some manueverability, but at the sacrafice of Utility (Science) and Tankability (Full Cruiser). Additionally, because you don't have the cannons, you aren't pulling the alpha strikes of Escorts.

    Seems like a pretty balanced build to me.
    Mid Size Border Patrol Cruiser

    Length: 415 Meters (same as Prometheus)

    Configuration: Vanguard Saucer, scaled down by 50-75%, with an honest to God neck section, like the Excelsior, but not as upright, and 2 swept-back nacelles, like a Sovereign, blended together in a whole new 2409 style.

    Hull: 32000

    Turn Rate: 11 deg/sec

    Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft

    Consoles: 3 Eng, 2 Sci, 4 Tac

    Bridge Officers:

    Cmdr Tac
    Lt Cmdr Eng
    Lt Tac
    Lt Eng
    Ens Sci


    What makes this ship unique? First of all, it has the style of a cruiser, with 2 nacelles instead of 4 like the Prometheus, without the size and the mass of a Sovereign or Galaxy. You can actually turn this boat, giving you some tactical options. But, if you look at the Hull, while you might be a bit stronger than an Escort or a Science Vessel, you aren't as strong as a battleship, so you need to be cautious. Also, you need to pick your science ability carefully, because you only get one.

    Think of this as kind of a "Light Beam Boat" with enough turn rate that you could make use of some dual beam banks for your approach shot before going into your circle formation of broadsides. You get a little bit of the benefit of escorts (reduced turn rate) at the sacrafice of reduced hull, without having to fly a science ship.

    I think of this as the kind of ship Starfleet might put out on the border, while the big ships are off fighting the war. It's tough, it can fight, it's just not as big as the capital ships.

    First off, the DSSV has a turn rate of 9, and is the "current science with an engineering focus" starship. This thing is a hair (-2) slower than the RSV, but faster turning than the DSSV.

    Second, there are plenty of beam-scort builds out there, and half the trick of "escorts" is the ability to fire off a half-dozen weapon enhancement powers that double to triple the base weapons damage in a massive "spike". This ship has plenty of that (6 Tac slots to include a Lt Cmdr and Cmdr slot), AP: O III, AP: B II, BFaW II, TS II, 2x TT I (rotation) = an awful heck of a lot of damage from those beams, and the beams are effective from a lot farther out than the 2km that cannons are best at. Combine that with the 5 Engineering powers (so you have 2x shield heals, 2x hull heals on a constant alternating chain with a third "panic heal" or other general-utility Engie power (EWP), and topping it off with either the "universal DOT-killing" HE or mobility-insurance Polarize Hull and you have a ship that's very hard to kill, spikes almost as good as any of the "dedicated" escorts, turns faster than at least 2 science ships (DSSV & Nebula), and has the survivability of a lot of these "engineering secondaried" ships.

    For ha-has, I'd like to compare this to the Patrol Escort (or whatever the other tier 5 "freebiee" escort is against the Promethius), as that ship is the "engineering secondaried" escort. I know, BOff-wise, compared to that build you've "slid" a slot from the Lt. Sci to the Ens. Tactical, and swapped the LtCmdr Tactical into a LtCmdr Engineering...

    Off to get kids, more later...
    Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...

    To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Looks like a good build, but without knowing some other specifics, like hull strength, turn rate, etc. it's hard to say for certain.

    If given a hull of about 33-35k, with a turn rate of about 10-13 deg/sec, this would be a fine ship.

    As you pointed out, the Lt. Cmdr. Uni slot might be a bit much, but I think dual Lt. Uni slots would be doable.
    Yes i think a Hull strenght of about 34000 and a turn rate of a Luna Class would be perfect for that ship.

    So then it will be two Lt. universal, i wasn't sure about it. But i think it would be a good ship.
    It's too bad that we can't create mods for game for ourselves.

    I think cryptic should release one of the ships being presented here. I'm sure that once the playerbase has taken a fancy to ships like them*, they will sell like hot cakes!

    *the chimera is a good example of hybrid ship, people will fight over them to get one, once a similar ship will hit the C or Z-Store!


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • rrincyrrincy Member Posts: 1,023
    edited October 2012
    small ships that arent squat bricks like the defiant are great , stuff like the fleet nova are an excellent example of how to do it right :)
    12th Fleet
    Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
    U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »

    Here is what i would like to see:
    Depending on focus its BOFF stations should consist of:
    1 Cmdr Engineering
    1 Lt.Cmdr (depending on the ships focus Tac, Engineering or Science)
    1 Lt.Cmdr Universal *
    1 Lt. Universal*
    (*i am not so sure about it, maybe it would be better if it where just two Lt. universal?)

    Consoles could be like this:
    Engineering: 3 (4 on engineering variant)
    Science: 3 (4 on science variant)
    Tactical: 3 (4 on tactical variant)

    Weapons:
    4 fore
    4 aft

    Devices: 3

    Energy:
    Engineering version: +5 Engines/Weapons, +10 Shields
    Science Version: +5 Engines/Shields, +10 Aux
    Tactical Version: +5 Shields/Engines, +10 Weapons

    Its ship parts could include some Sovereign and some more Galaxy like design elements.
    (basically one should be able to build the ship you described and the one i was describing previously.)

    What do you think?

    Man where to start... I like you yeo, I really do, but this idea needs work. Allow me to explain.

    You essentially recreated the Odyssey with your console layout, but that's kind of a norm for most tier 5 ships, having a layout like that, so no issues there.

    Secondly, you only have 4 BOff slots. On a 10 console ship. Even with your unis it's weird (btw, two LtCmdr slots is too much. Seriously. Too much. I mean can you imagine the offensive power that a double tac LtCmdr would bring to the field while still having the Cmdr engi for survivability? Does the term BROKEN ring a bell?). I would propose turning that uni ltcmdr into a uni lt (like you put in brackets), make one of those uni lts into whatever it is you don't currently have atm (like if you have ltcmdr sci, cmdr, engi, make the uni tac, and so on and so forth), and add a uni ensign. So it would turn into these possible layouts:

    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Tac, Lt, Sci, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Sci, Lt. Tac, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Engi, Lt. Uni, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    (only reason I have the double Lt. Uni on the engi version is because you're probably already shafted by having the Cmdr Engi and LtCmdr Engi, so I want some flexibility to avoid further shafting).

    With that BOff layout, it would force you to keep a balance of abilities while still allowing specialization into certain areas with your two universal slots.

    The bonus powers are ok, except for the engi version I would say +5 to everything, since it's supposed to be the all around good, the other two power bonus layouts I have no issue.

    Devices and weapons, no issues.

    Also yeah, I agree, stats are needed. HP, Shield mod, Turn rate, Inertia, the works. I would propose 34k base hp, 1.0-1.1 shield mod, base turn rate of 10.

    ...
    I just realized. You guys essentially recreated the Fleet Vor'Cha Retrofit. *facepalm*
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • galr25galr25 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    The new 1000 day (or $200 ship) Chimera is a destroyer class which seem to be what this thread is asking for (I know it was mentioned before) , but if Cryptic are going to be crypticesk it is highly possible we will see a 2.5k Zen Chimera before long (up to 6 months say) with all the posh moving parts taken off , the shine dulled off and with a mickey mouse console like the Regent one (but not that one obviously). Many will of course get annoyed if they do but it would make money. Maybe even if they do the Andorian lock box the ship would have similar stats to a "destroyer class" would fit the style of the Andorian ship from ENT in my opinion so keep eyes out for a "destroy class" of ship afterall (as classified on STwiki ship chart) KDF has Raiders, Raptors, Battle Cruisers and Warships as the main classes and FED has Escorts, Cruisers and Sci vessels, so a forth main class on FED at least wouldn't go a miss really.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Man where to start... I like you yeo, I really do, but this idea needs work. Allow me to explain.

    You essentially recreated the Odyssey with your console layout, but that's kind of a norm for most tier 5 ships, having a layout like that, so no issues there.

    Secondly, you only have 4 BOff slots. On a 10 console ship. Even with your unis it's weird (btw, two LtCmdr slots is too much. Seriously. Too much. I mean can you imagine the offensive power that a double tac LtCmdr would bring to the field while still having the Cmdr engi for survivability? Does the term BROKEN ring a bell?). I would propose turning that uni ltcmdr into a uni lt (like you put in brackets), make one of those uni lts into whatever it is you don't currently have atm (like if you have ltcmdr sci, cmdr, engi, make the uni tac, and so on and so forth), and add a uni ensign. So it would turn into these possible layouts:

    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Tac, Lt, Sci, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Sci, Lt. Tac, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    Cmdr Engi, LtCmdr Engi, Lt. Uni, Lt. Uni, Ensign Uni
    (only reason I have the double Lt. Uni on the engi version is because you're probably already shafted by having the Cmdr Engi and LtCmdr Engi, so I want some flexibility to avoid further shafting).

    With that BOff layout, it would force you to keep a balance of abilities while still allowing specialization into certain areas with your two universal slots.
    I agree, the Lt.Cmdr universal was a half-baked idea, especially in combination with a Lt uni.

    I like your BOFF layouts way better.
    The principal thing is that the player should be encouraged to use a lot of combinations of BOFF powers a "normal" crusier woudln't have. So the ship is much more versatile than most other ships and certainly ANY other Starfleet ship.
    Thats what your suggested BOFF layouts helps archieving. :)

    So the different versions would have the following different stats:
    Engineering Variant
    Tactical: - - -
    Engineering: Cmdr., Lt. Cmdr.
    Science: - - -
    Universal: 2x Lt., 1x Ensign
    Energy: +5 everything

    Tactical Variant
    Tactical: Lt. Cmdr.
    Engineering: Cmdr.
    Science: Lt.
    Universal: Lt., Ensign
    Energy: +5 Shields/Engines, +10 Weapons

    Sciene Variant
    Tactical: Lt.
    Engineering: Cmdr.
    Science: Lt. Cmdr.
    Universal: Lt., Ensign
    Energy: +5 Engines/Shields, +10 Aux

    Also yeah, I agree, stats are needed. HP, Shield mod, Turn rate, Inertia, the works. I would propose 34k base hp, 1.0-1.1 shield mod, base turn rate of 10.

    ...
    I just realized. You guys essentially recreated the Fleet Vor'Cha Retrofit. *facepalm*


    For the other stats i would say:
    Type: Exploration Vessel (multi role)
    Weapons: 4 Fore/ 4 Aft
    Inertia: 40
    Crew: 300 - 400
    Hull HP: 34000 or 35000
    Turn Rate: 11 (slightly less then a Intrepid Class)
    Shield mod: .98 (not as strong as a Galaxys Shields)
    Impulse Modifier: 0.15
    Miscellaneous: No Cannons possible, no cloak (of course)

    Appearance:
    As already been discussed on previous posts in this thread.
    Most important is that this ship has a lot of possible (balanced) ship designs and combinations. Please no holes in pylons or anywhere else, no rough edges or spikes that can be found on some of cryptics designs. Just some well balanced and conservative Starfleet ship parts.
    Elements of the Sovereign AND the Galaxy Class should be availlable. So the player is able to create a characteristic long or wide ship just a he or she likes. It's general shape should be more like a classical Starfleet ship featuring a Saucer, Hull, pylons and nacelles.
    I think the Starfleet Heavy Cruiser could be a good example of how to integrate different design elements on one ship (but with just two Nacelles of course, not four).


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • theindefatigabletheindefatigable Member Posts: 351 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    galr25 wrote: »
    The new 1000 day (or $200 ship) Chimera is a destroyer class which seem to be what this thread is asking for (I know it was mentioned before) , but if Cryptic are going to be crypticesk it is highly possible we will see a 2.5k Zen Chimera before long (up to 6 months say) with all the posh moving parts taken off , the shine dulled off and with a mickey mouse console like the Regent one (but not that one obviously). Many will of course get annoyed if they do but it would make money. Maybe even if they do the Andorian lock box the ship would have similar stats to a "destroyer class" would fit the style of the Andorian ship from ENT in my opinion so keep eyes out for a "destroy class" of ship afterall (as classified on STwiki ship chart) KDF has Raiders, Raptors, Battle Cruisers and Warships as the main classes and FED has Escorts, Cruisers and Sci vessels, so a forth main class on FED at least wouldn't go a miss really.

    Yeah the Chimera seems to be a good match for what the OP was looking for, although style-wise it's not exactly the sleekest ship. I also think that some of the lockbox ships offer the sort of stats the Op was looking for; though, again, without the sort of "Starfleet 2409" styling. Perhaps the Vesta class will be a solution, though it probably won't be as tactically oriented, but we will see.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Former/Cryptic Name: Captain_Hans_Langsdorff
    Founding member, Special Service Squadron
    "Fear God and Dread Nought." First Sea Lord, Adm. Jacky Fisher
  • galr25galr25 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Yeah the Chimera seems to be a good match for what the OP was looking for, although style-wise it's not exactly the sleekest ship. I also think that some of the lockbox ships offer the sort of stats the Op was looking for; though, again, without the sort of "Starfleet 2409" styling. Perhaps the Vesta class will be a solution, though it probably won't be as tactically oriented, but we will see.
    I agree the Chimera is abit 'Bulky' , specifically in the hull area. Reposition the pylons to put necles on an angle and abit lower and throw a 2409 style hull on her and it would be closer to what a Cruiser Escort would be. I think the class might be better called the Interceptor class rather than Destroyer maybe. To me destroyer sounds more like a larger ship all about Fire power and an unmoveable object.
  • rrincyrrincy Member Posts: 1,023
    edited October 2012
    well the vesta is assault cruiser in size , so it might be a tad too big for what we're after here
    12th Fleet
    Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
    U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    galr25 wrote: »
    I agree the Chimera is abit 'Bulky' , specifically in the hull area. Reposition the pylons to put necles on an angle and abit lower and throw a 2409 style hull on her and it would be closer to what a Cruiser Escort would be. I think the class might be better called the Interceptor class rather than Destroyer maybe. To me destroyer sounds more like a larger ship all about Fire power and an unmoveable object.
    Personally i like the "bulkyness" of the chimera class.
    The only thing i would change is the Deflector/Hull thing benath the saucer section, i would have moved that bulge to the back so the pylons would look more integrated to the ship. I think Cryptics devs always have to add a design element that makes something look strange or bad.


    What i don't like about the vesta, sovereign and odyssey style are the fragile looking pylons in combination with laughable huge Nacelles. For me that looks way to breakable for a combat focused ship. It looks like Kirks 1701 but not like a 24/25th century starfleet ship.
    I like compact and elegant designs much more. But that's just my personal preference.


    Thank you for reading or ignoring, depending on who you are. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
Sign In or Register to comment.