We have the Artimage Flight Deck Carrier - A plus that competes against the KDF Orion Flight Deck Carrier. However; the Atrox is dead last in the true Carrier department in comparison to the KDF OFFICIAL Faction Carrier and the now Recluse Carrier.
More NTS fallacy. What do you define as a "true" carrier? Use that definition instead.
Fleet Neg'hvar has a universal ensign, standard cloak, better turn and cannosn with same hull and shields as the Starcruiser. As for the Rom vs KDF BOP thats another debate and this was between the bop and federation ships. The BOP still has full universal boff slots that has to be countered somewhere.
My personal view is that the Feds should get the Atrox to fleet level when the KDF gets the Karfi to fleet level as well.
I wasn't going into Fleet but yes the Fleet Negh'var fixes it's BOFF layout (I wish the Galaxy did the same). I completely agree with anybody who says the Atrox should be given a Fleet upgrade (Fleet Kar'fi too of course) and it's own Catian Frigates.
The thing about the Kar'Fi and the Atrox is they both step on the toes of the Lobi Carriers that are Fleet level. The Kar'Fi would be an easier to acquire version of the JHDC.
The Klingon BoP paid for a lot its features, that made sense when the Federation had nothing like it, now with the introduction of Romulans there are many things like it, and most of them do the job better.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
I wasn't going into Fleet but yes the Fleet Negh'var fixes it's BOFF layout (I wish the Galaxy did the same). I completely agree with anybody who says the Atrox should be given a Fleet upgrade (Fleet Kar'fi too of course) and it's own Catian Frigates.
The thing about the Kar'Fi and the Atrox is they both step on the toes of the Lobi Carriers that are Fleet level. The Kar'Fi would be an easier to acquire version of the JHDC.
The Klingon BoP paid for a lot its features, that made sense when the Federation had nothing like it, now with the introduction of Romulans there are many things like it, and most of them do the job better.
They can't step on any ships toes.
There isn't anything to step on. It's all flavor.
If each cruiser in the game had the exact same layout, it wouldn't be terribly interesting true.
But we would still see all of those different models being flown by players.
As for the Klingon BoP, I don't think it needs a counter.
I like that there are still, barely, differences between the factions. I hope they continue to expand on that and make each faction have a clear and unique flavor to their gameplay.
The idea of a Fleet Atrox, Fleet Kar'Fi stepping on the toes of the Recluse and JHDC is merely a theory both ships generate more money acquiring 800 Lobi than a Fleet version of Atrox and Kar'fi would would at even 6 Modules. (ignoring the discount for the people who own the originals.)
I propose 2 things for the Fleet Atrox and Kar'fi lock the Frigates to ownership of the original ship and give the Atrox Frigates.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
The idea of a Fleet Atrox, Fleet Kar'Fi stepping on the toes of the Recluse and JHDC is merely a theory both ships generate more money acquiring 800 Lobi than a Fleet version of Atrox and Kar'fi would would at even 6 Modules. (ignoring the discount for the people who own the originals.)
I propose 2 things for the Fleet Atrox and Kar'fi lock the Frigates to ownership of the original ship and give the Atrox Frigates.
Ooo!
Take away the fighters from the Atrox and let it launch TWO frigates! :eek:
Take away the fighters from the Atrox and let it launch TWO frigates! :eek:
Every other Carrier has Fighters and Frigates I think the Atrox should have both. Than it's the choice of the Player what to put in it.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
but, if you take the galaxy classes and turn them into carriers. could the aquarius destroyer be paired with another and be in 1 hanger bay?? and the usual hanger items in the other???
Not in anyway remotely fair or Balanced. Are you a Troll or just unaware of Balance. The Galaxy X can equip Quad Cannons if you own them from the Defiant. And you can put both Photons and Quantums on it if you wish.
but, if you take the galaxy classes and turn them into carriers. could the aquarius destroyer be paired with another and be in 1 hanger bay?? and the usual hanger items in the other???
please be kind....
The Aquarius should never ever be a Hanger Craft. I don't think it should be separate from the Odyssey, same goes for the Klingon HoH'SuS BoP.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Hull 42,500
Shield modifier 1.15
Crew 1500
Turn rate 7
Device slots 4
Bonus power +5 all systems
Special weapon 360 anti-proton beam array
Special console quantum torpedo PDS
I would love to see the Midway Class skin used for this carrier as well.
Thoughts?
Why would the Federation develop a 360 beam array that isn't Phaser based? Also isn't the Kinetic Cutting Beam a 360 Anti proton Beam Array?
Quantum Torpedo version of the HEC's console. So longer cooldown or less torpedoes? Also drop the turn rate it's a Carrier.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
But the fed carrier and carrier pet can't be as strong or stronger than the Jem hadar ships or cryptic will lose there golden egg that's the only problem I can see arising. Can you imagine all those players that tanked so much cash into getting the JHAS carrier pet Only to be out done by a regular carrier LOL people would go batsht crazy
there, a "True Carrier" with lots of power that doesn't obselete the JemDred.
bonuses: you thought you could spam Elite Danoobs and yellowstones before? hah!
Drawbacks: it actaually HAS SOME. you're actually dependent on your teammates in PvP to be effective. You're slow, you're vulnerable, you don't have subsystem targeting or sensor analysis.
Get out of here with your 4 hangars and 2 tac consoles, that's hilarious. Higher turn rate, AT LEAST 3 tac slots (Ideally 4), and 2 hangar bays. 4 is just insanity. Turn that ensign engi into an ensign sci and you've got the cherry on top of a nice carrier.
____________________________________________________
Pay no attention to the dates and titles under my name at the left! I am a Career Officer, Lifetime Sub since launch, was in the Beta. Having problems with my forum account.
Why wouldn't they? The Federation doesn't know how to make Anti-Proton Beams?
Fine, make it Photons Torpedoes. And btw, there is already a Carrier in the game with a 7 turn rate so I don't what you are on about as far as that.
The Federation don't field Anti proton beams, they field phasers. You may equip any weapon you like but every Fed special weapon is Phaser. Quad Cannons, Gal X lance, Vesta Console, Chimera Console are all Phaser based. The only exception to this is the wide angle quantum Torpedo.
The only Carrier with a turn rate of 7 has 34.500 hull since yours has quite a bit more than that you either lose hull or lose turn.
So now your just using the same Point Defense console as the Armitage? Your taking something unique away from an already existing ship. There's a reason that console is locked to one ship.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
I must remember to employ the [sarcasm] and [/sarcasm] tags in the future-your reply shows a desire for POWER, but no consideration for BALANCE-or worse, no interest in uniqueness that isn't severely OP.
You want 4 tac consoles and a good turn rate, you need to get your butt into an Armitage and get that upgraded, in which case you need to sacrifice hangar space. The big KDF carriers run 3 and 2 for tac consoles (3 for Kar'fi, 2 for Vo'Quv)-this, and the lost weapons mounting is the sacrifice they pay for that second hangar.
The Kar'fi gives up subsystem targeting and sensor analysis for that third tac console, and turns at cruiser (Fed cruiser) rates, the Vo'Quv is the worst turning ship in the game, it gives up a LOT for it's capabilities-as a carrier.
tracking so far?
Okay, the Scimitar-has ONE hangar bay. it gives up the chance at a second for the abilities it gets in return.
so...you want a Fed carrier, but you don't want the Caitan or Armitage...that means you have to accept balance, presumably if you wanted to fly a Kar'fi or Vo'quv, you'd be playing Klink, so your carrier has to be DIFFERENT without being obscenely superior.
That means niche building-the FEderation has the Vesta (a sci carrier with DHC, a good turn rate, science ship abilities and neat consoles), the Armitage (Escort wiht hangars), and the Caitan Atrox (a goofy looking Vo'Quv copy).
So your fourth one? gotta give up something and get something in return that you don't have-preferably that nobody has, but that doesn't make your ship the "I Win Button" (or generally superior to other comparable ships!)
How many CRUISERS have 4 tac consoles, good turn rate, etc. etc.? Not too many, and a Carrier's basically supposed to be slower than a cruiser, and more reliant on the fighter/smallcraft complement to do it's work.
Okay, so..I suggested a build that is a "Pure Carrier"-few weapons mounts, low weapons power, reduced Science abilities but lots of engineering abilities instead, so it's not the ultimate healer and it's not the ultimate damage dealer...it's a Carrier.
Slow to turn, slow to accellerate, slow to stop, thick shields but reliant on engineering abilities to keep them up, weak weapons layout (6 weps and 2 tac consoles), weak sci, strong in engineering, and the biggest fighter complement in the game, so it's a force multiplier-but only for a good team, see? a ship you have to be social and work together with others to win with.
1) 4 hangars is purely OP, pure and simple.
2) 3 tac consoles and a *higher* turn rate is not. Period. I never said anything about a *good* turn rate.
3) The fleet sovvy and the fleet excel come to mind for cruisers with 4 tac consoles and decent turn rates. (DECENT, not 16, but 9 or so). So yeah......
4) Finally I said nothing regarding six weapon slots. I'm fine with that, as with 2 hangars and a moderately decent tactical layout, it should be on par with, say, a fleet AHC- R or a Fleet Sovvy.
In conclusion, stop setting up straw man arguments so you can knock them down.
Turn rate of 3 is simply un fun to play in.
Edit: couldn't resist:
5) How exactly is having four hangars a 'force multiplier'? I don't think you know what that means. Power Armor is a force multiplier, laz guns are a force multiplier (when not on arrakis...if on arrakis they are force subtractors). Having four hangars is simply multiplying your...actual.... force.
6) My suggestions ARE giving something up by virtue of the boff and console layouts. Do you not understand that if you trade for a tac Lt. Cmdr that means you DONT have a sci or engi one? Your tanking ability goes down...and for those 3 or 4 tac slots you lose RCS slots, armor slots, shield gen slots, and universal slots for consoles. To say that simply trading one boff or console slot for another isn't 'losing anything' is to fail to understand that system.
In short, I appreciate your attempt at a 'true niche carrier' concept, and I really wasn't trying to belittle you when I said that 4 hangars was hilarious. I literally laughed at the thought of it, like how OP would that be.
____________________________________________________
Pay no attention to the dates and titles under my name at the left! I am a Career Officer, Lifetime Sub since launch, was in the Beta. Having problems with my forum account.
Comments
There are Federation carriers in STO.
Caitian ships are just as much part of the Federation as any other Fed ship. Or do you mean a Starfleet ship?
More NTS fallacy. What do you define as a "true" carrier? Use that definition instead.
Irrelevant...?
And there it is again...
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
I think this is what the OP meant.
I wasn't going into Fleet but yes the Fleet Negh'var fixes it's BOFF layout (I wish the Galaxy did the same). I completely agree with anybody who says the Atrox should be given a Fleet upgrade (Fleet Kar'fi too of course) and it's own Catian Frigates.
The thing about the Kar'Fi and the Atrox is they both step on the toes of the Lobi Carriers that are Fleet level. The Kar'Fi would be an easier to acquire version of the JHDC.
The Klingon BoP paid for a lot its features, that made sense when the Federation had nothing like it, now with the introduction of Romulans there are many things like it, and most of them do the job better.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
They can't step on any ships toes.
There isn't anything to step on. It's all flavor.
If each cruiser in the game had the exact same layout, it wouldn't be terribly interesting true.
But we would still see all of those different models being flown by players.
As for the Klingon BoP, I don't think it needs a counter.
I like that there are still, barely, differences between the factions. I hope they continue to expand on that and make each faction have a clear and unique flavor to their gameplay.
I propose 2 things for the Fleet Atrox and Kar'fi lock the Frigates to ownership of the original ship and give the Atrox Frigates.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Ooo!
Take away the fighters from the Atrox and let it launch TWO frigates! :eek:
Every other Carrier has Fighters and Frigates I think the Atrox should have both. Than it's the choice of the Player what to put in it.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
why not take the galaxy-x and add 2 hanger bays. give her quad heavy cannons. both photon and quantum torpedo launchers. 2 slots for shields.
4 consoles for tactical consoles, 4 engineering console, 4 science consoles.
commander tactical, commander engineer, commander science. lt., commander tactical,
lt.,commander engineer, lt., commander science.
4 device slots.
please be kind...
still think it is time for a federation carrier.
but, if you take the galaxy classes and turn them into carriers. could the aquarius destroyer be paired with another and be in 1 hanger bay?? and the usual hanger items in the other???
please be kind....
Not in anyway remotely fair or Balanced. Are you a Troll or just unaware of Balance. The Galaxy X can equip Quad Cannons if you own them from the Defiant. And you can put both Photons and Quantums on it if you wish.
The Aquarius should never ever be a Hanger Craft. I don't think it should be separate from the Odyssey, same goes for the Klingon HoH'SuS BoP.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Weapons slots 4fore/3aft
4 Eng consoles
4 Sci consoles
2 Tac consoles
2 hanger bays
Commander Engineer
Lieutenant Engineer
Lieutenant Commander Science
Ensign Tactical
Lieutenant Universal
Hull 42,500
Shield modifier 1.15
Crew 1500
Turn rate 7
Device slots 4
Bonus power +5 all systems
Special weapon 360 anti-proton beam array
Special console quantum torpedo PDS
I would love to see the Midway Class skin used for this carrier as well.
Thoughts?
Why would the Federation develop a 360 beam array that isn't Phaser based? Also isn't the Kinetic Cutting Beam a 360 Anti proton Beam Array?
Quantum Torpedo version of the HEC's console. So longer cooldown or less torpedoes? Also drop the turn rate it's a Carrier.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Fine, make it Photons Torpedoes. And btw, there is already a Carrier in the game with a 7 turn rate so I don't what you are on about as far as that.
I would be down for that ship! SECOND that!!!
Get out of here with your 4 hangars and 2 tac consoles, that's hilarious. Higher turn rate, AT LEAST 3 tac slots (Ideally 4), and 2 hangar bays. 4 is just insanity. Turn that ensign engi into an ensign sci and you've got the cherry on top of a nice carrier.
Pay no attention to the dates and titles under my name at the left! I am a Career Officer, Lifetime Sub since launch, was in the Beta. Having problems with my forum account.
The Federation don't field Anti proton beams, they field phasers. You may equip any weapon you like but every Fed special weapon is Phaser. Quad Cannons, Gal X lance, Vesta Console, Chimera Console are all Phaser based. The only exception to this is the wide angle quantum Torpedo.
The only Carrier with a turn rate of 7 has 34.500 hull since yours has quite a bit more than that you either lose hull or lose turn.
So now your just using the same Point Defense console as the Armitage? Your taking something unique away from an already existing ship. There's a reason that console is locked to one ship.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
1) 4 hangars is purely OP, pure and simple.
2) 3 tac consoles and a *higher* turn rate is not. Period. I never said anything about a *good* turn rate.
3) The fleet sovvy and the fleet excel come to mind for cruisers with 4 tac consoles and decent turn rates. (DECENT, not 16, but 9 or so). So yeah......
4) Finally I said nothing regarding six weapon slots. I'm fine with that, as with 2 hangars and a moderately decent tactical layout, it should be on par with, say, a fleet AHC- R or a Fleet Sovvy.
In conclusion, stop setting up straw man arguments so you can knock them down.
Turn rate of 3 is simply un fun to play in.
Edit: couldn't resist:
5) How exactly is having four hangars a 'force multiplier'? I don't think you know what that means. Power Armor is a force multiplier, laz guns are a force multiplier (when not on arrakis...if on arrakis they are force subtractors). Having four hangars is simply multiplying your...actual.... force.
6) My suggestions ARE giving something up by virtue of the boff and console layouts. Do you not understand that if you trade for a tac Lt. Cmdr that means you DONT have a sci or engi one? Your tanking ability goes down...and for those 3 or 4 tac slots you lose RCS slots, armor slots, shield gen slots, and universal slots for consoles. To say that simply trading one boff or console slot for another isn't 'losing anything' is to fail to understand that system.
In short, I appreciate your attempt at a 'true niche carrier' concept, and I really wasn't trying to belittle you when I said that 4 hangars was hilarious. I literally laughed at the thought of it, like how OP would that be.
Pay no attention to the dates and titles under my name at the left! I am a Career Officer, Lifetime Sub since launch, was in the Beta. Having problems with my forum account.