test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

2 TAC consoles on D'Deridex = NOT acceptable

12346

Comments

  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Now since the Romulans seemed to build nothing but D'Deridex all through TNG and the Dominion war

    Star Trek isn't real. It's fictional. Both TNG and DS9 were TV series. They had budgets. There were limited models and even limited CGI work done a the time. Heck, how many times did they reuse the same scenes over and over during the Dominion War? Meh...

    That's one of the problems when dealing with Canon. It's not the same thing as heading out to the mudpit with the Chevy, Ford, and Dodge. It's not the same thing as going to the stadium to watch two teams play football. It's not the same thing as having the Intel/nVidia and AMD/AMD machines on a workbench for benchmarking. It's not real. It's fictional...
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    I would like to point out that the T4 Galaxy is indeed the "Enterprise" peace loving variant. Not much the retrofits that served during Dominion war and now klingon war. Hence the term retrofit.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    dalnar83 wrote: »
    I would like to point out that the T4 Galaxy is indeed the "Enterprise" peace loving variant. Not much the retrofits that served during Dominion war and now klingon war. Hence the term retrofit.

    Yep, it's one thing for the T4 to be somewhat what it is...but that shouldn't apply to the other variants.
  • ouroboros99ouroboros99 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Star Trek isn't real. It's fictional. Both TNG and DS9 were TV series. They had budgets. There were limited models and even limited CGI work done a the time. Heck, how many times did they reuse the same scenes over and over during the Dominion War? Meh...

    That's one of the problems when dealing with Canon. It's not the same thing as heading out to the mudpit with the Chevy, Ford, and Dodge. It's not the same thing as going to the stadium to watch two teams play football. It's not the same thing as having the Intel/nVidia and AMD/AMD machines on a workbench for benchmarking. It's not real. It's fictional...

    The reality is that people that play this game are likely to be playing it because they want to play as the ships they saw in the show, and they want those ships to live up to what they saw in the show. They expect those ships to be useful and fun to play as, especially if they're paying real dollars for them.

    Making those ships garbage is not making anyone happy.

    No one wants to spend real money on one of those sinister looking Romulan battle cruisers that used to terrorize the Enterprise only to find out that it's TRIBBLE because of the way the game works.

    "Oh sorry bro, turns out that because of the way the game designers did it this obsolete Federation science cruiser I got for free can actually out damage the Warbird you paid 20 bucks for. Bet you sure weren't expecting that huh! Read more wikis next time I guess. Have fun dragging down STFs and making other players frown at you."
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    It was a much simpler statement on my part...that budgets often castrate Canon and that it's pretty much subject to hero ship plot whim. The hero ship can lead a thousand ships against a foe...and be the only ship that survives! The hero ship can be taken out by a single ship!

    It's whatever the writers wanted to do for the story...it's fictional.

    Yes, there were times that the D'deridex was threatening to the Enterprise.
    But, there were times that the D'deridex blew up just as fast as a Miranda.

    The wonderful world of Star Trek Canon...

    People that think that they should be able to hop in a D'deridex and conquer the universe...they're delusional. Doesn't mean that the D'd doesn't need some tweaking...but some of the suggestions for it are outright ridiculous.
  • redsnake721redsnake721 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Sometime I wonder if the Dev's even play the game? They release ships with stats and Boff and console layouts that anyone that has played a toon to level 50 would know would suck. I just wonder what goes on in thier design meetings, Do none of them understand how the game currently works? How can a ship woth 5 Eng Console and 2 Tac consoles even contribute to lets say KA elite? A ship like this would not be able to solo a Cube or stop probes or DPS down the gate. Or in cure how could this ship protect the Kang? It couldent. I just facepalm and shake my head when I see or read about some of the contect they release. Its like one team dosigns somethig all the way to release without even checking with eachother or testing it. All it would take is one STF in that ship for them to say "Perhaps we need to re-think this design" but nope its here it is and have fun sucking in it.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    How can a ship woth 5 Eng Console and 2 Tac consoles even contribute to lets say KA elite?

    Teamwork and support.
    A ship like this would not be able to solo a Cube or stop probes or DPS down the gate.

    It can stop probes. You can stop probes in a shuttle for crying out loud. The benchmark for STF contribution shouldn't be wether or not you can solo a cube, since it's a team mission.
    Or in cure how could this ship protect the Kang? It couldent.

    If a Star Cruiser can protect the Kang, a D'Deridex can protect the Kang. It's not that hard to protect the Kang.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • aexraelaexrael Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Teamwork and support.

    That's another way of saying, "Hey guys can you carry me through this mission because my setup sucks and I know it."
  • suavekssuaveks Member Posts: 1,736 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Does one tac console more or less really makes THAT much of a difference...?

    Because let me tell you something - I recently switched from my Kar'Fi (3 tac consoles, lt.cmdr. tac, dual heavy cannons, two hangar bays) to Fleet Corsair FDC Retrofit (2 tac consoles, only one lt. tac, one hangar bay, no dual cannons) on my SCI toon and quite frankly, the overall performance of this ship is on the same level - if not a bit better - than what I'm used to flying - including escorts. Of course I do not PvP, playing mostly Elite PvE content, but believe me when I say this pressumed "downgrade" resulted in quite an increase performance-wise and allowed for more varied playstyle.
    How can a ship woth 5 Eng Console and 2 Tac consoles even contribute to lets say KA elite? A ship like this would not be able to solo a Cube or stop probes or DPS down the gate. Or in cure how could this ship protect the Kang?
    I'm doing everything you mention in that Corsair FDC. I can take down probes AND solo a cube and a transformer during KASE quite fast (taking out a cube in ~15 seconds), sometimes even with time to spare to take out the second cube, I can solo Raptors while on Kang duty, take out the nanite probes in the meantime, and much more. I believe a D'deridex will be able to do all this just fine AND be more support-oriented.

    Sure, it's not scatter/spread oriented Escort disposing everything in sight, but it's not supposed to be, while the DPS on a single target (I'm using dual beam banks with romulan weapons + turrets) is way higher than let's say my dual cannon oriented tactical vesta with 4 mk xi purple tac consoles...

    As such, the current state of the D'deridex really doesn't bother me that much, as I plan to use a very similar build like one above, but with added battle cloak (increased turn-rate). And I still think with that lieutenat universal the ship still can be a bit battle-cruiser-ish.

    Overall, I understand the need to give Romulans a Fleet ship with 5 engineering consoles, while retaining it ofensive/science capabilities. People may have wanted D'deridex to be uber battlecruiser, but personally I always wanted it to be more of a multi-task ship. And in its current state it almost is.

    If anything, it's way better than 3 ensign engi slots...
    PyKDqad.jpg
  • f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    valenn1 wrote: »
    Absolutely, 2 Tac slots are not enough!

    Yeah ... It should be at least three tac slots. I agree completely.
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • sarek93sarek93 Member Posts: 274 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Did it ever occur to those of you who are whining about this, that the devs might indeed be playing the game and not liking the fact that it is becoming "DPS is king" Escorts Online, so they have decided to correct that. To be fair cruisers can do DPS; it all depends on skill and boff/doff layouts. Anybody can stick a tac captain in an escort and give him 4 tac slots and he should pull 4-5k dps without any skill whatsoever as a player. An engineering captain with a good build in a cruiser can pull that same amount of dps or better consistently. I was able to solo cubes in a cruiser. It might not have taken as fast as DPS monster X showing up and firing his alpha strike and then watching the cube blow up, but I could still solo it (and not blow 30 seconds into it).

    Also remember that time after season 7 when the borg got all powerful in STFs and everyone complained about how OP the borg had got and that they were one shotting tac captains in escorts? The devs changed it because they cater to tac captains (the majority of players more than likely). It probably never occurred to the tac captains that it was intentional to make STFs more raid like where you would need a healer to support the team so you didn't die every 5 seconds (or a cruiser with some team heals that would be difficult to kill). But no, we couldn't have something like that in game, because heaven forbid you might actually have to have something besides escorts to be the king of the game then and dps might not have been the only metric you needed to match up to.
    "Insufficient facts always invite danger." - Spock
  • sdkraustsdkraust Member Posts: 524 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    suaveks wrote: »
    Does one tac console more or less really makes THAT much of a difference...?

    Because let me tell you something - I recently switched from my Kar'Fi (3 tac consoles, lt.cmdr. tac, dual heavy cannons, two hangar bays) to Fleet Corsair FDC Retrofit (2 tac consoles, only one lt. tac, one hangar bay, no dual cannons) on my SCI toon and quite frankly, the overall performance of this ship is on the same level - if not a bit better - than what I'm used to flying - including escorts. Of course I do not PvP, playing mostly Elite PvE content, but believe me when I say this pressumed "downgrade" resulted in quite an increase performance-wise and allowed for more varied playstyle.

    .

    Yup, my friend (Sci) ran a Wells this morning (CSE), did 7K DPS. Ran a Fleet Nebula and did just as much. DPS isn't an issue these days if you know what you're doing, the issue is learning how to do it, same character last night did 13K with his D'Kora. (He also does 15K+ with a Fleet ACR)

    The prior 2 aren't "Optimal" ships for DPS. You know what an optimal DPS ship is? Fleet ACR, Fleet Excelsior, **** that can tank and deal DPS.

    You know what the issue really is? Engineers, can't DPS for ****. Both Scis and Tacs can DPS, but Eng have no offensive abilities. But that's a different topic.

    I really think some variant of the D'Deridex should have Hangers, but that is my opinion.

    Edit: I think I am going to run a Recluse for my Romulan. I have another friend that can do 10K+ with it because of mechanics and not because of pew pew.
  • longasclongasc Member Posts: 490
    edited May 2013
    2 Tac consoles, poor BOFF layout and turnrate - the iconic D'deridex gets totally destroyed by this.

    As I just read the comment above, NO, giving any ship 2 Tac consoles is NOT in any way fixing the current extreme love for Rscorts, quite the opposite, it's making this particular Cruiser even more useless.

    If the D'deridex would get a 3rd Tac consoles there would be still enough incentives to buy pimped Cryptic designs in the shop.

    I would like to see Cruisers viable outside the specialized Aux2Battery builds that do nothing but trying to emulate Escorts and their DPS output. Some major changes are necessary for that, but for now giving a Cruiser 2 Tac consoles only is a death sentence for it.
  • suavekssuaveks Member Posts: 1,736 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    And how significant really is that 3rd tactical console slot? No, seriously, please tell me, how large of an increase is it in terms of raw numbers? And more importantly, is it really THAT much of a difference during combat?

    I'm really thinking that whole "cruisers can't do ***t" talk is becoming more of a trend among STO community. Some people also can't seem to understand that you're NOT supposed to reach escort level of DPS in a cruiser, even though you CAN do some significant damage, even without Aux2Bat build.

    Of course I won't dismiss the fact that cruisers do need some love in STO becoming World of Escorts, but people claiming cruiser-type ships not being able to anything substantial seem to know even less about the game and gameplay mechanics than some of the devs they're bashing.

    And over anything else, the main argument here is not that the ship is unbalanced, but that it's the iconic D'deridex and it turned out differently than SOME people expected.

    For me personally the current configuration is ok. I don't really need 5 engineering console slots, but I understand Cryptic's reasoning behind it, looking at Fleet Galaxy or Fleet Negh'var. Whether the ship has 2 or 3 tactical console slots doesn't really make THAT much of a difference, as in some good hands the ship will still be able to deal significant amount of damage AND withstand some beating, and even support the team when needed, thanks to Lt.Cmdr. Science station which I really appreciate.

    And if you really want DPS/Tactical Consoles in your Escorts Online, get a Fleet T'Varo or Fleet Mogai, or even either of the Ha'apaxes. Romulan ships need to be varied regardless of how you feel about it, and D'deridex being "the tanky one" is a decent choice with its current stats.

    Personally, I can't wait to fly the D'deridex as it is currently. If I can do just fine if not better than some escort-players solo-ing stuff in KASE or CSE with my Fleet Corsair, then I should do even better in a D'deridex.
    PyKDqad.jpg
  • doffingcomradedoffingcomrade Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    suaveks wrote: »
    Overall, I understand the need to give Romulans a Fleet ship with 5 engineering consoles, while retaining it ofensive/science capabilities.
    Firstly, WHAT need? There's nobody that actually wants a 5-Engineering-console setup. Secondly, offensive capabilities? I'm sure by "offensive capabilities", you did not mean "being offensive", because that's what the console layout is. And science capabilities...eh, with merely 3 consoles, nothing to write home about.
    longasc wrote: »
    2 Tac consoles, poor BOFF layout and turnrate - the iconic D'deridex gets totally destroyed by this.
    The current Amby layout is exactly what we'd expect of it based on its observed capabilities in-game, and an excellent layout. The turnrate is similarly what we'd expect. These factors cannot be blamed. The 2 Tac consoles blows, though.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    suaveks wrote: »
    And how significant really is that 3rd tactical console slot? No, seriously, please tell me, how large of an increase is it in terms of raw numbers? And more importantly, is it really THAT much of a difference during combat?

    Hm like 6-7% ? Maybe 8% on lucky day.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • mn03mn03 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Lt.Comm tac > 3 tac consoles. Really, why are we whining about the consoles. This warbird/battle cruiser only has a LT Tac slot, let's focus on this problem. .
    Join date: 5 Feb 2010
  • suavekssuaveks Member Posts: 1,736 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Firstly, WHAT need? There's nobody that actually wants a 5-Engineering-console setup. Secondly, offensive capabilities? I'm sure by "offensive capabilities", you did not mean "being offensive", because that's what the console layout is. And science capabilities...eh, with merely 3 consoles, nothing to write home about.
    Because Fleet Galaxy and Fleet Negh'Var - two other iconic faction specific ships - were given 5 console slots, so Cryptic may have wanted to keep things similar with the Romulans. And I still think the D'deridex is more versatile than those two.

    And I'm sure you'll find numerous cruiser builds that can in fact be in the front line as main damage dealers, with my 2 Tac console and one Lt. Tactical boff Fleet Corsair being only one example. And if I can perform just as well if not better (depending on circumstances) with this cruiser than many escort-players in all Elite PvE missions, then I'd say that 3rd tac console isn't really THAT significant in the game's current state.

    I guess what I'm saying is, if you'd actucally test things out by yourself and learn to create your own builds and adapt, then you wouldn't cry over one more or less console slot. Same goes for the Turn Rate argument - have you actually tried the D'deridex on Tribble? Use Battle Cloak, add Evasive Maneuvers and perhaps EPtE and/or Aux 2 ID and you're turn rate goes from 9 to 96. And that's only Tier 4 D'deridex I'm talking about.

    Also, EPtW is getting a buff (5 sec to 30 sec bonus damage), so that's all the more energy damage bonus for cruisers when LoR launches. More energy to pew pew pew stuff that is already WAY to easy - speaking of PvE.
    PyKDqad.jpg
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    the tier 4 d'deridex refit has 3 tac consoles. of all the d'deridex, this could potentially hit the hardest :rolleyes:
  • marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    suaveks wrote: »
    And if you really want DPS/Tactical Consoles in your Escorts Online, get a Fleet T'Varo or Fleet Mogai, or even either of the Ha'apaxes. Romulan ships need to be varied regardless of how you feel about it, and D'deridex being "the tanky one" is a decent choice with its current stats.

    Personally, I can't wait to fly the D'deridex as it is currently. If I can do just fine if not better than some escort-players solo-ing stuff in KASE or CSE with my Fleet Corsair, then I should do even better in a D'deridex.

    See the problem with them being varied is they all battlecloak and give up stats and power for it. Battlecloaking tactics don't really work with eng heavy ships, it is more of a tac and sci thing. What are you supposed to do sneak up on someone and decloak in front of them just to tank them? lol

    With 3 tac consoles for the retrofit and 4 on the fleet version it will still be able to do some healing and tanking while still being able to make use of the cloak for ambushes. Thats why all endgame Klingon battlecruisers are all 3 tac consoles minimum, it makes no sense to have less. If they want Romulans to have ship with mostly eng and sci with only 2 tac consoles they can make a non cloaking allied ship like how the KDF has the Marauder and Corsair.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • sarek93sarek93 Member Posts: 274 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    mn03 wrote: »
    Lt.Comm tac > 3 tac consoles. Really, why are we whining about the consoles. This warbird/battle cruiser only has a LT Tac slot, let's focus on this problem. .

    Agree 100%. Boff layouts and doff slotting are way more important than the number of tac consoles you get. I can tell you the biggest dps changes I see in my ships (and yes, I AM an engineer who can do decent DPS) happens between the boff slots I can use. If I can use 2 APB's, 2 TT's, and 1-2 CSV's/BFW's I am going to be able to do more DPS with 2 tac console slots than I would with 1 BFW and 1 TS/TT with 3 tac consoles.
    "Insufficient facts always invite danger." - Spock
  • sarek93sarek93 Member Posts: 274 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Also, I am really disappointed that whenever these types of changes hit, the same old conversation and whining starts up. It's always: "It won't be able to do enough DPS;" "Make this ship able to do more DPS;" "DPS is the only thing that matters so beef up X ship's DPS capabilities."

    NEVER do I see the conversation starting with "This isn't a good DPS ship, so make changes to the game to make non-DPS ships worth something in anything besides capture and hold PvP's where survivability is king." Saying we need ships to do more DPS just perpetuates the problem of this game not rewarding non-DPS by creating a vicious cycle in which there is a race to the top to see who can do more DPS which inevitably creates more players who will create a vicious backlash if/when devs try to make the game more balanced which in turn makes the devs unwilling/unable to implement those changes.

    We need to change the discourse of this community from one of "Give me MOAR DPS!!!!" to "Make end game in this game about more than DPS/escorts!" Force this to be a priority for the devs. As many great economists have said, DIVERSIFY! Bring that golden triangle of MMO's back!
    "Insufficient facts always invite danger." - Spock
  • tsurutafan01tsurutafan01 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    NEVER do I see the conversation starting with "This isn't a good DPS ship, so make changes to the game to make non-DPS ships worth something in anything besides capture and hold PvP's where survivability is king."

    This has been tried many times since I joined this game late in season 6 actually.

    It's pretty clear that isn't going to happen, or this giant revamp they set out to do for this expansion would have included it.


    "We are smart." - Grebnedlog

    Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom
  • bpharmabpharma Member Posts: 2,022
    edited May 2013
    Seems I can't quote you using the quote button sarek but here it is for others

    "Agree 100%. Boff layouts and doff slotting are way more important than the number of tac consoles you get. I can tell you the biggest dps changes I see in my ships (and yes, I AM an engineer who can do decent DPS) happens between the boff slots I can use. If I can use 2 APB's, 2 TT's, and 1-2 CSV's/BFW's I am going to be able to do more DPS with 2 tac console slots than I would with 1 BFW and 1 TS/TT with 3 tac consoles."

    I made a list of other things that affect DPS more than tactical consoles many pages ago and rather than read and test people have decided to ignore and rage.

    It is through repetition that we learn our weakness.
    A master with a stone is better than a novice with a sword.

    Has damage got out of control?
    This is the last thing I will post.
  • marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    sarek93 wrote: »
    Also, I am really disappointed that whenever these types of changes hit, the same old conversation and whining starts up. It's always: "It won't be able to do enough DPS;" "Make this ship able to do more DPS;" "DPS is the only thing that matters so beef up X ship's DPS capabilities."

    NEVER do I see the conversation starting with "This isn't a good DPS ship, so make changes to the game to make non-DPS ships worth something in anything besides capture and hold PvP's where survivability is king." Saying we need ships to do more DPS just perpetuates the problem of this game not rewarding non-DPS by creating a vicious cycle in which there is a race to the top to see who can do more DPS which inevitably creates more players who will create a vicious backlash if/when devs try to make the game more balanced which in turn makes the devs unwilling/unable to implement those changes.

    We need to change the discourse of this community from one of "Give me MOAR DPS!!!!" to "Make end game in this game about more than DPS/escorts!" Force this to be a priority for the devs. As many great economists have said, DIVERSIFY! Bring that golden triangle of MMO's back!

    I don't think anyone is saying their shouldn't be ships that focus on healing/tanking/support roles, we are just saying not to use the D'deridex model for it, that it should be more of a DPS cruiser such as the Vorcha and Regent. They can use a new model for the Romulans version of a Star cruiser, and leave the D'Deridex model for TNG Romulan fans who want the ship to be like it was on the show, the main battlecruiser of the fleet that does all the damage not a support ship that just heals other ships.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • ouroboros99ouroboros99 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    The D'Deridex and all canon ship designs should be the ones that are easy for anyone to pick up and do reasonably well with as soon as they've hit 50 because that's what the majority of people will be wanting to play as. You shouldn't need millions of ec and weeks in the Omega/Romulan grind just to make the ship bearable.

    No one is saying don't have a ship with 5 eng consoles or 5 science or whatever. Those options should be available for the people who want to try them but they're specialist builds. Specialist builds and configurations shouldn't be any faction's primary or iconic ships.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Bortasqu' Command Battle Cruiser
    Lt, Cmdr, Lt, LCdr/En
    4, 4, 2

    Bortasqu' Tactical Battle Cruiser
    Lt, Cmdr, Lt, LCdr/En
    5, 4, 1

    Bortasqu' War Battle Cruiser
    Lt, Cmdr, Lt, LCdr/En
    4, 5, 1

    Fleet K'Maj Battle Cruiser Retrofit
    Lt/En, Cmdr, LCdr, Lt
    3, 4, 3

    Fleet K't'inga Battle Cruiser Retrofit
    Lt/En, Cmdr/LCdr, Lt
    3, 4, 3

    Fleet Negh'Var Heavy Battle Cruiser
    Lt, Cmdr/LCdr, Lt, En
    3, 5, 2

    Fleet Tor'Kaht Battle Cruiser Retrofit
    LCdr/Lt, Cmdr/En, Lt
    4, 4, 2

    Fleet D'deridex Warbird Battle Cruiser Retrofit
    Lt/En, Cmdr, LCdr, Lt
    2, 5, 3

    So our green friend there is sporting Fleet Gal-R Consoles and Fleet Amby BOFFs. A curious mixture - a mixture bringing forth complaints both about the Consoles and the BOFFs.

    Were they to give it the matching Amby Consoles to go with those BOFFs, then it creates an issue in regard to whether there would ever be the Romulan boat for the Ambassador/Kamarag. But...then again...is it possible that the D'deridex was the unnamed Warbird class from "Yesterday's Enterprise"...? If so, then it should be somewhat of a non-issue for the D'deridex to sport both the Amby Consoles and Amby BOFFs, no? D'deridex, Kamarag, Ambassador...plausible, no?

    But! But! But!

    Yes, there's a but there. There are folks that are no only unhappy with the Gal-R consoles, but they are also unhappy with the Amby BOFFs.

    Which got me thinking...you know how Geko's been talking about wanting to do a Regent-like Fleet Negh'Var Assault Battle Cruiser variant? What would stop them from doing an "Assault" variant of the D'deridex down the line if things go well with LoR and Cryptic gets that surge of moolah that further funds all the goodies folks want? So somewhere down the line folks got their 4, 4, 2 Consoles with a Tac LCdr?

    There's so much talk about the TNG D'deridex...frankly, I just don't remember it being as awesomesauce as some folks are making it out to be. To be honest, DS9's what I rewatched most recently...and yeah../cough

    Still though, there's a precedent - an expectation - that's been set for Battle Cruisers having at least 3 Tac Consoles that the D'deridex is not meeting. As for the BOFF layout, as I said - there's the potential for an "Assault" variant like the "Assault" Negh'Var down the road, no?

    Have to keep in mind that it is a business - if they ever gave anybody the completely perfect ship - that person would never have the need to buy another ship. It's a case of trying to put aside the fanaticism and seeing that...then trying to work/offer feedback with/to Cryptic on that. Trying to find that middle-ground, that acceptable compromise - that doesn't compromise their business nor compromises the player's fun.
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 937 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Were they to give it the matching Amby Consoles to go with those BOFFs, then it creates an issue in regard to whether there would ever be the Romulan boat for the Ambassador/Kamarag. But...then again...is it possible that the D'deridex was the unnamed Warbird class from "Yesterday's Enterprise"...? If so, then it should be somewhat of a non-issue for the D'deridex to sport both the Amby Consoles and Amby BOFFs, no? D'deridex, Kamarag, Ambassador...plausible, no?

    The warbirds that destroyed the enterprise wouldn't have been D'deridex, otherwise, when it showed up all menacingly in front of the enterprise D to be all "that's right, picard, the romulans are back!" the whole crew would have had to try their best to contain their laughter, even data without his emotion chip would have been thrown into fits of uncontrollable laughter at the thought of a ship from the ambassador era threatening the enterprise D.

    We don't really need a canon excuse to make the D'deridex more powerful, the devs took the vorcha, which at captain level has identical consoles and boffs to a galaxy, and then refit it to be slightly more tactical than the galaxy, and then fleet refit it to be WAY more tactical than the galaxy, so the devs could do the same with the D'deridex easy peasy.

    Though I'd still prefer them make engineering attack powers less of a joke so that warp plasma, aceton beam, and directed energy modulation are as desirable as high level tactical skills. Same for science attack abilities.
  • marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013

    Have to keep in mind that it is a business - if they ever gave anybody the completely perfect ship - that person would never have the need to buy another ship. It's a case of trying to put aside the fanaticism and seeing that...then trying to work/offer feedback with/to Cryptic on that. Trying to find that middle-ground, that acceptable compromise - that doesn't compromise their business nor compromises the player's fun.

    Nobody is asking for it to be the Romulans version of a bug or a perfect ship. I have a Fleet Tor'kaht and it never stopped me from buying more Fleet and Z-store ships, so I don't see whats wrong with the Fleet D'D getting the same console layout and similar boff layout as the Tor'kaht. The ship in its current state will stop me from buying it or making a Romulan character at all for that matter so they lose potential sales on other ships if there are more Romulan fans as mad as I am if this ship goes live in its current state.

    As for the D'D in TNG, it never actually had to fire at the Enterprise much because it had so much firepower that Picard normally had to talk his way out of situations with Romulans, retreat, or get KDF reinforcements. The Enterprise never tried to solo a D'D, while a D'D did manage to temporarily disable the Enterprise on its own while pursuing Tinman. In DS9 the only times D'Deridex's were destroyed was when they were massively outnumbered and focused on by the Dominion.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    marc8219 wrote: »
    The Enterprise never tried to solo a D'D, while a D'D did manage to temporarily disable the Enterprise on its own while pursuing Tinman.

    What part of creative license, plot device, etc, etc, etc...are you not getting here? Star Trek is not real. It is a fictional work. You're not watching a documentary - it's not a recorded news broadcast of events as they transpired...it's fictional.

    The D'deridex plink-plinking the Enterprise's shields created the delay that allowed the additional display of Elbrun's potential lack of judgment. It further developed his character. Tam believed they had to be first at any cost. This separated him from Picard and created additional distrust. It allowed for Tam to issue the warning to Gomtuu that put the Enterprise at risk...again, increasing that distrust. Thus, when Tam asks later to beam aboard Tin Man - Picard is doubtful. Troi plays to that side. Tada, Data speaks up for Elbrun - they've been developing that relationship. Data convinces Picard to let them both go. Tam and Gomtuu ride off together, no longer alone...the pain of each resolved. That's the story. There's the additional "threat" of the star, the Romulans, etc - adding to the conflict and trying to make things more dramatic. But it's a basic story of two folks finding what's missing in their lives and living happily ever after...awwwww.

    The plink-plinking of the shields...plot device...simple as that. It's not an example of the D'deridex being the uber awesomesauce that some want to make it out to be.

    Yes, the plink-plink happened...yes, the shields were all fubar... but to the writers, the producers, etc, etc, etc...it's the story. How folks miss that is beyond me...

    edit: I have to wonder if they think wrestling is real too...
Sign In or Register to comment.