test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Defiant Cloak

24

Comments

  • rodentmasterrodentmaster Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    None of that matters. That hijack aside, these ships' cloaks need to be integrated. What's the difference between PAYING real money for a Gal-x vs using an Assault Cruiser? The console slots are identical. The hull differs by 1k. The boffs are the same. Weapons/devices are the same. Turn rate is actually WORSE than the AC.

    You're paying for the cloak. Otherwise it's just an external costume with a console and the entire thing should drop in price to 1000 zen.
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    you ppl still QQ if it was because you still have no BC
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • rodentmasterrodentmaster Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    You mean in the same way I say: YOU people only retort with QQ because you QQ about not being smart enough to understand the issue or what's being discussed.

    Right? Right? Becuase if you're making false accusations with moronic intellect levels at play, that's about the right response to you.
  • edited October 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    You mean in the same way I say: YOU people only retort with QQ because you QQ about not being smart enough to understand the issue or what's being discussed.

    Right? Right? Becuase if you're making false accusations with moronic intellect levels at play, that's about the right response to you.

    there is no issue only ppl trying to make one up ship dose just good with out a integrated cloak this is i see new baby with toy i got to have it or else i blow up the forums till i get what i want

    ask the connie ppl how that goes ;)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    It's no balance, it's stupid. Most of KDF has cloak, all of Rommie has cloak. were are talking 2 ships with cloak and THEY have it as consoles. niot Balanced.

    Yes it is balanced. Because if they integrate the cloaks those ships WILL lose something else (presuming that the devs keep that in mind). Most likely in shields and hull, or maybe some turn rate.

    What folks are asking for is an integrated cloak (possible battle cloak) and giving up nothing for it. For all their problems, the devs usually do take things into consideration and balance accordingly. Romulans are another story, but that's due to other factors besides only their cloaking.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    brwjames85 wrote: »
    Treaty of Algeron

    Good reason why not to TRIBBLE over Trek lore more, and keep the cloaks as consoles, iso innate skills for Starfleet.)

    The Treaty of Algeron is no longer in effect.
    The Treaty of Algeron, signed in 2311 by the Romulan Star Empire and the United Federation of Planets, prohibited Federation cloaking devices. This agreement has been a source of controversy in Starfleet, where some officers believed it severely limited tactical options and put the Federation at a disadvantage.

    Although the Federation initially agreed to follow the treaty after the destruction of the Romulan homeworld, in early 2409 Starfleet was authorized to develop and implement cloaking technology on selected ships.

    This is taken directly from the tooltip for the Federation cloaking device. If you own the cloak, check it out for yourself in-game.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    The Treaty of Algeron is no longer in effect.



    This is taken directly from the tooltip for the Federation cloaking device. If you own the cloak, check it out for yourself in-game.

    happy you dont lead the feds and if i do recall right there was something in the path to 2409 about feds and cloak
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    mimey2 wrote: »
    Yes it is balanced. Because if they integrate the cloaks those ships WILL lose something else (presuming that the devs keep that in mind). Most likely in shields and hull, or maybe some turn rate.

    What folks are asking for is an integrated cloak (possible battle cloak) and giving up nothing for it. For all their problems, the devs usually do take things into consideration and balance accordingly. Romulans are another story, but that's due to other factors besides only their cloaking.

    Behold: the Fleet Ha'feh

    Hull: 34,100
    Shield Modifier: 0.99
    Turn Rate: 16
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Integrated Battle Cloak


    The Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit

    Hull: 33,000
    Shield Modifier: 0.9
    Turn Rate: 17
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Non-Integrated Cloak (That you must make a separate purchase to get)


    You were saying something about balance...?

    daan2006 wrote: »
    happy you dont lead the feds and if i do recall right there was something in the path to 2409 about feds and cloak

    That quote is directly from the game. It's not my opinion, it is part of the game. What's so hard to understand about that?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    Behold: the Fleet Ha'feh

    Hull: 34,100
    Shield Modifier: 0.99
    Turn Rate: 16
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Integrated Battle Cloak


    The Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit

    Hull: 33,000
    Shield Modifier: 0.9
    Turn Rate: 17
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Non-Integrated Cloak


    You were saying something about balance...?




    That quote is directly from the game. It's not my opinion, it is part of the game. What's so hard to understand about that?

    rom masters of cloaks feds not what so hard to under stand about that? and what dose it got to do with the path to 2409?????
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    daan2006 wrote: »
    rom master of cloaks feds not what so hard to under stand about that? and what dose it got to do with the path to 2409?????

    We're talking about game balance, not lore.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    We're talking about game balance, not lore.

    well i am because it was made a console for balance again path to 2409 so do you want to give up hull shields or turn rate or like roms lower power levels? because trust me if it dose happen something will have to be sacrificed but no one want to talk about that stuff
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    daan2006 wrote: »
    no one want to talk about that stuff just give me give me give me QQQQ

    I'm sorry, I wasn't aware I was talking to a child.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    I'm sorry, I wasn't aware I was talking to a child.

    ya like i said no one want to give up any thing this post prove it :)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • silverashes1silverashes1 Member Posts: 192 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    I totally agree on the Gal-X and Defy cloaks. Needs to be 100% integrated into the ship, with NO loss in console slots. Hell, you get the fleet advanced Defiant, and you don't even get a SHIELDS boost. Standard is 10%, but you get NO shields boost while having to pay fleet modules to get the ship.

    Cloak is fine with standard settings. Allows you an alpha strike and allows you to cloak between fights. Does NOT need to be a battlecloak. However, it DOES need to ditch the freaking console. There are already far too many universal consoles to choose from. You can't load them all out already. You're losing basic cloak functionality if you sacrifice the cloak slot for something more useful.


    While we're at it, make the "useless ensign" a universal slot! For TRIBBLE's sake! It's an advanced fleet ship! It has the lowest benefits of any advanced fleet ship over its Z-store companion!

    take a look at the fleet galaxy before you complain about boff slots THAT ships been screwed since day one
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • hanoverhanover Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    I vote the Fleet Defiant be given an integrated cloak without losing a console slot.

    Then again, I'd also vote that all Fleet level ships be able to mount any console from any T5 ship.

    I also think all BO slots for fleet ships should be universal.

    C'mon. These things are a pain in the TRIBBLE to unlock and expensive to buy.
    Does Arc install a root kit? Ask a Dev today!
  • alopenalopen Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    khayuung wrote: »
    Battlecloaks are overrated. If anything, someone BCing under fire is a free kill for me.

    This +1. Romulans get away with cloaking under fire sometimes because of singularity powers and stronger hulls. BOPs are more or less dead unless speeding away with any two of the following: evasive, epte, engine battery, APO, deuterium.

    That being said it would be nice if non battle cloak didnt break because some stupid widow pet took a shot at you from 9.9km on your way to 10+km .
  • oracion666oracion666 Member Posts: 338 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    This poor horse. . . I thought it was buried and left to rest in peace back in season 5. Why must somebody pull out a shovel and try and reanimate it? Let the horse rot in peace!!!!

    With that being said, I don't mind integrated cloaking. Not like we see many Defiants and even fewer Galaxy Xs as it is. But a battle cloak for either? No.
    Formerly known as Echo@Rivyn13
    Member since early 2011




  • hanoverhanover Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    NAh, I don't need a battle cloak. But an integrated cloak giving me an empty console slot might help my poor Fleet Defiant stand up to lock box JHAS and Scimitars with croissant disruptors and cloud of doom consoles. :(
    Does Arc install a root kit? Ask a Dev today!
  • darthstormstrikedarthstormstrike Member Posts: 771 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    oracion666 wrote: »
    This poor horse. . . I thought it was buried and left to rest in peace back in season 5. Why must somebody pull out a shovel and try and reanimate it? Let the horse rot in peace!!!!.


    People want to prove they have +10 Necro power.
    ___________________

    "There is no problem in the universe that can't be solved with a bribe, a paid assassin, or an overpowered fighter." - Chubain from Jumpgate Evolution
  • dknight0001dknight0001 Member Posts: 1,542
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    Behold: the Fleet Ha'feh

    Hull: 34,100
    Shield Modifier: 0.99
    Turn Rate: 16
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Integrated Battle Cloak

    Base Power 160 with +15 to weapons. In Weapons mode: 115/30/15/15

    The Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit

    Hull: 33,000
    Shield Modifier: 0.9
    Turn Rate: 17
    Consoles: 5 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci
    Non-Integrated Cloak (That you must make a separate purchase to get)

    Base Power 200 with +15 to weapons. In Weapons mode: 115/50/25/25

    You were saying something about balance...?

    That quote is directly from the game. It's not my opinion, it is part of the game. What's so hard to understand about that?

    You forgot to account for power levels.

    The Path to 2409 says the Federation banned cloaking devices and that is taken directly from the game so both answer are correct and wrong.

    But I'm more inclined to believe the story of the game that is Path to 2409 over a Tooltip on a console.
    hanover2 wrote: »
    I vote the Fleet Defiant be given an integrated cloak without losing a console slot.

    Then again, I'd also vote that all Fleet level ships be able to mount any console from any T5 ship.

    I also think all BO slots for fleet ships should be universal.

    C'mon. These things are a pain in the TRIBBLE to unlock and expensive to buy.

    That ship is called the Bird of Prey, Universal BOFF layout but you lose an Ensign power, Battle Cloak But you lose Hull, Shields and a Weapon. But it has the M/AM Core so you get good base power.

    The Fleet Norgh Bird of Prey also restores that missing Ensign power, but only comes with 9 consoles.
    I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. :confused:
    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.
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    the power levels is do to the singularity powers ALL rom ships get and has nothing to do with the battle cloak
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    The Path to 2409 says the Federation banned cloaking devices and that is taken directly from the game so both answer are correct and wrong.

    But I'm more inclined to believe the story of the game that is Path to 2409 over a Tooltip on a console.

    The Path to 2409 is just that... the path to 2409.

    The Cloaking Device's tooltip doesn't contradict the Path to 2409, it supplements it. It's not an either-or situation where you have to choose what to believe -- the Path to 2409 states that when the Romulan homeworld was destroyed, the Federation President decided to abide by the treaty and continue diplomatic relations with the Romulan government, even in the wake of that disaster.

    The tooltip then goes on to say that, despite the initial agreement, in 2409 itself the Federation stopped abiding by the treaty. It doesn't that the Federation never abided by the treaty, which is what you seem to think it says.

    I don't even see why people insist on discussing this when the clear and obvious reality (in the game) is that the Federation is developing and using cloaking tech. There's no murkiness here, it's very clear what the Federation is doing.

    And to top it off, it has no bearing on the discussion of whether or not the cloak should be integrated or remain a console. The Federation already has cloaking technology, it's not going away. The only thing left to discuss is the gameplay balance of keeping it a console for arbitrary reasons, or making it integrated like all other cloaking-capable ships.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • astro2244astro2244 Member Posts: 623 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    hanover2 wrote: »
    NAh, I don't need a battle cloak. But an integrated cloak giving me an empty console slot might help my poor Fleet Defiant stand up to lock box JHAS and Scimitars with croissant disruptors and cloud of doom consoles. :(




    I had to lol when I saw that http://www.pachd.com/free-images/food-images/croissant-01.jpg
    [SIGPIC]583px-Romulan_Star_Empire_logo%2C_2379.svg.png
    [/SIGPIC]
  • astro2244astro2244 Member Posts: 623 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Not to mention it wasnt a top of the line one anyway I think the Defiant could only go warp 3 with it active or something not maximum warp. but the I think the federation could out tech even the romulans making a cloak.



    It could go faster then warp three but all cloaks romulan and Klingon were visable to dominion sensors above warp six iirc
    [SIGPIC]583px-Romulan_Star_Empire_logo%2C_2379.svg.png
    [/SIGPIC]
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    mimey2 wrote: »
    Yes it is balanced. Because if they integrate the cloaks those ships WILL lose something else (presuming that the devs keep that in mind). Most likely in shields and hull, or maybe some turn rate.

    What folks are asking for is an integrated cloak (possible battle cloak) and giving up nothing for it. For all their problems, the devs usually do take things into consideration and balance accordingly. Romulans are another story, but that's due to other factors besides only their cloaking.

    No it isn't. all Rommie and KDF cloaks are non console, the 2 fed ones are. Not balanced. Also Defiant cloak came from rommies so should be battlecloak by default.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    The Path to 2409 is just that... the path to 2409.

    The Cloaking Device's tooltip doesn't contradict the Path to 2409, it supplements it. It's not an either-or situation where you have to choose what to believe -- the Path to 2409 states that when the Romulan homeworld was destroyed, the Federation President decided to abide by the treaty and continue diplomatic relations with the Romulan government, even in the wake of that disaster.

    The tooltip then goes on to say that, despite the initial agreement, in 2409 itself the Federation stopped abiding by the treaty. It doesn't that the Federation never abided by the treaty, which is what you seem to think it says.

    I don't even see why people insist on discussing this when the clear and obvious reality (in the game) is that the Federation is developing and using cloaking tech. There's no murkiness here, it's very clear what the Federation is doing.

    And to top it off, it has no bearing on the discussion of whether or not the cloak should be integrated or remain a console. The Federation already has cloaking technology, it's not going away. The only thing left to discuss is the gameplay balance of keeping it a console for arbitrary reasons, or making it integrated like all other cloaking-capable ships.

    Also with the Romulan Republic coming in The Star Empire barely exists so treaty now void since the government that signed it no longer exists. And Romluan Republic never signed the treaty.
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    No it isn't. all Rommie and KDF cloaks are non console, the 2 fed ones are. Not balanced. Also Defiant cloak came from rommies so should be battlecloak by default.

    *sigh* Gonna say this one last time.

    Yes it is balanced. That is what you give up for it instead of hull or shields like a KDF cloak would take. If you want a cloak, you can choose to cloak. A KDF ship by example doesn't have that choice and MUST fly with lower base stats even if they weren't wanting a cloak. And yes they can get other ships without cloak, but I'm just sayin. If they did integrate the cloaks, the devs WOULD alter something else to balance it, period.

    Also no, it wouldn't be a battlecloak by default. Yes, you are right, the original Defiant had a Romulan cloak in it. BUT that doesn't mean that our ships in this game are Romulan cloaks, they are going to be FEDERATION designed ones, made for mass production. Which means that they are going to make it with their design choices and such compared to Romulans.



    I had an idea with cloaks awhile back:

    Fed cloaks: Remain a console, gains the ability to cloak while in red alert, but gets NONE of the other benefits of battlecloaking.

    KDF cloaks: Gains the other effects of battle cloaking (particularly the bonus to turn rate while under cloak), but still cannot cloak while under red alert, possibly also gain a boost to their base stealth. (On a similar note, the two Tal Shiar lockbox ships would gain this particular bonus as well)

    KDF Battlecloaks: Gains a boost to base stealth, but otherwise remains unchanged.

    Romulan cloaks: Too much of a can of worms, they need to be balanced out in many ways besides just cloaking right now.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    mimey2 wrote: »
    *sigh* Gonna say this one last time.

    Yes it is balanced. That is what you give up for it instead of hull or shields like a KDF cloak would take. If you want a cloak, you can choose to cloak. A KDF ship by example doesn't have that choice and MUST fly with lower base stats even if they weren't wanting a cloak. And yes they can get other ships without cloak, but I'm just sayin. If they did integrate the cloaks, the devs WOULD alter something else to balance it, period.

    You keep saying this without providing any actual proof.

    Let's compare the Tactical Odyssey with the Tactical Bortasqu'

    Odyssey:
    Hull: 42,000
    Shield Modifier: 1.15
    Turn Rate: 6
    Consoles: 3/4/3

    Bortasqu':
    Hull: 43,500
    Shield Modifier: 1
    Turn Rate: 5.5
    Consoles: 5/4/1


    Seems to me that the Bortasqu' gives up a little bit of shields, and .5 turn rate, but gains higher Hull and more Tactical console slots (largely considered the most valuable ones, going by these forums). It doesn't seem to be objectively inferior to the Odyssey, its direct counterpart... and still has its built-in cloak.

    In fact, looking at Klingon ships, it seems the prevailing tradeoff is lower shields, higher hull. This is almost universally the case when comparing those ships to the closest Federation contemporary, and has nothing to do with their Cloak.

    It's also worth noting that, apparently, the Fleet Defiant already has given up something for its cloak -- it is the only Fleet ship not to receive a 10% boost to its Shield Modifier. Which means that players who choose not to use the Cloaking device are needlessly penalized even further.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    mimey2 wrote: »
    *sigh* Gonna say this one last time.

    Yes it is balanced. That is what you give up for it instead of hull or shields like a KDF cloak would take. If you want a cloak, you can choose to cloak. A KDF ship by example doesn't have that choice and MUST fly with lower base stats even if they weren't wanting a cloak. And yes they can get other ships without cloak, but I'm just sayin. If they did integrate the cloaks, the devs WOULD alter something else to balance it, period.

    Also no, it wouldn't be a battlecloak by default. Yes, you are right, the original Defiant had a Romulan cloak in it. BUT that doesn't mean that our ships in this game are Romulan cloaks, they are going to be FEDERATION designed ones, made for mass production. Which means that they are going to make it with their design choices and such compared to Romulans.



    I had an idea with cloaks awhile back:

    Fed cloaks: Remain a console, gains the ability to cloak while in red alert, but gets NONE of the other benefits of battlecloaking.

    KDF cloaks: Gains the other effects of battle cloaking (particularly the bonus to turn rate while under cloak), but still cannot cloak while under red alert, possibly also gain a boost to their base stealth. (On a similar note, the two Tal Shiar lockbox ships would gain this particular bonus as well)

    KDF Battlecloaks: Gains a boost to base stealth, but otherwise remains unchanged.

    Romulan cloaks: Too much of a can of worms, they need to be balanced out in many ways besides just cloaking right now.

    again 2 ships needing a console while entire lines have built in. NOT BALANCED YOU IDIOT.
Sign In or Register to comment.