So much for the T5 reward ... sorry but the cost of a Federation Battle Cloak would be about the same as a JHAS, I take the JHAS.
Yeah I am disappointed by the way the Bulwark is acquired, but ah well. However, it is not a 'Federation' Battlecloak, it is a universally abiet hard to acquire battlecloak. Lockbox vessels are not made specifically for one faction or another. We don't necessarily need a battlecloak, we just need our standard cloaks to not be out of touch with modern balance.
vs. the bonuses for mounting a fifth tac console that accrue at ALL TIMES on a Fleet Tactical Escort Retro, or superior turn rates and on-target times with all levels of Defiant?
In the end, pitting a VA C-Store ship against an RA free ship. This part here is becoming a dead horse, the answer is not to hold back a c-store ship because of a lower-ranked closest free comparable. A new Raptor is in order.
well, we can agree on that. notably the line that wasn't entirely abandoned (the Bird of Prey) pays through the nose for theirs.
BoPs are Raiders, they a different breed with battlecloak, not standard cloaking. All that crazy asymmetrical game balance and such.
The OP brought up the Qin, and notably there's nothing in the KDF toybox that matches precisely to the capabilities of the fed ships being discussed one-for-one except the Mogh.
See above about the Qin at his point. As for the Avenger and Mogh, yes, that is what makes this debate so very much valid and urgent. Near-same ships, same price, but one is worth more; being the Mogh with innate cloaking. Not simply from a tactical and logistical perspective, but from an outright monetary perspective. Innate cloak, versus a console from another purchased ship.
you can mount the console, nothing is stopping you. Like cloaking on Fed ships, it's an alternative that is available. There are better ones, but it's your choice.
You acknowledged the underlying problem of this already... Though you also revealed you don't care that it is a problem because it furthers your personal bias and PvP gain. :rolleyes: That bit follows.
They are not "Non Competitive", they're not "Crippled" unless you slot the cloak...in which case, you're making a tactical decision and sacrificing OTHER tactical choices you could have made instead, in exchange for a decloak-alpha that is significantly better than anything the KDF can pull off (if you are in the Fleet Defiant running that cloak console), or better than 90% of the non-lockbox, non Battlecruisers KDF can field even WITH only eight additional console slots open.
Unless you slot the cloak, which is why this thread exists in the first place. Now factor in Gorngonzola's statement that standard cloak is not enough of a benefit to take away from a ship for the same of balance. But yet you insist it is, as long as it is Federation ships it is applying to.
This is a double-standard. You can not have double-standards while maintaining integrity as a person or business. There is no legitimate reason at this point in time as to why federation ships should continue to require a console to enable an ability which has be stated to be a freebie. If the were to Devs go back and adjust the Mogh or Avenger to compensate, there would be a valid counterargument. But we all know they won't, so trying to disrupt this topic further by saying it isn't needing is detrimental to the thread and discussion.
The rest of the post is irrelevant. This isn't about counters, it isn't about the Defiant to Qin balance, which is null to begin with. This is about the three, grand total of 10% of the Starfleet line, having standard cloaking, but being forced to be inferior to employ it. The reliance on a console to activate an ability which is considered of no real worth in the terms of game balance at this point in the game atleast for one side; as evidenced by the Mogh.
The fact that the Federation ships and players are still held to a standard which has been stated as gone, and are made to sacrifice for their standard cloaking, is unacceptable from a business and balance aspect. Again, it is a double-standard. Double-standards are the anathema of honesty and integrity.
I've been pretty quiet on this thread, but I will keep it short.
Simplest solution:
1. Cloaking device, becomes a device instead of a console.
It would remain a normal cloak and allowed on more ships, possibly. Feds don't have to pay as high a cost for cloaking, and the balance issue wouldn't be a problem anymore, and we move on.
OR
2. Cloaking device, becomes a limited battle cloak.
Stays a console, and allows the few ships that can equip it, to cloak in and out of combat. It wouldn't gain some of the other bonuses of a BC though, like the turn rate bonus.
The number of ships it could be used on would stay highly limited.
Gives a unique twist to it. Feds can cloak freely, but don't gain some of the other bonuses that BC provides. They'd have BC cruisers, but would always have to give up a console slot for it. KDF battlecruisers would still pay nothing for their basic cloak, and possibly adjust stats on other KDF ships, but that's a topic for it's own.
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.
I've been pretty quiet on this thread, but I will keep it short.
Simplest solution:
1. Cloaking device, becomes a device instead of a console.
It would remain a normal cloak and allowed on more ships, possibly. Feds don't have to pay as high a cost for cloaking, and the balance issue wouldn't be a problem anymore, and we move on.
OR
2. Cloaking device, becomes a limited battle cloak.
Stays a console, and allows the few ships that can equip it, to cloak in and out of combat. It wouldn't gain some of the other bonuses of a BC though, like the turn rate bonus.
The number of ships it could be used on would stay highly limited.
Gives a unique twist to it. Feds can cloak freely, but don't gain some of the other bonuses that BC provides. They'd have BC cruisers, but would always have to give up a console slot for it. KDF battlecruisers would still pay nothing for their basic cloak, and possibly adjust stats on other KDF ships, but that's a topic for it's own.
on 1. at that point they may as well just make it part of the ships.
2. then they would want the other bonuses because "balance" or so they keep saying after reading this thread I've begun tp think someone needs to post a definition because I get the feeling everyone is not using the same one.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
2) Very likely not. seems to be that 'Balance' for some of these cats means all the good stuff they already have, plus the good stuff someone else has, is 'balance'.
Oh, and the envyragehate about the Mogh too...
See earlier post about balance double-standards, which you've seem to have missed. :rolleyes:
Edit: Saving you the effort of scrolling up. In regards to these ships being 'fine and not underpowered':
Unless you slot the cloak, which is why this thread exists in the first place. Now factor in Gorngonzola's statement that standard cloak is not enough of a benefit to take away from a ship for the sake of balance. But yet you insist it is, as long as it is Federation ships it is applying to.
This is a double-standard. You can not have double-standards while maintaining integrity as a person or business. There is no legitimate reason at this point in time as to why federation ships should continue to require a console to enable an ability which has be stated to be a freebie. If the were to Devs go back and adjust the Mogh or Avenger to compensate, there would be a valid counterargument. But we all know they won't, so trying to disrupt this topic further by saying it isn't needed is detrimental to the thread and discussion.
The rest of the post is irrelevant. This isn't about counters, it isn't about the Defiant to Qin balance, which is null to begin with. This is about the three, grand total of 10% of the Starfleet line, having standard cloaking, but being forced to be inferior to employ it. The reliance on a console to activate an ability which is considered of no real worth in the terms of game balance at this point in the game atleast for one side; as evidenced by the Mogh.
The fact that the Federation ships and players are still held to a standard which has been stated as gone, and are made to sacrifice for their standard cloaking, is unacceptable from a business and balance aspect. Again, it is a double-standard. Double-standards are the anathema of honesty and integrity.
I really hoped this thread was dead by now but like a good bad man it just won't die.
Let me cover everything in points
Point 1) Both of the Galaxies need their own each to cover what is wrong with them.
Point 2) The Feddie Battlecrusier got both factions mad. Something should happen to make more then copies of each other.
Point 3) A Raptor with 5 tactical console slots is more OP then the Jem'Hadar Attack Ship. No faction should have a ship that powerful. KDF or Starfleet without paying something for it. And if you are saying cash counts as "paying" for it then think P2W is right and this whole thread is even more pointless.
I really hoped this thread was dead by now but like a good bad man it just won't die.
Let me cover everything in points
Point 1) Both of the Galaxies need their own each to cover what is wrong with them.
Point 2) The Feddie Battlecrusier got both factions mad. Something should happen to make more then copies of each other.
Point 3) A Raptor with 5 tactical console slots is more OP then the Jem'Hadar Attack Ship. No faction should have a ship that powerful. KDF or Starfleet without paying something for it. And if you are saying cash counts as "paying" for it then think P2W is right and this whole thread is even more pointless.
And what f2pdrakon said about the JHAS. It's a super BoP/Escort/BC Frankenstein's monster, only missing a cloak to- wait, the one I was just fighting was cloaking with the Rommy T5 ability. There's a reason why it's the undeniably OP 'p2w' ship in the game.
The Defiant doesn't even hold a candle to it, even if it had integrated cloak. But the JHAS is another topic.
Our now critical concern is the fact standard cloak is so trivial to the devs, it's a freebie as shown with the Mogh and by statement. Except the Federation trio of cloakers which are forced to gimp themselves to do so with a console.
2) Very likely not. seems to be that 'Balance' for some of these cats means all the good stuff they already have, plus the good stuff someone else has, is 'balance'.
Oh, and the envyragehate about the Mogh too...
The definition of balance used to support their point is BS.
So what if they have to use a console slot to cloak? A player has to use a console slot to use a leech, AMS, GpG or almost any other special ability console on a build.
Fornthe feds to use clakng, a technology not normally allowed them, they have to use one more console than the KDF whom have cloaking as a design quality of thier vessels.
Big deal. No balance is being upset. Its choice like all the other consoles and nothing more.
When they start giving extra consoles on my shipsnto slot those other power then balance as they call it can complained about.
The definition of balance used to support their point is BS.
So what if they have to use a console slot to cloak? A player has to use a console slot to use a leech, AMS, GpG or almost any other special ability console on a build.
Fornthe feds to use clakng, a technology not normally allowed them, they have to use one more console than the KDF whom have cloaking as a design quality of thier vessels.
Big deal. No balance is being upset. Its choice like all the other consoles and nothing more.
When they start giving extra consoles on my shipsnto slot those other power then balance as they call it can complained about.
You're incorrect on your presentation of the problem. It's not an issue of balance with other consoles, it's an issue with the ability being innate and free to one side of the fence and not to the other. It's a double-standard as there has been a stated change in standards on top of it already being applied to the game with the Mogh.
Correct. Standard Cloak isn't enough to warrant reducing the effectiveness of this ship or improving the Avenger in my opinion. The massive advantage that the Avenger has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific battlecruiser, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them.
...
Ultimately though, some concessions had to be made for the Avenger, which in my opinion is a super rock solid ship. It's starfleet, so it shouldn't have cloak without some cost. This precedence has been set with both the Galaxy X and the Tactical Escort Retrofit. It would be a slippery slope to start giving fed ships free cloaking devices.
...
Had we given the Avenger Cloak, we'd embark on a slippery slope where similar fed ships would be expected to have cloak.
That last line is the flaw in his logic, and through it a double-standard has been created. No good business, no good man, employs and supports double-standards as such things are dishonest and unjust. Thus the new focus and life to this topic; basic cloak in a balance perspective isn't valuable to reduce stats, thus the console reliance is obsolete.
As it stands, none of those whom object and try to dispute the need for balance, and even attempted to refute the fact of this being a case of a double-standard. You just ignore it and argue against other things. :rolleyes: Leave the scarecrows alone.
"The massive advantage that the Avenger has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific battlecruiser, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
Don't know how to quote well but ^ is from the quote you have been building your whole cry for built in cloak around. Now lets have some fun replacing random words.
"The massive advantage that the Varanus Support Vessel has is that it gives KDF players the ability to fly a faction specific Science Ship, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
"The massive advantage that the Tactical Escort Retrofit has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific Raptor, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
I could keep going to I would love to hear you counters to this.
My god! You are right! Where is the KDF 2nd poor version of a Starfleet ship?
*rings the double-standards bell:rolleyes:*
Cute.
If all you have is nonsense to avoid the matter that the Devs have stated that standard cloaking is of no balancing cost, but still impose a cost and penalty on some ships to use it, then you're pretty off-base.
Ship classes are null. It's not about how many rides are in the respective garages. It's not about consoles as a whole. This is about the antiquated balance of cloak availability in light of modern standads. The Fed cloaking ships need a QoL update to remain within standards, it's as simple as that.
I'm hearing everything but a counter to what a dev said. In case you forgot.
"The massive advantage that the Avenger has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific battlecruiser, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
We both have dev quotes from the same dev and I think they counter each other pretty well. I think the best thing to do now is to agree to disagree.
Starfleet gains poor versions of KDF class of ships
KDF gains a poor version Starfleet class of ships.
You think that is wrong and maybe it is but I don't.
The Dev made a conflicting statement as well in regards to cloak. James gets it for free, Rick has to have his arm tied behind his back after paying for it to begin with.
You still aren't even on the same page, and at this point its clearly intentional. It is the issue of double-standards with cloaking. Not ship-class disparity or tradeoffs. Three starfleet ships are forced to rely on a console to enable basic cloaking, when it is stated to be a free addition to other ships. Your focus on classes is nothing more than a diversionary false argument.
Why is it okay for this double-standard to exist? I am sure we all are in agreement that double-standards are a dishonest practice, and those whom employ and uphold them lack integrity. Yet people defend this case of it with zealotry.
I notice you only quote bits and pieces of the Gorngonzolla post. Scared someone less biased than yourself will read the full explanation and see the logic that Dev gave for why the three cloaking fed ships are set up to cloak the way they do?
Here it is for those less biased than you to read in its complete form.
Correct. Standard Cloak isn't enough to warrant reducing the effectiveness of this ship or improving the Avenger in my opinion. The massive advantage that the Avenger has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific battlecruiser, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them.
To give you a bit of insight into both how the Avenger and Mogh were created. When we make new ships we want to make them attractive and as balanced as possible. When creating the Avenger Battlecruiser I initially tried balancing it around Starfleet cruisers. This led me to a dead end, as a battlecruiser it would end being way too similar to existing fed cruisers and not be comparable to kdf battlecruisers and that was ultimately my goal.
So, I began listing out all the tier 5 kdf battlecruiser stats side by side (along with a few choice fed cruisers) and found a niche that hadn't been hit by either faction. That's where the Avenger's stats came from, and ultimately the Mogh. It was always the plan to release a kdf equivalent of the Avenger.
Ultimately though, some concessions had to be made for the Avenger, which in my opinion is a super rock solid ship. It's starfleet, so it shouldn't have cloak without some cost. This precedence has been set with both the Galaxy X and the Tactical Escort Retrofit. It would be a slippery slope to start giving fed ships free cloaking devices.
The example you're giving is true for Fed Escorts and KDF Raptors, but KDF Battlecruisers do not have this drawback. Had I reduced the shield mod on the Mogh, it would be an inferior ship to the Avenger and players would be making different suggestions now.
Had we reduced the Mogh's shield modifier it would have the lowest shield modifier of any Tier 5 KDF battlecruiser making it less desirable.
Had we given the Avenger Cloak, we'd embark on a slippery slope where similar fed ships would be expected to have cloak.
Had we given the Mogh less crew, it would be inconsistent with KDF battlecruisers as they have large crews:
-Vor'cha has 1500
-Negh'Var has 2500
-Tor'Kaht has 1500
-Kamarag has 700
Regards,
Phil "Gorngonzolla" Zeleski
A chance to for feds to play a class otherwise unkown to them. Much like carriers which is another class that was unknown to feds.
"Starfleet shouldn't have cloak without some cost". Seems Gorngonzolla is more in touch with Star Trek than many others. He knows that Star Fleet doesn't cloak as an everyday ability for a reason, much like Gene Roddenberry intended.
KDF raptors and fed escorts pay for cloak? Whats this?!! Some would have a us believe all KDF get cloaking for freebies. How untrue. How fudged over by some to defend their bias.
KDF battle cruisers do not have this disadvantage. Its true. They never have and if the Devs had changed it with the Mogh it would be a lesser T5 Battle Cruiser than any KDF BC in the game and unwanted for being nerfed for no reason.
It would not have made money and Cryptic is a business after all. Or so it has been stated to many a KDF fan in the past. How has that changed now?
"Had we given the Avenger Cloak, we'd embark on a slippery slope where similar fed ships would be expected to have cloak."
How true is this this? Very I say. Just look at the situation. They gave cloak option to another ship well after it was already set that the feds would get no more cloaking ships.
The Devs skirted a rule to give the feds something that if they lacked on their new battle cruiser clone it would have made it less desired and not sell very well.
They broke their solemn vow for you feds and yet all you do is cry about it like they handed you a piece of TRIBBLE wrapped in a bow for Christmas.
Slipper slope indeed and I think Gorngonzolla was smarter than the feds may think in realizing that this gift of a fed cloaking Battle cruiser would only cause you all to want even more rules bent broken and changed to satisfy your biased balance. Or as Patrick already pointed out, if you give a fed an inch he will want the whole foot.
There are no double standards. The reasons have been given as to why cloaks for feds work the way they do. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong or unbalanced.
I notice you only quote bits and pieces of the Gorngonzolla post. Scared someone less biased than yourself will read the full explanation and see the logic that Dev gave for why the three cloaking fed ships are set up to cloak the way they do?
Here it is for those less biased than you to read in its complete form.
The full post was trimmed down to avoid page-stretching as a lot of it was more regarding the inter-ship balance of the two.
A chance to for feds to play a class otherwise unkown to them. Much like carriers which is another class that was unknown to feds.
Again, not debating ship class balance at this point.
"Starfleet shouldn't have cloak without some cost". Seems Gorngonzolla is more in touch with Star Trek than many others. He knows that Star Fleet doesn't cloak as an everyday ability for a reason, much like Gene Roddenberry intended.
Falling back into lore, you can not allow lore to dictate game balance and mechanics. Otherwise Starfleet vessels would only be allowed to use phasers, KDF Distrupters, etc; that only the defiant and sabre are escorts, the rest would be cruisers or similar absurdities. Concessions and factional balance are required to preserve equal gameplay.
KDF raptors and fed escorts pay for cloak? Whats this?!! Some would have a us believe all KDF get cloaking for freebies. How untrue. How fudged over by some to defend their bias.
Obsolete in light of the fleet consoles and the statements to larger vessels and already addressed many times in this thread. As you yourself constantly ignored, bitemepwe.
KDF battle cruisers do not have this disadvantage. Its true. They never have and if the Devs had changed it with the Mogh it would be a lesser T5 Battle Cruiser than any KDF BC in the game and unwanted for being nerfed for no reason.
It would not have made money and Cryptic is a business after all. Or so it has been stated to many a KDF fan in the past. How has that changed now?
Actually I recall they did, but they were buffed to remove the cost in the past. And as pointed out once again numerous times, when you apply financial cost, the Avenger's is most extreme. It's 45-50 dollars for a cloak-capable battlecruiser, ontop of the slots.
"Had we given the Avenger Cloak, we'd embark on a slippery slope where similar fed ships would be expected to have cloak."
How true is this this? Very I say. Just look at the situation. They gave cloak option to another ship well after it was already set that the feds would get no more cloaking ships.
The Devs skirted a rule to give the feds something that if they lacked on their new battle cruiser clone it would have made it less desired and not sell very well.
They broke their solemn vow for you feds and yet all you do is cry about it like they handed you a piece of TRIBBLE wrapped in a bow for Christmas.
This is where the double-standard comes into being. It is a mistake to penalize one side more than another for something that is openly stated to be a free boost to a vessel's tactical flexibility. The best way of breaking down the Avenger/Mogh snafu was here. Thus the continuation of this thread with a new light, as it is becoming a matter of poor business decisions.
Slipper slope indeed and I think Gorngonzolla was smarter than the feds may think in realizing that this gift of a fed cloaking Battle cruiser would only cause you all to want even more rules bent broken and changed to satisfy your biased balance. Or as Patrick already pointed out, if you give a fed an inch he will want the whole foot.
Such irony and hypocrisy here. You decry those for this as biased, then drop this pro-KDF superiority bit here. The request is for equality in design and balance, and balance can't be biased. Wanting better, is an advantage; which is exactly what you are about protecting with this attack.
There are no double standards. The reasons have been given as to why cloaks for feds work the way they do. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong or unbalanced.
Then you are a man without integrity or moral fiber it seems. The double-standard is clear as day, you refuse to acknowledge it exists because doing so compromises your ability to defend you advantage you have at this time. :rolleyes:
The issue has been stated, again and in many ways. The current state of the game results in the Federation cloak console reliance rendering those who employ it inferior. As this ability comes with a financial cost to begin with, it a double-standard business model. Thus the effort to bring to light the terrible path this is starting to take, which we're seeing again already in other circles.
Aww " a man without integrity or moral fiber"... Cant give a true reason for your bias so you offer more insults as arguement.
How progressive of you. Will you call me racist next for not believing your arguement? Shall malign my family and faith even rather than offer real evidence of the cloaking console situation and how it horribly unbalances your gameplay and renders such play unjust?
Or shall you continue to rereat behind insult and slander to protect your beliefs?
Either is fine by me. I know you are wrong, and so do others.
All you have done is focus on defending the double-standard with quips that support the bias, not accounted for the fact it is a unjust policy to begin with. This has been presented before fully and was conveniently ignored.
On the account that the three Starfleet ships and their users don't suffer:
Unless you slot the cloak, which is why this thread exists in the first place. Now factor in Gorngonzola's statement that standard cloak is not enough of a benefit to take away from a ship for the same of balance. But yet you insist it is, as long as it is Federation ships it is applying to.
This is a double-standard. You can not have double-standards while maintaining integrity as a person or business. There is no legitimate reason at this point in time as to why federation ships should continue to require a console to enable an ability which has be stated to be a freebie. If the were to Devs go back and adjust the Mogh or Avenger to compensate, there would be a valid counterargument. But we all know they won't, so trying to disrupt this topic further by saying it isn't needing is detrimental to the thread and discussion.
...
The fact that the Federation ships and players are still held to a standard which has been stated as gone, and are made to sacrifice for their standard cloaking, is unacceptable from a business and balance aspect. Again, it is a double-standard. Double-standards are the anathema of honesty and integrity.
Cryptic needs to correct this.
Yes Gorngonzola stated an exception. This does not make it right, however, as it devalues one faction's investment and support of the game over the other. Considering Federation players investing in STO are why it is still alive today, that's a pretty large disservice to their consumers. Before it was a non-issue due to the balance of consoles in the game. Fleet consoles have broken the mold, and are outright superior, and thus a ship which is forced to sacrifice competitiveness for an otherwise 'worthless' ability.
It's a terrible business standard to value one customer's time and money as less than another's. Double-standards undermine credibly and trust, and are counter to balance and equality. It's something the KDF has been combating for years, has it not? I would hope it simply is not something to oppose when it affects only oneself.
So, going with the "We spend more money so we deserve what we want" aproach I see.
Funny, I know many non-feds who spend big money on STO as well as many just plain gamers that spend money on STO who dont see the ethical slant of " Monetary Majority rules". I guess the new saying should be "Money makes right".
You have not been cheated. Every special ability console takes the choice of wether its worth it to use it. If you dont think cloak is worth it dont use it. Thats why it was made a console, by fed player demand, in the first place.
Use that right and stop acting as if your pockets have been robbed. No one forced you to spend buy anything in STO you didnt already want or desire.
Though your " money makes right " attitude has given me an excellent kick starter idea.
So, going with the "We spend more money so we deserve what we want" aproach I see.
Funny, I know many non-feds who spend big money on STO as well as many just plain gamers that spend money on STO who dont see the ethical slant of " Monetary Majority rules". I guess the new saying should be "Money makes right".
You have not been cheated. Every special ability console takes the choice of wether its worth it to use it. If you dont think cloak is worth it dont use it. Thats why it was made a console, by fed player demand, in the first place.
Use that right and stop acting as if your pockets have been robbed. No one forced you to spend buy anything in STO you didnt already want or desire.
Though your " money makes right " attitude has given me an excellent kick starter idea.
Except in the case of a purchase being devalued in an evolving game, while still within the scope of relevance, money does come into play. These all are VA ships, thus they are end-game ships; ones that are purchased by players for all of their traits. This includes cloaking, even if they don't always use it. With the power-creep in the game, they already were facing a troubled position.
This is called Quality-of-Life (QoL) updating. It happens in every MMO, it helps keep old content still viable, and in the case of a micro-transaction platform, worth buying. New players who don't yet own it are inclined to buy it, and those who have, it improves their mood towards the platform and encourages them to continue to invest.
As for the balance aspect, the shining example is the Avenger/Mogh snafu. Same exact price, but one is more valuable. This falls in alongside the problem with the Starfleet cloak system as it stands today in regards to the balance. Say Season 9 is balanced around fleet consoles at Mk XII as Cryptic sees they have become the majority. Having to give up the slot to cloak, means the blue cloakers are even more inferior than they cane be now. Imagine if the Gorn Support ships had their Sensor Analysis and Subsystem targeting moved to a console? It would be absurd.
It's about eliminating the double-standard for game mechanics balance. Trying to paint it as greedy feds just belittles everyone. I can't speak for everyone, but I am not here with bias; I just want things to be justly equalized in the end. Be it Fed cloaking, KDF ship disparity, and what have you not.
the old fed cloak thing again let me put it this way feds get a cloak of there pick of cloaks now and Romulan scimitars get all 3 of there consoles integrated to there ships still want a cloak? oh and on top of that for my dear friends the KDF they get BC integrated to all there ship with no lose of any thing
Comments
Yeah I am disappointed by the way the Bulwark is acquired, but ah well. However, it is not a 'Federation' Battlecloak, it is a universally abiet hard to acquire battlecloak. Lockbox vessels are not made specifically for one faction or another. We don't necessarily need a battlecloak, we just need our standard cloaks to not be out of touch with modern balance.
In the end, pitting a VA C-Store ship against an RA free ship. This part here is becoming a dead horse, the answer is not to hold back a c-store ship because of a lower-ranked closest free comparable. A new Raptor is in order.
BoPs are Raiders, they a different breed with battlecloak, not standard cloaking. All that crazy asymmetrical game balance and such.
See above about the Qin at his point. As for the Avenger and Mogh, yes, that is what makes this debate so very much valid and urgent. Near-same ships, same price, but one is worth more; being the Mogh with innate cloaking. Not simply from a tactical and logistical perspective, but from an outright monetary perspective. Innate cloak, versus a console from another purchased ship.
You acknowledged the underlying problem of this already... Though you also revealed you don't care that it is a problem because it furthers your personal bias and PvP gain. :rolleyes: That bit follows.
Unless you slot the cloak, which is why this thread exists in the first place. Now factor in Gorngonzola's statement that standard cloak is not enough of a benefit to take away from a ship for the same of balance. But yet you insist it is, as long as it is Federation ships it is applying to.
This is a double-standard. You can not have double-standards while maintaining integrity as a person or business. There is no legitimate reason at this point in time as to why federation ships should continue to require a console to enable an ability which has be stated to be a freebie. If the were to Devs go back and adjust the Mogh or Avenger to compensate, there would be a valid counterargument. But we all know they won't, so trying to disrupt this topic further by saying it isn't needing is detrimental to the thread and discussion.
The rest of the post is irrelevant. This isn't about counters, it isn't about the Defiant to Qin balance, which is null to begin with. This is about the three, grand total of 10% of the Starfleet line, having standard cloaking, but being forced to be inferior to employ it. The reliance on a console to activate an ability which is considered of no real worth in the terms of game balance at this point in the game atleast for one side; as evidenced by the Mogh.
The fact that the Federation ships and players are still held to a standard which has been stated as gone, and are made to sacrifice for their standard cloaking, is unacceptable from a business and balance aspect. Again, it is a double-standard. Double-standards are the anathema of honesty and integrity.
Cryptic needs to correct this.
Simplest solution:
1. Cloaking device, becomes a device instead of a console.
It would remain a normal cloak and allowed on more ships, possibly. Feds don't have to pay as high a cost for cloaking, and the balance issue wouldn't be a problem anymore, and we move on.
OR
2. Cloaking device, becomes a limited battle cloak.
Stays a console, and allows the few ships that can equip it, to cloak in and out of combat. It wouldn't gain some of the other bonuses of a BC though, like the turn rate bonus.
The number of ships it could be used on would stay highly limited.
Gives a unique twist to it. Feds can cloak freely, but don't gain some of the other bonuses that BC provides. They'd have BC cruisers, but would always have to give up a console slot for it. KDF battlecruisers would still pay nothing for their basic cloak, and possibly adjust stats on other KDF ships, but that's a topic for it's own.
on 1. at that point they may as well just make it part of the ships.
2. then they would want the other bonuses because "balance" or so they keep saying after reading this thread I've begun tp think someone needs to post a definition because I get the feeling everyone is not using the same one.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
See earlier post about balance double-standards, which you've seem to have missed. :rolleyes:
Edit: Saving you the effort of scrolling up. In regards to these ships being 'fine and not underpowered':
Let me cover everything in points
Point 1) Both of the Galaxies need their own each to cover what is wrong with them.
Point 2) The Feddie Battlecrusier got both factions mad. Something should happen to make more then copies of each other.
Point 3) A Raptor with 5 tactical console slots is more OP then the Jem'Hadar Attack Ship. No faction should have a ship that powerful. KDF or Starfleet without paying something for it. And if you are saying cash counts as "paying" for it then think P2W is right and this whole thread is even more pointless.
Reading comprehension fail. All you've done is presented your own points and argued against them; you have not addressed the real problem of the game-mechanic balance double-standard. :rolleyes:
And what f2pdrakon said about the JHAS. It's a super BoP/Escort/BC Frankenstein's monster, only missing a cloak to- wait, the one I was just fighting was cloaking with the Rommy T5 ability. There's a reason why it's the undeniably OP 'p2w' ship in the game.
The Defiant doesn't even hold a candle to it, even if it had integrated cloak. But the JHAS is another topic.
Our now critical concern is the fact standard cloak is so trivial to the devs, it's a freebie as shown with the Mogh and by statement. Except the Federation trio of cloakers which are forced to gimp themselves to do so with a console.
The definition of balance used to support their point is BS.
So what if they have to use a console slot to cloak? A player has to use a console slot to use a leech, AMS, GpG or almost any other special ability console on a build.
Fornthe feds to use clakng, a technology not normally allowed them, they have to use one more console than the KDF whom have cloaking as a design quality of thier vessels.
Big deal. No balance is being upset. Its choice like all the other consoles and nothing more.
When they start giving extra consoles on my shipsnto slot those other power then balance as they call it can complained about.
R.I.P
You're incorrect on your presentation of the problem. It's not an issue of balance with other consoles, it's an issue with the ability being innate and free to one side of the fence and not to the other. It's a double-standard as there has been a stated change in standards on top of it already being applied to the game with the Mogh.
That last line is the flaw in his logic, and through it a double-standard has been created. No good business, no good man, employs and supports double-standards as such things are dishonest and unjust. Thus the new focus and life to this topic; basic cloak in a balance perspective isn't valuable to reduce stats, thus the console reliance is obsolete.
As it stands, none of those whom object and try to dispute the need for balance, and even attempted to refute the fact of this being a case of a double-standard. You just ignore it and argue against other things. :rolleyes: Leave the scarecrows alone.
Don't know how to quote well but ^ is from the quote you have been building your whole cry for built in cloak around. Now lets have some fun replacing random words.
"The massive advantage that the Varanus Support Vessel has is that it gives KDF players the ability to fly a faction specific Science Ship, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
"The massive advantage that the Tactical Escort Retrofit has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific Raptor, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
I could keep going to I would love to hear you counters to this.
KDF pays for a ok sci ship
My god! You are right! Where is the KDF 2nd poor version of a Starfleet ship?
*rings the double-standards bell:rolleyes:*
Cute.
If all you have is nonsense to avoid the matter that the Devs have stated that standard cloaking is of no balancing cost, but still impose a cost and penalty on some ships to use it, then you're pretty off-base.
Ship classes are null. It's not about how many rides are in the respective garages. It's not about consoles as a whole. This is about the antiquated balance of cloak availability in light of modern standads. The Fed cloaking ships need a QoL update to remain within standards, it's as simple as that.
"The massive advantage that the Avenger has is that it gives fed players the ability to fly a faction specific battlecruiser, which is a ship class previously unavailable to them."
We both have dev quotes from the same dev and I think they counter each other pretty well. I think the best thing to do now is to agree to disagree.
Starfleet gains poor versions of KDF class of ships
KDF gains a poor version Starfleet class of ships.
You think that is wrong and maybe it is but I don't.
You still aren't even on the same page, and at this point its clearly intentional. It is the issue of double-standards with cloaking. Not ship-class disparity or tradeoffs. Three starfleet ships are forced to rely on a console to enable basic cloaking, when it is stated to be a free addition to other ships. Your focus on classes is nothing more than a diversionary false argument.
Why is it okay for this double-standard to exist? I am sure we all are in agreement that double-standards are a dishonest practice, and those whom employ and uphold them lack integrity. Yet people defend this case of it with zealotry.
I notice you only quote bits and pieces of the Gorngonzolla post. Scared someone less biased than yourself will read the full explanation and see the logic that Dev gave for why the three cloaking fed ships are set up to cloak the way they do?
Here it is for those less biased than you to read in its complete form.
A chance to for feds to play a class otherwise unkown to them. Much like carriers which is another class that was unknown to feds.
"Starfleet shouldn't have cloak without some cost". Seems Gorngonzolla is more in touch with Star Trek than many others. He knows that Star Fleet doesn't cloak as an everyday ability for a reason, much like Gene Roddenberry intended.
KDF raptors and fed escorts pay for cloak? Whats this?!! Some would have a us believe all KDF get cloaking for freebies. How untrue. How fudged over by some to defend their bias.
KDF battle cruisers do not have this disadvantage. Its true. They never have and if the Devs had changed it with the Mogh it would be a lesser T5 Battle Cruiser than any KDF BC in the game and unwanted for being nerfed for no reason.
It would not have made money and Cryptic is a business after all. Or so it has been stated to many a KDF fan in the past. How has that changed now?
"Had we given the Avenger Cloak, we'd embark on a slippery slope where similar fed ships would be expected to have cloak."
How true is this this? Very I say. Just look at the situation. They gave cloak option to another ship well after it was already set that the feds would get no more cloaking ships.
The Devs skirted a rule to give the feds something that if they lacked on their new battle cruiser clone it would have made it less desired and not sell very well.
They broke their solemn vow for you feds and yet all you do is cry about it like they handed you a piece of TRIBBLE wrapped in a bow for Christmas.
Slipper slope indeed and I think Gorngonzolla was smarter than the feds may think in realizing that this gift of a fed cloaking Battle cruiser would only cause you all to want even more rules bent broken and changed to satisfy your biased balance. Or as Patrick already pointed out, if you give a fed an inch he will want the whole foot.
There are no double standards. The reasons have been given as to why cloaks for feds work the way they do. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong or unbalanced.
R.I.P
Who says Klingons are not great speakers? :cool:
The full post was trimmed down to avoid page-stretching as a lot of it was more regarding the inter-ship balance of the two.
Again, not debating ship class balance at this point.
Falling back into lore, you can not allow lore to dictate game balance and mechanics. Otherwise Starfleet vessels would only be allowed to use phasers, KDF Distrupters, etc; that only the defiant and sabre are escorts, the rest would be cruisers or similar absurdities. Concessions and factional balance are required to preserve equal gameplay.
Obsolete in light of the fleet consoles and the statements to larger vessels and already addressed many times in this thread. As you yourself constantly ignored, bitemepwe.
Actually I recall they did, but they were buffed to remove the cost in the past. And as pointed out once again numerous times, when you apply financial cost, the Avenger's is most extreme. It's 45-50 dollars for a cloak-capable battlecruiser, ontop of the slots.
This is where the double-standard comes into being. It is a mistake to penalize one side more than another for something that is openly stated to be a free boost to a vessel's tactical flexibility. The best way of breaking down the Avenger/Mogh snafu was here. Thus the continuation of this thread with a new light, as it is becoming a matter of poor business decisions.
Such irony and hypocrisy here. You decry those for this as biased, then drop this pro-KDF superiority bit here. The request is for equality in design and balance, and balance can't be biased. Wanting better, is an advantage; which is exactly what you are about protecting with this attack.
Then you are a man without integrity or moral fiber it seems. The double-standard is clear as day, you refuse to acknowledge it exists because doing so compromises your ability to defend you advantage you have at this time. :rolleyes:
The issue has been stated, again and in many ways. The current state of the game results in the Federation cloak console reliance rendering those who employ it inferior. As this ability comes with a financial cost to begin with, it a double-standard business model. Thus the effort to bring to light the terrible path this is starting to take, which we're seeing again already in other circles.
How progressive of you. Will you call me racist next for not believing your arguement? Shall malign my family and faith even rather than offer real evidence of the cloaking console situation and how it horribly unbalances your gameplay and renders such play unjust?
Or shall you continue to rereat behind insult and slander to protect your beliefs?
Either is fine by me. I know you are wrong, and so do others.
R.I.P
Why?
Cause a Klingon and a Vorta are the only ones who are trying to hold on to the ideals that made Starfleet well...Starfleet.
On the account that the three Starfleet ships and their users don't suffer:
Yes Gorngonzola stated an exception. This does not make it right, however, as it devalues one faction's investment and support of the game over the other. Considering Federation players investing in STO are why it is still alive today, that's a pretty large disservice to their consumers. Before it was a non-issue due to the balance of consoles in the game. Fleet consoles have broken the mold, and are outright superior, and thus a ship which is forced to sacrifice competitiveness for an otherwise 'worthless' ability.
It's a terrible business standard to value one customer's time and money as less than another's. Double-standards undermine credibly and trust, and are counter to balance and equality. It's something the KDF has been combating for years, has it not? I would hope it simply is not something to oppose when it affects only oneself.
Funny, I know many non-feds who spend big money on STO as well as many just plain gamers that spend money on STO who dont see the ethical slant of " Monetary Majority rules". I guess the new saying should be "Money makes right".
You have not been cheated. Every special ability console takes the choice of wether its worth it to use it. If you dont think cloak is worth it dont use it. Thats why it was made a console, by fed player demand, in the first place.
Use that right and stop acting as if your pockets have been robbed. No one forced you to spend buy anything in STO you didnt already want or desire.
Though your " money makes right " attitude has given me an excellent kick starter idea.
R.I.P
Except in the case of a purchase being devalued in an evolving game, while still within the scope of relevance, money does come into play. These all are VA ships, thus they are end-game ships; ones that are purchased by players for all of their traits. This includes cloaking, even if they don't always use it. With the power-creep in the game, they already were facing a troubled position.
This is called Quality-of-Life (QoL) updating. It happens in every MMO, it helps keep old content still viable, and in the case of a micro-transaction platform, worth buying. New players who don't yet own it are inclined to buy it, and those who have, it improves their mood towards the platform and encourages them to continue to invest.
As for the balance aspect, the shining example is the Avenger/Mogh snafu. Same exact price, but one is more valuable. This falls in alongside the problem with the Starfleet cloak system as it stands today in regards to the balance. Say Season 9 is balanced around fleet consoles at Mk XII as Cryptic sees they have become the majority. Having to give up the slot to cloak, means the blue cloakers are even more inferior than they cane be now. Imagine if the Gorn Support ships had their Sensor Analysis and Subsystem targeting moved to a console? It would be absurd.
It's about eliminating the double-standard for game mechanics balance. Trying to paint it as greedy feds just belittles everyone. I can't speak for everyone, but I am not here with bias; I just want things to be justly equalized in the end. Be it Fed cloaking, KDF ship disparity, and what have you not.
system Lord Baal is dead