And now this thread got Romulans! So Mister Romulan, what do you think about the Federation Raptor cloaking being based on a lie and the death of an unarmed Romulan by an Starfleet Officer? The lie that weaken the Star Empire leaving them not fully able to move countless Romulan children away from the Hobus supernova and gave rise to the half-blood ruler Sela.
And now this thread got Romulans! So Mister Romulan, what do you think about the Federation Raptor cloaking being based on a lie and the death of an unarmed Romulan by an Starfleet Officer? The lie that weaken the Star Empire leaving them not fully able to move countless Romulan children away from the Hobus supernova and gave rise to the half-blood ruler Sela.
A lie that saved the entire quadrant from losing the dominion war which would have likely resulted in enslavement of the entire quadrant a la temporal ambassador.
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.
I would like to point out that the Avenger is not a 'bad' battlecruiser. In fact, aside from lacking an innate cloak (but having an option for the console cloak). . .the Avenger is better than most of the other battlecruisers in the KDF line.
Likewise, the Defiant isn't a 'bad' counterpart to KDF raptors. It's arguably superior to the Qin, if anything, especially the Fleet variant with the 5 tac consoles.
However, the Varanus. . .that IS a 2nd rate science ship, largely due to the lower shield modifier. The Fleet variant is like a combination of the Deep Space and Long Range science vessels in stats, but with a 1.32 shield mod rather than 1.43. Oh, and there's no console that can be used to compensate for that shield modifier lack. It's not THAT far below 'em, but it's noticeable.
You analogy is incredibly stretched and just forces your perspective and ultimately has no true bearing. If it was a request for a cloaking Oddessy or Vesta your example would have credence. But the vessels that can cloak for Starfleet are not typical Federation designs; each and every one is a warship, even the Gal-X was refitted for modern battle in its Era. There are not within the scope you portrayed.
Ironically I was considering a similar example. Let us look at the Defiant, it's a swift, nimble, powerful, but lacks staying power; it's a rogue. It is simply an inferior rogue because its stealth is forced to a piece of gear. Imagine if that really big MMO forced one faction's rogues to need to equip a special cloak to stealth; the item had not stats, just the ability to stealth. Yet the other still had it innate, and could wear any cape item with all sorts of beneficial stats or abilities in the same slot? The balance would be shot, thus why this would never happen there.
Yet it is okay here?
Highlighted in all it's terribleness with the lack of even attempting asymmetrical balance to hide it with the Avenger and Mogh. It was already being felt, and now it's being waved about.
As for getting there ships for cloaking. That stems from the fact that not only are the two canon ships seen cloaking on screen and thus are inherently expected to do so in-game, but they are sold with it being their thing. The issue being their method of cloaking being hinged to a console is archaic and out of touch with modern game balance.
Which brings us back to reality and not in the realm of straw and forced comparisons. The balance of cloak, isn't, with the existence and thus requirement of the cloak consoles. Which is a double-standard in game mechanics and seeping into the business aspect. Cryptic has created a substantial amount of power-creep over this year alone with the Fleet, Rep, and Lockboxes; which contributes to the problem. Fleet consoles are the new standard, being forced to use one less for the use of a 'free' ability is the issue. The conflict of difference and value based off of which side they are on. Which ironically still is something KDF players stood against for years; but it seems this case of it is okay.
Musing over the accusations of Munchkin, needing innate basic cloak in ships which are already cloaking vessels parallel to similarly innate cloaking ships is within the scope of balance.
You want Munchy, there have been some zany requests this past year, like 5/3 weapons on a BoP-nimble battlecloaking raptor chassis, ships with a unique weapon slot that gives any weapon slotted into it a 360 degree firing angle, requests for 180 degree DHC outdamaging super-heavy beam arrays, and similar absurdities. Now those are within the realm of Munchkin. :rolleyes:
Not a rogue-it's a Fighter-it's not materially inferior to any of it's peers and it's superior to most of them...as it sits right now. It's a fighter with a high dex stat and high strength score, capable of wearing full armor and using a full array of fighter weapons.
Rogues sacrifice payload-that is, weapons and armor, for their skills. Rangers do it to a lesser extent, paladins and fighters don't.
In the end it's a flawed analogy because this is a MMO with different balances than your classic Tabletop RPG. We don't have the level of complexity and sophistication in making classes different, and there is nothing locking you in. I've seen a Risan Corvette tank six standard and two tact cubes, with an uncounted slew of smaller craft as well, without ever coming close to losing a shield facing once.
Problem being-they don't NEED it. The ships in question are already good ships, work just fine, etc. If the Mogh had NOT been released, the Avenger would be the best battlecruiser in the game, outstripping ALL KDF battlecruisers in the role the KDF created and the Feds were johnny-come-lately to.
The equvalent would be if Cryptic churned out a KDF sci ship with a 1.50 shield mod, inertial of 70 base turn of 14, 4/2 layout, and 35k hull with nine console slots laid out 4sci/2eng/3tac, CDR Sci, LtC tac, Lt. Uni Lt. Eng, Ens sci.
as a GORN ship, so no innate cloak. but it would be materially BETTER than a Fed sci ship.
it would be fundamentally unbalanced. they DID this imbalance when they RELEASED the Avenger-they hit the limits there, they made it so good that any offering that wasn't cloned would be inferior on a fundamental level.
The Avenger is a c-store ship that's better on a fundamental level than most of the 10 console fleet ships available to the KDF. losing that total superiority to the Mogh?
balances that back out. Federation doesn't get to claim alpha on EVERY range shared by both sides.
I'll say it again-you're not after "balanced" you're after "Best".
The core of this is arguing ship range balance, which again, is not even a factor is the argument present. The debate is not about ship ranges, because this isn't a single range of ships affected, all three for Federation are different types. It is the game mechanic behind the way they get to cloak, which is an stark contrast to the otherwise stated norm. If I was arguing for best, I would be wanting something absurd as innate battlecloaking on these ships. It is simply equality in basic cloak standards that I seek, myself.
This topic is at a state where it is focusing on balance in cloaking from a balance of game mechanics and cost. Balance in that field. You are seeking a differing form of balance, in which because one side has less content and versatile vessels the other should be inferior in game mechanics. Personally I find this to be eye-for-and-eye thinking, and would argue for improvements in a piecemeal manner than accepting flawed double-standards for the sake of equal suffering.
I would love a proper KDF science vessel just as much as I would like for this console matter to be done away with; that is why I support the Qang concept. I have played through KDF multiple times, and I've flown almost every kind of vessel they have. Improvement is needed, but I don't feel that warrants handicapping other factions instead.
I've argued against the majority of those (the KDF specific examples) in those threads, Teron.
Here's where we fundamentally come out at odds, Teron...
I don't see anything wrong with console cloak, any more than I'd see anything wrong with Cryptic offering a console for BoPs that gives them the same sensor-scan ability you get on a sci ship for free-I'd sacrifice a turn console or even a weapons console on a B'rel for that. The big difference between us being, I wouldn't then turn around and start arguing that it should be innate.
BoPs weren't designed, introduced, and then sold with Sensor Scan as an element however. The three Starfleet cloak vessels were. Sensor Scan is also not innate to any vessel, it is innate to Science Officers. That's the failing of this analogy as well.
and how does THAT support anything except that the Corvette, when built right, is a good PvE machine?
And yet, until the advent of the Scimitar, the Defiant had the highest VIABLE Decloak-spike in the game... in spite of sacrificing a console.
No...
Let's go newest-to-oldest...
Avenger: sold with a Universal console that, iirc, is some kind of armor/weapon thing.
Defiant: sold with a separate console-the only one that didn't come with some other innate ability. Originally packaged as an eight-console vessel with innate cloak, this was changed on the Defiant Refit and Failaxy to a console and a ninth space was added.
Note that when the Defiant-R was released, it had the same stats othewise it has now, and it was released as being more powerful than the Raptors of the time(which have not improved.)
Failaxy-X: Sold with two innate abilities at release-the cloak, and the Phaser Lance.
You're not looking for game-balance, you want to have the best of all worlds, and you want it without having to roll a new toon, or muck about in the comedy of bugs and errors that infest KDF side of play.
The Defiant-R is still the best NON ROMULAN decloak alpha in the game when you account for the need to survive the possible counter attack. It is totally viable without ever mounting the cloak, and it's still viable WITH mounting the cloak.
It stacks directly against it's technological peers in the other factions, most often favourably in SPITE of having one console space dedicated to mounting a console cloak.
It's got more guns, shields and armor than a Bird of Prey, and better turn rate, inertia and on-target performance as well as better shielding than a Raptor, and in fleet comparison, it's better than a Raptor in firepower potential as well as retaining turn-rate, inertia and defensive superiority.
WITH the console.
This is the hurdle you're refusing to acknowledge-you already HAVE a better ship, losing one potential console slot to match an innate ability you don't absolutely need to be viable is not unbalanced-it balances your Defiant's other advantages.
What your arguments consistently come down to when we compare it, whether by faction, or type, is that you're upset that you aren't superior in every single area, that there is something you have to pay more for, that someone else can do, meanwhile you enjoy advantages that other side doesn't have, but you want to KEEP those advantages while gaining someone else's inherent abilities at no penalty.
Gorngonzolla had it right-giving innate back to the FEds just means the next target is Battlecloaking, because you guys can't be satisfied until you have the best in every single category, regardless of over all meta-balance.
Well, again, then based on your reasoning, is that the "Raider" bonus, should then be a console. Instead of innate. Thus forcing you to choose whether or not to gain that bonus, but having to sacrifice something else, or forgo the bonus, but getting to use whatever console you want. As BoP's are already viable for their intended use, and needed no "buffing" mechanic.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
and how does THAT support anything except that the Corvette, when built right, is a good PvE machine?
Pointing out nothing is clear-cut in this game, not even the holy trinity applies anymore.
And yet, until the advent of the Scimitar, the Defiant had the highest VIABLE Decloak-spike in the game... in spite of sacrificing a console.
Actually the highest potential decloak Alpha was the Bortas'qu, you got one shot at it but 4/4 DHC and turrets, 5 tact consoles, and the autocannon is hard to beat; and it still is potent as long as you don't miss. The C-store Defiant-R was par to the Qin in Alpha potential, and it takes the Fleet grade version to be up there.
No...
Let's go newest-to-oldest...
Avenger: sold with a Universal console that, iirc, is some kind of armor/weapon thing.
Defiant: sold with a separate console-the only one that didn't come with some other innate ability. Originally packaged as an eight-console vessel with innate cloak, this was changed on the Defiant Refit and Failaxy to a console and a ninth space was added.
Note that when the Defiant-R was released, it had the same stats othewise it has now, and it was released as being more powerful than the Raptors of the time(which have not improved.)
Failaxy-X: Sold with two innate abilities at release-the cloak, and the Phaser Lance.
The Avenger's console is an quirky twin Torp launcher, no armor element there. The Mogh's DDDS actually seems more useful.
We are all already in agreement that innate cloak won't fix the Gal-X but it's a start. Ironically the vessel people wanted it to be, turned into the Bulwark in a way.
You major hang up here seems to be fear of the Defiant class.
You're not looking for game-balance, you want to have the best of all worlds, and you want it without having to roll a new toon, or muck about in the comedy of bugs and errors that infest KDF side of play.
The Defiant-R is still the best NON ROMULAN decloak alpha in the game when you account for the need to survive the possible counter attack. It is totally viable without ever mounting the cloak, and it's still viable WITH mounting the cloak.
If the decloak alpha fails, that proposed survivability doesn't last you too much longer. You get a RSP to try to recover with, otherwise you're likely going to see the respawn screen. The Mogh has a powerful decloak alpha potential as well, which you are ignoring, and as pointed out prior, the Bortas'qu can still decloak-alpha brutally, it just has poor follow-up.
Again, you seem to be hung up over a single ship.
It stacks directly against it's technological peers in the other factions, most often favourably in SPITE of having one console space dedicated to mounting a console cloak.
It's got more guns, shields and armor than a Bird of Prey, and better turn rate, inertia and on-target performance as well as better shielding than a Raptor, and in fleet comparison, it's better than a Raptor in firepower potential as well as retaining turn-rate, inertia and defensive superiority.
WITH the console.
The Defiant is not a BoP, the Raider line has been kept almost exclusively KDF, with the exception of the Breen universally available one, and as an inferior reflection in the Aquarius. You can't expect the Defiant to be comparable to these vessels.
As for the Raptors, again, it is an issue of the raptor line being mostly inferior initially and having atrophied under the power-creep. However they do have more hull and at fleet level more engi slots for utility bonuses, which you glanced over. The KDF line needs a new VA raptor that matches the balance of the current game here though, the answer is not to penalize the Defiant because of this oversight.
There is another factor for this vessel which you in turn don't account for; the other escorts. The Defiant has lower hull and shields out of this category, and the least flexible BOff layout, with only a single Lt. for Eng and Sci each. It marginally turns better, but even at Fleet level an Advanced Escort can match the offensive firepower potential pre-cloak, and the extra sci ability slot gives it a trump-card there. Again, ironicly, echoing the claimed costs and balance such a ship with innate cloaking should have; requiring the console to cloak further reduces it to the other escorts.
This is the hurdle you're refusing to acknowledge-you already HAVE a better ship, losing one potential console slot to match an innate ability you don't absolutely need to be viable is not unbalanced-it balances your Defiant's other advantages.
What your arguments consistently come down to when we compare it, whether by faction, or type, is that you're upset that you aren't superior in every single area, that there is something you have to pay more for, that someone else can do, meanwhile you enjoy advantages that other side doesn't have, but you want to KEEP those advantages while gaining someone else's inherent abilities at no penalty.
Again fearing a Defiant balanced to today's standards, and citing only one perspective almost a fervently as scripture. It is not just balance cross-faction, but internal balance where the Defiant is waning. And again, the Defiant is not the sole ship affected by the cloak double-standard. The Gal-X needs something, and the Avenger is a same-price inferior vessel due to the cloaking imbalance.
The only thing that upsets me is lack of justice and equality. It is not about superiority, because that is not balance. This isn't clamoring for battlecloak, nor wanting a 5/3 escort, or something of that sort. It's critique on the fact that two standards exist for cloaking, at such a level of disparity as it stands at now. One side is free, the other is a hefty cost in numerous ways. Double-standards can not exist alongside balance and fairness.
Gorngonzolla had it right-giving innate back to the FEds just means the next target is Battlecloaking, because you guys can't be satisfied until you have the best in every single category, regardless of over all meta-balance.
False pretense, fear-mongering, and personal prejudice with the statement here. It's the same kind of derogatory mindset that just causes division and contention between people, encouraging a 'us vs. them' situation that always results in petty bitterness. This is a wish for balance over a double-standard, the standard for basic cloak. I disagree with Starfleet having innate battlecloak in any form; that is the scope of Warbirds and Birds-of-Prey.
sure, but so should the all four 'Cruiser Powers" and the entire suite of Singularity powers. (Warbirds already get decloak, they don't need free gravity well and subspace jumping too...but they got 'em, didn't they?)
Notice a trend?
Basically, then, is what you're saying, is that KDF ships should get the stuff they have built-in, but everyone else has to pay for their stuff? Just makes no sense, and is kind of a knee-jerk reaction. Personally, even though I don't have any of the Fed "wannabe-cloakers", and probably won't for a long time, I do feel that their cloaks should be in-built. After all, with the BoP's getting a boost, then these 3 ships should as well. Resotre them back to in-built cloaks, while leaving their console layout alone. Otherwise, nerf BoP's with further shield and/or hull penalties, to reflect the fact of their inbuilt cloaks, (and being b/c on top of that), vs the 3 Fed cloakers.
Now, the Rihan ships, whole 'nother can of worms entirely. I personally think (even though I enjoy using those ships), that Rihan get overall, waaaaay too much. Need to bring something down, to re-line them up with KDF and Fed capabilities. Make them equal, but different, if you know what I mean.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
No, I'm saying KDF shouldn't get singularity jump without a console, Feds shouldn't get Cloak without a console, and Warbirds (that's romulan ships) shouldn't get four full cruiser commands without a console, nor have the -40 power switched back.
IOW, if I want my Bird of Prey to have sensor scan on any toon that isn't a sci, then I need to pay for a console. If you want to Cloak, you need to pay for a console, if EITHER of us wants the singularity powers, we either better roll Romulans, or pay for it somehow. Probably with one or more consoles.
Cruisers get their four buffs, Raiders get their one buff, Warbirds get their singularity consoles, and whatever appears for Escorts the Raptors either get a cut down version the way Battlecruisers do with Cruiser commands, or nuffin'.
And that's fair. Because then, every faction has their little 'thing' that the other two can't do without big sacrifices.
Actually, if cruiser commands, only worked on the ship using them, I'd agree. However, ANY ship within 5 km gets the bonus.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
There is a joke about terongray used only one part of the dev quote to back his/her ideas of "balance" but says that same dev is wrong when his words can be used against him/she.
But I want to wait until the 26th so it will be the most funny
There is a joke about terongray used only one part of the dev quote to back his/her ideas of "balance" but says that same dev is wrong when his words can be used against him/she.
Thank you Tyler, it had almost be a dozen posts without a personal attack and insults being tossed around. :rolleyes:
But I want to wait until the 26th so it will be the most funny
If you had read the original post where I quoted it, I posted the link to the full post while stating I clipped the key points I did to minimize page stretching. Not once did I imply that's all there was to is; and the fact that the Devs made the exception is the whole issue I'm challenging.
Suppose if find it amusing, that's fine for you. Not the ideal time of year for Schadenfreude but to each his own.
now that's not nice. Teron's very passionate about his/her stance, not entirely reasonable about it, but very passionate. I'm sure it was an honest mistake...(okay, that may not be accurate, but I'm trying to be nice...)
Eh, no need to pull punches, this entire debate is mild compared to what I put up with in reality all too often. XD
As for passionate and reasonable, I would say numerous people here have passions fueling their involvement. If we didn't have passion in some form, this topic wouldn't be so active and long-lived. Reasonable is perspective based, to be honest, when it comes to things like this, it is easy to see the other guy as being unreasonable when they don't yield and concur. I will confess to being quite stubborn however, Danish blood and such.
I'll be taking a break from things here to enjoy the Holiday. Merry Christmas, or your personal equivalent, everyone.
um...that would be the whole idea-the Cruiser becomes a force multiplier for the team. it IS their 'special ability'-running a Cruiser with a sci and three escorts means you've increased the capability of all five ships just by being there and hitting the right control.
That's a darn powerful ability and none of those auras give benefit to your opponent unless he's got a cruiser too.
The whole concept is to make the whole team stronger, by bringing a Cruiser. that's the 'special ability' Cruisers have.
Yes, but cloak, singularity, etc etc all benefit only the ship using them, directly. Whereas, the cruiser commands are shared. The cruiser gets a boost? Well so does ANY ship, whether carrier, sci, escort, BoP, whatever, that happens to be in range. My fix would be simple. The cruiser commands (ie command network), the cruiser uses to synergize IT'S movement/attack/shielding, what-have-you, to bring up it's performance. However, it's up to those other ships, to boost themselves, in whatever way's they have.
Otherwise, we're back to "give the 3 Fed cloakers back innate cloak (w/o touching their console #'s), and make the Raider bonus, a bonus for everyone" After all, if a Raider can get some sort of "backstab" whether cloaked or not, then everyone should. This isn't a rogue-class, where the opponent has to be "unaware" of it being a target.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
I think we have a definite miscommunication here-do you not play anything where you're teamed? One ship getting a buff, say, to their weapons power is nice, five getting it can be a LOT nicer, whether you're running PvP or STF, the Cruiser buffs are designed for Fedball tactics-that is, formation fighting, and when you have more than one cruiser, you can overlap the abilities to get very useful combinations.
and it doesn't cost a uni slot or boff slot to do it.
how is confining it to just one ship superior when the intent is obviously for teamwork?
Yes, but you're saying the cruisers only were benefitting from it, therefore, it was on equal footing to say, cloaking, raider buff, etc etc. While I like the cruiser control, the fact that it benefits escorts, raiders, and everything else out there, JUST as much as it benefits the cruiser, means it's not "cruiser exclusive" So it makes everything on your team, more tanky, more damage-y, more maneuverable, not just the cruiser itself. Only stipulation, that the other ship has to stay w/in 5km of the cruiser. Maybe if the cruiser got 1.5x to double the bonus, than what the other ships get, I'd consider it more of a "cruiser-exclusive". But it's not.
Sure, the guy driving the cruiser can select what mode to pick, but it doesn't enhance just him.
Whereas the guy with the cloak, the guy with the thalaron, the guy with the sing abilities, they enhance JUST him. And usually give a kick-TRIBBLE amount of bene as well.
And to the guy saying "You don't team much", hell, have you pugged stuff lately? You're lucky to get people in there to act like even a loose team, so yeah, I kind of go into those things for myself. If someone takes issue with that, not my problem, lol. When I see others start (on a typical basis), acting like a team, then I'll return the favour. Til then, I do what I have to do, to make my ship fun & effective for myself, even if it doesn't enhance the team as a whole.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Ok, I have no problem with your point of view, and from a certain perspective, you're definately correct.
However, I feel that considering all the "bonuses" being lavished on just about every ship type out there, from BoP's/Raiders, Warbirds, etc, that they DON'T have to share (ie, in a competitive setting will help them pull ahead on the damage scale), a cruisers power ends up being shared, unless he purposely flies out of range of the others.
Now while in PvP, especially, I'd agree, your point of view would be the best one, as it allows the team to do more overall.
In a competitive PvE scneario though, where "whoever does the most damage wins" especially with how tanky every other class of ship is getting, I don't think a cruiser's abilities should have to be shared out, unless it's commander decides that's what he wants.
Just my personal point of view, and I'll admit, it's starting to flow off the thread topic, but it all comes down to bene's, and powers being handed out to certain things, supposed to be counterbalancing others.
Then again, I'm from "old-school" RPGing, where generally, if a DM found out something was too ridiculous, (s)he could, on the spot, change how things worked, and as long as they were consistent, the players would mostly be okay with it. (Except for that despicable creature, the "Munchkin")
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
And to the guy saying "You don't team much", hell, have you pugged stuff lately? You're lucky to get people in there to act like even a loose team, so yeah, I kind of go into those things for myself. If someone takes issue with that, not my problem, lol. When I see others start (on a typical basis), acting like a team, then I'll return the favour. Til then, I do what I have to do, to make my ship fun & effective for myself, even if it doesn't enhance the team as a whole.
must suck being a fed. pub queued kdf team will smash the objectives, get the optional, win the pvp match, or carry the kirks every time.
...and not even say a word to one another while doing it.
its no wonder the devs gave you cruiser commands. and even now you still dont get it :rolleyes:
How bout we just settle this for once and for all ...
Feds get built in cloaks.
Kdf get something in return though ...
equal science ships for a start.
A defiant bop equal.
feds in return of their crappy cloaks get their defiant nerfed to kdf raiders.
Are we starting to get on level playing fields here ?
And for you feds ... if you think the cloak needs to be inbuilt in the defiant ... why are you would you ever appose a t5 bop with the same abilities as it ?
How bout we just settle this for once and for all ...
Feds get built in cloaks.
Kdf get something in return though ...
equal science ships for a start.
A defiant bop equal.
feds in return of their crappy cloaks get their defiant nerfed to kdf raiders.
Are we starting to get on level playing fields here ?
And for you feds ... if you think the cloak needs to be inbuilt in the defiant ... why are you would you ever appose a t5 bop with the same abilities as it ?
nah thread like this will going on and on no matter what even if was dev was to have a DB moment feds would find something elses they want from some other faction and it would just alienate the rom and kdf imo so its best to just let them to keep wanting on like the dev have done for just about 4 years
How bout we just settle this for once and for all ...
Feds get built in cloaks.
Kdf get something in return though ...
equal science ships for a start.
A defiant bop equal.
feds in return of their crappy cloaks get their defiant nerfed to kdf raiders.
Are we starting to get on level playing fields here ?
And for you feds ... if you think the cloak needs to be inbuilt in the defiant ... why are you would you ever appose a t5 bop with the same abilities as it ?
Hahaha. And herein lies the crux of the matter, and why this thread is so useless. "We" don't get to settle anything. Whatever, or whoever think you are, whatever you think you're entitled to, game design issues are not up to you, or pretty much anyone in this thread. They're up to no one but the devs. And the devs have already decided: no battlecloak / innate cloak for Feds.
So, as a fed you can go play with your cruiser commands, 5 tac console escorts, kumaris and vestas; and like it. Or you can go play some other game.
must suck being a fed. pub queued kdf team will smash the objectives, get the optional, win the pvp match, or carry the kirks every time.
...and not even say a word to one another while doing it.
its no wonder the devs gave you cruiser commands. and even now you still dont get it :rolleyes:
This getting nowhere, and getting to the point of "never mind"
(And just for your info, I wasn't even really talking about PvP, as I don't)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Comments
A lie that saved the entire quadrant from losing the dominion war which would have likely resulted in enslavement of the entire quadrant a la temporal ambassador.
I would like to point out that the Avenger is not a 'bad' battlecruiser. In fact, aside from lacking an innate cloak (but having an option for the console cloak). . .the Avenger is better than most of the other battlecruisers in the KDF line.
Likewise, the Defiant isn't a 'bad' counterpart to KDF raptors. It's arguably superior to the Qin, if anything, especially the Fleet variant with the 5 tac consoles.
However, the Varanus. . .that IS a 2nd rate science ship, largely due to the lower shield modifier. The Fleet variant is like a combination of the Deep Space and Long Range science vessels in stats, but with a 1.32 shield mod rather than 1.43. Oh, and there's no console that can be used to compensate for that shield modifier lack. It's not THAT far below 'em, but it's noticeable.
Ironically I was considering a similar example. Let us look at the Defiant, it's a swift, nimble, powerful, but lacks staying power; it's a rogue. It is simply an inferior rogue because its stealth is forced to a piece of gear. Imagine if that really big MMO forced one faction's rogues to need to equip a special cloak to stealth; the item had not stats, just the ability to stealth. Yet the other still had it innate, and could wear any cape item with all sorts of beneficial stats or abilities in the same slot? The balance would be shot, thus why this would never happen there.
Yet it is okay here?
Highlighted in all it's terribleness with the lack of even attempting asymmetrical balance to hide it with the Avenger and Mogh. It was already being felt, and now it's being waved about.
As for getting there ships for cloaking. That stems from the fact that not only are the two canon ships seen cloaking on screen and thus are inherently expected to do so in-game, but they are sold with it being their thing. The issue being their method of cloaking being hinged to a console is archaic and out of touch with modern game balance.
Which brings us back to reality and not in the realm of straw and forced comparisons. The balance of cloak, isn't, with the existence and thus requirement of the cloak consoles. Which is a double-standard in game mechanics and seeping into the business aspect. Cryptic has created a substantial amount of power-creep over this year alone with the Fleet, Rep, and Lockboxes; which contributes to the problem. Fleet consoles are the new standard, being forced to use one less for the use of a 'free' ability is the issue. The conflict of difference and value based off of which side they are on. Which ironically still is something KDF players stood against for years; but it seems this case of it is okay.
Musing over the accusations of Munchkin, needing innate basic cloak in ships which are already cloaking vessels parallel to similarly innate cloaking ships is within the scope of balance.
You want Munchy, there have been some zany requests this past year, like 5/3 weapons on a BoP-nimble battlecloaking raptor chassis, ships with a unique weapon slot that gives any weapon slotted into it a 360 degree firing angle, requests for 180 degree DHC outdamaging super-heavy beam arrays, and similar absurdities. Now those are within the realm of Munchkin. :rolleyes:
In the end it's a flawed analogy because this is a MMO with different balances than your classic Tabletop RPG. We don't have the level of complexity and sophistication in making classes different, and there is nothing locking you in. I've seen a Risan Corvette tank six standard and two tact cubes, with an uncounted slew of smaller craft as well, without ever coming close to losing a shield facing once.
The core of this is arguing ship range balance, which again, is not even a factor is the argument present. The debate is not about ship ranges, because this isn't a single range of ships affected, all three for Federation are different types. It is the game mechanic behind the way they get to cloak, which is an stark contrast to the otherwise stated norm. If I was arguing for best, I would be wanting something absurd as innate battlecloaking on these ships. It is simply equality in basic cloak standards that I seek, myself.
This topic is at a state where it is focusing on balance in cloaking from a balance of game mechanics and cost. Balance in that field. You are seeking a differing form of balance, in which because one side has less content and versatile vessels the other should be inferior in game mechanics. Personally I find this to be eye-for-and-eye thinking, and would argue for improvements in a piecemeal manner than accepting flawed double-standards for the sake of equal suffering.
I would love a proper KDF science vessel just as much as I would like for this console matter to be done away with; that is why I support the Qang concept. I have played through KDF multiple times, and I've flown almost every kind of vessel they have. Improvement is needed, but I don't feel that warrants handicapping other factions instead.
BoPs weren't designed, introduced, and then sold with Sensor Scan as an element however. The three Starfleet cloak vessels were. Sensor Scan is also not innate to any vessel, it is innate to Science Officers. That's the failing of this analogy as well.
Well, again, then based on your reasoning, is that the "Raider" bonus, should then be a console. Instead of innate. Thus forcing you to choose whether or not to gain that bonus, but having to sacrifice something else, or forgo the bonus, but getting to use whatever console you want. As BoP's are already viable for their intended use, and needed no "buffing" mechanic.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Pointing out nothing is clear-cut in this game, not even the holy trinity applies anymore.
Actually the highest potential decloak Alpha was the Bortas'qu, you got one shot at it but 4/4 DHC and turrets, 5 tact consoles, and the autocannon is hard to beat; and it still is potent as long as you don't miss. The C-store Defiant-R was par to the Qin in Alpha potential, and it takes the Fleet grade version to be up there.
The Avenger's console is an quirky twin Torp launcher, no armor element there. The Mogh's DDDS actually seems more useful.
We are all already in agreement that innate cloak won't fix the Gal-X but it's a start. Ironically the vessel people wanted it to be, turned into the Bulwark in a way.
You major hang up here seems to be fear of the Defiant class.
If the decloak alpha fails, that proposed survivability doesn't last you too much longer. You get a RSP to try to recover with, otherwise you're likely going to see the respawn screen. The Mogh has a powerful decloak alpha potential as well, which you are ignoring, and as pointed out prior, the Bortas'qu can still decloak-alpha brutally, it just has poor follow-up.
Again, you seem to be hung up over a single ship.
The Defiant is not a BoP, the Raider line has been kept almost exclusively KDF, with the exception of the Breen universally available one, and as an inferior reflection in the Aquarius. You can't expect the Defiant to be comparable to these vessels.
As for the Raptors, again, it is an issue of the raptor line being mostly inferior initially and having atrophied under the power-creep. However they do have more hull and at fleet level more engi slots for utility bonuses, which you glanced over. The KDF line needs a new VA raptor that matches the balance of the current game here though, the answer is not to penalize the Defiant because of this oversight.
There is another factor for this vessel which you in turn don't account for; the other escorts. The Defiant has lower hull and shields out of this category, and the least flexible BOff layout, with only a single Lt. for Eng and Sci each. It marginally turns better, but even at Fleet level an Advanced Escort can match the offensive firepower potential pre-cloak, and the extra sci ability slot gives it a trump-card there. Again, ironicly, echoing the claimed costs and balance such a ship with innate cloaking should have; requiring the console to cloak further reduces it to the other escorts.
Again fearing a Defiant balanced to today's standards, and citing only one perspective almost a fervently as scripture. It is not just balance cross-faction, but internal balance where the Defiant is waning. And again, the Defiant is not the sole ship affected by the cloak double-standard. The Gal-X needs something, and the Avenger is a same-price inferior vessel due to the cloaking imbalance.
The only thing that upsets me is lack of justice and equality. It is not about superiority, because that is not balance. This isn't clamoring for battlecloak, nor wanting a 5/3 escort, or something of that sort. It's critique on the fact that two standards exist for cloaking, at such a level of disparity as it stands at now. One side is free, the other is a hefty cost in numerous ways. Double-standards can not exist alongside balance and fairness.
False pretense, fear-mongering, and personal prejudice with the statement here. It's the same kind of derogatory mindset that just causes division and contention between people, encouraging a 'us vs. them' situation that always results in petty bitterness. This is a wish for balance over a double-standard, the standard for basic cloak. I disagree with Starfleet having innate battlecloak in any form; that is the scope of Warbirds and Birds-of-Prey.
Basically, then, is what you're saying, is that KDF ships should get the stuff they have built-in, but everyone else has to pay for their stuff? Just makes no sense, and is kind of a knee-jerk reaction. Personally, even though I don't have any of the Fed "wannabe-cloakers", and probably won't for a long time, I do feel that their cloaks should be in-built. After all, with the BoP's getting a boost, then these 3 ships should as well. Resotre them back to in-built cloaks, while leaving their console layout alone. Otherwise, nerf BoP's with further shield and/or hull penalties, to reflect the fact of their inbuilt cloaks, (and being b/c on top of that), vs the 3 Fed cloakers.
Now, the Rihan ships, whole 'nother can of worms entirely. I personally think (even though I enjoy using those ships), that Rihan get overall, waaaaay too much. Need to bring something down, to re-line them up with KDF and Fed capabilities. Make them equal, but different, if you know what I mean.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Actually, if cruiser commands, only worked on the ship using them, I'd agree. However, ANY ship within 5 km gets the bonus.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
But I want to wait until the 26th so it will be the most funny
If you had read the original post where I quoted it, I posted the link to the full post while stating I clipped the key points I did to minimize page stretching. Not once did I imply that's all there was to is; and the fact that the Devs made the exception is the whole issue I'm challenging.
Suppose if find it amusing, that's fine for you. Not the ideal time of year for Schadenfreude but to each his own.
Eh, no need to pull punches, this entire debate is mild compared to what I put up with in reality all too often. XD
As for passionate and reasonable, I would say numerous people here have passions fueling their involvement. If we didn't have passion in some form, this topic wouldn't be so active and long-lived. Reasonable is perspective based, to be honest, when it comes to things like this, it is easy to see the other guy as being unreasonable when they don't yield and concur. I will confess to being quite stubborn however, Danish blood and such.
I'll be taking a break from things here to enjoy the Holiday. Merry Christmas, or your personal equivalent, everyone.
Yes, but cloak, singularity, etc etc all benefit only the ship using them, directly. Whereas, the cruiser commands are shared. The cruiser gets a boost? Well so does ANY ship, whether carrier, sci, escort, BoP, whatever, that happens to be in range. My fix would be simple. The cruiser commands (ie command network), the cruiser uses to synergize IT'S movement/attack/shielding, what-have-you, to bring up it's performance. However, it's up to those other ships, to boost themselves, in whatever way's they have.
Otherwise, we're back to "give the 3 Fed cloakers back innate cloak (w/o touching their console #'s), and make the Raider bonus, a bonus for everyone" After all, if a Raider can get some sort of "backstab" whether cloaked or not, then everyone should. This isn't a rogue-class, where the opponent has to be "unaware" of it being a target.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Yes, but you're saying the cruisers only were benefitting from it, therefore, it was on equal footing to say, cloaking, raider buff, etc etc. While I like the cruiser control, the fact that it benefits escorts, raiders, and everything else out there, JUST as much as it benefits the cruiser, means it's not "cruiser exclusive" So it makes everything on your team, more tanky, more damage-y, more maneuverable, not just the cruiser itself. Only stipulation, that the other ship has to stay w/in 5km of the cruiser. Maybe if the cruiser got 1.5x to double the bonus, than what the other ships get, I'd consider it more of a "cruiser-exclusive". But it's not.
Sure, the guy driving the cruiser can select what mode to pick, but it doesn't enhance just him.
Whereas the guy with the cloak, the guy with the thalaron, the guy with the sing abilities, they enhance JUST him. And usually give a kick-TRIBBLE amount of bene as well.
And to the guy saying "You don't team much", hell, have you pugged stuff lately? You're lucky to get people in there to act like even a loose team, so yeah, I kind of go into those things for myself. If someone takes issue with that, not my problem, lol. When I see others start (on a typical basis), acting like a team, then I'll return the favour. Til then, I do what I have to do, to make my ship fun & effective for myself, even if it doesn't enhance the team as a whole.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Ok, I have no problem with your point of view, and from a certain perspective, you're definately correct.
However, I feel that considering all the "bonuses" being lavished on just about every ship type out there, from BoP's/Raiders, Warbirds, etc, that they DON'T have to share (ie, in a competitive setting will help them pull ahead on the damage scale), a cruisers power ends up being shared, unless he purposely flies out of range of the others.
Now while in PvP, especially, I'd agree, your point of view would be the best one, as it allows the team to do more overall.
In a competitive PvE scneario though, where "whoever does the most damage wins" especially with how tanky every other class of ship is getting, I don't think a cruiser's abilities should have to be shared out, unless it's commander decides that's what he wants.
Just my personal point of view, and I'll admit, it's starting to flow off the thread topic, but it all comes down to bene's, and powers being handed out to certain things, supposed to be counterbalancing others.
Then again, I'm from "old-school" RPGing, where generally, if a DM found out something was too ridiculous, (s)he could, on the spot, change how things worked, and as long as they were consistent, the players would mostly be okay with it. (Except for that despicable creature, the "Munchkin")
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
must suck being a fed. pub queued kdf team will smash the objectives, get the optional, win the pvp match, or carry the kirks every time.
...and not even say a word to one another while doing it.
its no wonder the devs gave you cruiser commands. and even now you still dont get it :rolleyes:
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Feds get built in cloaks.
Kdf get something in return though ...
equal science ships for a start.
A defiant bop equal.
feds in return of their crappy cloaks get their defiant nerfed to kdf raiders.
Are we starting to get on level playing fields here ?
And for you feds ... if you think the cloak needs to be inbuilt in the defiant ... why are you would you ever appose a t5 bop with the same abilities as it ?
nah thread like this will going on and on no matter what even if was dev was to have a DB moment feds would find something elses they want from some other faction and it would just alienate the rom and kdf imo so its best to just let them to keep wanting on like the dev have done for just about 4 years
system Lord Baal is dead
Hahaha. And herein lies the crux of the matter, and why this thread is so useless. "We" don't get to settle anything. Whatever, or whoever think you are, whatever you think you're entitled to, game design issues are not up to you, or pretty much anyone in this thread. They're up to no one but the devs. And the devs have already decided: no battlecloak / innate cloak for Feds.
So, as a fed you can go play with your cruiser commands, 5 tac console escorts, kumaris and vestas; and like it. Or you can go play some other game.
This getting nowhere, and getting to the point of "never mind"
(And just for your info, I wasn't even really talking about PvP, as I don't)
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"