Though the constant harping for a rules lawyer way to get a battle cloak on a Defiant, as well as the other fed cloakers, is a solid reminder of what Patrickngo stated earlier in the thread about fed measuring procedures and balance.
Y'all seem to have missed the point though-contained in "Then Fed players would riot and burn cryptic to the ground."
(snip)
because it sucks.
Even the Mirror version's better than the Qin. (this is not a normal state of affairs wrt mirror ships-which is why you can get MU versions of Fed ships cheap-cheap-cheap on the exchange).
and nobody's spending the twenty bucks on modules for the Fleet variant.
it doesn't fit ANYBODY's playing style.
Well, let's see, "Even the Mirror version's better than the Qin" really then put things into a true light. The answer is not to penalize and impose some false balance on the Defiant family if the Qin itself is just a terrible design. Though as I do quite well in my own Qin, possibly by flying it in a more hybrid form with Fed tactics, that also intones it doesn't fit the sole 'dagger in the dark' playstyle.
The solution here is as stated a couple times here and elsewhere, to make a proper VA store line of Raptors that can compete. The Tact Escort Retro is a store ship, so the more logical counterpart would be another store ship; additionally the Raptor line could use variety.
but...it would, in fact, be a 'balanced' trade-your Defiant/Fleet Defiant get integral cloak, your defiant/fleet defiant get the Qin's stats.
shortly thereafter, riot.
Such a terribly regressive way of approaching the matter would result in outcry of course. The whole issue at this point is 'basic cloak = no cost' except for the pesky console problem Fed-Side, and then the Qin being poorly designed from the ground up.
Solution is still as above.
And again this?
why? because instead of having the most powerful non-Romulan decloak alpha, they'd have an exact copy of a ship nobody red-side wants to fly.
Bortasqu' Tactical Cruiser. Pre-Roms the most devastating decloak alpha potential was here, it still is absolutely brutal when it is successful. It lacks the agility for follow up, but on it's own the Scim is rather clunky as well.
What Teron and co. want, is to keep a high-power, high-end, high-performance Escort, gain integral cloak, and lose nothing.
in a lot of ways, it's why Cryptic's not about to buff Raptors for the KDF-by eliminating the apparent sacrifices imposed, sure, they'd become more popular rides for KDF players, but you have already SEEN the backlash from Fed players over the Mogh, if they started buffing Raptors it'd be another cause for Federation Rioting.
How about that, a request for a ship, which has the lower hull and shields compared to its kin but also basic cloaking; which the latter is stated to be of no value and worth reducing stats, yet that is apparently okay and people are evil selfish monsters for wanting a true and equal balance over a double-standard. :rolleyes:
If they outright buffed Raptors without equalizing, you'd see people being unhappy; if they removed the handicap to the Defiant as well, I doubt we'd see much at all. The whole backlash about the Mogh is it's +1 over a ship which is nigh identical in stats to the Fed counterpart, which both cost the same monetarily, yet aren't actually the same in end value due to it. That fuss would be avoided by first and foremost, by not +1 cloning, and future releases that are asymmetrically balanced to each-other will mitigate it.
You want new improved Raptors, and 90% of the disgruntlement over the Avenger/Mogh go away? Then push for innate basic cloak for the three Starfleet ships which already have the means in their design. Elimination of the double-standard with basic cloaking quells the discontent, and opens doors.
Though the constant harping for a rules lawyer way to get a battle cloak on a Defiant, as well as the other fed cloakers, is a solid reminder of what Patrickngo stated earlier in the thread about fed measuring procedures and balance.
You mean opinion and conjecture, which is fueled by a need to preserve a different vision of balance of inferior game performance to inferior ship diversity? One is an easily observable and understandable issue; brought to center stage under spot-light in the Avenger/Mogh fiasco. Equal and just balance is the necessity in this situation; not perpetuating a double-standard; especially not when being the beneficiary of it. That just makes one come across a selfish and petty; and undermines them when facing their own desire for equality in other fields.
The cloak console, as long as it remains simply to enable basic cloaking, is an element of a double-standard per the state of the game today due to being a relic of an old balance system. Thus it needs to be corrected in some form, if not innate than with substantial improvements which could trend towards further issues. As we do seem to be in agreement of 'No battle cloaking for Starfleet' the simpler solution is retiring the console and integrating the power.
The only ship that should have Battle Cloak is the Defiant. The Federation have a experimental Transphasic Cloak seen in TNG. If anything, allow the Avengar to use the Transphasic Cloak. Still, it shouldn't not be a full-fledge Battle Cloak.
... End of Stafleet Communication.
Cryptic should not care about how much people complain. If you still to cannon it would be the above.
All cloaks seen in the TV series and Movies, with the exception of the transphasic, are Battle Cloaks in that they allowed a ship to cloak in battle.
The Defiant did not have a special type of cloak.
if you "Stick to canon" (sticking to a cannon would be painful-esp. when it fires) all Starfleet cloaks have a singular trait:
They kill the crew of the ship they're installed on.
Lol
That's true. Still keep the cloak on the Defiant. Then if you keep to cannon like you said.
1. Allow the Federation players use cloak with (15-25% chance something would go wrong, 5% terrible wrong.)
2. The Fed's have mask signature which is already available in game.
Then Klingons and Romulan only have the reliable cloaking system.
Now, (tongue in cheek here) if that's what you want, I'm sure the developers could accommodate you-adding a table and a roll for every time you activate or deactivate your in-built cloak/battle cloak to check a cumulative chance of something going seriously wrong (didn't cloak, dropped your power to 0, random system failures, explosions, etc.) but I don't think that'd be real popular, do you?
Every time I see you run with this logic, I just can't help but think in that case, every KDF ship should have a dice-roll for a chance of it exploding from a single lucky hit while shield-less under cloak, or even in general. Fair's fair right?
Ah, except that the Qin is from a faction that is SUPPOSED to cloak, has no laws against it, isn't centuries behind in development and design in the field, doesn't have to rent it from a foreign power, and has been designing it into their ships since the late 2200's, and has it integrated into their basic tactical and strategic doctrine. (the two doctrines that tend to dictate design doctrine).
You obviously missed or are avoiding the point that was here. The Raptor line needs work in-game, it's dated and insufficient, and thus you can't accurately balance against it.
The Federation's experiences with Cloaking aren't conducive to their matching the Empire on a technical level with it, much less the Romulans.
TOS: Kirk captured one, (stole it) and further research was rendered illegal in the Federation.
TNG: the prototype crashed the power grid and got the testbed stuck in a rock, everybody died.
DS9: The borrowed cloak had numerous points of failure and the Defiant was detected and captured, later it was detected, and finally destroyed.
VOY: did they even bother trying?
STO: The cloak made the ship EXPLODE.
Lore. Lore lore lore, and lore. As above, your logic his is flawed and centered around lore in a game balance debate. All further lore arguments will be discarded as they just serve as a strawman element.
Potential firepower means nothing if you can't bring it to bear-the Bort can't outside of very narrow conditions, the Defiant CAN across a broad spectrum of conditions. This factors into objective analyses for "Best", specifically when talking tactics and use. The Bort is a classic example of a ship that suffers for an ability that it can't use effectively.
Ah, so now the 'facts' of argument change again; you cited decloak-alpha, did you not. The whole foundation of your stance in this area is the Defiant has a strong ambush. The Borta's is inherently stronger; and if done right the target shouldn't get a chance to get out of the way. You line up while cloaked, drop, fire for great effect. This is the basis of your anti innate-cloak Defiant soapbox.
But here, once that has been kicked out from under you, you quickly find a different position to argue your agenda from. The Bortas is far more durable than the tact escort, or any smaller craft, and the various tools at your disposal, the same you'd argue to justify assist anything, are there.
Notably, the Avenger was a +2 improvement over the Tor'kaht, a FLEET ship, in objective terms, and hit the limits of Klingon Design doctrine-this is like a country with no prior experience in submarine warfare turning out the Los Angeles class as their very first attempt at a submarine.
And then came the Mogh. For how many years did KDF have supremacy in Battlecruisers? For a few months Starfleet had something shiny, and then KDF got theirs.
Um, no, what happens is this: Cryptic gives you what you want, then you start agitating for Battlecloaks after assuring everyone that you wouldn't do that, and you folks use any improvements to the Raptor line as your basis.
Projection of falsehoods likely to instill fear and hostility towards again with this. This is the kind of tactics intended to scare people into following a belief. The only shred of possibility of this fear becoming real would be in Cryptic were to make the proposed VA Raptors Escort-grade battle cloaking vessels without sacrifice. Which would be unlikely as they cite battlecloaking as being of cost, not basic cloaking. Balance of standards, so on and so forth.
Said now, because it's a good negotiating tactic. Hell, you might even believe it. However I'll point you to the next post by a Federation player, declaring all federation cloaks should be battlecloaks.
I'd concur they're out of place when they show. Given Romulans have made a frustrating mockery of balance since their arrival.
no, the simplest solution is for cryptic to do NOTHING. it requires the least amount of work, and maintains existing balances and trade-offs.
Doing nothing maintains an imbalance and double-standard based off of the changes to the game in its growth. You only see it as balance as you currently benefit from it in your bias.
Addendum; lets try this, cite specifically what there is to lose from your perspective, as it is I see there is nothing. In PvE it's a useful utility for getting a boost in damage against Boss-grade targets, in PvP it's a coin-flip surprise and little more. I weather 4-man collaborative alpha-strikes in the Plesh Brekk; a raider with no cloak and survive to keep fighting until the attackers run back into the shadows. How will basic cloak innate for three ships change anything for the worse for you?
Wow, I've been on the road for almost a month and this still going!!??
I guess Einstein was slightly off mark, there are actually 3 things that are infinite: the Universe, the Human stupidity and the Federation whining. :P But we're not sure on the Universe.
And all of this to indulge the cries of a handfull of people, if not less. What a waste of thread.
All cloaks should be battle cloaks, regular cloak as we have now is just a relic of an old means of balancing that is no longer relevant.
Regular cloak is hell to use and it's so easily broken by ANYTHING that puts the ship in red alert, it's even worse in the adapted destroyer which is easily seen afar if not careful to keep max aux. I say keep the need for consoles for feds to cloak, but make the cloak a battle cloak, but also have the stealth weaker like the adapted destroyer, and that would be keeping battle cloak users on their toes. I'd happily take a weaker stealth battle cloak any day in addition to the need for the console. Regular cloak is a joke.
All cloaks should be battle cloaks, regular cloak as we have now is just a relic of an old means of balancing that is no longer relevant.
Time for the obligatory rolling of the newspaper and swatting of the nose. No battlecloaks for Starfleet.
Regular cloak is hell to use and it's so easily broken by ANYTHING that puts the ship in red alert, it's even worse in the adapted destroyer which is easily seen afar if not careful to keep max aux. I say keep the need for consoles for feds to cloak, but make the cloak a battle cloak, but also have the stealth weaker like the adapted destroyer, and that would be keeping battle cloak users on their toes. I'd happily take a weaker stealth battle cloak any day in addition to the need for the console. Regular cloak is a joke.
This does however point out a part of why the console feels like such a wasted slot. It's so frustratingly easy to be bumped out of cloak, and then you've lost all benefits associated with it until that spit of combat is over. I disagree with the notion of making it provide battle cloak, thus my motion to just retire the console and move the ability back to innate. Failing that, some substantial upgrade to the cloak console is needed.
Limitations exist to help define factions-the KDF has two things that Battlecloak-the Bird of Prey class, and the Peghu destroyer.
everything else uses a less sophisticated system.
Romulans battlecloak even ships that should never try to use it-because that's the faction.
Feds have trouble making Cloak work-because that's the Faction.
Romulans really break the mold, they aren't balanced to the other two in order to make the expansion profitable. We'll likely see them brought into line once the next race comes along so that one can be the superior one and thus cash cow.
It is never once indicated the console has to do with Starfleet having trouble with cloaks, it's a simple fact it is left over from an older system of balance where basic cloak was still a factor in balancing ship designs. It no longer has an internal points cost. That is simply your own fluff-based excuse; which if you wish to use fluff logic, it makes more sense that the Romulan Republic supplies cloaking devices for approved use on a limited scope of vessels, which is not treaty breaking at all. :rolleyes:
If you want BC on everything, play Romulan-everything they own has Battlecloak and they get all the benefits of both factions with none of the side-effects. Space elves.
Nope, no BC on everything. That'd actually be rather silly, having Olympic class or Excelsior class ships cloaking mid fight. Romulans are not Starfleet, just saying play that isn't the answer, it's a diversionary response. Roms don't fly these three ships which are currently penalized with unjust double-standards.
if you want integrated standard cloaks, play Klingon-everything they have (built by Klingons, except the Vo'Quv) has integrated cloak.
I thought the point to play KDF was for more offense ship builds in the entirely, and primary either battlecruiser or BoP playstyles. Doesn't change the fact that only a small, limited range of Starfleet ships already cloak, and the mechanism of which is not correctly balanced to today.
If you want better hulls and shield modifiers and don't NEED to cloak everywhere, you pick Federation and never have to have your systems die since your all-human BOFF crew keeps the disables away-i.e. your **** always works.
Amusing, it seems that your math is off again. Glancing at the Qin, it has more hull than the Defiant, which are the only two you can really lay side-by-side. If you try to compare battlecruisers to line cruisers, you find they are a completely different beast across the board with asymmetrical balance due to better turn rates and using dual cannons. Which matches the Dev's statement, basic cloak has no cost to KDF. If you are implying that if Starfleet's three cloakers got that power innate, that all KDF cruisers would need Federation level hull and shields with their other traits left unchanged... Wow, what is balance?
Dead crew doesn't seem to cripple my KDF like you imply it does to yours, even with my Vo'Quv or battlecruisers. After having flown a Plesh Brekk which is a heavy BoP sans cloak and proving quite tenacious, I've come to suspect Klingon mains don't really know how to make themselves survivable like Feds do, and just blame the crew system. :rolleyes:
On top of that, the Federation has a stronger 'trinity' setup. They can fedball with escorts, science ships, and FAWing cruisers and be VERY effective. Try attacking that kind of Fedball in Ker'rat with BoPs, Raptors, and Battlecruisers and see how well that goes. This is because the Federation has good science ships, escorts that are quite durable in the right hands, and cruisers that lay down good pressure damage and absorb a good amount of damage.
The Dev said that only KDF battle cruisers have innate cloaking without handicap.
The Raptor has cloaking for a price of a lower shield modifier and a lower turn rate statistic while the Defiant only pays for its cloak by said ability being a console device.
If you choose to not use the Cloaking device on a Defiant you end up with a standard fed escort with no handicap what so ever. An option that the Raptor does not enjoy. If I could take cloaking off a Raptor I would still have a raptor with less shields and lower turn rate.
The arguement that tje three fed cloaking ships suffer for having to use a console.slot is still BS. Without Cloak fed ships are still equal to their class, when using cloak they lose nothing but a single console slot to do so - for which they where given an extra slot so they would not be further handicapped by the choice.
Wow, I've been on the road for almost a month and this still going!!??
I guess Einstein was slightly off mark, there are actually 3 things that are infinite: the Universe, the Human stupidity and the Federation whining. :P But we're not sure on the Universe.
And all of this to indulge the cries of a handfull of people, if not less. What a waste of thread.
Actually, I see it as more of KDF-whine being infinite.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
On top of that, the Federation has a stronger 'trinity' setup. They can fedball with escorts, science ships, and FAWing cruisers and be VERY effective. Try attacking that kind of Fedball in Ker'rat with BoPs, Raptors, and Battlecruisers and see how well that goes. This is because the Federation has good science ships, escorts that are quite durable in the right hands, and cruisers that lay down good pressure damage and absorb a good amount of damage.
Vaper builds make a pretty good mockery of the much loathed "Fed-ball". Concerted alphas will overwhelm anyone.
The Dev said that only KDF battle cruisers have innate cloaking without handicap.
The Raptor has cloaking for a price of a lower shield modifier and a lower turn rate statistic while the Defiant only pays for its cloak by said ability being a console device.
If you choose to not use the Cloaking device on a Defiant you end up with a standard fed escort with no handicap what so ever. An option that the Raptor does not enjoy. If I could take cloaking off a Raptor I would still have a raptor with less shields and lower turn rate.
The arguement that tje three fed cloaking ships suffer for having to use a console.slot is still BS. Without Cloak fed ships are still equal to their class, when using cloak they lose nothing but a single console slot to do so - for which they where given an extra slot so they would not be further handicapped by the choice.
The Raptor also has more hull, and more crew. The case of the Defiant and Qin seems to simply a very shoddy attempt at asymmetrical balance when you really look at it, even more so when you assess the RA/VA disparity as well.
As stated, the Tact Escort also has to remain up there with other Starfleet Escorts; it's not a simple binary comparison with the Qin. Solution, add more variety in Raptors to properly compete. Losing a console slot in order to enable what balance dictates should be innate, and thus losing the substantial bonuses from Fleet-grade consoles, is excessively heavy.
And again you claim they have an extra slot... Just no, stop this falsity. Same as everyone else, the is no 'extra slot'.
Dead crew doesn't seem to cripple my KDF like you imply it does to yours, even with my Vo'Quv or battlecruisers. After having flown a Plesh Brekk which is a heavy BoP sans cloak and proving quite tenacious, I've come to suspect Klingon mains don't really know how to make themselves survivable like Feds do, and just blame the crew system. :rolleyes:
In regards to crew:
It isn't so much that KDF die much more often or anything, more that they get much less usage out of crew on many, at least many Klingon-designed ships, because crew is lost very easily, and gained very slowly.
Sure you can use consoles and such to help, but in the end, does it matter much? You can still lose tons of crew and then be hurting elsewhere because you have focused on trying to keep them alive.
In regards to the Avenger and Mogh, the Avenger has 500 crew, and the Mogh has 2,000. It'll take 4 times as long for the Mogh to regain all it's crew (presuming we're starting from 0), and in turn, lose crew much faster since crew is lost on a percent, not a number. The Avenger can regain crew more quickly as such, and lose less crew on the whole in return.
Does that automatically make the KDF ships harder to keep alive? Not really, you can work around it, you yourself prove that by being able to survive well enough in Klingon ships. It's just that crew is more of a hindrance to any benefit it might provide compared to similar Fed ships, because of how the crew mechanic works.
About the Plesh Brek: Yes, it is a BoP with no cloak, BUT...it is also damn nearly a Defiant as well. A .88 shield modifier (same as fleet BoPs, and only .02 below most escort shields), 29,700 hull (just a smidge below a normal C-store Defiant), and similar BoP stats.
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.
And again you claim they have an extra slot... Just no, stop this falsity. Same as everyone else, the is no 'extra slot'.
Its not a falsehood. Go back several pages or go tos STOwiki for the link to the update where the Devs converted the innate powers of Cstore ships into consoles and then go to the update where they added extra console slots to those same vessels to compensate yhe players for having to slot said powers.
Its concrete hard truth this has happened. Just because you dont like it does not mean its not true.
So as it turns out your ignoring truth and spouting fedwhine for no reason what so ever because the Devs compensated the feds for their cloaking in 2010/2011.
Feds should be thankful they have access to one at all, more so with Fed/Rom players.
This whole thread reads as follows: Blah blah blah balance! Blah blah blah Defiants! Blah blah blah cloak on a Fed Dreadnaught! Blah blah blah (insert trolling).
If you want a battle cloak (Enhanced or otherwise) this badly, the solution is really simple folks: ROLL A KLING and try to have some fun with one!!!
Man . . . reading all of these posts gives me the impression that Feds won't be happy until they get a cloakable Death Star from the C-Store with 50 hangars full of TIE Fighters crafted from unicorn tears. Geeez.
If you want a battle cloak (Enhanced or otherwise) this badly, the solution is really simple folks: ROLL A KLING and try to have some fun with one!!!
Its entirely possible they did, liked the ship, didn't ike the culture, and wanted it on their Fed with the reasoning of 'why should the other two factions get it, but mine doesn't?' Not everyone thinks Klinking is fun.
Also, for those saying its all Fed complaints vs Klingon thoughtfulness, the previous 10 posts on this thread are 2 Fed posters and 7 Klingon posters. Going back further, I don't care enough to read, but I don't think anyone can pretend they smell like lilacs here.
Its entirely possible they did, liked the ship, didn't ike the culture, and wanted it on their Fed with the reasoning of 'why should the other two factions get it, but mine doesn't?' Not everyone thinks Klinking is fun.
Yeah its possible, but I'm still going to call BS on it being likely.
LOL@Culture - what is that even supposed to mean anyway? We're all just gamers no matter what side you pick. You'll run into helpful friends and jerky players no matter WHAT faction you play. I like bacon so I'm not going to play with you because you dont like bacon! <- thats what that sounded like. Culture! Like all KDF players look at the ceiling and scream into our headsets when we lose a team-mate over TeamSpeak.
If not everyone thinks Klinking is fun, fine . . . also irrelevant as you can be a Fed/Rom and choose a ship with a cloak or choose not to.
Feds should be thankful they have access to one at all, more so with Fed/Rom players.
This whole thread reads as follows: Blah blah blah balance! Blah blah blah Defiants! Blah blah blah cloak on a Fed Dreadnaught! Blah blah blah (insert trolling).
If you want a battle cloak (Enhanced or otherwise) this badly, the solution is really simple folks: ROLL A KLING and try to have some fun with one!!!
Man . . . reading all of these posts gives me the impression that Feds won't be happy until they get a cloakable Death Star from the C-Store with 50 hangars full of TIE Fighters crafted from unicorn tears. Geeez.
Well here is a FACT we all know.. the KLINK WAR WILL BE ENDING! So at some point, you'll be factioned under the Federation. Hmmm why is that? LACK OF CONTENT, PLAYERS AND MOOOLAH, who knows, who cares. Respectfully, how about you not comment if you have a negative attitude and provide constructive comments as many others have to sway the reason. I'm sure MANY Fed players have posted respectful comments on the klink side which we've seen the Klinks post their amazing thread whining and the EPIC 'Disenchanted' thread about Fed players and what they have and the Klinks don't.
Geez grab a tissue, the majority will always get what they wish for and leave the negativity off the forums.
Well here is a FACT we all know.. the KLINK WAR WILL BE ENDING! So at some point, you'll be factioned under the Federation. Hmmm why is that? LACK OF CONTENT, PLAYERS AND MOOOLAH, who knows, who cares. Respectfully, how about you not comment if you have a negative attitude and provide constructive comments as many others have to sway the reason. I'm sure MANY Fed players have posted respectful comments on the klink side which we've seen the Klinks post their amazing thread whining and the EPIC 'Disenchanted' thread about Fed players and what they have and the Klinks don't.
Geez grab a tissue, the majority will always get what they wish for and leave the negativity off the forums.
I wasn't the one crying. I was the one POINTING OUT the crying in addition to offering readily available solutions:
Again:
A - Try rolling a Klingon.
or
B - Try a Fed/Rom the devs spent so much time working on.
*EDIT* PS - The entire KDF faction being moved under the Federation one? Your source please. Not going to happen, but thanks for the anti-inflamitory "constructive" prediction.
Wondering how many ships out there are called the USS Bette Midler.
I wasn't the one crying. I was the one POINTING OUT the crying in addition to offering readily available solutions:
Again:
A - Try rolling a Klingon.
or
B - Try a Fed/Rom the devs spent so much time working on.
Wondering how many ships out there are called the USS Bette Midler.
You might want to ask how many have the IKS Bette Midler I'm glad feds don't have the innate trait after careful review and understanding of why it was done long ago. I prefer Romulan over Klink due to what I thought was painful grinding on the Klink side due to lack of content. But you are correct, Try green over red, you'd probably see the difference.
Comments
If people are forced to use that weapon in order to get the option to battle cloak would that be a fair trade off?
Though the constant harping for a rules lawyer way to get a battle cloak on a Defiant, as well as the other fed cloakers, is a solid reminder of what Patrickngo stated earlier in the thread about fed measuring procedures and balance.
R.I.P
Well, let's see, "Even the Mirror version's better than the Qin" really then put things into a true light. The answer is not to penalize and impose some false balance on the Defiant family if the Qin itself is just a terrible design. Though as I do quite well in my own Qin, possibly by flying it in a more hybrid form with Fed tactics, that also intones it doesn't fit the sole 'dagger in the dark' playstyle.
The solution here is as stated a couple times here and elsewhere, to make a proper VA store line of Raptors that can compete. The Tact Escort Retro is a store ship, so the more logical counterpart would be another store ship; additionally the Raptor line could use variety.
Such a terribly regressive way of approaching the matter would result in outcry of course. The whole issue at this point is 'basic cloak = no cost' except for the pesky console problem Fed-Side, and then the Qin being poorly designed from the ground up.
Solution is still as above.
And again this?
Bortasqu' Tactical Cruiser. Pre-Roms the most devastating decloak alpha potential was here, it still is absolutely brutal when it is successful. It lacks the agility for follow up, but on it's own the Scim is rather clunky as well.
How about that, a request for a ship, which has the lower hull and shields compared to its kin but also basic cloaking; which the latter is stated to be of no value and worth reducing stats, yet that is apparently okay and people are evil selfish monsters for wanting a true and equal balance over a double-standard. :rolleyes:
If they outright buffed Raptors without equalizing, you'd see people being unhappy; if they removed the handicap to the Defiant as well, I doubt we'd see much at all. The whole backlash about the Mogh is it's +1 over a ship which is nigh identical in stats to the Fed counterpart, which both cost the same monetarily, yet aren't actually the same in end value due to it. That fuss would be avoided by first and foremost, by not +1 cloning, and future releases that are asymmetrically balanced to each-other will mitigate it.
You want new improved Raptors, and 90% of the disgruntlement over the Avenger/Mogh go away? Then push for innate basic cloak for the three Starfleet ships which already have the means in their design. Elimination of the double-standard with basic cloaking quells the discontent, and opens doors.
No battlecloak for Stafleet, ever. Basic cloak suffices when you need it.
You mean opinion and conjecture, which is fueled by a need to preserve a different vision of balance of inferior game performance to inferior ship diversity? One is an easily observable and understandable issue; brought to center stage under spot-light in the Avenger/Mogh fiasco. Equal and just balance is the necessity in this situation; not perpetuating a double-standard; especially not when being the beneficiary of it. That just makes one come across a selfish and petty; and undermines them when facing their own desire for equality in other fields.
The cloak console, as long as it remains simply to enable basic cloaking, is an element of a double-standard per the state of the game today due to being a relic of an old balance system. Thus it needs to be corrected in some form, if not innate than with substantial improvements which could trend towards further issues. As we do seem to be in agreement of 'No battle cloaking for Starfleet' the simpler solution is retiring the console and integrating the power.
The only ship that should have Battle Cloak is the Defiant. The Federation have a experimental Transphasic Cloak seen in TNG. If anything, allow the Avengar to use the Transphasic Cloak. Still, it shouldn't not be a full-fledge Battle Cloak.
... End of Stafleet Communication.
Cryptic should not care about how much people complain. If you still to cannon it would be the above.
All cloaks seen in the TV series and Movies, with the exception of the transphasic, are Battle Cloaks in that they allowed a ship to cloak in battle.
The Defiant did not have a special type of cloak.
R.I.P
Lol
That's true. Still keep the cloak on the Defiant. Then if you keep to cannon like you said.
1. Allow the Federation players use cloak with (15-25% chance something would go wrong, 5% terrible wrong.)
2. The Fed's have mask signature which is already available in game.
Then Klingons and Romulan only have the reliable cloaking system.
Just saying.
Every time I see you run with this logic, I just can't help but think in that case, every KDF ship should have a dice-roll for a chance of it exploding from a single lucky hit while shield-less under cloak, or even in general. Fair's fair right?
Impractical and would ruin game-play in the end.
You obviously missed or are avoiding the point that was here. The Raptor line needs work in-game, it's dated and insufficient, and thus you can't accurately balance against it.
Lore. Lore lore lore, and lore. As above, your logic his is flawed and centered around lore in a game balance debate. All further lore arguments will be discarded as they just serve as a strawman element.
Ah, so now the 'facts' of argument change again; you cited decloak-alpha, did you not. The whole foundation of your stance in this area is the Defiant has a strong ambush. The Borta's is inherently stronger; and if done right the target shouldn't get a chance to get out of the way. You line up while cloaked, drop, fire for great effect. This is the basis of your anti innate-cloak Defiant soapbox.
But here, once that has been kicked out from under you, you quickly find a different position to argue your agenda from. The Bortas is far more durable than the tact escort, or any smaller craft, and the various tools at your disposal, the same you'd argue to justify assist anything, are there.
And then came the Mogh. For how many years did KDF have supremacy in Battlecruisers? For a few months Starfleet had something shiny, and then KDF got theirs.
Projection of falsehoods likely to instill fear and hostility towards again with this. This is the kind of tactics intended to scare people into following a belief. The only shred of possibility of this fear becoming real would be in Cryptic were to make the proposed VA Raptors Escort-grade battle cloaking vessels without sacrifice. Which would be unlikely as they cite battlecloaking as being of cost, not basic cloaking. Balance of standards, so on and so forth.
I'd concur they're out of place when they show. Given Romulans have made a frustrating mockery of balance since their arrival.
Doing nothing maintains an imbalance and double-standard based off of the changes to the game in its growth. You only see it as balance as you currently benefit from it in your bias.
Addendum; lets try this, cite specifically what there is to lose from your perspective, as it is I see there is nothing. In PvE it's a useful utility for getting a boost in damage against Boss-grade targets, in PvP it's a coin-flip surprise and little more. I weather 4-man collaborative alpha-strikes in the Plesh Brekk; a raider with no cloak and survive to keep fighting until the attackers run back into the shadows. How will basic cloak innate for three ships change anything for the worse for you?
I guess Einstein was slightly off mark, there are actually 3 things that are infinite: the Universe, the Human stupidity and the Federation whining. :P But we're not sure on the Universe.
And all of this to indulge the cries of a handfull of people, if not less. What a waste of thread.
Regular cloak is hell to use and it's so easily broken by ANYTHING that puts the ship in red alert, it's even worse in the adapted destroyer which is easily seen afar if not careful to keep max aux. I say keep the need for consoles for feds to cloak, but make the cloak a battle cloak, but also have the stealth weaker like the adapted destroyer, and that would be keeping battle cloak users on their toes. I'd happily take a weaker stealth battle cloak any day in addition to the need for the console. Regular cloak is a joke.
Time for the obligatory rolling of the newspaper and swatting of the nose. No battlecloaks for Starfleet.
This does however point out a part of why the console feels like such a wasted slot. It's so frustratingly easy to be bumped out of cloak, and then you've lost all benefits associated with it until that spit of combat is over. I disagree with the notion of making it provide battle cloak, thus my motion to just retire the console and move the ability back to innate. Failing that, some substantial upgrade to the cloak console is needed.
Newpaper applied to the kitsune.
Romulans really break the mold, they aren't balanced to the other two in order to make the expansion profitable. We'll likely see them brought into line once the next race comes along so that one can be the superior one and thus cash cow.
It is never once indicated the console has to do with Starfleet having trouble with cloaks, it's a simple fact it is left over from an older system of balance where basic cloak was still a factor in balancing ship designs. It no longer has an internal points cost. That is simply your own fluff-based excuse; which if you wish to use fluff logic, it makes more sense that the Romulan Republic supplies cloaking devices for approved use on a limited scope of vessels, which is not treaty breaking at all. :rolleyes:
Nope, no BC on everything. That'd actually be rather silly, having Olympic class or Excelsior class ships cloaking mid fight. Romulans are not Starfleet, just saying play that isn't the answer, it's a diversionary response. Roms don't fly these three ships which are currently penalized with unjust double-standards.
I thought the point to play KDF was for more offense ship builds in the entirely, and primary either battlecruiser or BoP playstyles. Doesn't change the fact that only a small, limited range of Starfleet ships already cloak, and the mechanism of which is not correctly balanced to today.
Amusing, it seems that your math is off again. Glancing at the Qin, it has more hull than the Defiant, which are the only two you can really lay side-by-side. If you try to compare battlecruisers to line cruisers, you find they are a completely different beast across the board with asymmetrical balance due to better turn rates and using dual cannons. Which matches the Dev's statement, basic cloak has no cost to KDF. If you are implying that if Starfleet's three cloakers got that power innate, that all KDF cruisers would need Federation level hull and shields with their other traits left unchanged... Wow, what is balance?
Dead crew doesn't seem to cripple my KDF like you imply it does to yours, even with my Vo'Quv or battlecruisers. After having flown a Plesh Brekk which is a heavy BoP sans cloak and proving quite tenacious, I've come to suspect Klingon mains don't really know how to make themselves survivable like Feds do, and just blame the crew system. :rolleyes:
The Raptor has cloaking for a price of a lower shield modifier and a lower turn rate statistic while the Defiant only pays for its cloak by said ability being a console device.
If you choose to not use the Cloaking device on a Defiant you end up with a standard fed escort with no handicap what so ever. An option that the Raptor does not enjoy. If I could take cloaking off a Raptor I would still have a raptor with less shields and lower turn rate.
The arguement that tje three fed cloaking ships suffer for having to use a console.slot is still BS. Without Cloak fed ships are still equal to their class, when using cloak they lose nothing but a single console slot to do so - for which they where given an extra slot so they would not be further handicapped by the choice.
R.I.P
Actually, I see it as more of KDF-whine being infinite.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Vaper builds make a pretty good mockery of the much loathed "Fed-ball". Concerted alphas will overwhelm anyone.
The Raptor also has more hull, and more crew. The case of the Defiant and Qin seems to simply a very shoddy attempt at asymmetrical balance when you really look at it, even more so when you assess the RA/VA disparity as well.
As stated, the Tact Escort also has to remain up there with other Starfleet Escorts; it's not a simple binary comparison with the Qin. Solution, add more variety in Raptors to properly compete. Losing a console slot in order to enable what balance dictates should be innate, and thus losing the substantial bonuses from Fleet-grade consoles, is excessively heavy.
And again you claim they have an extra slot... Just no, stop this falsity. Same as everyone else, the is no 'extra slot'.
In regards to crew:
It isn't so much that KDF die much more often or anything, more that they get much less usage out of crew on many, at least many Klingon-designed ships, because crew is lost very easily, and gained very slowly.
Sure you can use consoles and such to help, but in the end, does it matter much? You can still lose tons of crew and then be hurting elsewhere because you have focused on trying to keep them alive.
In regards to the Avenger and Mogh, the Avenger has 500 crew, and the Mogh has 2,000. It'll take 4 times as long for the Mogh to regain all it's crew (presuming we're starting from 0), and in turn, lose crew much faster since crew is lost on a percent, not a number. The Avenger can regain crew more quickly as such, and lose less crew on the whole in return.
Does that automatically make the KDF ships harder to keep alive? Not really, you can work around it, you yourself prove that by being able to survive well enough in Klingon ships. It's just that crew is more of a hindrance to any benefit it might provide compared to similar Fed ships, because of how the crew mechanic works.
About the Plesh Brek: Yes, it is a BoP with no cloak, BUT...it is also damn nearly a Defiant as well. A .88 shield modifier (same as fleet BoPs, and only .02 below most escort shields), 29,700 hull (just a smidge below a normal C-store Defiant), and similar BoP stats.
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
May I recommend a good ophtalmologist then?
Its not a falsehood. Go back several pages or go tos STOwiki for the link to the update where the Devs converted the innate powers of Cstore ships into consoles and then go to the update where they added extra console slots to those same vessels to compensate yhe players for having to slot said powers.
Its concrete hard truth this has happened. Just because you dont like it does not mean its not true.
So as it turns out your ignoring truth and spouting fedwhine for no reason what so ever because the Devs compensated the feds for their cloaking in 2010/2011.
R.I.P
Feds should be thankful they have access to one at all, more so with Fed/Rom players.
This whole thread reads as follows: Blah blah blah balance! Blah blah blah Defiants! Blah blah blah cloak on a Fed Dreadnaught! Blah blah blah (insert trolling).
If you want a battle cloak (Enhanced or otherwise) this badly, the solution is really simple folks: ROLL A KLING and try to have some fun with one!!!
Man . . . reading all of these posts gives me the impression that Feds won't be happy until they get a cloakable Death Star from the C-Store with 50 hangars full of TIE Fighters crafted from unicorn tears. Geeez.
Its entirely possible they did, liked the ship, didn't ike the culture, and wanted it on their Fed with the reasoning of 'why should the other two factions get it, but mine doesn't?' Not everyone thinks Klinking is fun.
Also, for those saying its all Fed complaints vs Klingon thoughtfulness, the previous 10 posts on this thread are 2 Fed posters and 7 Klingon posters. Going back further, I don't care enough to read, but I don't think anyone can pretend they smell like lilacs here.
Yeah its possible, but I'm still going to call BS on it being likely.
LOL@Culture - what is that even supposed to mean anyway? We're all just gamers no matter what side you pick. You'll run into helpful friends and jerky players no matter WHAT faction you play. I like bacon so I'm not going to play with you because you dont like bacon! <- thats what that sounded like. Culture! Like all KDF players look at the ceiling and scream into our headsets when we lose a team-mate over TeamSpeak.
If not everyone thinks Klinking is fun, fine . . . also irrelevant as you can be a Fed/Rom and choose a ship with a cloak or choose not to.
Well here is a FACT we all know.. the KLINK WAR WILL BE ENDING! So at some point, you'll be factioned under the Federation. Hmmm why is that? LACK OF CONTENT, PLAYERS AND MOOOLAH, who knows, who cares. Respectfully, how about you not comment if you have a negative attitude and provide constructive comments as many others have to sway the reason. I'm sure MANY Fed players have posted respectful comments on the klink side which we've seen the Klinks post their amazing thread whining and the EPIC 'Disenchanted' thread about Fed players and what they have and the Klinks don't.
Geez grab a tissue, the majority will always get what they wish for and leave the negativity off the forums.
I wasn't the one crying. I was the one POINTING OUT the crying in addition to offering readily available solutions:
Again:
A - Try rolling a Klingon.
or
B - Try a Fed/Rom the devs spent so much time working on.
*EDIT* PS - The entire KDF faction being moved under the Federation one? Your source please. Not going to happen, but thanks for the anti-inflamitory "constructive" prediction.
Wondering how many ships out there are called the USS Bette Midler.
You might want to ask how many have the IKS Bette Midler