As the game progresses and new things are added, sadly we see old ones fall to the wayside. The Universal Console Cloaking Device is probably the most obvious and painful example of this issue. It?s become nearly impossible to use in any efficient manner outside of onetime use ambushes.
That being said, I don?t think it?s unsalvageable. It really wouldn?t take much to update this into an effective tool.
Only three ships are able to equip it, and all three are basically pure warships. So, shouldn?t this component reflect that fact?...
I agree in all with you man, and i hope that someone reads your suggestions...and i only agree with you because Klingons and Romulans are using the Battle Cloak like cowards to just do coward actions on the game...
I saw some people saying that Fed cant have a cloack for stupid reasons..., but since almost no Klingon behave like honored man (according to the series, since people uses this as excuse for Fed cant have a cloak)...and since many things on the game is not following the principles of the history written by Gene, we all can have equal capabilities just to balance the damn pvp on this game...
And to end this post...you all should fight for a new season just for pvp improvements, balance and maybe a rewrite from scratch to correct problems..., since pvp is dying and is almost dead these days...and we all like pvp. I dont understand why in 2 or 3 years that the game has...we still have problems with clicking more than one bridge officer skill with mouse or spacebar...
I saw some people saying that Fed cant have a cloack for stupid reasons..., but since almost no Klingon behave like honored man (according to the series, since people uses this as excuse for Fed cant have a cloak)...and since many things on the game is not following the principles of the history written by Gene, we all can have equal capabilities just to balance the damn pvp on this game...
The crux of the entire argument here, game balance. The consoles are relics from a old balance system; when cloaking cost a console slot outright for everyone. No longer true; fix the balance.
And BiteMe, we seem to have come to an accord then, no more absurd sacrifices for Cloak, leave the Mogh as an Avenger analog, and improve old ships such as making Fed cloaks, innate, right?
One thing I would like to mention is that, traditionally, the KDF has had something of an edge in cruisers. Specifically, our battlecruisers turn better, have dual cannons, and can cloak. In response, the Federation has had a clear edge in science ships, with the KDF only having one true science ship that doesn't quite match what the Federation has in all aspects.
The battlecruiser edge has been negated somewhat by the addition of the Avenger, which is why I'm pleased Cryptic is going to release a response to it of some sort (probably will end up with lower hull or something). Meanwhile, Cryptic hasn't really touched the Federation's edge in science ships.
Same argument could be made in reverse if someone wanted the Avenger/Vesta/Scimitar/whatever so badly.
Is the Federation suffering from a lack of players? no, and the KDF isn't really taking the Avenger anyway considering it was the Feds that stole battlecruisers from the KDF in the first place.
The crux of the entire argument here, game balance. The consoles are relics from a old balance system; when cloaking cost a console slot outright for everyone. No longer true; fix the balance.
And BiteMe, we seem to have come to an accord then, no more absurd sacrifices for Cloak, leave the Mogh as an Avenger analog, and improve old ships such as making Fed cloaks, innate, right?
Cloaking never cost the KDF a console slot and never should, while cloaking has always been limited to a few Federation ships and always took a console.
The Avenger, Defiant, and Gal X are fine as they are, I have 2 of those ships already and will buy the Avenger soon after I get the KDF battlecruiser and have no problem with the cloak remaining as a console. Cloaking technology is not the Federations specialty, it makes sense that theirs is bulkier so takes up a console slot, it lets the other factions be different which is good also.
KDF gets worse sci ships and tank/heal cruisers then Fed and should remain so. The game is not supposed to be balanced on a ship per ship basis otherwise all factions would be the same. Factions need strengths and weaknesses.
Is the Federation suffering from a lack of players? no, and the KDF isn't really taking the Avenger anyway considering it was the Feds that stole battlecruisers from the KDF in the first place.
:rolleyes:
Cloaking never cost the KDF a console slot and never should, while cloaking has always been limited to a few Federation ships and always took a console.
The Avenger, Defiant, and Gal X are fine as they are, I have 2 of those ships already and will buy the Avenger soon after I get the KDF battlecruiser and have no problem with the cloak remaining as a console. Cloaking technology is not the Federations specialty, it makes sense that theirs is bulkier so takes up a console slot, it lets the other factions be different which is good also.
Then you should talk to BiteMe and all the other Klinkers who never let us forget how much sacrifice KDF ships had to make in the past as it's their soapbox.
Also obviously KDF main, so no real grounds to argue that Fed cloak is really fine as though you mean it when Klinks love their agendas of trying to suppress Blue being giving equal footing.
KDF gets worse sci ships and tank/heal cruisers then Fed and should remain so. The game is not supposed to be balanced on a ship per ship basis otherwise all factions would be the same. Factions need strengths and weaknesses.
Better Sci and Tank Cruisers is not Fed's uniqueness, KDF always try to argue to 'protect their uniqueness' while ignoring the fact Starfleet has none. :P
Is the Federation suffering from a lack of players?
So what? Its about balance. You could have 10,000 players on one faction and 2 players for the other, it should still be balanced (including nerfing the Kumari, Avenger, and Scimitar). Could care less about Klingon or Federation numbers. Do something because its the right thing to do and a logical choice for balance, not because people need to be bribed to play a faction or the victimhood complex that too many players seem to have.
Then you should talk to BiteMe and all the other Klinkers who never let us forget how much sacrifice KDF ships had to make in the past as it's their soapbox.
Also obviously KDF main, so no real grounds to argue that Fed cloak is really fine as though you mean it when Klinks love their agendas of trying to suppress Blue being giving equal footing.
Better Sci and Tank Cruisers is not Fed's uniqueness, KDF always try to argue to 'protect their uniqueness' while ignoring the fact Starfleet has none. :P
lets look at all the premium sci ships the Feds get compared to KDF
Fed-
Fleet Recon SV
Fleet Deep Space SV
Fleet SV
Fleet Research SV
Fleet LR SV
Dkyr
Vesta 3 pack
KDF gets 1, just the Fleet Varanus
Ok now for heal/tanking cruisers, the Feds don't have a lot more, but the ones they do have are more specialized for healing and tanking while KDF ones are still more DPS hybrid
The Fleet Star Cruiser gets 4 sci and 4 eng consoles so is specialized as a tank/healer, so does the Sci oddy, and the Fleet Galaxy and eng oddy get 5 eng consoles and 3 sci consoles. These ships all get 2 tac consoles which is ideal for the healer role as you don't need DPS but need survivability and healing. All KDF Battlecruisers have 3 tac consoles at a minimum so less room for specializing as a healer, thats why so many KDF have to use lockbox ships instead for this. KDF gets 1 heal ship, the Fleet Corsair which has 4 eng and 4 sci consoles, all other KDF ships don't have as much sci and eng consoles as this. So yes Feds do get an advantage here.
Overall Feds are a more defensive oriented faction and KDF is more offense.
So what? Its about balance. You could have 10,000 players on one faction and 2 players for the other, it should still be balanced (including nerfing the Kumari, Avenger, and Scimitar). Could care less about Klingon or Federation numbers. Do something because its the right thing to do and a logical choice for balance, not because people need to be bribed to play a faction or the victimhood complex that too many players seem to have.
You won't have a game much longer if factions became that unbalanced in population. MMO's need bad guys. Its not bribes, its preserving uniqueness of factions to make all of them interesting, even though only small parts of it are left.
Federation ships lose a console slot for the cloak.
At one point, these were balanced, but at this point in the life of the game, they're apples and oranges. So why not have the three federation ships take equivalent stat hits and have the cloak built in? Minimal amount of work and game balance is preserved on the level of itemization (cloak is worth X amount of stats, everybody has the same number of consoles...except the gal-x, but that's a different can of worms). If they are truly equivalent, then everybody's happy.
And yes, I'm disregarding canon because, honestly, who cares at this point?
Ok now for heal/tanking cruisers, the Feds don't have a lot more, but the ones they do have are more specialized for healing and tanking while KDF ones are still more DPS hybrid
...
Overall Feds are a more defensive oriented faction and KDF is more offense.
In a game where DPS is king in PvE content, healing and tanking is second fiddle. People always cringe when a pug match has several science ships or tanking cruisers, as there goes the optional and a speedy completion. KDF doesn't really suffer there.
You won't have a game much longer if factions became that unbalanced in population. MMO's need bad guys. Its not bribes, its preserving uniqueness of factions to make all of them interesting, even though only small parts of it are left.
Implying that 'without KDF to PvP', the game will die; when PvP is a laughably small footnote in the community, overall. How amusing.
If you really feel this is so, you'd be all for more PvP balance, such as the cloak console issue, as it would help grow and further PvP. But be honest, you're here being the typical H.O.B.O. trying to preserve KDF's 'superiority' in PvP by shooting down calls for balance.
You won't have a game much longer if factions became that unbalanced in population. MMO's need bad guys. Its not bribes, its preserving uniqueness of factions to make all of them interesting, even though only small parts of it are left.
No you don't. The only thing that needs opposing players PVP, and even that can be done with red-v-blue, allies doing wargames or friendly rivalries. Otherwise it just breeds useless animosity.
"I hate Feds/Klingons/Romulans because the story said I'm supposed to!!!" Huh? Sometimes I'm driving a Tor'kaht sometimes in an Odyssey sometimes in a D'deridex, so I'm hated when I'm driving blue and a comrade-in-arms when I'm driving red? I do NOT understand the emotional investment some people have in one faction or another; we're all players in a video game here. Only ones I 'hate' are the people who think they should get a pure advantage with no cost paid for it, or that they're somehow owed something because Grudge! Those people are idiots no matter what faction they're in.
And its tons of bribes. Look at all the anger over cross faction consoles when the Feds don't have anything worth taking compared to the KDF offerings, and didn't some dev interview all but admit the KDF's consoles were that much better for that reason? (Could've sworn I heard that somewhere.) And when the Romulans were released, they were jacked up even moreso to get people to buy new character slots and new ships, and when the Cardassians likely come out I'm sure they'll do it all again.
In a game where DPS is king in PvE content, healing and tanking is second fiddle. People always cringe when a pug match has several science ships or tanking cruisers, as there goes the optional and a speedy completion. KDF doesn't really suffer there.
Implying that 'without KDF to PvP', the game will die; when PvP is a laughably small footnote in the community, overall. How amusing.
If you really feel this is so, you'd be all for more PvP balance, such as the cloak console issue, as it would help grow and further PvP. But be honest, you're here being the typical H.O.B.O. trying to preserve KDF's 'superiority' in PvP by shooting down calls for balance.
DPS is not king in PVP though, and the newer PVE content is becoming harder to where tanking does help. You try taking on the Voth dreadnought in a BOP without a tank you will die a lot, while the Fleet Star Cruiser can tank it easily.
In PVP the sci ship and tanking advantage does help Feds, if you go to kerrat you will see KDF gankers complaining about Fed Zombies all the time, so it helps them against the evul KDF.
If you only PVE this will not matter for you anyway as cloak is not very useful in pve, its only good for pvp. I unslot the cloaking device on my defiant for pve for that reason.
Also even though the PVP community is small, they like in other games spend money vastly out of proportion to their population, thats why devs always listen to PVPers about balance issues instead of ignoring them.
No you don't. The only thing that needs opposing players PVP, and even that can be done with red-v-blue, allies doing wargames or friendly rivalries. Otherwise it just breeds useless animosity.
"I hate Feds/Klingons/Romulans because the story said I'm supposed to!!!" Huh? Sometimes I'm driving a Tor'kaht sometimes in an Odyssey sometimes in a D'deridex, so I'm hated when I'm driving blue and a comrade-in-arms when I'm driving red? I do NOT understand the emotional investment some people have in one faction or another; we're all players in a video game here. Only ones I 'hate' are the people who think they should get a pure advantage with no cost paid for it, or that they're somehow owed something because Grudge! Those people are idiots no matter what faction they're in.
And its tons of bribes. Look at all the anger over cross faction consoles when the Feds don't have anything worth taking compared to the KDF offerings, and didn't some dev interview all but admit the KDF's consoles were that much better for that reason? (Could've sworn I heard that somewhere.) And when the Romulans were released, they were jacked up even moreso to get people to buy new character slots and new ships, and when the Cardassians likely come out I'm sure they'll do it all again.
This kind of attitude about we don't need other factions would be less prevalent if we had more balanced faction numbers, and giving away KDF features to Feds won't help that at all. Some of us invested a lot more time and effort into KDF characters then Fed, and it sucks when the KDF gets less attention and that is because of population disparity, so of course we will oppose anything that might help increase or maintain that disparity.
DPS is not king in PVP though, and the newer PVE content is becoming harder to where tanking does help. You try taking on the Voth dreadnought in a BOP without a tank you will die a lot, while the Fleet Star Cruiser can tank it easily.
In PvP, it's a combination of which ship, what gear, who gets the drop, and such.
As for the Voth Dread, if you're trying to solo/tank it in a BoP, pilot error; and the Star Cruiser was likely easily tanking not because it's a Fed ship, but because of Aux2Bad which is rather OP right now.
In PVP the sci ship and tanking advantage does help Feds, if you go to kerrat you will see KDF gankers complaining about Fed Zombies all the time, so it helps them against the evul KDF.
Sci Captains with Scan and Subnuc impact more than the Sci-ships themselves. I run a KDf Sci in a B'rel Retro, it's an evil shadow science and torp ship. As for Zombies, see above as to the issue of A2B; and there are Red Zombies too.
If you only PVE this will not matter for you anyway as cloak is not very useful in pve, its only good for pvp. I unslot the cloaking device on my defiant for pve for that reason.
Cloak can be nice at times for PvE as well, I find use for it often. However, even when it goes unused for ships with it innate, it's there, ready to go, without needing to shuffle consoles or trade bonuses. That's the underlying issue. You don't have to unslot the cloak for Rom or Klink ships.
Also even though the PVP community is small, they like in other games spend money vastly out of proportion to their population, thats why devs always listen to PVPers about balance issues instead of ignoring them.
Sadly, I doubt PvPers are listened to that much; otherwise PvP in STO would not be as terrible as it is today. JHAS teams still shred, Aux2Bad right behind it, with all sorts of gimmicks from DOffs otherwise causing zany imbalances.
This kind of attitude about we don't need other factions would be less prevalent if we had more balanced faction numbers, and giving away KDF features to Feds won't help that at all. Some of us invested a lot more time and effort into KDF characters then Fed, and it sucks when the KDF gets less attention and that is because of population disparity, so of course we will oppose anything that might help increase or maintain that disparity.
And therein is why you lose all possible sympathetic support from Starfleet-main players. That vitriol and spiteful response to any suggestion to improve the Blue experience instead of Red, just makes the other side just as hostile back towards your own plight. So instead of trying to spit on every Fed idea to make their side better while demanding improvements for yours, be supportive, and you're more likely to receive support in turn.
Every response that the KDF gives to any of these suggestions is always becried as red anger regardless of how soft spoken and patiently it may be phrased that they do not agree with the suggestion.
It does not matter how we disagree, we are always accussed of being unreasonable and unyielding in our disagreement.
The fed cloakers are not unbalanced as far as cloaking is concerned. They have been given compensation of extra console slots to accomidate the cloaking device.
The fed cloakers are not unbalanced as far as cloaking is concerned. They have been given compensation of extra console slots to accomidate the cloaking device.
How many defiant class ships in DS9 / Voyager did we see cloaking again ?
It simply isn't a standard piece of ship equipment , they aren't BUILT with cloaks in them , and I think them having cloaks as a console in-game is designed to represent this , its bolt on tech.
One can't properly assess the Gal-X , since we only ever see one , and that' s in an alternate timeline.
Whereas ALL Klingon built ships are designed and built around their cloaking technology, Its a completely different school of design.
The disparity that's being argued here is that all top-end ships have 10 console slots.
The federation loses one of those if they want to cloak, the kdf does not.
With the rise of excellent universal consoles and fleet consoles, as well as the tremendous advantage of heal/buff over capacity, these are not equal prices to pay for the same functionality. Endgame ships SHOULD be balanced on a ship-by-ship basis, not for the same job necessarily, but as an overall equal ship. Think of every ship as nothing until a certain number of itemization "points" are distributed. Some ships have more of these "points" in maneuverability, others in more weapons, or more hull and shields. The important thing is that all of these ships have the same number of points somewhere in their design.
It's the distribution that makes them unique. If a new race gets released that canonically has faster ships than the existing factions, then more of their point pool would be put into engines, but those points would have to come from somewhere else. If you just take a Fleet B'rel and increase the impulse modifier on the same tier of ship, you have an objectively superior ship, which is unbalanced and bad game design.
The problem the federation has with console cloaks is that they are not paying the same price as the klingons are for the exact same functionality. Right now, the klingons are getting the cloak far cheaper than the federation. You can call it specialization, but the end result is that the klingons have more points in their ships than the federation does.
I'm sorry if this is obvious to some of you, but I keep seeing a lot of fundamental misunderstanding as to what ship balance is. Am I claiming that the game is currently balanced? No, there's a lot of retooling that needs to happen to make everything viable again that probably won't happen. But for the issue at hand (cloaking consoles) this is how it is.
How to spot a newb 101. Fed cloaking ships were given an extra console slot back when they first came out.
It doesn't matter what WAS the case. Federation ships are NOW at one less console slot than their kdf counterparts in order to enjoy the same functionality that the kdf has built in.
The kdf pays for their cloak in stats, not consoles. Let the Federation pay an equal price. The same price for the same functionality. That's balance.
It doesn't matter what WAS the case. Federation ships are NOW at one less console slot than their kdf counterparts in order to enjoy the same functionality that the kdf has built in.
The kdf pays for their cloak in stats, not consoles. Let the Federation pay an equal price. The same price for the same functionality. That's balance.
They're one and the same. A cloaking device isn't worth more to one side than it is to the other; they have the same functionality all around. Ships that get the same functionality and pay less of a price for it are objectively better ships. Just like a ship that pays more for the same functionality is an objectively inferior ship. In a balanced system, there are no objectively superior or inferior ships.
Does that mean all ships have to have the same boff layout or console layout? No, that would kill variety and specialization. But they DO have to be equally-powered in order for them all to be viable. Having a large number of ships of equal value promotes experimentation and adds to the life of the game, whereas having unequal ships causes people to fall into the established lines of the objectively better ships and the game becomes a rut.
Now this could be Cryptic trying to exert pressure to move people kdf-side, or it could be the folks at CBS meddling in a medium they don't understand, but as it stands this issue is a lingering sore spot on the quality of the game, which is why it keeps coming up. Just like the lack of sci ships for the kdf.
Gene Roddenberry said it himself, the the Federation through Starfleet are explorers, not cats creeping around stealthily like Klingons or Romulans.
And as to that Romulan cloak on the Defiant? Very likely that was a less powerful older model that the Romulans felt was obsolete.
In which case, BoP's should be at a disadvantage when facing cruisers like the galaxy class. They even mentioned it in star trek;generations. 1 klingon bird of prey is no match for a galaxy class starship. From my perspective, games based on tv shows should do 1 of 2 things. Either reflect the show, or make everything equal. This game does niether, but rather takes inferior ships like the BoP and makes it somehow superior. So if everyone else gets a battle cloak, so should federation ships. Either that or make fed cruisers more powerful so they can really fight back against cloaking ships.
Now battlecloak is a whoooooooooole 'nother story. That's a big tactical advantage and so far most of the ships that have it have paid dearly for it. Right now, there is no federation ship that has battlecloak, so there is no basis for comparison and I'm inclined to call this one ok-as-is.
As for the galaxy vs birdie issue, a galaxy of equal pilot skill, build effectiveness, and gearing is more than capable of thrashing a BoP in a stand-up fight. This is why the BoP pilot fights dirty and uses the battlecloak to maximum effectiveness, making it a better fight and even winning on many occasions. Thus both the notion of the galaxy being a more powerful ship and game balance are preserved.
So you are asking to fed cloakable ships to take a nerf for built in cloak? Cause if you are saying one console slot is equal to all the hull and shield that fed ships get then I say ok. Maybe this will stop the cries of "Cloak is OP".
Also thank you Timezarg for doing the rundown of what KDF "pay" for cloak (which is here)
Could someone do the same for Romulan ships please. I would like to show what they have to give up to use cloaks.
Note: I don't think of myself as a Starfleet or KDF player. I speak for factions staying something more then an UI change. Not for PVP reasons (with lockbox ships,consoles, and other non-faction stuff that is next to a moot point).
It doesn't matter what WAS the case. Federation ships are NOW at one less console slot than their kdf counterparts in order to enjoy the same functionality that the kdf has built in.
The kdf pays for their cloak in stats, not consoles. Let the Federation pay an equal price. The same price for the same functionality. That's balance.
Yes! Give the Defiant 15 turn, 60 inertia, .83 shields, 33000 hull and an integrated Cloak. There would be absolutely no complaints from players about how bad the turnrate is and how it now turns slower than a MVAE. None at all. Especially not from people that paid Zen in order to get a tiny, nimble little striker with the option to use a console slot for a Cloak.
Look, in all seriousness, give it a bit. Based on leaked stats, the (New) Avenger is being reskinned and released to the KDF, which means either:
KDF-only players can now experience the complaint Federation-only players have with the Cloak console, and you might get less opposition.
or:
The Cloak will be integrated, which gives you a better argument to integrating the Cloak on Federation ships.
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
So you are asking to fed cloakable ships to take a nerf for built in cloak? Cause if you are saying one console slot is equal to all the hull and shield that fed ships get then I say ok. Maybe this will stop the cries of "Cloak is OP".
Absolutely. The only thing that's really going to put this issue to bed is making everyone pay the same price for cloak. My fed character flies a fleet sovereign and a fleet avenger on the side, and I think this is more than reasonable for the convenience of not fiddling with consoles and being able to cloak with 10. My kdf toon agrees.
The Cloak will be integrated, which gives you a better argument to integrating the Cloak on Federation ships.
The accidentally-released one shown on the Fleet store had it integrated. I'll be very surprised if that gets changed between now and next Thursday.
(Last response to all these threads on the Mogh, Fed Cloak, Flanking, whatever. They're all blurring together and making no headway, so hell with it. Textwall rant ensues)
The accusations of Red Rage, Roach is right, being overdone. That said one can't say that there aren't a lot of guys angrily stomping around with "I hate Feds, they're all a bunch of whiners and I just want to kill them all they should never get anything again rabble rabble rabble." You look at the average of some of these threads where the OP asks for way too much, one person says 'yeah right on!' three more say 'maybe if you adjusted XYZ might be better balanced' and another three that say 'probably a bad idea.' Then the couple of KDF-supremacist players who stomp around in permanent Red Rage wanting some kind of endless payback for Grudge! or maybe they just enjoy starting fights all the time, they show up and the usual occurs. Its ridiculous and useless and sometimes I think they're doing it specifically to stifle discussion because their idea of 'lets have a conversation' boils down to 'you sit there while I shout angrily at you.' Its not all Klingons, just like its not all Feds (hell I don't even consider myself a Fed but keep finding myself on that side because of these guys), but for chrissake some people just need to get over it.
As far as cloaking its a huge advantage and I don't understand how anyone can say it isn't. You get to pick how, where, and when a fight starts, or even to have that fight at all, combat initiative at the push of a button. How is that not an amazing edge? I think of some of the stuff I've pulled in like the Contested Zone recently where the ability to vanish and reappear somewhere else has let my Ning'tao or Tor'kaht smoke Dread battlegroups that would smite my Vesta or Odyssey, all because of I can retake the initiative whenever I like. And if someone wants to counter that cloak they have to spend console slots, skill points, boff powers and effort against something that I got for free. I still come out the net winner there. And the price paid for it is, what a few thousand hull and a cruiser-command option? A missing tac console but I get two extra eng consoles? I'll happily take any of those deals. Cloaking is great and the Klingons get it for practically free, and yet some are still angry that its not free enough? Huh?
For Battlecloak, that seems to be the Romulan's thing, they pay for it with reduced energy. (Yeah they get the ridiculous boffs but thats separate). Fed ships using up a precious, precious console slot, and given that its borrowed Romulan cloaks maybe it should be a battlecloak, unsure but its worth an honest discussion. Likewise, I'd maybe do a Klingon ship the same way, comes with standard cloaking and then a console that upgrades to battlecloak. BoPs likewise get BC and pay for it with the reduced weaponry rather than energy, which I always found a fair trade in my own experiences and its why I think the Flanking stuff is a bad move encouraging excessive focus on firepower instead of flexibility, but I'm not a Dev so all I can do is opine.
The uniqueness/diversity/whatever fight, maybe its just a question of all the voices with different ideas blurring together. (You ridgeheads all look alike! ) The impression I'm getting is someone says "in the name of balance I want this mechanical advantage," to which I think "okay, what corresponding mechanical disadvantage comes with it to balance out?" Then someone responds "I shouldn't pay a disadvantage because my playerbase is smaller and the Kumari has 5 fore weapons." Playerbase size has zero to do with mechanics and since we're discussing battlecruisers or cloaking devices, who cares about the Kumari? (The thing sucks anyways IMHO) Balance, absolutely! Uniqueness, sure if you think it can be still done at this point, and you need to give some serious uniqueness to all three factions or else you get 'the sneaky guy, the aggressive in-your-face guy, and the boring uninteresting guy.' Every advantage should come with a corresponding disadvantage, big advantage means big disadvantage. Right now so many ships in this game don't pay a price, whether its Mogh (or Kamarag or Qin or Vor'cha) getting free cloaking, the Avenger being an obvious money-grab next to every other Fed cruiser, or the general ridiculousness of the Scimitar. Doesn't mean we should encourage it further though, trying to make a Right out of two Wrongs, and I'll argue with anyone who says they should get something for nothing, or even worse when their 'price paid' amounts to little more than some sense of 'getting even.'
(/Rant Probably just gonna be written off as Whiney Fed, but I suppose I can hope. Better to go kill snowmen than this Forum PVP stuff though)
Hmm... I rather wouldn't want for Federation ships to gain access to Cloak of any kind, save for the few ships (even canon, only 2 - U.S.S. Pegasus, U.S.S. Defiant - maybe 3 or 4 ships had cloaking device). Cloak was always associated with KDF and Romulans, and having Federation use it would just reduce the uniquess between three factions.
However, what I WOULD like is for each 3 factions to gain 1-2 Captain abilities associated with Beam arrays, and universal for all 3 professions (or having a variation of the same ability per profession): ability to blindly fire small bursts around the ship, as Enterprise-E did in its fight against Scimitar in Star Trek: Nemesis. Each burst would deal a small portion of the usual damage (5-10%), with small chance to knock the cloak offline if it hits the ship (space where cloaked ship is should be distorted on hit). Sure, Federation would gain most from those abilities, but while KDF and Romulans keep (almost) exclusive usage of cloak, Federation would have a way to react to the cloaked ships.
So you are asking to fed cloakable ships to take a nerf for built in cloak? Cause if you are saying one console slot is equal to all the hull and shield that fed ships get then I say ok. Maybe this will stop the cries of "Cloak is OP".
Also thank you Timezarg for doing the rundown of what KDF "pay" for cloak (which is here)
Could someone do the same for Romulan ships please. I would like to show what they have to give up to use cloaks.
Note: I don't think of myself as a Starfleet or KDF player. I speak for factions staying something more then an UI change. Not for PVP reasons (with lockbox ships,consoles, and other non-faction stuff that is next to a moot point).
I'm on painkillers right now so I don't feel like figuring out direct ship-to-ship comparisons, but I think the overall logic is that most Romulan ships pay for their cloaks via the reduced power levels and (for some ships, at least) lower inertia or turnrates. The power bit I've got issues with, because they gain a few nifty singularity abilities along with that. I can definitely see how sacrificing inertia or turnrate could be a tradeoff. . .but then you have to factor in the issue of Romulans having ungodly levels of crit chance and crit damage.
I'm ultimately of the opinion that Romulans don't really pay enough for what advantages they've got. The Fleet T'Varo certainly doesn't pay enough for its Enhanced Battlecloak. . .it has a full 5000 hullpoint advantage over the Fleet B'rel, along with better tactical-focused performance due to the 4th tac console and the Romulan crit advantages. Fleet B'rel is better for sci-spamming, of course, but that only gets you so far.
I would love to see an overall reduction in Romulan hullpoint values. . .not much of one, but something. Maybe a 5-10% reduction. Make 'em a little more reliant on their battlecloaks, like the BoP is.
Actually, honest & well thought out opinions & ideas I welcome. Beats all the bs ranting. And btw, seeing as how you say you freq run KDF, seemingly, as well as Fed, I'd consider you "faction-neutral", trying to have fun on both sides of the fence, rather than being a "faction-prime".
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
I'm on painkillers right now so I don't feel like figuring out direct ship-to-ship comparisons, but I think the overall logic is that most Romulan ships pay for their cloaks via the reduced power levels and (for some ships, at least) lower inertia or turnrates. The power bit I've got issues with, because they gain a few nifty singularity abilities along with that. I can definitely see how sacrificing inertia or turnrate could be a tradeoff. . .but then you have to factor in the issue of Romulans having ungodly levels of crit chance and crit damage.
I'm ultimately of the opinion that Romulans don't really pay enough for what advantages they've got. The Fleet T'Varo certainly doesn't pay enough for its Enhanced Battlecloak. . .it has a full 5000 hullpoint advantage over the Fleet B'rel, along with better tactical-focused performance due to the 4th tac console and the Romulan crit advantages. Fleet B'rel is better for sci-spamming, of course, but that only gets you so far.
I would love to see an overall reduction in Romulan hullpoint values. . .not much of one, but something. Maybe a 5-10% reduction. Make 'em a little more reliant on their battlecloaks, like the BoP is.
And I agree, the Rihan b/c IS over-powered compared to what any other cloaking vessels. Heck, when any Rihan ship enters a cloaked state, it enhances their flight characteristics (at least it did in my Ha'apex) Seeing as I've never used the "end-game" BoP's, I don't know if theirs' does the same, but I've never heard anyone mention that it does. But to me, the fact that a ship is in b/xc should NOT have anything to do with flight performance. Actually, having higher engine/flight performance would likely make more emissions of various kinds, thus, should actually make the cloak weaker, in that case.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Comments
I agree in all with you man, and i hope that someone reads your suggestions...and i only agree with you because Klingons and Romulans are using the Battle Cloak like cowards to just do coward actions on the game...
I saw some people saying that Fed cant have a cloack for stupid reasons..., but since almost no Klingon behave like honored man (according to the series, since people uses this as excuse for Fed cant have a cloak)...and since many things on the game is not following the principles of the history written by Gene, we all can have equal capabilities just to balance the damn pvp on this game...
And to end this post...you all should fight for a new season just for pvp improvements, balance and maybe a rewrite from scratch to correct problems..., since pvp is dying and is almost dead these days...and we all like pvp. I dont understand why in 2 or 3 years that the game has...we still have problems with clicking more than one bridge officer skill with mouse or spacebar...
The crux of the entire argument here, game balance. The consoles are relics from a old balance system; when cloaking cost a console slot outright for everyone. No longer true; fix the balance.
And BiteMe, we seem to have come to an accord then, no more absurd sacrifices for Cloak, leave the Mogh as an Avenger analog, and improve old ships such as making Fed cloaks, innate, right?
The battlecruiser edge has been negated somewhat by the addition of the Avenger, which is why I'm pleased Cryptic is going to release a response to it of some sort (probably will end up with lower hull or something). Meanwhile, Cryptic hasn't really touched the Federation's edge in science ships.
Is the Federation suffering from a lack of players? no, and the KDF isn't really taking the Avenger anyway considering it was the Feds that stole battlecruisers from the KDF in the first place.
Cloaking never cost the KDF a console slot and never should, while cloaking has always been limited to a few Federation ships and always took a console.
The Avenger, Defiant, and Gal X are fine as they are, I have 2 of those ships already and will buy the Avenger soon after I get the KDF battlecruiser and have no problem with the cloak remaining as a console. Cloaking technology is not the Federations specialty, it makes sense that theirs is bulkier so takes up a console slot, it lets the other factions be different which is good also.
KDF gets worse sci ships and tank/heal cruisers then Fed and should remain so. The game is not supposed to be balanced on a ship per ship basis otherwise all factions would be the same. Factions need strengths and weaknesses.
:rolleyes:
Then you should talk to BiteMe and all the other Klinkers who never let us forget how much sacrifice KDF ships had to make in the past as it's their soapbox.
Also obviously KDF main, so no real grounds to argue that Fed cloak is really fine as though you mean it when Klinks love their agendas of trying to suppress Blue being giving equal footing.
Better Sci and Tank Cruisers is not Fed's uniqueness, KDF always try to argue to 'protect their uniqueness' while ignoring the fact Starfleet has none. :P
So what? Its about balance. You could have 10,000 players on one faction and 2 players for the other, it should still be balanced (including nerfing the Kumari, Avenger, and Scimitar). Could care less about Klingon or Federation numbers. Do something because its the right thing to do and a logical choice for balance, not because people need to be bribed to play a faction or the victimhood complex that too many players seem to have.
lets look at all the premium sci ships the Feds get compared to KDF
Fed-
Fleet Recon SV
Fleet Deep Space SV
Fleet SV
Fleet Research SV
Fleet LR SV
Dkyr
Vesta 3 pack
KDF gets 1, just the Fleet Varanus
Ok now for heal/tanking cruisers, the Feds don't have a lot more, but the ones they do have are more specialized for healing and tanking while KDF ones are still more DPS hybrid
The Fleet Star Cruiser gets 4 sci and 4 eng consoles so is specialized as a tank/healer, so does the Sci oddy, and the Fleet Galaxy and eng oddy get 5 eng consoles and 3 sci consoles. These ships all get 2 tac consoles which is ideal for the healer role as you don't need DPS but need survivability and healing. All KDF Battlecruisers have 3 tac consoles at a minimum so less room for specializing as a healer, thats why so many KDF have to use lockbox ships instead for this. KDF gets 1 heal ship, the Fleet Corsair which has 4 eng and 4 sci consoles, all other KDF ships don't have as much sci and eng consoles as this. So yes Feds do get an advantage here.
Overall Feds are a more defensive oriented faction and KDF is more offense.
You won't have a game much longer if factions became that unbalanced in population. MMO's need bad guys. Its not bribes, its preserving uniqueness of factions to make all of them interesting, even though only small parts of it are left.
Federation ships lose a console slot for the cloak.
At one point, these were balanced, but at this point in the life of the game, they're apples and oranges. So why not have the three federation ships take equivalent stat hits and have the cloak built in? Minimal amount of work and game balance is preserved on the level of itemization (cloak is worth X amount of stats, everybody has the same number of consoles...except the gal-x, but that's a different can of worms). If they are truly equivalent, then everybody's happy.
And yes, I'm disregarding canon because, honestly, who cares at this point?
In a game where DPS is king in PvE content, healing and tanking is second fiddle. People always cringe when a pug match has several science ships or tanking cruisers, as there goes the optional and a speedy completion. KDF doesn't really suffer there.
Implying that 'without KDF to PvP', the game will die; when PvP is a laughably small footnote in the community, overall. How amusing.
If you really feel this is so, you'd be all for more PvP balance, such as the cloak console issue, as it would help grow and further PvP. But be honest, you're here being the typical H.O.B.O. trying to preserve KDF's 'superiority' in PvP by shooting down calls for balance.
No you don't. The only thing that needs opposing players PVP, and even that can be done with red-v-blue, allies doing wargames or friendly rivalries. Otherwise it just breeds useless animosity.
"I hate Feds/Klingons/Romulans because the story said I'm supposed to!!!" Huh? Sometimes I'm driving a Tor'kaht sometimes in an Odyssey sometimes in a D'deridex, so I'm hated when I'm driving blue and a comrade-in-arms when I'm driving red? I do NOT understand the emotional investment some people have in one faction or another; we're all players in a video game here. Only ones I 'hate' are the people who think they should get a pure advantage with no cost paid for it, or that they're somehow owed something because Grudge! Those people are idiots no matter what faction they're in.
And its tons of bribes. Look at all the anger over cross faction consoles when the Feds don't have anything worth taking compared to the KDF offerings, and didn't some dev interview all but admit the KDF's consoles were that much better for that reason? (Could've sworn I heard that somewhere.) And when the Romulans were released, they were jacked up even moreso to get people to buy new character slots and new ships, and when the Cardassians likely come out I'm sure they'll do it all again.
DPS is not king in PVP though, and the newer PVE content is becoming harder to where tanking does help. You try taking on the Voth dreadnought in a BOP without a tank you will die a lot, while the Fleet Star Cruiser can tank it easily.
In PVP the sci ship and tanking advantage does help Feds, if you go to kerrat you will see KDF gankers complaining about Fed Zombies all the time, so it helps them against the evul KDF.
If you only PVE this will not matter for you anyway as cloak is not very useful in pve, its only good for pvp. I unslot the cloaking device on my defiant for pve for that reason.
Also even though the PVP community is small, they like in other games spend money vastly out of proportion to their population, thats why devs always listen to PVPers about balance issues instead of ignoring them.
This kind of attitude about we don't need other factions would be less prevalent if we had more balanced faction numbers, and giving away KDF features to Feds won't help that at all. Some of us invested a lot more time and effort into KDF characters then Fed, and it sucks when the KDF gets less attention and that is because of population disparity, so of course we will oppose anything that might help increase or maintain that disparity.
In PvP, it's a combination of which ship, what gear, who gets the drop, and such.
As for the Voth Dread, if you're trying to solo/tank it in a BoP, pilot error; and the Star Cruiser was likely easily tanking not because it's a Fed ship, but because of Aux2Bad which is rather OP right now.
Sci Captains with Scan and Subnuc impact more than the Sci-ships themselves. I run a KDf Sci in a B'rel Retro, it's an evil shadow science and torp ship. As for Zombies, see above as to the issue of A2B; and there are Red Zombies too.
Cloak can be nice at times for PvE as well, I find use for it often. However, even when it goes unused for ships with it innate, it's there, ready to go, without needing to shuffle consoles or trade bonuses. That's the underlying issue. You don't have to unslot the cloak for Rom or Klink ships.
Sadly, I doubt PvPers are listened to that much; otherwise PvP in STO would not be as terrible as it is today. JHAS teams still shred, Aux2Bad right behind it, with all sorts of gimmicks from DOffs otherwise causing zany imbalances.
And therein is why you lose all possible sympathetic support from Starfleet-main players. That vitriol and spiteful response to any suggestion to improve the Blue experience instead of Red, just makes the other side just as hostile back towards your own plight. So instead of trying to spit on every Fed idea to make their side better while demanding improvements for yours, be supportive, and you're more likely to receive support in turn.
It does not matter how we disagree, we are always accussed of being unreasonable and unyielding in our disagreement.
The fed cloakers are not unbalanced as far as cloaking is concerned. They have been given compensation of extra console slots to accomidate the cloaking device.
R.I.P
Totally extra console slots on them.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Tactical_Escort_Retrofit
vs.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Qin_Heavy_Raptor
and
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Dreadnought_Cruiser
vs.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Negh%27Var_Heavy_Battle_Cruiser
You speak lies, blatant lies, constantly.
It simply isn't a standard piece of ship equipment , they aren't BUILT with cloaks in them , and I think them having cloaks as a console in-game is designed to represent this , its bolt on tech.
One can't properly assess the Gal-X , since we only ever see one , and that' s in an alternate timeline.
Whereas ALL Klingon built ships are designed and built around their cloaking technology, Its a completely different school of design.
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
The federation loses one of those if they want to cloak, the kdf does not.
With the rise of excellent universal consoles and fleet consoles, as well as the tremendous advantage of heal/buff over capacity, these are not equal prices to pay for the same functionality. Endgame ships SHOULD be balanced on a ship-by-ship basis, not for the same job necessarily, but as an overall equal ship. Think of every ship as nothing until a certain number of itemization "points" are distributed. Some ships have more of these "points" in maneuverability, others in more weapons, or more hull and shields. The important thing is that all of these ships have the same number of points somewhere in their design.
It's the distribution that makes them unique. If a new race gets released that canonically has faster ships than the existing factions, then more of their point pool would be put into engines, but those points would have to come from somewhere else. If you just take a Fleet B'rel and increase the impulse modifier on the same tier of ship, you have an objectively superior ship, which is unbalanced and bad game design.
The problem the federation has with console cloaks is that they are not paying the same price as the klingons are for the exact same functionality. Right now, the klingons are getting the cloak far cheaper than the federation. You can call it specialization, but the end result is that the klingons have more points in their ships than the federation does.
I'm sorry if this is obvious to some of you, but I keep seeing a lot of fundamental misunderstanding as to what ship balance is. Am I claiming that the game is currently balanced? No, there's a lot of retooling that needs to happen to make everything viable again that probably won't happen. But for the issue at hand (cloaking consoles) this is how it is.
How to spot a newb 101. Fed cloaking ships were given an extra console slot back when they first came out.
It doesn't matter what WAS the case. Federation ships are NOW at one less console slot than their kdf counterparts in order to enjoy the same functionality that the kdf has built in.
The kdf pays for their cloak in stats, not consoles. Let the Federation pay an equal price. The same price for the same functionality. That's balance.
No... that's equality, not balance.
Does that mean all ships have to have the same boff layout or console layout? No, that would kill variety and specialization. But they DO have to be equally-powered in order for them all to be viable. Having a large number of ships of equal value promotes experimentation and adds to the life of the game, whereas having unequal ships causes people to fall into the established lines of the objectively better ships and the game becomes a rut.
Now this could be Cryptic trying to exert pressure to move people kdf-side, or it could be the folks at CBS meddling in a medium they don't understand, but as it stands this issue is a lingering sore spot on the quality of the game, which is why it keeps coming up. Just like the lack of sci ships for the kdf.
In which case, BoP's should be at a disadvantage when facing cruisers like the galaxy class. They even mentioned it in star trek;generations. 1 klingon bird of prey is no match for a galaxy class starship. From my perspective, games based on tv shows should do 1 of 2 things. Either reflect the show, or make everything equal. This game does niether, but rather takes inferior ships like the BoP and makes it somehow superior. So if everyone else gets a battle cloak, so should federation ships. Either that or make fed cruisers more powerful so they can really fight back against cloaking ships.
As for the galaxy vs birdie issue, a galaxy of equal pilot skill, build effectiveness, and gearing is more than capable of thrashing a BoP in a stand-up fight. This is why the BoP pilot fights dirty and uses the battlecloak to maximum effectiveness, making it a better fight and even winning on many occasions. Thus both the notion of the galaxy being a more powerful ship and game balance are preserved.
So you are asking to fed cloakable ships to take a nerf for built in cloak? Cause if you are saying one console slot is equal to all the hull and shield that fed ships get then I say ok. Maybe this will stop the cries of "Cloak is OP".
Also thank you Timezarg for doing the rundown of what KDF "pay" for cloak (which is here)
Could someone do the same for Romulan ships please. I would like to show what they have to give up to use cloaks.
Note: I don't think of myself as a Starfleet or KDF player. I speak for factions staying something more then an UI change. Not for PVP reasons (with lockbox ships,consoles, and other non-faction stuff that is next to a moot point).
Yes! Give the Defiant 15 turn, 60 inertia, .83 shields, 33000 hull and an integrated Cloak. There would be absolutely no complaints from players about how bad the turnrate is and how it now turns slower than a MVAE. None at all. Especially not from people that paid Zen in order to get a tiny, nimble little striker with the option to use a console slot for a Cloak.
Look, in all seriousness, give it a bit. Based on leaked stats, the (New) Avenger is being reskinned and released to the KDF, which means either:
KDF-only players can now experience the complaint Federation-only players have with the Cloak console, and you might get less opposition.
or:
The Cloak will be integrated, which gives you a better argument to integrating the Cloak on Federation ships.
Absolutely. The only thing that's really going to put this issue to bed is making everyone pay the same price for cloak. My fed character flies a fleet sovereign and a fleet avenger on the side, and I think this is more than reasonable for the convenience of not fiddling with consoles and being able to cloak with 10. My kdf toon agrees.
The accidentally-released one shown on the Fleet store had it integrated. I'll be very surprised if that gets changed between now and next Thursday.
(Last response to all these threads on the Mogh, Fed Cloak, Flanking, whatever. They're all blurring together and making no headway, so hell with it. Textwall rant ensues)
The accusations of Red Rage, Roach is right, being overdone. That said one can't say that there aren't a lot of guys angrily stomping around with "I hate Feds, they're all a bunch of whiners and I just want to kill them all they should never get anything again rabble rabble rabble." You look at the average of some of these threads where the OP asks for way too much, one person says 'yeah right on!' three more say 'maybe if you adjusted XYZ might be better balanced' and another three that say 'probably a bad idea.' Then the couple of KDF-supremacist players who stomp around in permanent Red Rage wanting some kind of endless payback for Grudge! or maybe they just enjoy starting fights all the time, they show up and the usual occurs. Its ridiculous and useless and sometimes I think they're doing it specifically to stifle discussion because their idea of 'lets have a conversation' boils down to 'you sit there while I shout angrily at you.' Its not all Klingons, just like its not all Feds (hell I don't even consider myself a Fed but keep finding myself on that side because of these guys), but for chrissake some people just need to get over it.
As far as cloaking its a huge advantage and I don't understand how anyone can say it isn't. You get to pick how, where, and when a fight starts, or even to have that fight at all, combat initiative at the push of a button. How is that not an amazing edge? I think of some of the stuff I've pulled in like the Contested Zone recently where the ability to vanish and reappear somewhere else has let my Ning'tao or Tor'kaht smoke Dread battlegroups that would smite my Vesta or Odyssey, all because of I can retake the initiative whenever I like. And if someone wants to counter that cloak they have to spend console slots, skill points, boff powers and effort against something that I got for free. I still come out the net winner there. And the price paid for it is, what a few thousand hull and a cruiser-command option? A missing tac console but I get two extra eng consoles? I'll happily take any of those deals. Cloaking is great and the Klingons get it for practically free, and yet some are still angry that its not free enough? Huh?
For Battlecloak, that seems to be the Romulan's thing, they pay for it with reduced energy. (Yeah they get the ridiculous boffs but thats separate). Fed ships using up a precious, precious console slot, and given that its borrowed Romulan cloaks maybe it should be a battlecloak, unsure but its worth an honest discussion. Likewise, I'd maybe do a Klingon ship the same way, comes with standard cloaking and then a console that upgrades to battlecloak. BoPs likewise get BC and pay for it with the reduced weaponry rather than energy, which I always found a fair trade in my own experiences and its why I think the Flanking stuff is a bad move encouraging excessive focus on firepower instead of flexibility, but I'm not a Dev so all I can do is opine.
The uniqueness/diversity/whatever fight, maybe its just a question of all the voices with different ideas blurring together. (You ridgeheads all look alike!
(/Rant Probably just gonna be written off as Whiney Fed, but I suppose I can hope. Better to go kill snowmen than this Forum PVP stuff though)
However, what I WOULD like is for each 3 factions to gain 1-2 Captain abilities associated with Beam arrays, and universal for all 3 professions (or having a variation of the same ability per profession): ability to blindly fire small bursts around the ship, as Enterprise-E did in its fight against Scimitar in Star Trek: Nemesis. Each burst would deal a small portion of the usual damage (5-10%), with small chance to knock the cloak offline if it hits the ship (space where cloaked ship is should be distorted on hit). Sure, Federation would gain most from those abilities, but while KDF and Romulans keep (almost) exclusive usage of cloak, Federation would have a way to react to the cloaked ships.
I'm on painkillers right now so I don't feel like figuring out direct ship-to-ship comparisons, but I think the overall logic is that most Romulan ships pay for their cloaks via the reduced power levels and (for some ships, at least) lower inertia or turnrates. The power bit I've got issues with, because they gain a few nifty singularity abilities along with that. I can definitely see how sacrificing inertia or turnrate could be a tradeoff. . .but then you have to factor in the issue of Romulans having ungodly levels of crit chance and crit damage.
I'm ultimately of the opinion that Romulans don't really pay enough for what advantages they've got. The Fleet T'Varo certainly doesn't pay enough for its Enhanced Battlecloak. . .it has a full 5000 hullpoint advantage over the Fleet B'rel, along with better tactical-focused performance due to the 4th tac console and the Romulan crit advantages. Fleet B'rel is better for sci-spamming, of course, but that only gets you so far.
I would love to see an overall reduction in Romulan hullpoint values. . .not much of one, but something. Maybe a 5-10% reduction. Make 'em a little more reliant on their battlecloaks, like the BoP is.
Actually, honest & well thought out opinions & ideas I welcome. Beats all the bs ranting. And btw, seeing as how you say you freq run KDF, seemingly, as well as Fed, I'd consider you "faction-neutral", trying to have fun on both sides of the fence, rather than being a "faction-prime".
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
And I agree, the Rihan b/c IS over-powered compared to what any other cloaking vessels. Heck, when any Rihan ship enters a cloaked state, it enhances their flight characteristics (at least it did in my Ha'apex) Seeing as I've never used the "end-game" BoP's, I don't know if theirs' does the same, but I've never heard anyone mention that it does. But to me, the fact that a ship is in b/xc should NOT have anything to do with flight performance. Actually, having higher engine/flight performance would likely make more emissions of various kinds, thus, should actually make the cloak weaker, in that case.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"