even though I've proposed the science conversion over half a dozen (minimum) times already, this is the first time I've actually seen "constructive feedback" about the idea
That's because it's easy to be negative, particularly when it looks like long odds of anything every being done. Isn't exactly hard to come up with a "not gonna happen" response. Actually attempting to build something though, trying out the "what if" scenarios and trying to decide where the boundaries of "good taste" are when it comes to game design ... that's a lot harder and takes a lot more effort.
So yeah ... basically sand castle rules. It takes mere seconds to tear down (or stomp down, if you prefer) what can take the better part of an hour (or few) to make.
Very much doubt we'll ever see two LT commander stations on a federation ship , let alone one of them being universal too
Well, if you look at the loadouts for BOffs on Tier 5 ships for the Federation, you'll notice that a pattern emerges ... of having 5 BOffs and that the total number of BOff skills added up between them equals 12. It's pretty consistent.
So as for the point of getting two Lt Commander stations on a Federation ship, the Atrox Carrier does that already, so there is a precedent. All I did was take the Atrox BOff layout, switch the (spare) Lt Commander Science to being a Lt Commander Universal, and left the layout at 4 BOffs instead of 5, as is more typical for Tier 5 ships. The net result would be a more "versatile" Constitution Carrier which could (technically speaking) be organized around Tactical, Engineering or Science specializations with relatively equal ease without stepping all that hard on the toes of the Atrox design thanks to other differences (number of hangar bays, crew size differences, hull strength, power bonuses, etc.).
Very true , the Atrox does have two Lt Cmdrs , but that's a dedicated carrier , like the Vo'Quv. not a cruiser/ science ship. Only 2 of the full carriers in game have that Boff layout. ( Or similar , like the Recluse )
And I'm sorry , but even if you restricted it to shuttles only , the Constitution is WAY too small to be a carrier, They are pushing it with the Vesta , It simply doesn't have the room
Abilities: Strategic Maneuvering, Shield Frequency Modulation, Weapon System Efficiency, Attract Fire
New Art Assets Required: *NONE*
Cash Cow Potential: {need new meter, old one seems to be busted}
S imple E asy E ffective
... not being done.
Makes me so lol...Command Uni...with cruiser commands...only slightly outperformed in maneuverability by the Avenger...slightly less hull than the Avenger.
I also find it amazing that they're cramming all of this brand new 25th century technology into this 170 year old rust bucket and managed to find room for double the amount of crew! :rolleyes:
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
only slightly outperformed in maneuverability by the Avenger...
So while I really don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of some mythical setup for a ship that isn't going to happen, I will point out that all of the other T2 shipts turned into T5 Fleet Variants have the same turn rate that they have at T2. The Fleet Nova and the Fleet Saber.
These turn rates are superior to other tiers because the lower tier ships turn faster.
So keeping in line with the way fleet variants get kitted out, if they do ever make a T5 fleet variant of a T2 cruiser, it's going to have a turn rate of 9, because that's what the Cruiser has at T2.
Everything else? I have no idea. But the turn rates are pretty much set in stone with how they put these fleet ships out.
Makes me so lol...Command Uni...with cruiser commands...only slightly outperformed in maneuverability by the Avenger...slightly less hull than the Avenger.
I also find it amazing that they're cramming all of this brand new 25th century technology into this 170 year old rust bucket and managed to find room for double the amount of crew! :rolleyes:
Yes, it makes no sense, please refer to my initial admission of senselessness, but actually I can totally see how more powerful and comparably "miniaturized" 25th Century technology fits into a 170 year old chassis quite nicely. Especially when it fits in something the size of a runabout.
One of the "other" arguments I've heard was licensing concerns - something about not wanting to "confuse" the Older-School Connies with the JJ-prise. Since Excalibur, Exeter, Vesper are "extremely close" in design to the Connie, a license restriction prohibiting any possible confusion between "Prime" and "JJ" ships would encompass these designs. However, taking the recent use of the 60's Connie lines in the Twizzlers commercial, said design confusion issues should be a moot point - the JJ-prise has enough recognition now to prevent confusion, much as there's enough recognition difference to tell the Connie-Refit from the Connie proper...
Whole separate argument, but one I'll stand with...
The vesper looks more like an Excelsior, and the Exeter looks a lot like the connie but it's not. Excalibur doesn't even look close like it.
Sorry the iconic look sure, but the Vesper and Excalibur are basically the hero ships. You see them on the poster or front of the box when the game launched.
Excuse doesn't hold water IMO.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
well i am getting a feeling that....... no one wants these makes me really sad
It's not so much that nobody wants them. Rather, it's more along the lines of nobody having much USE for them. If blue retrophasers of any kind gained some significant advantages, I can pretty much guarantee you that they'd get a lot more attention.
Honestly if it weren't for the fact that high-end phasers and fleet phasers outclass the blue phasers so badly, I'd probably STILL be using mine. I picked up the TOS Connie for explicitly that purpose - I didn't even use the ship itself for leveling, I just claim/dismiss the ship as much as I want for a nice set of leveling phasers.
DBB are more unlikely because they're a somewhat specialized weapon. Really, IMO the most commonly used weapons are full-up arrays and dual heavy cannons, at least so far as energy attacks go. A DBB is not going to be as much of a draw as you'd want, especially since people who do use DBB's typically do it so they have a concentrated cone of fire on the ship's fore - not the sort, for the most part, that would pass up obviously superior weapons.
There IS one very slight option available. One of the Devidian missions gives out blue retrophasers, fore and aft, that are a bit closer to Mk XI blue (whereas the retrophasers from the TOS Connie peter out somewhere around Mk XI green or less). So they're somewhat passable end-game weapons if you collect a full set there. Not DBB's, but at the moment this is about as close as you're going to get to more usable blue TOS phasers.
As a final note, if your build is good enough you can probably make the retrophasers work as-is at end game, DBB or not. Especially if you're on a cruiser. Cruisers were generally built with broadsiding in mind, making that sort of weapon ideal. You'll lag behind the others in STFs, but you'll have the base competence and DPS necessary to be a contributing member of the team. That said, you'll probably have to optimize the build a bit more.
I seem to recall that the NCC-1701(-A) had a Science Officer in the Commander BOff seat and filling the role as First Officer, not an Engineer. It also kept getting sent on "5 year missions" to seek out and explore new worlds and new civilizations.
Actually, it had a Captain science, so does that mean that Cryptic has to come up with a new level of Boffs to satisfy this ship? :rolleyes:
Not that I wouldn't PAY for a Constitution Retrofit...
I know this is crazy-talk but has anyone tried taking the T2 Constitution Refit out lately?
Just for the heck of it, a few weeks ago I threw some reputation gear on it.... and it did REALLY well! It's not a tank but I didn't pop more than a couple of times and I completed all my Tau Dawa missions. Didn't take too long either.
It was a neat challenge but not viable for all end-game content. It would be nice to have a Connie Retrofit with the specs of the Heavy Cruiser Retrofit.
(The Heavy Cruiser Retrofit (from the Hirogen lockbox) has a saucer skin that makes it look exactly like Picards Stargazer - now if only the rest of the ship looked like that version.)
Star Trek Battles Channel - Play Star Trek like they did in the series!Avatar: pinterest-com/pin/14003448816884219Are you sure it isn't time for a "colorful metaphor"? --Spock in 'The Voyage Home' SCE ADVISORY NOTICE: Improper Impulse Engine maintenance can result in REAR THRUSTER LEAKAGE. ALWAYS have your work inspected by another qualified officer.
well i am getting a feeling that....... no one wants these makes me really sad
I thought I did say I would support them when I said that the programers might as well add them.
It shouldn't be too terribly hard to do, either copy over the Andorian visual effect, or turn the standard phaser dual beam bank blue to achieve the same effect.
I fail to see how adding them would be game breaking at this point.
Yes, it makes no sense, please refer to my initial admission of senselessness, but actually I can totally see how more powerful and comparably "miniaturized" 25th Century technology fits into a 170 year old chassis quite nicely. Especially when it fits in something the size of a runabout.
So then what you're saying is this t5 connie will have only 2 weapon slots, only 1/1/1 console slots and a shield mod of .5?
Sure you can "fit" anything onto a shuttle but it's pretty obvious you aren't getting the same output and much less space to fit said technology.
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
Yes, it makes no sense, please refer to my initial admission of senselessness, but actually I can totally see how more powerful and comparably "miniaturized" 25th Century technology fits into a 170 year old chassis quite nicely. Especially when it fits in something the size of a runabout.
I also find it amazing that they're cramming all of this brand new 25th century technology into this 170 year old rust bucket and managed to find room for double the amount of crew! :rolleyes:
Connie "always" was listed as having close to 430 crew - 400 "enlisted" and 30 "officers".
As far as the "tech cramming" goes, the Nova Class is 221.74 m, Connie is 289 m (going by Memory Alpha right now, I know ship sizes are highly "suggestive"). Therefore, the "challenge" for these designers isn't "fitting" the tech into a 170 year old chassis (as variants about the right "size" already exist), but having the "mounts" to get this tech to sit there...
The vesper looks more like an Excelsior, and the Exeter looks a lot like the connie but it's not. Excalibur doesn't even look close like it.
Sorry the iconic look sure, but the Vesper and Excalibur are basically the hero ships. You see them on the poster or front of the box when the game launched.
Excuse doesn't hold water IMO.
As I said, I stand with you on the argument of trying to get these ships into the game at T5 (might not have been clear on that...).
However, and my memory be somewhat hazy, I've got thoughts floating around in my head saying:
A- There is the "no T5 Connie issue", which seems to exclude anything "remotely close" to the Connie lines (Exeter)...
B- There was the "recognition issue" with "preventing confusion over the JJ-prise". This kept any part set that "used" the "iconic Connie lines" (straight up part swap of Excelsior saucer, nacelles, secondary with neck & pylon lengths/angles of Connie) that might have kept Vesper "on the out-list".
C- Someone (Dev?) muttered something about "not being able to 'exclude' parts lists from ships", so if they "attempted" to bring even the T2 Excalibur to T5, the system would "allow" use of all compatable T2 parts, including the "banned" Connie-R, and the "issues using" Exeter / Vesper. However, as I said, the Twizzler commercial seems to have relaxed the Point B recognition issue, so starting a whole 'nother argument about getting Excalibur/Exeter/Vesper to T5, using the "same tech that prevents a non-C-store owner from using C-Store parts" to keep Connie-R off the parts list (modified just a touch to make sure the Connie-R parts don't even show up in list, not just have a "please buy, 2000 zen" marker on them) is appropriate.
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
by nobody i mean that not many... i meant no disrespect. but i agree, it takes HOW much programming.... cant be to much, give it the values the same as mk xi normal phasers, and add the color and sound
So keeping in line with the way fleet variants get kitted out, if they do ever make a T5 fleet variant of a T2 cruiser, it's going to have a turn rate of 9, because that's what the Cruiser has at T2.
Everything else? I have no idea. But the turn rates are pretty much set in stone with how they put these fleet ships out.
This point would be completely and absolutely true ... if the T2 Cruiser was a cruiser class ship (which it is, duh) and the T5 Constitution was also a Cruiser. However, if the ship class gets changed from cruiser to science vessel ... that assumption/presumption is no longer quite as operative as it had been previously.
So ... just for giggles ... what happens if the T5 Constitution Carrier isn't a Science Vessel but remains a Cruiser, AND happens to be a 1 Hangar Carrier built on a Cruiser hull? Note that we haven't got any Carrier/Cruisers in the Federation lineup ... just Carrier/Escorts and Carrier/Science Vessels. Shouldn't there be a Carrier/Cruiser option too?
Abilities: Carrier Commands, Attract Fire, Shield Frequency Modulation, Strategic Maneuvering, Weapon System Efficiency
Hangar Bays: 1
The "real" design goal here would be ... versatility ... hence the "balanced plus universal" choice of Bridge Officers and Consoles. It would also be "nice" for the Hangar to be able to accommodate an unusually wide variety of Hangar Pets, thereby playing up the "versatile" angle, which is something that's really hard to express through game stats (short of going Klingon Raider all universal stations). The key point being that there is a wide enough diversity of options (Commander BOff type, Universal Console slot, Pet types) that simply seeing the silhouette of the ship won't instantly tell you what it's equipped for or what the build strategy is based on, simply because there are too many choices available. At the same time, the ship is "versatile enough" (in the jack-of-all-trades sense) that it won't be able to push other ships (other carriers in particular) that are more specialized out of their respective niches.
This point would be completely and absolutely true ... if the T2 Cruiser was a cruiser class ship (which it is, duh) and the T5 Constitution was also a Cruiser. However, if the ship class gets changed from cruiser to science vessel ... that assumption/presumption is no longer quite as operative as it had been previously.
So ... just for giggles ... what happens if the T5 Constitution Carrier isn't a Science Vessel but remains a Cruiser, AND happens to be a 1 Hangar Carrier built on a Cruiser hull? Note that we haven't got any Carrier/Cruisers in the Federation lineup ... just Carrier/Escorts and Carrier/Science Vessels. Shouldn't there be a Carrier/Cruiser option too?
Abilities: Carrier Commands, Attract Fire, Shield Frequency Modulation, Strategic Maneuvering, Weapon System Efficiency
Hangar Bays: 1
The "real" design goal here would be ... versatility ... hence the "balanced plus universal" choice of Bridge Officers and Consoles. It would also be "nice" for the Hangar to be able to accommodate an unusually wide variety of Hangar Pets, thereby playing up the "versatile" angle, which is something that's really hard to express through game stats (short of going Klingon Raider all universal stations). The key point being that there is a wide enough diversity of options (Commander BOff type, Universal Console slot, Pet types) that simply seeing the silhouette of the ship won't instantly tell you what it's equipped for or what the build strategy is based on, simply because there are too many choices available. At the same time, the ship is "versatile enough" (in the jack-of-all-trades sense) that it won't be able to push other ships (other carriers in particular) that are more specialized out of their respective niches.
Can I ask one STUPID question. considering the fact the Enterprise A could barely hold 2-4 shuttle craft, where in the name of hell are you going to put a whole squadron?
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Can I ask one STUPID question. considering the fact the Enterprise A could barely hold 2-4 shuttle craft, where in the name of hell are you going to put a whole squadron?
Upscale the ship. Make it as big as those annoying-as-all-get-out Scimitar monstrosities.
The vesper looks more like an Excelsior, and the Exeter looks a lot like the connie but it's not. Excalibur doesn't even look close like it.
Sorry the iconic look sure, but the Vesper and Excalibur are basically the hero ships. You see them on the poster or front of the box when the game launched.
Excuse doesn't hold water IMO.
I'm looking at the Collector's Edition of the box I bought for open beta. It has a picture of the original Constitution class on it.
One of the "other" arguments I've heard was licensing concerns - something about not wanting to "confuse" the Older-School Connies with the JJ-prise. Since Excalibur, Exeter, Vesper are "extremely close" in design to the Connie, a license restriction prohibiting any possible confusion between "Prime" and "JJ" ships would encompass these designs. However, taking the recent use of the 60's Connie lines in the Twizzlers commercial, said design confusion issues should be a moot point - the JJ-prise has enough recognition now to prevent confusion, much as there's enough recognition difference to tell the Connie-Refit from the Connie proper...
Whole separate argument, but one I'll stand with...
That's not an argument. Arguments have to hold water. Your post is leaking like a sieve.
Considering the fact the Enterprise A could barely hold 2-4 shuttle craft, where in the name of hell are you going to put a whole squadron?
The entire aft end of the secondary hull of course. Basically everything aft of the Cryogenic Deuterium Storage Tanks (item #26 on the linked schematic) would be dedicated to supporting the squadron of embarked small craft. So essentially from the midpoint of where the pylons attach to the secondary hull and further aft would be designed for and dedicated to hangar bay operations.
Can I ask one STUPID question. considering the fact the Enterprise A could barely hold 2-4 shuttle craft, where in the name of hell are you going to put a whole squadron?
Cryogenically sealed in Torpedoes. Then we'll have a really cute British blonde woman load them onboard and Robocop will order us to fire them all at the Klingon Homeworld. Oh wait, that's already been done hasn't it?
Just on this point ... I guarantee that if we ever got that T5 Connie that soooo many would like, then Retrofit Phasers, both Arrays and Banks, would be in HUGE demand ...
But of course, we'll never get a T5 Connie, and though RP'ing with the Retro's is cool and all (I did it myself) you end up needing, or at least wanting something with more punch later in the game ...
T1-T3 ships are junk in this game, including the TOS Constellation class, since they are no match for the T4&5 ships. Only two ways to fix this:
-either give us the ability to upgrade these ships to T4/5 or...
-create zones in game where T4/5 ships have no access to (like the shuttle zones).
As for the retrofit TOS phasers, nothing to write home about as they are no endgear.
Tyr shall give me strength! For the glory of Tempus! I am the hands of Shar! Flames of Kossuth, protect me! Oghma, grant me knowledge! Lolth commands, and I obey!
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
T1-T3 ships are junk in this game, including the TOS Constellation class, since they are no match for the T4&5 ships. Only two ways to fix this:
-either give us the ability to upgrade these ships to T4/5 or...
-create zones in game where T4/5 ships have no access to (like the shuttle zones).
As for the retrofit TOS phasers, nothing to write home about as they are no endgear.
a) it's constitution class
b) yeah, go figure...that T1-T3 is junk compared to T4 and T5 is 100% intentional, so no fix needed. Not a bug, a feature!
on topic: would love to see the DBB in general get a 2 narrow beam animation like the retro phasers. even the icon picture of a DBB suggests that they are very close together.
Make it so that owning the TOS Connie opens up TOS dil store/fleet phasers at an end game level, and I'd be all over it.
I just don't personally have any use for any more of this less then end game gear. We are getting enough downgrades with the rep gear. Bring on a new, tougher endgame please and thank you...
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Many of the people I chat with in this game have been saying this and I have come here to find out why.
Dear Devs, we would like to know why you despise or even hate Kirk's Enterprise?
We do not understand why you can make a Fleet version of Enterprise B, C and D and not A?
The Enterprise A that you have ingame has even less weapon slots than a science vessel.
ST II and VI are probably the most beloved of the movies and yet you have a Klingon Bird of Prey that can fire while cloaked (surely not) and Fleet Excelsior and Enterprise and Reliant are left as newbie ships.
I see in one thread that you are using CBS as a deterrent, and you speak of the cannon from the show. Well the mirror mirror Enterprise episode clearly shows there is a way for an ingame episode to go and get us a ship if not a Zen version and Fleet version.
You did this with Enterprise C and the Tholians. Surely you can make some episode where the ship is able to be retrieved from the mirror world before it's attacked. YOU can think of something with bending time or a time loop or MANY things if you are so stuck on cannon.
You have a high end Vulcan ship from Enterprise era that has more weapon slots than kirks. None of this makes sense why Kirk's Enterprise is treated so badly in this game. The only thing we can figure is you have Developers that have their own agenda and yet it is we the players who pay your salary. I know there are free players but me and my friends support you through sub and lifetime and zen sales quite well.
You could make a retro lock box pack with actual Mk XII blue phasers, Blue torpedo launcher, the Reliant and Mk XII blue phasers (which were even shown in ST V) yet you do nothing.
I find it hard to believe that you cannot create an ingame image toggle for ships as well. Surely you know that people would pay $$$ to simply change the visual appearance or their ships with a perma on/off clicky. The programming is already ingame as we can clearly see there are ship illusions sold on DS9 from the Ferengi.
Make a Ferengi Delta Quadrant mission with those two that were stranded and maybe they sold holographic ship nodules for the ship exterior just like the romulan drones can do? These drones are also ingame.
You have tons of minor things in the game from little one episodes and things from movies yet again there is nothing for Kirk's Enterprise.
So many of us would keep buying your new ships for the layouts, all you have to do is give us an option to simply click a button for "Illusion Enterprise" or whatever you want to call it.
Here, I am throwing $$$$ at you and whatever profit CBS makes from this game to simply sell this to us.
I am eager to hear your thoughts on this Devs, cause I cannot see even one logical reason why in four years we can have tons of ships that are boosted to fleet and retrofitted status from one or two episodes and Kirk's Enterprise from 25 years of fame is left untouched with one refit.:(
Comments
That's because it's easy to be negative, particularly when it looks like long odds of anything every being done. Isn't exactly hard to come up with a "not gonna happen" response. Actually attempting to build something though, trying out the "what if" scenarios and trying to decide where the boundaries of "good taste" are when it comes to game design ... that's a lot harder and takes a lot more effort.
So yeah ... basically sand castle rules. It takes mere seconds to tear down (or stomp down, if you prefer) what can take the better part of an hour (or few) to make.
Well, if you look at the loadouts for BOffs on Tier 5 ships for the Federation, you'll notice that a pattern emerges ... of having 5 BOffs and that the total number of BOff skills added up between them equals 12. It's pretty consistent.
Star Cruiser = 2 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 12 in 5 BOffs
Assault Cruiser = 2 + 1 + 4 + 3 + 2 = 12 in 5 BOffs
Solanae Science Destroyer = 4 + 3 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 12 in 5 BOffs
Wells Temporal Science Vessel = 1 + 4 + 2 + 3 + 2 = 12 in 5 BOffs
Caitian Atrox Carrier = 2 + 3 + 4 + 3 = 12 in 4 BOffs
So as for the point of getting two Lt Commander stations on a Federation ship, the Atrox Carrier does that already, so there is a precedent. All I did was take the Atrox BOff layout, switch the (spare) Lt Commander Science to being a Lt Commander Universal, and left the layout at 4 BOffs instead of 5, as is more typical for Tier 5 ships. The net result would be a more "versatile" Constitution Carrier which could (technically speaking) be organized around Tactical, Engineering or Science specializations with relatively equal ease without stepping all that hard on the toes of the Atrox design thanks to other differences (number of hangar bays, crew size differences, hull strength, power bonuses, etc.).
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
And I'm sorry , but even if you restricted it to shuttles only , the Constitution is WAY too small to be a carrier, They are pushing it with the Vesta , It simply doesn't have the room
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Makes me so lol...Command Uni...with cruiser commands...only slightly outperformed in maneuverability by the Avenger...slightly less hull than the Avenger.
I also find it amazing that they're cramming all of this brand new 25th century technology into this 170 year old rust bucket and managed to find room for double the amount of crew! :rolleyes:
So while I really don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of some mythical setup for a ship that isn't going to happen, I will point out that all of the other T2 shipts turned into T5 Fleet Variants have the same turn rate that they have at T2. The Fleet Nova and the Fleet Saber.
These turn rates are superior to other tiers because the lower tier ships turn faster.
So keeping in line with the way fleet variants get kitted out, if they do ever make a T5 fleet variant of a T2 cruiser, it's going to have a turn rate of 9, because that's what the Cruiser has at T2.
Everything else? I have no idea. But the turn rates are pretty much set in stone with how they put these fleet ships out.
Yes, it makes no sense, please refer to my initial admission of senselessness, but actually I can totally see how more powerful and comparably "miniaturized" 25th Century technology fits into a 170 year old chassis quite nicely. Especially when it fits in something the size of a runabout.
Support the Typhoon and Jupiter class starships!
The vesper looks more like an Excelsior, and the Exeter looks a lot like the connie but it's not. Excalibur doesn't even look close like it.
Sorry the iconic look sure, but the Vesper and Excalibur are basically the hero ships. You see them on the poster or front of the box when the game launched.
Excuse doesn't hold water IMO.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
It's not so much that nobody wants them. Rather, it's more along the lines of nobody having much USE for them. If blue retrophasers of any kind gained some significant advantages, I can pretty much guarantee you that they'd get a lot more attention.
Honestly if it weren't for the fact that high-end phasers and fleet phasers outclass the blue phasers so badly, I'd probably STILL be using mine. I picked up the TOS Connie for explicitly that purpose - I didn't even use the ship itself for leveling, I just claim/dismiss the ship as much as I want for a nice set of leveling phasers.
DBB are more unlikely because they're a somewhat specialized weapon. Really, IMO the most commonly used weapons are full-up arrays and dual heavy cannons, at least so far as energy attacks go. A DBB is not going to be as much of a draw as you'd want, especially since people who do use DBB's typically do it so they have a concentrated cone of fire on the ship's fore - not the sort, for the most part, that would pass up obviously superior weapons.
There IS one very slight option available. One of the Devidian missions gives out blue retrophasers, fore and aft, that are a bit closer to Mk XI blue (whereas the retrophasers from the TOS Connie peter out somewhere around Mk XI green or less). So they're somewhat passable end-game weapons if you collect a full set there. Not DBB's, but at the moment this is about as close as you're going to get to more usable blue TOS phasers.
As a final note, if your build is good enough you can probably make the retrophasers work as-is at end game, DBB or not. Especially if you're on a cruiser. Cruisers were generally built with broadsiding in mind, making that sort of weapon ideal. You'll lag behind the others in STFs, but you'll have the base competence and DPS necessary to be a contributing member of the team. That said, you'll probably have to optimize the build a bit more.
Actually, it had a Captain science, so does that mean that Cryptic has to come up with a new level of Boffs to satisfy this ship? :rolleyes:
I know this is crazy-talk but has anyone tried taking the T2 Constitution Refit out lately?
Just for the heck of it, a few weeks ago I threw some reputation gear on it.... and it did REALLY well! It's not a tank but I didn't pop more than a couple of times and I completed all my Tau Dawa missions. Didn't take too long either.
It was a neat challenge but not viable for all end-game content. It would be nice to have a Connie Retrofit with the specs of the Heavy Cruiser Retrofit.
(The Heavy Cruiser Retrofit (from the Hirogen lockbox) has a saucer skin that makes it look exactly like Picards Stargazer - now if only the rest of the ship looked like that version.)
SCE ADVISORY NOTICE: Improper Impulse Engine maintenance can result in REAR THRUSTER LEAKAGE. ALWAYS have your work inspected by another qualified officer.
I thought I did say I would support them when I said that the programers might as well add them.
It shouldn't be too terribly hard to do, either copy over the Andorian visual effect, or turn the standard phaser dual beam bank blue to achieve the same effect.
I fail to see how adding them would be game breaking at this point.
So then what you're saying is this t5 connie will have only 2 weapon slots, only 1/1/1 console slots and a shield mod of .5?
Sure you can "fit" anything onto a shuttle but it's pretty obvious you aren't getting the same output and much less space to fit said technology.
I think it's bigger than a JHAS. Let's just give it the JHAS setup, since it can fit all of that same tech in bigger space?
Or if that's too much, just give it the Fleet Saber's stats, since it's far bigger than that ship.
Connie "always" was listed as having close to 430 crew - 400 "enlisted" and 30 "officers".
As far as the "tech cramming" goes, the Nova Class is 221.74 m, Connie is 289 m (going by Memory Alpha right now, I know ship sizes are highly "suggestive"). Therefore, the "challenge" for these designers isn't "fitting" the tech into a 170 year old chassis (as variants about the right "size" already exist), but having the "mounts" to get this tech to sit there...
As I said, I stand with you on the argument of trying to get these ships into the game at T5 (might not have been clear on that...).
However, and my memory be somewhat hazy, I've got thoughts floating around in my head saying:
A- There is the "no T5 Connie issue", which seems to exclude anything "remotely close" to the Connie lines (Exeter)...
B- There was the "recognition issue" with "preventing confusion over the JJ-prise". This kept any part set that "used" the "iconic Connie lines" (straight up part swap of Excelsior saucer, nacelles, secondary with neck & pylon lengths/angles of Connie) that might have kept Vesper "on the out-list".
C- Someone (Dev?) muttered something about "not being able to 'exclude' parts lists from ships", so if they "attempted" to bring even the T2 Excalibur to T5, the system would "allow" use of all compatable T2 parts, including the "banned" Connie-R, and the "issues using" Exeter / Vesper. However, as I said, the Twizzler commercial seems to have relaxed the Point B recognition issue, so starting a whole 'nother argument about getting Excalibur/Exeter/Vesper to T5, using the "same tech that prevents a non-C-store owner from using C-Store parts" to keep Connie-R off the parts list (modified just a touch to make sure the Connie-R parts don't even show up in list, not just have a "please buy, 2000 zen" marker on them) is appropriate.
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Support the Typhoon and Jupiter class starships!
This point would be completely and absolutely true ... if the T2 Cruiser was a cruiser class ship (which it is, duh) and the T5 Constitution was also a Cruiser. However, if the ship class gets changed from cruiser to science vessel ... that assumption/presumption is no longer quite as operative as it had been previously.
So ... just for giggles ... what happens if the T5 Constitution Carrier isn't a Science Vessel but remains a Cruiser, AND happens to be a 1 Hangar Carrier built on a Cruiser hull? Note that we haven't got any Carrier/Cruisers in the Federation lineup ... just Carrier/Escorts and Carrier/Science Vessels. Shouldn't there be a Carrier/Cruiser option too?
Constitution Carrier
The "real" design goal here would be ... versatility ... hence the "balanced plus universal" choice of Bridge Officers and Consoles. It would also be "nice" for the Hangar to be able to accommodate an unusually wide variety of Hangar Pets, thereby playing up the "versatile" angle, which is something that's really hard to express through game stats (short of going Klingon Raider all universal stations). The key point being that there is a wide enough diversity of options (Commander BOff type, Universal Console slot, Pet types) that simply seeing the silhouette of the ship won't instantly tell you what it's equipped for or what the build strategy is based on, simply because there are too many choices available. At the same time, the ship is "versatile enough" (in the jack-of-all-trades sense) that it won't be able to push other ships (other carriers in particular) that are more specialized out of their respective niches.
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
Can I ask one STUPID question. considering the fact the Enterprise A could barely hold 2-4 shuttle craft, where in the name of hell are you going to put a whole squadron?
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.massively.com/media/2010/02/stoceoverfront.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.massively.com/media/2010/02/stocecover.jpg That's not an argument. Arguments have to hold water. Your post is leaking like a sieve.
The entire aft end of the secondary hull of course. Basically everything aft of the Cryogenic Deuterium Storage Tanks (item #26 on the linked schematic) would be dedicated to supporting the squadron of embarked small craft. So essentially from the midpoint of where the pylons attach to the secondary hull and further aft would be designed for and dedicated to hangar bay operations.
Next question.
Protonic Kool-Aid Down The Drain Cruiser
Immortal BOff Skills combo for Ground
Then it is not a Constitution anymore. If the K'Vort is a huge B'Rel, then a huge Constitution won't be a Constitution, but something else.
Cryogenically sealed in Torpedoes. Then we'll have a really cute British blonde woman load them onboard and Robocop will order us to fire them all at the Klingon Homeworld. Oh wait, that's already been done hasn't it?
Uh ... I'll get back to you?
Just on this point ... I guarantee that if we ever got that T5 Connie that soooo many would like, then Retrofit Phasers, both Arrays and Banks, would be in HUGE demand ...
But of course, we'll never get a T5 Connie, and though RP'ing with the Retro's is cool and all (I did it myself) you end up needing, or at least wanting something with more punch later in the game ...
-either give us the ability to upgrade these ships to T4/5 or...
-create zones in game where T4/5 ships have no access to (like the shuttle zones).
As for the retrofit TOS phasers, nothing to write home about as they are no endgear.
For the glory of Tempus!
I am the hands of Shar!
Flames of Kossuth, protect me!
Oghma, grant me knowledge!
Lolth commands, and I obey!
https://twitter.com/Flamin_Gaming
Igniting You Passion For Gaming!
Not real star trek ships
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
a) it's constitution class
b) yeah, go figure...that T1-T3 is junk compared to T4 and T5 is 100% intentional, so no fix needed. Not a bug, a feature!
on topic: would love to see the DBB in general get a 2 narrow beam animation like the retro phasers. even the icon picture of a DBB suggests that they are very close together.
It's that I would never use them.
Make it so that owning the TOS Connie opens up TOS dil store/fleet phasers at an end game level, and I'd be all over it.
I just don't personally have any use for any more of this less then end game gear. We are getting enough downgrades with the rep gear. Bring on a new, tougher endgame please and thank you...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Dear Devs, we would like to know why you despise or even hate Kirk's Enterprise?
We do not understand why you can make a Fleet version of Enterprise B, C and D and not A?
The Enterprise A that you have ingame has even less weapon slots than a science vessel.
ST II and VI are probably the most beloved of the movies and yet you have a Klingon Bird of Prey that can fire while cloaked (surely not) and Fleet Excelsior and Enterprise and Reliant are left as newbie ships.
I see in one thread that you are using CBS as a deterrent, and you speak of the cannon from the show. Well the mirror mirror Enterprise episode clearly shows there is a way for an ingame episode to go and get us a ship if not a Zen version and Fleet version.
You did this with Enterprise C and the Tholians. Surely you can make some episode where the ship is able to be retrieved from the mirror world before it's attacked. YOU can think of something with bending time or a time loop or MANY things if you are so stuck on cannon.
You have a high end Vulcan ship from Enterprise era that has more weapon slots than kirks. None of this makes sense why Kirk's Enterprise is treated so badly in this game. The only thing we can figure is you have Developers that have their own agenda and yet it is we the players who pay your salary. I know there are free players but me and my friends support you through sub and lifetime and zen sales quite well.
You could make a retro lock box pack with actual Mk XII blue phasers, Blue torpedo launcher, the Reliant and Mk XII blue phasers (which were even shown in ST V) yet you do nothing.
I find it hard to believe that you cannot create an ingame image toggle for ships as well. Surely you know that people would pay $$$ to simply change the visual appearance or their ships with a perma on/off clicky. The programming is already ingame as we can clearly see there are ship illusions sold on DS9 from the Ferengi.
Make a Ferengi Delta Quadrant mission with those two that were stranded and maybe they sold holographic ship nodules for the ship exterior just like the romulan drones can do? These drones are also ingame.
You have tons of minor things in the game from little one episodes and things from movies yet again there is nothing for Kirk's Enterprise.
So many of us would keep buying your new ships for the layouts, all you have to do is give us an option to simply click a button for "Illusion Enterprise" or whatever you want to call it.
Here, I am throwing $$$$ at you and whatever profit CBS makes from this game to simply sell this to us.
I am eager to hear your thoughts on this Devs, cause I cannot see even one logical reason why in four years we can have tons of ships that are boosted to fleet and retrofitted status from one or two episodes and Kirk's Enterprise from 25 years of fame is left untouched with one refit.:(
Defending The Galaxy By Breaking One Starfleet Regulation After The Next.