We do, we do but I see no reason why 5Tac con Raptors cant exist in say 2 or 3 variants on the KDF. Something that maybe gives up a console slot and has to be bought from the Cstore as a handicap.
Better yet the Devs can make new ship with a special engineering console that acts just like a 5th Tac console that we can use on say just three ships. We KDF can then complain that its unfair because said console takes up vaulable console space (while the power itself is not very useful) until they convert it into a universal console, plus add an extra console slot so we dont lose a slot to use it. Later we can complain about how its unfair that the new Universal console is not an innate ability but we need to keep the extra console slot anyways as its only fair because the power is so important for us to have as a balancer between the factions.
We do, we do but I see no reason why 5Tac con Raptors cant exist in say 2 or 3 variants on the KDF. Something that maybe gives up a console slot and has to be bought from the Cstore as a handicap.
Better yet the Devs can make new ship with a special engineering console that acts just like a 5th Tac console that we can use on say just three ships. We KDF can then complain that its unfair because said console takes up vaulable console space (while the power itself is not very useful) until they convert it into a universal console, plus add an extra console slot so we dont lose a slot to use it. Later we can complain about how its unfair that the new Universal console is not an innate ability but we need to keep the extra console slot anyways as its only fair because the power is so important for us to have as a balancer between the factions.
I'm sorry but what in the world was that rant?
What ship got a extra console slot to mount a universal console? last I checked there are no ships with more then 10.
Funny how much of a hypocrites some of you are when it comes to balance you want... lol
Like I said.. you want a 5 tac console escort.. go play a different faction.. after all its balanced../rollseyes.
What ship got a extra console slot to mount a universal console? last I checked there are no ships with more then 10.
Funny how much of a hypocrites some of you are when it comes to balance you want... lol
Like I said.. you want a 5 tac console escort.. go play a different faction.. after all its balanced../rollseyes.
Are you really that ignorant on lore, are your views on this game that much flawed, or are you just trolling again?? I don't intend to sound insulting, I'm genuinely interested to know, I can't quite figure out your posts.
Let me try and explain once again in high hopes that you won't ingore it once more:
Console slots are not a thing that defines unique gameplay, because all the top tier ships in game come with 9 or 10 console slots and every faction has numerous variations of them. Furthermore, the effectivness of the console slots defines a ship and a build, therefore you can't make any faction have exclusivity in certain console combiantion - espeically the tac. ones which unlike the others - stack.
Science ships are not a thing that defines unique gameplay, because there is a science career profile availible for all the factions in STO. You can't let people make science characters and then tell them that only 1 faction has science ships even though you made science career profles open to all the factions.
If the career profiles in STO were different or varied between the faction, then the Feds. could've had the exclusivity on science ships.
Something that could have been unique is the 5/3 weapons layout, but the devs gave them all across the board or the 5/2 of the Kumari. (which can still be left unique to Feds)
The really hillarious part here is the relation to lore, the same issue I have with the Feds. demanding cloaking - based on lore it's impossibly hillarious to tell the players of the KDF that if they want a brutal warship they need to roll a Fed. or a Rom. lol The Klingons invented warships.
Now, on the other hand - there are some things that do define a unique gameplay:
Warbirds and singularity powers. That particular style of gameplay is unique and should be left alone for the Romulans.
Raiders and flanking. This is also unique as a gameplay style, not performance style and should be left to the KDF for flavor.
Carriers - this one was a unique gameplay style tied to the KDF, but was also given across the board in a similar manner to the 5/3 weapons layout.
Those are just a few examples. I'm going to add examples of what could be unique gameplay for the Federation:
A new type of ship, let's call it "scout" because I saw someone speak about this a while ago. This scout could be a small, fast, not heavily armed but very defensive oriented ship that would act as a natural snooper for cloaked vessels and reveal them for the heavier Fed. ships.
This is unique gameplay and something that could be a signature for the faction.
A new innate ability that would need to be heavily balanced, but for the sake of discussion let it be somekind of a scan availible for all or most Starfleet ships that helps them notice cloaked ships. This could be unique to a faction.
Just a few off the top of my head, I didn't even think through. I hope you'll understand the point I'm trying to make about what does and what does not define a unique gameplay style relevant to a certain faction.
I'm fairly certain that if in the Fed. section of the forum there were 20 threads about this innate ability I mentioned instead of the 20 threads on how Starfleet needs cloaking, 90% of the KDF and Romulan players that come there and stand against it (the cloak) would either ignore them or give their support.
What ship got a extra console slot to mount a universal console? last I checked there are no ships with more then 10.
Funny how much of a hypocrites some of you are when it comes to balance you want... lol
Like I said.. you want a 5 tac console escort.. go play a different faction.. after all its balanced../rollseyes.
I do play a different faction to enjoy a 5 tac escort. What I wonder is why the KDF is the only faction without one.
As to the rant, thats the history the Cstore Defiant w/cloaking paraphrased to fit the KDF since we have innate cloaking. The Cstore Defiant came with innate cloaking in the form of a set Cloak console in one of its science slots. The players did not like it as such as it took up a scislot and cloaking is seen as pointless in pve. The playerbase complained it was unfair so the devs turned almost all Cstore ship special abilities into console based powers that could be removed, plus the Devs gave each Cstore ship an extra console slot so the use of said special consoles would not take up valuable space. Most where happy for a while. Years later some started complaining that the cloak console needs to be an innate power but the ships that use it should not lose the added console that was given to said ships to make its use easier.
Its the "we're special" balance insanity that some of us have noticed in parts of the playerbase.
Do some research. Its all in the games back history of updates. STOwiki is a good place to look.
You can find the definition of hypocrite in a Websters Dictionary.
For one Star Fleet was based off the US Navy.. they have warships.. Star Fleet is referred to as a "peace keeping armada" federation had combat ships. You can refer to Federation vs Empire board game and the Star Fleet Battles board game that had reference to Federation warships being built for war vs the Klingon Empire and later vs the Romulan Empire when they allied against the Federation. There is a lot of good info from the Federation vs Emipire board game on the war and other factions.
Carriers were in fact first seen in the show were Federation as well as fighter craft not klingon.. as well as the fact Humans.. have been using carriers for centuries..
There is no "unique" game play mechanic that Starfleet ships have.. All ships in game can tank.. some more then others just like all ships can dps.. some more then others.
But for arguments sake.. lets say devs came out saying 5 tac slots was a "unique" aspect of Federation and Roumlan ships.. would you think this fair?
My point is that what matters to some players what they view as balance is going to be different.. I can argue that you having a cloak is balance against me having 5 tac console. I can also argue that having to give up a console slot for a cloak is not balanced if all other cloaking ships are innate.
I just find it funny that same people jumping on every cloak/balance post for the federation are the same ones whining about 5 tac console and balance. When Fed players have for year been saying the same things about cloak. That cloak is more powerful then what its balanced against. So ya its just the hypocrisy of it all I find amusing
I do play a different faction to enjoy a 5 tac escort. What I wonder is why the KDF is the only faction without one.
As to the rant, thats the history the Cstore Defiant w/cloaking paraphrased to fit the KDF since we have innate cloaking. The Cstore Defiant came with innate cloaking in the form of a set Cloak console in one of its science slots. The players did not like it as such as it took up a scislot and cloaking is seen as pointless in pve. The playerbase complained it was unfair so the devs turned almost all Cstore ship special abilities into console based powers that could be removed, plus the Devs gave each Cstore ship an extra console slot so the use of said special consoles would not take up valuable space. Most where happy for a while. Years later some started complaining that the cloak console needs to be an innate power but the ships that use it should not lose the added console that was given to said ships to make its use easier.
Its the "we're special" balance insanity that some of us have noticed in parts of the playerbase.
Do some research. Its all in the games back history of updates. STOwiki is a good place to look.
You can find the definition of hypocrite in a Websters Dictionary.
/facepalm..
You ever consider it was the fact they were having to give up a console for something that they feel should of been innate to the Defiant? I know what the history of the cloak for the Defiant was. You seem to be missing the point that after all these years its the issue of having to give up a console that's been bugging people. Yes you scream its not fair and chastise others when they say its not fair.. so yes I call that hypocrisy.
For one Star Fleet was based off the US Navy.. they have warships.. Star Fleet is referred to as a "peace keeping armada" federation had combat ships. You can refer to Federation vs Empire board game and the Star Fleet Battles board game that had reference to Federation warships being built for war vs the Klingon Empire and later vs the Romulan Empire when they allied against the Federation. There is a lot of good info from the Federation vs Emipire board game on the war and other factions.
Actually, it is you whose lore is a bit off, but no point in bickering about lore now. "Peacekeeping armada" is J.J.Abrams's line, while Gene Roddenberry said it himself that he created Starfleet to be more like the Coast Guard.
I'm not saying that the Federation doesn't build warships, they just don't call them that. Take the Galaxy for example - the largest phaser array in Star Trek.
My point was that it makes no sense in a franchsise where there are 2 evenly matched factions - the one that peacefull and based on the Coast Guard to have a vast advantage on warships over the one that is suposed to thrive on conflict, live for war and has a honor code based on dying in battle.
They should be evenly matched at least, but what I personally think is that one needs to have premium offensive force while the other has premium defensive force.
Carriers were in fact first seen in the show were Federation as well as fighter craft not klingon.. as well as the fact Humans.. have been using carriers for centuries..
Actually, I was talking about in game mechanics when I spoke about the carriers. Just like there's nothing in lore that portrays a Bird of Prey as a raider, but STO does. Those are in-game gameplay mechanics.
And the Federation didn't use carriers, in fact only the Kazon used carriers in ST. (unless there is some really minor spin-off species that used them which I'm forgetting)
There is no "unique" game play mechanic that Starfleet ships have.. All ships in game can tank.. some more then others just like all ships can dps.. some more then others.
I agree. There's no unique gimmicky mechanic tied to the Federation in STO that would be relative to warbirds or raiders. Although people will say - well the Feds got pretty much everything, so that's their "unique mechanic" - I do think that Starfleet ships could use something unique in that regard, just for fun and further diversifying the factions.
That's why I get agrivated when I see hundreds of Fed threads asking for cloak, or raiders or singularities, but noone bothers to give a new and unique idea that the players would stand behind instead of robbing the other factions blind.
But for arguments sake.. lets say devs came out saying 5 tac slots was a "unique" aspect of Federation and Roumlan ships.. would you think this fair?
No, it't not and I explained that in my previous post. And if you really want to go down that road - the first ship with 5 tac.slots was the Jem Bug and shortly after came the first faction specific ship with 5 tac.slots which was the Tactical Bortasqu' - a KDF ship.
My point is that what matters to some players what they view as balance is going to be different.. I can argue that you having a cloak is balance against me having 5 tac console. I can also argue that having to give up a console slot for a cloak is not balanced if all other cloaking ships are innate.
Taking the obviously OP Romulans aside, I did point out in that other thread in the Fed. forum that there are a lot of drawbacks to the direct KDF counterparts of the Defiant that make the Defiant a better ship from them.
You're talking apples and oranges here. I have a Guramba - the Guramba doesn't cloak. You can't say that your 5 tac.console is an offset for my cloak because I don't have one. Ship classes can only be comparable to their counterparts.
That's why tactical consoles or Boff layouts can't be a defining factor that diversifies one faction from another - they're not flavor of gameplay, they're the base, the essential game mechanic.
I just find it funny that same people jumping on every cloak/balance post for the federation are the same ones whining about 5 tac console and balance. When Fed players have for year been saying the same things about cloak. That cloak is more powerful then what its balanced against. So ya its just hypocrisy of it all I find amusing
Again, currently only the Romulan cloak is OP. The KDF raiders pay for battlecloak with their very skin. The raptors pay with their durability compared to Fed. escorts and their ability to preform in a dogfight. The only ships who don't pay for the innate cloak are the battlecruisers as per the dev. decision to treat them as a native KDF class. (and even then there are quite a few battlecruisers that pay a slight penalty - for ex. Bortasqu with weaker cloak and 1.0 shield mod)
Again, "those" people that you refer to are not asking for something unique that other factions have, like warbirds or singularities for example. They're asking for equalizing the basic game mechanics that can by no term be a distinguishable factor of a faction.
You want 5 tac escorts play Feds or Romulans... Gee.. didn't I hear something like that about cloaks
LOL, REALLY? The faction in Star Trek who lives, breathes, and hopes to die a good death in battle does not have the offensive firepower needed to fight?
The faction that, by tradition in Star Trek canon, has been defined by forward firepower, has less 5 forward weapon ships than Starfleet, and has yet to have a 5 forward weapon w/ 5 TAC Console ship?
And yes, if you want to play with Cloaks, you need to roll KDF or Romulan.
STILL :cool:
YOU KNOW in Star Trek canon that Starfleet has absolutely no tradition of Cloak usage like the Klingons and Romulans do. To ask for otherwise is ridiculously stupid on so many levels.
Gene Rodenberry's "White Knights" did not go skulking around :rolleyes:
You ever consider it was the fact they were having to give up a console for something that they feel should of been innate to the Defiant? I know what the history of the cloak for the Defiant was. You seem to be missing the point that after all these years its the issue of having to give up a console that's been bugging people. Yes you scream its not fair and chastise others when they say its not fair.. so yes I call that hypocrisy.
Oh yeah:
YOU KNOW in Star Trek canon that Starfleet has absolutely no tradition of Cloak usage like the Klingons and Romulans do. To ask for otherwise is ridiculously stupid on so many levels.
Gene Rodenberry's "White Knights" did not go skulking around :rolleyes:
Actually, it is you whose lore is a bit off, but no point in bickering about lore now. "Peacekeeping armada" is J.J.Abrams's line, while Gene Roddenberry said it himself that he created Starfleet to be more like the Coast Guard.
I'm not saying that the Federation doesn't build warships, they just don't call them that. Take the Galaxy for example - the largest phaser array in Star Trek.
My point was that it makes no sense in a franchsise where there are 2 evenly matched factions - the one that peacefull and based on the Coast Guard to have a vast advantage on warships over the one that is suposed to live thrive on conflict, live for war and has a honor code based on dying in battle.
They should be evenly matched at least, but what I personally think is that one needs to have premium offensive force while the other has premium defensive force.
Actually, I was talking about in game mechanics when I spoke about the carriers. Just like there's nothing in lore that portrays a Bird of Prey as a raider, but STO does. Those are in-game gameplay mechanics.
And the Federation didn't use carriers, in fact only the Kazon used carriers in ST. (unless there isn't some really minor spin-off species that used them which I'm forgetting)
I agree. There's no unique gimmicky mechanic tied to the Federation in STO that would be relative to warbirds or raiders. Although people will say - well the Feds, got pretty much everything, so that's their "unique mechanic" - I do think that Starfleet ships could use something unique in that regard, just for fun and further diversifying the factions.
That's why I get agrivated when I see hundreds of Fed threads asking for cloak, or raiders or singularities, but noone bothers to give a new and unique idea that the players would stand behind instead of robbing the other factions blind.
No, it't not and I explained that in my previous post. And if you really want to go down that road - the first ship with 5 tac.slots was the Jem Bug and shortly after came the first faction specific ship with 5 tac.slots which was the Tactical Bortasqu' - a KDF ship.
Taking the obviously OP Romulans aside, I did point out in that other thread in the Fed. forum that there are a lot of drawbacks to the direct KDF counterparts of the Defiant that make the Defiant a better ship from them.
You're talking apples and oranges here. I have a Guramba - the Guramba doesn't cloak. You can't say that your 5 tac.console is an offset for my cloak because I don't have one. Ship classes can only be comparable to their counterparts.
That's why tactical consoles of Boff layouts can't be a defining factor that diversifies one faction from another - they're not flavor of gameplay, they're the base, the essential game mechanic.
Again, currently only the Romulan cloak is OP. The KDF raiders pay for battlecloak with their very skin. The raptors pay with their durability compared to Fed. escorts and their ability to preform in a dogfight. The only ships who don't pay for the innate cloak are the battlecruisers as per the dev. decision to treat them as a native KDF class. (and even then there are quite a few battlecruisers that pay a slight penalty - for ex. Bortasqu with weaker cloak and 1.0 shield mod)
Again, "those" people that you refer to are not asking for something unique that other factions have, like warbirds or singularities for example. They're asking for equalizing the basic game mechanics that can by no term be a distinguishable factor of a faction.
I do not want to edit your whole post but I'm pretty sure that in Enterprise its referred as the same thing as well as in Ds9 Star Fleet ship refered to as battle groups. There is also multi times Star Fleet is referred as a military arm of the Federation. In Star Trek Undiscovered Country when they discussion of peace with the Klingons are brought up.. there is a comment to the effect of "Moth balling Star Fleet" and in response is "our scientific and exploration should be not effected". That a pretty good indication that Star Fleet is a combat force not a coast guard.
Another thing is Gene Roddenberry Star Trek this is not... he had a rule that no "war" would last more then 2 episodes.. that war was not a thing of the future. Was till his death that Star Trek got a lot more bloody. Starting with DS9
In DS9: Sacrifice of Angels is the first time we see fighters in Star Trek.. so unless those fighters had there own warp drives ( they may have.. who knows) there would of been carriers.
As far as the Grumba.. the Galaxy X and Ar'Kif are its counter parts.. less so on the Ar'Kif given its beam is not innate. The Grumba is not fleet level as of yes.. and I agree it needs a revamp. But takeing that into consideration Lets look at the Spinal Lance (pre-revamp) vs the Javelin.. Both were direct high damage direct fire weapons.. The spinal lance fire 2 shots though giving it a great chance one would miss on a 2 mins timer and did less damage per shot. Where as the Grumba was on a 1 mins timer fired a single shot that tended to hit harder... over all they were pretty balanced. Slight edge in the Grumba favor. Now with the revamp on the Galaxy X.. that advantage is all to the Galaxy mainly do to the saucer separation AOE blast. Now I totally agree the Grumba needs a fleet version and a revamp on the Javelin. My thought are remove the -35% turn rate. Making it a better dog fighter then the Galaxy-X but giving the Galaxy X an advantage in fleet fights.
My point with the console vs cloak is that the federation cloak is taking up a console.. so in away saying they are apples to oranges is I feel not right.. given a 5 tac slot.. or removing a console slot to cloak are more in line.
I have stated I think all cloaks should be battle cloaks
As you saw in the fed post I gave some suggestions for a unique ability's for federation ships.. and was attacked just as much as the cloak issue.
I personally think that a Sensor Sweep ability on a 30 sec cool down would be a good balancer. it would pulse out decloaking any ship with in 5km. This would allow federation players to "catch" cloaking ships but also balance out battle cloaking.. Making timing vs scanning.. the Sensor sweep would be on a slightly longer cool down then battle cloak so if you battle cloaked at to low of life the Star Fleet ship could detect you and prevent the running away. If the cloaking ship used it more of a hit and run it would be able to re battle cloak during the cool down and break combat or come back in for another cloaking attack... this to me seems more balance then current situation.
To end it.. my issue is that people claim balance when it suits there advantage and vice versa. My comment was more a sarcastic look at the same people whining about 5 tac slots that scream fed players are whiners because they want balance between cloaking and non cloaking ships.
I think there is room for balance changes on all the factions.. and have stated such before as you know.
kelshando: What I want to ask for you, ignoring the player base, what do you have against KDF? Is it because of "killing good guys"? If that's the case, there are plenty other games that does that, such as GTA or Payday 2, where you get kicked out of a game for not killing a hostage. (trust me, it happened to me more than once)
Now, you have build a lot of characters on all side, but the question is, which is your main?
For example, I have 1 fed, 1 KDF, and 2 Rom, but I am not a Rom, because I always go back to my KDF no matter what, and thus I am to be considered as a KDF main player. So we would like to know which one do you main the most, and why -- even if it happen to be a Fed.
On a sidenote, you could have just point out that Lorewise, Fed is only good at science and innovation, because the only reason they win time and time again is through human ingenuity; in fact that's the true point of star trek, not by superior firepower or defense, which Lorewise KDF have distinct advantage (in fact they are quite OP), but by knowledges and thinking.
And by collorary through Canon, KDF should not need more science, because their warrior culture actually decrease their science efficiency.
I do not want to edit your whole post but I'm pretty sure that in Enterprise its referred as the same thing as well as in Ds9 Star Fleet ship refered to as battle groups. There is also multi times Star Fleet is referred as a military arm of the Federation. In Star Trek Undiscovered Country when they discussion of peace with the Klingons are brought up.. there is a comment to the effect of "Moth balling Star Fleet" and in response is "our scientific and exploration should be not effected". That a pretty good indication that Star Fleet is a combat force not a coast guard.
Like I said - the primary role of Starfleet working as a type of Coast Guard (although this might not be the best description even if Gene used it himself), but they build ships capable of war. The difference between for ex. Klignon pure warships and Federation ships capable of war is not in the damage potential, but in the primary role. The Fed one has sensors, labs, etc. and it's set to explore first and foremost, but to be capable to defend itself. On the other hand the KDF one if built for war intentions usually doesn't have commodities, labs, researach facilities but rather a large crew complement suitable for boarding ships and ground invasions.
I then to see Starfleet as a mix of a military defense force and NASA + a few other renowned scientific reasearch facilities. They're responsible for protecting the entire Federation after all.
As for the references - it's natural that they'd be called battle groups in DS9 since they were at war and about to engage a battle. In ENT there is no Starfleet yet, or rather Starfleet is still a Human only organization. (unless you meant the Enterprise-D, that was referred as a battleship by Worf in one episode. Like I said, they just don't call the ships that way and it's not their primary role, but Starfleet ships pack a punch)
Another thing is Gene Roddenberry Star Trek this is not... he had a rule that no "war" would last more then 2 episodes.. that war was not a thing of the future. Was till his death that Star Trek got a lot more bloody. Starting with DS9
In DS9: Sacrifice of Angels is the first time we see fighters in Star Trek.. so unless those fighters had there own warp drives ( they may have.. who knows) there would of been carriers.
Actually we know - the Peregrines are warp capable, just as the runabouts.
There's also the option for a larger ship to cover them with it's own warp bubble and help them travel at higher warp speeds. (since they're not capable of high warp)
There's a third option - that they were transpored in a shuttlebay of larger ships, like the Enterprise-D transported the 3 runabouts at the beginning of DS9. They could have unloaded the Peregrines shortly before arriving to the battle destination, since the fighters were already departed in space in the first scenes in 'Sacrifice of Angels'.
My point was - none of the Fed. ships in canon functioned as a carrier. There was no ship capable to launch, re-launch, dock and service multiple small craft and preform a role of a conventional carrier. And fighters were used as a distraction in the most dire of situations - where they were losing to the Dominion heavily.
As far as the Grumba.. the Galaxy X and Ar'Kif are its counter parts.. less so on the Ar'Kif given its beam is not innate. The Grumba is not fleet level as of yes.. and I agree it needs a revamp. But takeing that into consideration Lets look at the Spinal Lance (pre-revamp) vs the Javelin.. Both were direct high damage direct fire weapons.. The spinal lance fire 2 shots though giving it a great chance one would miss on a 2 mins timer and did less damage per shot. Where as the Grumba was on a 1 mins timer fired a single shot that tended to hit harder... over all they were pretty balanced. Slight edge in the Grumba favor. Now with the revamp on the Galaxy X.. that advantage is all to the Galaxy mainly do to the saucer separation AOE blast. Now I totally agree the Grumba needs a fleet version and a revamp on the Javelin. My thought are remove the -35% turn rate. Making it a better dog fighter then the Galaxy-X but giving the Galaxy X an advantage in fleet fights.
Ok, now this is all elementary wrong. There's just no way in hell that any of those 3 ships you mentioned are a counterpart of any other of those 3.
This is wrong on so many levels - one is a destroyer, the other is a dreadnought cruiser and the third is an escort carrier. There isn't even a single thing related between them, not even the Boff layout.
Sure, the javelin and lance look similar on the first glance - but that is also wrong. If we go by that why don't we put the Vesta as well, since she also has a similar weapon.
The javelin is an ability that charges over combat time from the energy the Guramba drains from the targeted enemy. The lance doesn't need to do that, it just cycles 2 shots.
That said, the lance really does need a fix beacuse it's quite messed up - but that's not for balance reasons, it's just messed up and needs to be fixed regardless. Just like the missing floor in 'Blood of the Empire'.
My point with the console vs cloak is that the federation cloak is taking up a console.. so in away saying they are apples to oranges is I feel not right.. given a 5 tac slot.. or removing a console slot to cloak are more in line.
But that's what Roach has been saying all the time. The Defiant used to have a console slot removed for innate cloak, but the Fed. players complained that the cloak is not usefull enough in PvE to warrant a console slot decrease, so Crptyic turned it into a console and added a slot to the Defiant - thus enabling the players who complained to make the choice themselves.
I have stated I think all cloaks should be battle cloaks
As per lore they should, but that will never happen in STO because of game mechanics. And if it happens, then all KDF raiders need to be buffed as hell because they currently pay with life for battlecloak - and that's a whole other can of worms to oppen.
As you saw in the fed post I gave some suggestions for a unique ability's for federation ships.. and was attacked just as much as the cloak issue.
I personally think that a Sensor Sweep ability on a 30 sec cool down would be a good balancer. it would pulse out decloaking any ship with in 5km. This would allow federation players to "catch" cloaking ships but also balance out battle cloaking.. Making timing vs scanning.. the Sensor sweep would be on a slightly longer cool down then battle cloak so if you battle cloaked at to low of life the Star Fleet ship could detect you and prevent the running away. If the cloaking ship used it more of a hit and run it would be able to re battle cloak during the cool down and break combat or come back in for another cloaking attack... this to me seems more balance then current situation.
I can't speak for everyone on this forum, I can speak only for myself. There are people that will attack you even if you propose Cryptic to give free 1000 Zen to players.
Like I said, I wouldn't mind somekind of sensor sweep mechanic that'd be unique for Starfleet, although I consider 30 secs to be very unbalanced. You have to remember, under cloak a ship is as good as dead (Scimitar excluded) and there are already abilities and consoles in game that are usefull in snooping.
However, I'd leave balancing issues to the devs - they're the ones that should know best how should anything in game preform.
To end it.. my issue is that people claim balance when it suits there advantage and vice versa. My comment was more a sarcastic look at the same people whining about 5 tac slots that scream fed players are whiners because they want balance between cloaking and non cloaking ships.
I think there is room for balance changes on all the factions.. and have stated such before as you know.
As long as the game is allive and well, there will be room for balance and changes.
But again, the console slot distribution can't be observed as a distinctive factor of a certain faction because the console slots, the Boff slots and the Doffs are an essential part of the base game mechanic. They're not the flavor, they're what makes STO tick.
I'm all for balance between the factions, just I don't see balance in a form which equalizies the factions in terms of abilities, gimicks and gameplay as many other people seem to do.
Like I said - the primary role of Starfleet working as a type of Coast Guard (although this might not be the best description even if Gene used it himself), but they build ships capable of war. The difference between for ex. Klignon pure warships and Federation ships capable of war is not in the damage potential, but in the primary role. The Fed one has sensors, labs, etc. and it's set to explore first and foremost, but to be capable to defend itself. On the other hand the KDF one if built for war intentions usually doesn't have commodities, labs, researach facilities but rather a large crew complement suitable for boarding ships and ground invasions.
I then to see Starfleet as a mix of a military defense force and NASA + a few other renowned scientific reasearch facilities. They're responsible for protecting the entire Federation after all.
As for the references - it's natural that they'd be called battle groups in DS9 since they were at war and about to engage a battle. In ENT there is no Starfleet yet, or rather Starfleet is still a Human only organization. (unless you meant the Enterprise-D, that was referred as a battleship by Worf in one episode. Like I said, they just don't call the ships that way and it's not their primary role, but Starfleet ships pack a punch)
Actually we know - the Peregrines are warp capable, just as the runabouts.
There's also the option for a larger ship to cover them with it's own warp bubble and help them travel at higher warp speeds. (since they're not capable of high warp)
There's a third option - that they were transpored in a shuttlebay of larger ships, like the Enterprise-D transported the 3 runabouts at the beginning of DS9. They could have unloaded the Peregrines shortly before arriving to the battle destination, since the fighters were already departed in space in the first scenes in 'Sacrifice of Angels'.
My point was - none of the Fed. ships in canon functioned as a carrier. There was no ship capable to launch, re-launch, dock and service multiple small craft and preform a role of a conventional carrier. And fighters were used as a distraction in the most dire of situations - where they were losing to the Dominion heavily.
Ok, now this is all elementary wrong. There's just no way in hell that any of those 3 ships you mentioned are a counterpart of any other of those 3.
This is wrong on so many levels - one is a destroyer, the other is a dreadnought cruiser and the third is an escort carrier. There isn't even a single thing related between them, not even the Boff layout.
Sure, the javelin and lance look similar on the first glance - but that is also wrong. If we go by that why don't we put the Vesta as well, since she also has a similar weapon.
The javelin is an ability that charges over combat time from the energy the Guramba drains from the targeted enemy. The lance doesn't need to do that, it just cycles 2 shots.
That said, the lance really does need a fix beacuse it's quite messed up - but that's not for balance reasons, it's just messed up and needs to be fixed regardless. Just like the missing floor in 'Blood of the Empire'.
But that's what Roach has been saying all the time. The Defiant used to have a console slot removed for innate cloak, but the Fed. players complained that the cloak is not usefull enough in PvE to warrant a console slot decrease, so Crptyic turned it into a console and added a slot to the Defiant - thus enabling the players who complained to make the choice themselves.
As per lore they should, but that will never happen in STO because of game mechanics. And if it happens, then all KDF raiders need to be buffed as hell because they currently pay with life for battlecloak - and that's a whole other can of worms to oppen.
I can't speak for everyone on this forum, I can speak only for myself. There are people that will attack you even if you propose Cryptic to give free 1000 Zen to players.
Like I said, I wouldn't mind somekind of sensor sweep mechanic that'd be unique for Starfleet, although I consider 30 secs to be very unbalanced. You have to remember, under cloak a ship is as good as dead (Scimitar excluded) and there are already abilities and consoles in game that are usefull in snooping.
However, I'd leave balancing issues to the devs - they're the ones that should know best how should anything in game preform.
As long as the game is allive and well, there will be room for balance and changes.
But again, the console slot distribution can't be observed as a distinctive factor of a certain faction because the console slots, the Boff slots and the Doffs are an essential part of the base game mechanic. They're not the flavor, they're what makes STO tick.
I'm all for balance between the factions, just I don't see balance in a form which equalizies the factions in terms of abilities, gimicks and gameplay as many other people seem to do.
The Klingons have a scientific arm.. just because its not front in center does not mean they do not have one. I think this is a huge misconception. They have a warrior society.. that means they honor there warriors above all else.. Does not mean that every Klingon is a warrior most of the population are not warriors. They couldn't be they have to support needs of the fleet.
Also Star Fleet is known even in STO to gear its ships for war.. they make new ships for war.. how long in game has Star Fleet been fighting wars non-stop. Also Lore wise Federation starships were pound for pound more powerful. You can not have this in a game do to balance issue.
Klingons ships have always been presented as nimble fighters, hit and run. While Federation ships were slower but had massive fire power and shields. Look at Star Trek Space Battles.. the 1st canon based board game. They referred to the Klingons as doing the Klingon Death Dance in space combat. They could not stand toe to toe with federation ships.. those same explore / scientific ship.
As far as the Grumba.. you totally looked at the wrong thing for balance.. The balance was between the weapon systems.. the lance vs javelin.. and I own both ships.. I know how they work. So what I said was accurate.
I knew you were going to say unbalanced about the sensor sweep.. Its not unbalanced... You are taken out of stealth by the sensor sweep.. so your shield would be up right away. It's totally different then catching a cloaked ship passively.
You are right.. people like to whine.
Given its a game there should be balance.. but people need to admit there is a balance issue.. and well Klingon only players are some of the worse when comes to admitting this... At least Romulan players admit there OP.. they just laugh at you as they admit it.
kelshando: What I want to ask for you, ignoring the player base, what do you have against KDF? Is it because of "killing good guys"? If that's the case, there are plenty other games that does that, such as GTA or Payday 2, where you get kicked out of a game for not killing a hostage. (trust me, it happened to me more than once)
Now, you have build a lot of characters on all side, but the question is, which is your main?
For example, I have 1 fed, 1 KDF, and 2 Rom, but I am not a Rom, because I always go back to my KDF no matter what, and thus I am to be considered as a KDF main player. So we would like to know which one do you main the most, and why -- even if it happen to be a Fed.
On a sidenote, you could have just point out that Lorewise, Fed is only good at science and innovation, because the only reason they win time and time again is through human ingenuity; in fact that's the true point of star trek, not by superior firepower or defense, which Lorewise KDF have distinct advantage (in fact they are quite OP), but by knowledges and thinking.
And by collorary through Canon, KDF should not need more science, because their warrior culture actually decrease their science efficiency.
I have 2 level 50 Klingons 1 tac, 1 eng.. I own Grumba, Mogh, B'rolth, Marauder. Ning'Tao, Phalanx, Vandal C-Store ships.
I have 2 Romulan level 50 1 tac, 1 sci.. I own Ar'Kala, Ar'Kif, Dhael, T'varo, Valdore C-Store ships
I have 3 Federation level 50 1 tac, 1 sci, 1 eng I own Galaxy Bundle, Armitiage, Thunder Child, Rode island, San Palo, Andorian 3 pack, nebula, assault cruiser retro, Atrox C-Store ships
I have nothing against Klingons, Romulan or Federation... what I'm against is blatant balance issue... All the faction need help.
Be it Klingon needing more sci ships and dedicated tanking ships non cloak (Gorn) ships, better space traits for boffs, or romulan needing more Sci ships, more non romulan ships such as Reman and more faction races with there ships, they also need elite fleet plasma weapon for the romulans. Or Federation needing balance against cloaks, something added to Star Fleet ships that's innate to only them, Elite fleet Phasers need to be buffed.
After playing all three those are just some of the issue I would like to see addressed.
Edit: Lore wise Federation ships had better shield and fire power then Klingon ships.. just fyi
I have 2 level 50 Klingons 1 tac, 1 eng.. I own Grumba, Mogh, B'rolth, Marauder. Ning'Tao, Phalanx, Vandal C-Store ships.
I have 2 Romulan level 50 1 tac, 1 sci.. I own Ar'Kala, Ar'Kif, Dhael, T'varo, Valdore C-Store ships
I have 3 Federation level 50 1 tac, 1 sci, 1 eng I own Galaxy Bundle, Armitiage, Thunder Child, Rode island, San Palo, Andorian 3 pack, nebula, assault cruiser retro, Atrox C-Store ships
I have nothing against Klingons, Romulan or Federation... what I'm against is blatant balance issue... All the faction need help.
Be it Klingon needing more sci ships and dedicated tanking ships non cloak (Gorn) ships, better space traits for boffs, or romulan needing more Sci ships, more non romulan ships such as Reman and more faction races with there ships, they also need elite fleet plasma weapon for the romulans. Or Federation needing balance against cloaks, something added to Star Fleet ships that's innate to only them, Elite fleet Phasers need to be buffed.
After playing all three those are just some of the issue I would like to see addressed.
Edit: Lore wise Federation ships had better shield and fire power then Klingon ships.. just fyi
Where is the evidence in canon the Feds had decisively better technology? Because the Klingons and Federation had been at war with each other numerous times, and were quite even, despite the Federation being the far, FAR larger political and military power.
Even this technological edge alot of Fed players assume, just because all the series and movies have been Fed-POV, isn't as good as people think back on with rose tinted glasses. Many times the USS Enterprise throughout the franchise has come across ships, other political powers that were on even footing as the Enterprise. This was REALLY evident in TNG. The ENT-D comes across some new race, with their ship. Picard orders a scan, Worf tells him the general specs and that their technology is comparable to their own... and this is a Galaxy-class we're talking about, fitted with the best technology the Federation has to offer for its best crewed ship using Starfleet's flagship. With Picard coming across people regularly being on equal terms on technology (and comparable fighting power), it forces him to be actually more polite... because one wrong move, and you have a fight between evenly matched powers and not some lopsided match.
The Federation and Klingon Empire had been on roughly even footing with each other because they have been at odds with each other for most of their history. Even in TOS timeframe, there was an arms race. The Constitution-class was the pinnacle of Starfleet's technology and made everything obsolete that they were designed to come across. The Klingons didn't let themselves lag behind, so they came up with their answer, the D-7. The arms race persisted into the "modern" era of TNG, DS9, and the Dominion War era. Both powers KNOW each other well. Both powers have their own philosophies in ships.
Just because Starfleet ships looked pretty or were painted in a beautiful white or light grey, doesn't mean they were above their competition. The KDF and Romulan Navy were styled quite differently, but their technology is close enough that it's not a blatantly overpowering advantage against each other.
I really do wish in STO that there's far more differences in playstyle between the 3 playable factions. I despise Red vs Blue, but I do desire the playing field to be fun and even. But they still need to be distinct.
In general, esp. from past Star Trek games, I have felt Starfleet vessels to be well rounded, sturdy defenses. Klingons ships were maneuverable, good forward firepower, but did not have the staying power compared to Starfleet vessels. In some ST games, like Birth of the Federation, the Romulan Navy featured powerful, tough vessels with cloaks. A Warbird coming out of cloaks was usually the last thing you saw, but games offset this with slower maneuverability than Starfleet and Klingon vessels.
I know that's very simplified, but again, I *DO* wish there were distinctive playstyles in STO between the different factions. Right now, outside of Cloaks, there isn't. Even Starfleet vessels are at a point where they're not quite Starfleet in style, compared to the TV shows and movies.
No, it't not and I explained that in my previous post. And if you really want to go down that road - the first ship with 5 tac.slots was the Jem Bug and shortly after came the first faction specific ship with 5 tac.slots which was the Tactical Bortasqu' - a KDF ship.
Sorry Shpoks, it was the other way around:
Bortas 3-pack was released first, making the tac version the first 5 tac console ship in the game. When the fleet system was released, the Bug and other lockbox ships at the time were buffed to fleet level, the Bug itself being given a 5th tac console.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
Where is the evidence in canon the Feds had decisively better technology? Because the Klingons and Federation had been at war with each other numerous times, and were quite even, despite the Federation being the far, FAR larger political and military power.
Even this technological edge alot of Fed players assume, just because all the series and movies have been Fed-POV, isn't as good as people think back on with rose tinted glasses. Many times the USS Enterprise throughout the franchise has come across ships, other political powers that were on even footing as the Enterprise. This was REALLY evident in TNG. The ENT-D comes across some new race, with their ship. Picard orders a scan, Worf tells him the general specs and that their technology is comparable to their own... and this is a Galaxy-class we're talking about, fitted with the best technology the Federation has to offer for its best crewed ship using Starfleet's flagship. With Picard coming across people regularly being on equal terms on technology (and comparable fighting power), it forces him to be actually more polite... because one wrong move, and you have a fight between evenly matched powers and not some lopsided match.
The Federation and Klingon Empire had been on roughly even footing with each other because they have been at odds with each other for most of their history. Even in TOS timeframe, there was an arms race. The Constitution-class was the pinnacle of Starfleet's technology and made everything obsolete that they were designed to come across. The Klingons didn't let themselves lag behind, so they came up with their answer, the D-7. The arms race persisted into the "modern" era of TNG, DS9, and the Dominion War era. Both powers KNOW each other well. Both powers have their own philosophies in ships.
Just because Starfleet ships looked pretty or were painted in a beautiful white or light grey, doesn't mean they were above their competition. The KDF and Romulan Navy were styled quite differently, but their technology is close enough that it's not a blatantly overpowering advantage against each other.
I really do wish in STO that there's far more differences in playstyle between the 3 playable factions. I despise Red vs Blue, but I do desire the playing field to be fun and even. But they still need to be distinct.
In general, esp. from past Star Trek games, I have felt Starfleet vessels to be well rounded, sturdy defenses. Klingons ships were maneuverable, good forward firepower, but did not have the staying power compared to Starfleet vessels. In some ST games, like Birth of the Federation, the Romulan Navy featured powerful, tough vessels with cloaks. A Warbird coming out of cloaks was usually the last thing you saw, but games offset this with slower maneuverability than Starfleet and Klingon vessels.
I know that's very simplified, but again, I *DO* wish there were distinctive playstyles in STO between the different factions. Right now, outside of Cloaks, there isn't. Even Starfleet vessels are at a point where they're not quite Starfleet in style, compared to the TV shows and movies.
I really do not have room to go over everything.. check out Star Fleet Battles.. it was a board game.. reviewed as one of the greats space combat sims at the time. Was the first licensed space combat game for Star Trek. It goes in to huge details.
Just to sum up.. The KDF was about numbers.. the Federation was about quality. Remember Star Trek was created during the cold war.. The Klingons really were created as the evil "eastern pac" forces.. they were aggressive.. they would over whelm you with numbers... the Federation was the "western forces" Small numbers but better gear and training.
One thing in Star Fleet Battles is it went over the war in much more detail. In almost all the battles Federation forces were out numbered by Klingon. Klingon ships were smaller and faster, they maneuvered better. But Federation ships had better shields, fire power and damage control.
The tactics out lined for Klingons were hit and run.. to widdle down Federation ships with lots of smaller hits. The term in game of the Klingon Death Dance was to describe Klingon captain moving in and out and max range to strike and retreat. That prolonged fights with Federation ships would lead to there destruction.
Federation ship tactics were much more straight forward... was to close and pound the target. They had Very strong shields and weapons systems but were slower. The Klingons would try to dance around and keep in the side arcs of Federation ships doing every thing they could to keep out of torp. arcs aka the front and rear arc.
The only race that matched Federation for shear protection was Gorn ships. They had same shield but better armor.. though there weapons were weaker.
The only ships that were much bigger then anything the Federation had were the B-10 battle crusiers / battleship that was 4 times larger then anything any race had at the time.. only 5 were to be built for each border of the Empire. But due to the cost only 1 was every complete and was lost vs the HYDRAN KINGDOM before the Klingon Empire annexed there territory.
There is a lot of Lore in both Federation & Empire and Star Fleet Battle games. In the end though the Federation fought 3 different Empires at once and was able to force peace treaties with all three, the Gorn, Klingons and the Romulan Empire. The Romulans attacked the Gorn after they were defeated by the Federation only to fight to a stand still with the Gorn. The Klingons on the other hand Annexed the territory's of the HYDRAN KINGDOM, KZINTI HEGEMONY and the LYRAN STAR EMPIRE. They were actually lost territory to the Federation only for the Federation to give it back after forcing the Klingons to sign a peace treaty. In the end though the Empire did manage to expand it boarders almost doubling it size.. just not on its boarder with the Federation.
Not a lot of people know about these licensed games.. but its a lot of good back ground info from them
No, it't not and I explained that in my previous post. And if you really want to go down that road - the first ship with 5 tac.slots was the Jem Bug and shortly after came the first faction specific ship with 5 tac.slots which was the Tactical Bortasqu' - a KDF ship.
Bortas 3-pack was released first, making the tac version the first 5 tac console ship in the game. When the fleet system was released, the Bug and other lockbox ships at the time were buffed to fleet level, the Bug itself being given a 5th tac console.
mimey is correct; when the bugship was first released, it only had 4 tac consoles
it didn't get its 5th until all lockbox ships got updated for S6
so the klingons were the first faction to get a 5 tac console ship...too bad it took over a year before they could begin to make proper use of all those tac consoles
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
mimey is correct; when the bugship was first released, it only had 4 tac consoles
it didn't get its 5th until all lockbox ships got updated for S6
so the klingons were the first faction to get a 5 tac console ship...too bad it took over a year before they could begin to make proper use of all those tac consoles
Also, could go a step further and even say that the KDF had the first 4 tac console cruiser as well, also before anyone else. Sure there's a ton of those nowadays, but even so, it is true. Namely the original free Bortas did that, along with the eng and sci versions of the C-store Bortas as well.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
I really do not have room to go over everything.. check out Star Fleet Battles.. it was a board game.. reviewed as one of the greats space combat sims at the time. Was the first licensed space combat game for Star Trek. It goes in to huge details.
Just to sum up.. The KDF was about numbers.. the Federation was about quality. Remember Star Trek was created during the cold war.. The Klingons really were created as the evil "eastern pac" forces.. they were aggressive.. they would over whelm you with numbers... the Federation was the "western forces" Small numbers but better gear and training.
One thing in Star Fleet Battles is it went over the war in much more detail. In almost all the battles Federation forces were out numbered by Klingon. Klingon ships were smaller and faster, they maneuvered better. But Federation ships had better shields, fire power and damage control.
The tactics out lined for Klingons were hit and run.. to widdle down Federation ships with lots of smaller hits. The term in game of the Klingon Death Dance was to describe Klingon captain moving in and out and max range to strike and retreat. That prolonged fights with Federation ships would lead to there destruction.
Federation ship tactics were much more straight forward... was to close and pound the target. They had Very strong shields and weapons systems but were slower. The Klingons would try to dance around and keep in the side arcs of Federation ships doing every thing they could to keep out of torp. arcs aka the front and rear arc.
The only race that matched Federation for shear protection was Gorn ships. They had same shield but better armor.. though there weapons were weaker.
The only ships that were much bigger then anything the Federation had were the B-10 battle crusiers / battleship that was 4 times larger then anything any race had at the time.. only 5 were to be built for each border of the Empire. But due to the cost only 1 was every complete and was lost vs the HYDRAN KINGDOM before the Klingon Empire annexed there territory.
There is a lot of Lore in both Federation & Empire and Star Fleet Battle games. In the end though the Federation fought 3 different Empires at once and was able to force peace treaties with all three, the Gorn, Klingons and the Romulan Empire. The Romulans attacked the Gorn after they were defeated by the Federation only to fight to a stand still with the Gorn. The Klingons on the other hand Annexed the territory's of the HYDRAN KINGDOM, KZINTI HEGEMONY and the LYRAN STAR EMPIRE. They were actually lost territory to the Federation only for the Federation to give it back after forcing the Klingons to sign a peace treaty. In the end though the Empire did manage to expand it boarders almost doubling it size.. just not on its boarder with the Federation.
Not a lot of people know about these licensed games.. but its a lot of good back ground info from them
Star Fleet Battles is not Star Trek.
It is not set in the Star Trek universe and is not allowed to carry the name "Star Trek" in its title.
Not even its own authors consider it to be part of Trek, only based on it.
Here's what the people in authority at Amarillo Design Bureau say on the matter in their "Prime Directive" RPG on page 183 of their rulebook:
"This is the Star Fleet Universe, not Star Trek. When we created this universe, we reviewed the available source data. We used some, ignored others (considering some things to be "plot devieces" with no real basis in technology), and when we found multiple sources in conflict, we picked the most logical interpretation and rejected the rest. After we published our decisions (in the form of numerous game products), new source material appeared which contradicted the SFU. That doesn't make us wrong, or the data wrong. Data that doesn't fit is from the other parallel universe and won't always match up"
So if you use SFB or the SFU in general as a "source" you're successfully invalidating your own argument.
Bortas 3-pack was released first, making the tac version the first 5 tac console ship in the game. When the fleet system was released, the Bug and other lockbox ships at the time were buffed to fleet level, the Bug itself being given a 5th tac console.
Damn....you're right. It seems like it was yesterday, but it's actually been 2 years since then. :eek:
Yeah, I overlooked the fact that the 2012 Winter Event Jem Bug was not boosted to 5 tac.consoles yet.
so the klingons were the first faction to get a 5 tac console ship...too bad it took over a year before they could begin to make proper use of all those tac consoles
Over a year? Hehe...I've been using my Bortasqu' since it was released and I've been and still am thoroughly enjoying the ship. It is and always has been a beast, but now the new SA took the Command one that I was usually using anyway to a whole new level. Never had much issues to make full use of the ship, but then again - the slow heavy ships come natural to me. I actually had more issues getting used to escorts.
Could you imagine decloaking on some poor souls aft hull with Flanking + 5 Fleet Exploiter consoles+Fire on my mark (or sensor scan). You would hear a cry around the world beginning for klingon nerfs.
Could you imagine decloaking on some poor souls aft hull with Flanking + 5 Fleet Exploiter consoles+Fire on my mark (or sensor scan). You would hear a cry around the world beginning for klingon nerfs.
So what you're saying is - nothing will change? :P
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml6Yqu-spnM
That would be because I'm not really. I just saw an opportunity and figured eh, why not.
the new escort is round to! ok.....round-ish.
Did they......did they start sell us "O" ships?
I'm actually glad it has a round saucer instead of the chevrons. The round saucer section is Starfleet classic in Star Trek.
Heh, how many 5 TAC Escorts the Feds and Roms have now? How many does the KDF have?
Hang on.. I know this one...It was on Imperial Jepardy just last week... gimme a sec.....
R.I.P
You want 5 tac escorts play Feds or Romulans... Gee.. didn't I hear something like that about cloaks
Better yet the Devs can make new ship with a special engineering console that acts just like a 5th Tac console that we can use on say just three ships. We KDF can then complain that its unfair because said console takes up vaulable console space (while the power itself is not very useful) until they convert it into a universal console, plus add an extra console slot so we dont lose a slot to use it. Later we can complain about how its unfair that the new Universal console is not an innate ability but we need to keep the extra console slot anyways as its only fair because the power is so important for us to have as a balancer between the factions.
R.I.P
I'm sorry but what in the world was that rant?
What ship got a extra console slot to mount a universal console? last I checked there are no ships with more then 10.
Funny how much of a hypocrites some of you are when it comes to balance you want... lol
Like I said.. you want a 5 tac console escort.. go play a different faction.. after all its balanced../rollseyes.
Are you really that ignorant on lore, are your views on this game that much flawed, or are you just trolling again??
Let me try and explain once again in high hopes that you won't ingore it once more:
Console slots are not a thing that defines unique gameplay, because all the top tier ships in game come with 9 or 10 console slots and every faction has numerous variations of them. Furthermore, the effectivness of the console slots defines a ship and a build, therefore you can't make any faction have exclusivity in certain console combiantion - espeically the tac. ones which unlike the others - stack.
Science ships are not a thing that defines unique gameplay, because there is a science career profile availible for all the factions in STO. You can't let people make science characters and then tell them that only 1 faction has science ships even though you made science career profles open to all the factions.
If the career profiles in STO were different or varied between the faction, then the Feds. could've had the exclusivity on science ships.
Something that could have been unique is the 5/3 weapons layout, but the devs gave them all across the board or the 5/2 of the Kumari. (which can still be left unique to Feds)
The really hillarious part here is the relation to lore, the same issue I have with the Feds. demanding cloaking - based on lore it's impossibly hillarious to tell the players of the KDF that if they want a brutal warship they need to roll a Fed. or a Rom. lol
Now, on the other hand - there are some things that do define a unique gameplay:
Warbirds and singularity powers. That particular style of gameplay is unique and should be left alone for the Romulans.
Raiders and flanking. This is also unique as a gameplay style, not performance style and should be left to the KDF for flavor.
Carriers - this one was a unique gameplay style tied to the KDF, but was also given across the board in a similar manner to the 5/3 weapons layout.
Those are just a few examples. I'm going to add examples of what could be unique gameplay for the Federation:
A new type of ship, let's call it "scout" because I saw someone speak about this a while ago. This scout could be a small, fast, not heavily armed but very defensive oriented ship that would act as a natural snooper for cloaked vessels and reveal them for the heavier Fed. ships.
This is unique gameplay and something that could be a signature for the faction.
A new innate ability that would need to be heavily balanced, but for the sake of discussion let it be somekind of a scan availible for all or most Starfleet ships that helps them notice cloaked ships. This could be unique to a faction.
Just a few off the top of my head, I didn't even think through. I hope you'll understand the point I'm trying to make about what does and what does not define a unique gameplay style relevant to a certain faction.
I'm fairly certain that if in the Fed. section of the forum there were 20 threads about this innate ability I mentioned instead of the 20 threads on how Starfleet needs cloaking, 90% of the KDF and Romulan players that come there and stand against it (the cloak) would either ignore them or give their support.
I do play a different faction to enjoy a 5 tac escort. What I wonder is why the KDF is the only faction without one.
As to the rant, thats the history the Cstore Defiant w/cloaking paraphrased to fit the KDF since we have innate cloaking. The Cstore Defiant came with innate cloaking in the form of a set Cloak console in one of its science slots. The players did not like it as such as it took up a scislot and cloaking is seen as pointless in pve. The playerbase complained it was unfair so the devs turned almost all Cstore ship special abilities into console based powers that could be removed, plus the Devs gave each Cstore ship an extra console slot so the use of said special consoles would not take up valuable space. Most where happy for a while. Years later some started complaining that the cloak console needs to be an innate power but the ships that use it should not lose the added console that was given to said ships to make its use easier.
Its the "we're special" balance insanity that some of us have noticed in parts of the playerbase.
Do some research. Its all in the games back history of updates. STOwiki is a good place to look.
You can find the definition of hypocrite in a Websters Dictionary.
R.I.P
For one Star Fleet was based off the US Navy.. they have warships.. Star Fleet is referred to as a "peace keeping armada" federation had combat ships. You can refer to Federation vs Empire board game and the Star Fleet Battles board game that had reference to Federation warships being built for war vs the Klingon Empire and later vs the Romulan Empire when they allied against the Federation. There is a lot of good info from the Federation vs Emipire board game on the war and other factions.
Carriers were in fact first seen in the show were Federation as well as fighter craft not klingon.. as well as the fact Humans.. have been using carriers for centuries..
There is no "unique" game play mechanic that Starfleet ships have.. All ships in game can tank.. some more then others just like all ships can dps.. some more then others.
But for arguments sake.. lets say devs came out saying 5 tac slots was a "unique" aspect of Federation and Roumlan ships.. would you think this fair?
My point is that what matters to some players what they view as balance is going to be different.. I can argue that you having a cloak is balance against me having 5 tac console. I can also argue that having to give up a console slot for a cloak is not balanced if all other cloaking ships are innate.
I just find it funny that same people jumping on every cloak/balance post for the federation are the same ones whining about 5 tac console and balance. When Fed players have for year been saying the same things about cloak. That cloak is more powerful then what its balanced against. So ya its just the hypocrisy of it all I find amusing
/facepalm..
You ever consider it was the fact they were having to give up a console for something that they feel should of been innate to the Defiant? I know what the history of the cloak for the Defiant was. You seem to be missing the point that after all these years its the issue of having to give up a console that's been bugging people. Yes you scream its not fair and chastise others when they say its not fair.. so yes I call that hypocrisy.
Actually, it is you whose lore is a bit off, but no point in bickering about lore now. "Peacekeeping armada" is J.J.Abrams's line, while Gene Roddenberry said it himself that he created Starfleet to be more like the Coast Guard.
I'm not saying that the Federation doesn't build warships, they just don't call them that. Take the Galaxy for example - the largest phaser array in Star Trek.
My point was that it makes no sense in a franchsise where there are 2 evenly matched factions - the one that peacefull and based on the Coast Guard to have a vast advantage on warships over the one that is suposed to thrive on conflict, live for war and has a honor code based on dying in battle.
They should be evenly matched at least, but what I personally think is that one needs to have premium offensive force while the other has premium defensive force.
Actually, I was talking about in game mechanics when I spoke about the carriers. Just like there's nothing in lore that portrays a Bird of Prey as a raider, but STO does. Those are in-game gameplay mechanics.
And the Federation didn't use carriers, in fact only the Kazon used carriers in ST. (unless there is some really minor spin-off species that used them which I'm forgetting)
I agree. There's no unique gimmicky mechanic tied to the Federation in STO that would be relative to warbirds or raiders. Although people will say - well the Feds got pretty much everything, so that's their "unique mechanic" - I do think that Starfleet ships could use something unique in that regard, just for fun and further diversifying the factions.
That's why I get agrivated when I see hundreds of Fed threads asking for cloak, or raiders or singularities, but noone bothers to give a new and unique idea that the players would stand behind instead of robbing the other factions blind.
No, it't not and I explained that in my previous post. And if you really want to go down that road - the first ship with 5 tac.slots was the Jem Bug and shortly after came the first faction specific ship with 5 tac.slots which was the Tactical Bortasqu' - a KDF ship.
Taking the obviously OP Romulans aside, I did point out in that other thread in the Fed. forum that there are a lot of drawbacks to the direct KDF counterparts of the Defiant that make the Defiant a better ship from them.
You're talking apples and oranges here. I have a Guramba - the Guramba doesn't cloak. You can't say that your 5 tac.console is an offset for my cloak because I don't have one. Ship classes can only be comparable to their counterparts.
That's why tactical consoles or Boff layouts can't be a defining factor that diversifies one faction from another - they're not flavor of gameplay, they're the base, the essential game mechanic.
Again, currently only the Romulan cloak is OP. The KDF raiders pay for battlecloak with their very skin. The raptors pay with their durability compared to Fed. escorts and their ability to preform in a dogfight. The only ships who don't pay for the innate cloak are the battlecruisers as per the dev. decision to treat them as a native KDF class. (and even then there are quite a few battlecruisers that pay a slight penalty - for ex. Bortasqu with weaker cloak and 1.0 shield mod)
Again, "those" people that you refer to are not asking for something unique that other factions have, like warbirds or singularities for example. They're asking for equalizing the basic game mechanics that can by no term be a distinguishable factor of a faction.
LOL, REALLY? The faction in Star Trek who lives, breathes, and hopes to die a good death in battle does not have the offensive firepower needed to fight?
The faction that, by tradition in Star Trek canon, has been defined by forward firepower, has less 5 forward weapon ships than Starfleet, and has yet to have a 5 forward weapon w/ 5 TAC Console ship?
And yes, if you want to play with Cloaks, you need to roll KDF or Romulan.
STILL :cool:
YOU KNOW in Star Trek canon that Starfleet has absolutely no tradition of Cloak usage like the Klingons and Romulans do. To ask for otherwise is ridiculously stupid on so many levels.
Gene Rodenberry's "White Knights" did not go skulking around :rolleyes:
Oh yeah:
KDF premades can seem OP, but more because of the experience and teamwork.
I do not want to edit your whole post but I'm pretty sure that in Enterprise its referred as the same thing as well as in Ds9 Star Fleet ship refered to as battle groups. There is also multi times Star Fleet is referred as a military arm of the Federation. In Star Trek Undiscovered Country when they discussion of peace with the Klingons are brought up.. there is a comment to the effect of "Moth balling Star Fleet" and in response is "our scientific and exploration should be not effected". That a pretty good indication that Star Fleet is a combat force not a coast guard.
Another thing is Gene Roddenberry Star Trek this is not... he had a rule that no "war" would last more then 2 episodes.. that war was not a thing of the future. Was till his death that Star Trek got a lot more bloody. Starting with DS9
In DS9: Sacrifice of Angels is the first time we see fighters in Star Trek.. so unless those fighters had there own warp drives ( they may have.. who knows) there would of been carriers.
As far as the Grumba.. the Galaxy X and Ar'Kif are its counter parts.. less so on the Ar'Kif given its beam is not innate. The Grumba is not fleet level as of yes.. and I agree it needs a revamp. But takeing that into consideration Lets look at the Spinal Lance (pre-revamp) vs the Javelin.. Both were direct high damage direct fire weapons.. The spinal lance fire 2 shots though giving it a great chance one would miss on a 2 mins timer and did less damage per shot. Where as the Grumba was on a 1 mins timer fired a single shot that tended to hit harder... over all they were pretty balanced. Slight edge in the Grumba favor. Now with the revamp on the Galaxy X.. that advantage is all to the Galaxy mainly do to the saucer separation AOE blast. Now I totally agree the Grumba needs a fleet version and a revamp on the Javelin. My thought are remove the -35% turn rate. Making it a better dog fighter then the Galaxy-X but giving the Galaxy X an advantage in fleet fights.
My point with the console vs cloak is that the federation cloak is taking up a console.. so in away saying they are apples to oranges is I feel not right.. given a 5 tac slot.. or removing a console slot to cloak are more in line.
I have stated I think all cloaks should be battle cloaks
As you saw in the fed post I gave some suggestions for a unique ability's for federation ships.. and was attacked just as much as the cloak issue.
I personally think that a Sensor Sweep ability on a 30 sec cool down would be a good balancer. it would pulse out decloaking any ship with in 5km. This would allow federation players to "catch" cloaking ships but also balance out battle cloaking.. Making timing vs scanning.. the Sensor sweep would be on a slightly longer cool down then battle cloak so if you battle cloaked at to low of life the Star Fleet ship could detect you and prevent the running away. If the cloaking ship used it more of a hit and run it would be able to re battle cloak during the cool down and break combat or come back in for another cloaking attack... this to me seems more balance then current situation.
To end it.. my issue is that people claim balance when it suits there advantage and vice versa. My comment was more a sarcastic look at the same people whining about 5 tac slots that scream fed players are whiners because they want balance between cloaking and non cloaking ships.
I think there is room for balance changes on all the factions.. and have stated such before as you know.
Now, you have build a lot of characters on all side, but the question is, which is your main?
For example, I have 1 fed, 1 KDF, and 2 Rom, but I am not a Rom, because I always go back to my KDF no matter what, and thus I am to be considered as a KDF main player. So we would like to know which one do you main the most, and why -- even if it happen to be a Fed.
On a sidenote, you could have just point out that Lorewise, Fed is only good at science and innovation, because the only reason they win time and time again is through human ingenuity; in fact that's the true point of star trek, not by superior firepower or defense, which Lorewise KDF have distinct advantage (in fact they are quite OP), but by knowledges and thinking.
And by collorary through Canon, KDF should not need more science, because their warrior culture actually decrease their science efficiency.
Like I said - the primary role of Starfleet working as a type of Coast Guard (although this might not be the best description even if Gene used it himself), but they build ships capable of war. The difference between for ex. Klignon pure warships and Federation ships capable of war is not in the damage potential, but in the primary role. The Fed one has sensors, labs, etc. and it's set to explore first and foremost, but to be capable to defend itself. On the other hand the KDF one if built for war intentions usually doesn't have commodities, labs, researach facilities but rather a large crew complement suitable for boarding ships and ground invasions.
I then to see Starfleet as a mix of a military defense force and NASA + a few other renowned scientific reasearch facilities. They're responsible for protecting the entire Federation after all.
As for the references - it's natural that they'd be called battle groups in DS9 since they were at war and about to engage a battle. In ENT there is no Starfleet yet, or rather Starfleet is still a Human only organization. (unless you meant the Enterprise-D, that was referred as a battleship by Worf in one episode. Like I said, they just don't call the ships that way and it's not their primary role, but Starfleet ships pack a punch)
Actually we know - the Peregrines are warp capable, just as the runabouts.
There's also the option for a larger ship to cover them with it's own warp bubble and help them travel at higher warp speeds. (since they're not capable of high warp)
There's a third option - that they were transpored in a shuttlebay of larger ships, like the Enterprise-D transported the 3 runabouts at the beginning of DS9. They could have unloaded the Peregrines shortly before arriving to the battle destination, since the fighters were already departed in space in the first scenes in 'Sacrifice of Angels'.
My point was - none of the Fed. ships in canon functioned as a carrier. There was no ship capable to launch, re-launch, dock and service multiple small craft and preform a role of a conventional carrier. And fighters were used as a distraction in the most dire of situations - where they were losing to the Dominion heavily.
Ok, now this is all elementary wrong. There's just no way in hell that any of those 3 ships you mentioned are a counterpart of any other of those 3.
This is wrong on so many levels - one is a destroyer, the other is a dreadnought cruiser and the third is an escort carrier. There isn't even a single thing related between them, not even the Boff layout.
Sure, the javelin and lance look similar on the first glance - but that is also wrong. If we go by that why don't we put the Vesta as well, since she also has a similar weapon.
The javelin is an ability that charges over combat time from the energy the Guramba drains from the targeted enemy. The lance doesn't need to do that, it just cycles 2 shots.
That said, the lance really does need a fix beacuse it's quite messed up - but that's not for balance reasons, it's just messed up and needs to be fixed regardless. Just like the missing floor in 'Blood of the Empire'.
But that's what Roach has been saying all the time. The Defiant used to have a console slot removed for innate cloak, but the Fed. players complained that the cloak is not usefull enough in PvE to warrant a console slot decrease, so Crptyic turned it into a console and added a slot to the Defiant - thus enabling the players who complained to make the choice themselves.
As per lore they should, but that will never happen in STO because of game mechanics. And if it happens, then all KDF raiders need to be buffed as hell because they currently pay with life for battlecloak - and that's a whole other can of worms to oppen.
I can't speak for everyone on this forum, I can speak only for myself. There are people that will attack you even if you propose Cryptic to give free 1000 Zen to players.
Like I said, I wouldn't mind somekind of sensor sweep mechanic that'd be unique for Starfleet, although I consider 30 secs to be very unbalanced. You have to remember, under cloak a ship is as good as dead (Scimitar excluded) and there are already abilities and consoles in game that are usefull in snooping.
However, I'd leave balancing issues to the devs - they're the ones that should know best how should anything in game preform.
As long as the game is allive and well, there will be room for balance and changes.
But again, the console slot distribution can't be observed as a distinctive factor of a certain faction because the console slots, the Boff slots and the Doffs are an essential part of the base game mechanic. They're not the flavor, they're what makes STO tick.
I'm all for balance between the factions, just I don't see balance in a form which equalizies the factions in terms of abilities, gimicks and gameplay as many other people seem to do.
The Klingons have a scientific arm.. just because its not front in center does not mean they do not have one. I think this is a huge misconception. They have a warrior society.. that means they honor there warriors above all else.. Does not mean that every Klingon is a warrior most of the population are not warriors. They couldn't be they have to support needs of the fleet.
Also Star Fleet is known even in STO to gear its ships for war.. they make new ships for war.. how long in game has Star Fleet been fighting wars non-stop. Also Lore wise Federation starships were pound for pound more powerful. You can not have this in a game do to balance issue.
Klingons ships have always been presented as nimble fighters, hit and run. While Federation ships were slower but had massive fire power and shields. Look at Star Trek Space Battles.. the 1st canon based board game. They referred to the Klingons as doing the Klingon Death Dance in space combat. They could not stand toe to toe with federation ships.. those same explore / scientific ship.
As far as the Grumba.. you totally looked at the wrong thing for balance.. The balance was between the weapon systems.. the lance vs javelin.. and I own both ships.. I know how they work. So what I said was accurate.
I knew you were going to say unbalanced about the sensor sweep.. Its not unbalanced... You are taken out of stealth by the sensor sweep.. so your shield would be up right away. It's totally different then catching a cloaked ship passively.
You are right.. people like to whine.
Given its a game there should be balance.. but people need to admit there is a balance issue.. and well Klingon only players are some of the worse when comes to admitting this... At least Romulan players admit there OP.. they just laugh at you as they admit it.
I have 2 level 50 Klingons 1 tac, 1 eng.. I own Grumba, Mogh, B'rolth, Marauder. Ning'Tao, Phalanx, Vandal C-Store ships.
I have 2 Romulan level 50 1 tac, 1 sci.. I own Ar'Kala, Ar'Kif, Dhael, T'varo, Valdore C-Store ships
I have 3 Federation level 50 1 tac, 1 sci, 1 eng I own Galaxy Bundle, Armitiage, Thunder Child, Rode island, San Palo, Andorian 3 pack, nebula, assault cruiser retro, Atrox C-Store ships
I have nothing against Klingons, Romulan or Federation... what I'm against is blatant balance issue... All the faction need help.
Be it Klingon needing more sci ships and dedicated tanking ships non cloak (Gorn) ships, better space traits for boffs, or romulan needing more Sci ships, more non romulan ships such as Reman and more faction races with there ships, they also need elite fleet plasma weapon for the romulans. Or Federation needing balance against cloaks, something added to Star Fleet ships that's innate to only them, Elite fleet Phasers need to be buffed.
After playing all three those are just some of the issue I would like to see addressed.
Edit: Lore wise Federation ships had better shield and fire power then Klingon ships.. just fyi
Where is the evidence in canon the Feds had decisively better technology? Because the Klingons and Federation had been at war with each other numerous times, and were quite even, despite the Federation being the far, FAR larger political and military power.
Even this technological edge alot of Fed players assume, just because all the series and movies have been Fed-POV, isn't as good as people think back on with rose tinted glasses. Many times the USS Enterprise throughout the franchise has come across ships, other political powers that were on even footing as the Enterprise. This was REALLY evident in TNG. The ENT-D comes across some new race, with their ship. Picard orders a scan, Worf tells him the general specs and that their technology is comparable to their own... and this is a Galaxy-class we're talking about, fitted with the best technology the Federation has to offer for its best crewed ship using Starfleet's flagship. With Picard coming across people regularly being on equal terms on technology (and comparable fighting power), it forces him to be actually more polite... because one wrong move, and you have a fight between evenly matched powers and not some lopsided match.
The Federation and Klingon Empire had been on roughly even footing with each other because they have been at odds with each other for most of their history. Even in TOS timeframe, there was an arms race. The Constitution-class was the pinnacle of Starfleet's technology and made everything obsolete that they were designed to come across. The Klingons didn't let themselves lag behind, so they came up with their answer, the D-7. The arms race persisted into the "modern" era of TNG, DS9, and the Dominion War era. Both powers KNOW each other well. Both powers have their own philosophies in ships.
Just because Starfleet ships looked pretty or were painted in a beautiful white or light grey, doesn't mean they were above their competition. The KDF and Romulan Navy were styled quite differently, but their technology is close enough that it's not a blatantly overpowering advantage against each other.
I really do wish in STO that there's far more differences in playstyle between the 3 playable factions. I despise Red vs Blue, but I do desire the playing field to be fun and even. But they still need to be distinct.
In general, esp. from past Star Trek games, I have felt Starfleet vessels to be well rounded, sturdy defenses. Klingons ships were maneuverable, good forward firepower, but did not have the staying power compared to Starfleet vessels. In some ST games, like Birth of the Federation, the Romulan Navy featured powerful, tough vessels with cloaks. A Warbird coming out of cloaks was usually the last thing you saw, but games offset this with slower maneuverability than Starfleet and Klingon vessels.
I know that's very simplified, but again, I *DO* wish there were distinctive playstyles in STO between the different factions. Right now, outside of Cloaks, there isn't. Even Starfleet vessels are at a point where they're not quite Starfleet in style, compared to the TV shows and movies.
Sorry Shpoks, it was the other way around:
Bortas 3-pack was released first, making the tac version the first 5 tac console ship in the game. When the fleet system was released, the Bug and other lockbox ships at the time were buffed to fleet level, the Bug itself being given a 5th tac console.
I really do not have room to go over everything.. check out Star Fleet Battles.. it was a board game.. reviewed as one of the greats space combat sims at the time. Was the first licensed space combat game for Star Trek. It goes in to huge details.
Just to sum up.. The KDF was about numbers.. the Federation was about quality. Remember Star Trek was created during the cold war.. The Klingons really were created as the evil "eastern pac" forces.. they were aggressive.. they would over whelm you with numbers... the Federation was the "western forces" Small numbers but better gear and training.
One thing in Star Fleet Battles is it went over the war in much more detail. In almost all the battles Federation forces were out numbered by Klingon. Klingon ships were smaller and faster, they maneuvered better. But Federation ships had better shields, fire power and damage control.
The tactics out lined for Klingons were hit and run.. to widdle down Federation ships with lots of smaller hits. The term in game of the Klingon Death Dance was to describe Klingon captain moving in and out and max range to strike and retreat. That prolonged fights with Federation ships would lead to there destruction.
Federation ship tactics were much more straight forward... was to close and pound the target. They had Very strong shields and weapons systems but were slower. The Klingons would try to dance around and keep in the side arcs of Federation ships doing every thing they could to keep out of torp. arcs aka the front and rear arc.
The only race that matched Federation for shear protection was Gorn ships. They had same shield but better armor.. though there weapons were weaker.
The only ships that were much bigger then anything the Federation had were the B-10 battle crusiers / battleship that was 4 times larger then anything any race had at the time.. only 5 were to be built for each border of the Empire. But due to the cost only 1 was every complete and was lost vs the HYDRAN KINGDOM before the Klingon Empire annexed there territory.
There is a lot of Lore in both Federation & Empire and Star Fleet Battle games. In the end though the Federation fought 3 different Empires at once and was able to force peace treaties with all three, the Gorn, Klingons and the Romulan Empire. The Romulans attacked the Gorn after they were defeated by the Federation only to fight to a stand still with the Gorn. The Klingons on the other hand Annexed the territory's of the HYDRAN KINGDOM, KZINTI HEGEMONY and the LYRAN STAR EMPIRE. They were actually lost territory to the Federation only for the Federation to give it back after forcing the Klingons to sign a peace treaty. In the end though the Empire did manage to expand it boarders almost doubling it size.. just not on its boarder with the Federation.
Not a lot of people know about these licensed games.. but its a lot of good back ground info from them
it didn't get its 5th until all lockbox ships got updated for S6
so the klingons were the first faction to get a 5 tac console ship...too bad it took over a year before they could begin to make proper use of all those tac consoles
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Also, could go a step further and even say that the KDF had the first 4 tac console cruiser as well, also before anyone else. Sure there's a ton of those nowadays, but even so, it is true. Namely the original free Bortas did that, along with the eng and sci versions of the C-store Bortas as well.
Star Fleet Battles is not Star Trek.
It is not set in the Star Trek universe and is not allowed to carry the name "Star Trek" in its title.
Not even its own authors consider it to be part of Trek, only based on it.
Here's what the people in authority at Amarillo Design Bureau say on the matter in their "Prime Directive" RPG on page 183 of their rulebook:
"This is the Star Fleet Universe, not Star Trek. When we created this universe, we reviewed the available source data. We used some, ignored others (considering some things to be "plot devieces" with no real basis in technology), and when we found multiple sources in conflict, we picked the most logical interpretation and rejected the rest. After we published our decisions (in the form of numerous game products), new source material appeared which contradicted the SFU. That doesn't make us wrong, or the data wrong. Data that doesn't fit is from the other parallel universe and won't always match up"
So if you use SFB or the SFU in general as a "source" you're successfully invalidating your own argument.
Damn....you're right. It seems like it was yesterday, but it's actually been 2 years since then. :eek:
Yeah, I overlooked the fact that the 2012 Winter Event Jem Bug was not boosted to 5 tac.consoles yet.
Over a year? Hehe...I've been using my Bortasqu' since it was released and I've been and still am thoroughly enjoying the ship. It is and always has been a beast, but now the new SA took the Command one that I was usually using anyway to a whole new level. Never had much issues to make full use of the ship, but then again - the slow heavy ships come natural to me. I actually had more issues getting used to escorts.
So what you're saying is - nothing will change? :P