Oh here we go.. KDF players jumping on another Federation ship thread.. well Lore wise you KDF should never had Carriers.. they are not YOUR lore. In fact there is more lore pointing to the Federation having carriers then KDF, be if from the show, board games... even Human history's.. Star Fleet is a human based space navy.. and carriers were a interrogate part of human sea navies that Star Fleet was based on.
Given current tech trends Star Fleet should have Drone ship carriers. Most likely this is how a Star Fleet (human based) carrier would look like in the future. Having a large mother ship that would replicate Drones to swarm a target. Having crewed fighters in fact is pretty good way just to kill your people in Star Trek given the accuracy and fire power of ships. Drones would make more sense. When Star Trek came into being Drone tech was not something that was really in there minds.. they did not see a future of un-manned attack aircraft that we are seeing today.
There you have it, ladies and gentlemen - kelshando: loresinger, military specialist, clairvoyant, Klingon historian, canon aficionado and the man that was Gene Roddenberry before Gene Roddenberry. :P
There you have it, ladies and gentlemen - kelshando: loresinger, military specialist, clairvoyant, Klingon historian, canon aficionado and the man that was Gene Roddenberry before Gene Roddenberry. :P
I think the "frigate pet zkDF zomg imba" issue is more of a BFAW problem than a frigate pet issue.
Wow.. love the symbols.. like looking at some of these posts are like a foriegn laguage that BabbleFish won't translate.. For those of us that don't speak geek-an-ese please
I think most are mistaking the want of a "federation" carrier vs wanting a full Star Fleet carrier. Non-HEC/Alien carrier.. but a Star Fleet one.. that has the ship lines of a Star Fleet ship.
The weird thing is that I was not into Carriers at all until my Galaxy X got pets - I just love going into battle with 6 shuttles and my Saucer pew-pewing away around me.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
I think most are mistaking the want of a "federation" carrier vs wanting a full Star Fleet carrier. Non-HEC/Alien carrier.. but a Star Fleet one.. that has the ship lines of a Star Fleet ship.
I think the main reason why people tend to disregard the Atrox is the lack of frigate pets. I use Elite Scorpions on my Atrox, I would prefer frigate pets that are either Caitian in design or at least Starfleet. Otherwise the Atrox is pretty much a Vo'quv with a different skin.
I think the main reason why people tend to disregard the Atrox is the lack of frigate pets. I use Elite Scorpions on my Atrox, I would prefer frigate pets that are either Caitian in design or at least Starfleet. Otherwise the Atrox is pretty much a Vo'quv with a different skin.
Well and the fact it looks like a giant blue phallic shaped ship.... not sure who designed the ship.. but I wonder what they were thinking about when they did j/k
How about we try IDIC for a while, instead of harping on about faction uniqueness?
What is the big problem with being able to play however you want, as whatever you want, without being shackled to one faction? Why do people want "faction uniqueness", instead of making something unique of your own, via your playstyle?
Also, it makes no sense for the three major factions to not have all of each others' technology by now. I mean seriously. They've been through how many alliances and wars, and lived alongside each other for how many years? How many technologies are there in real life that Europe has, but America doesn't have any knowledge of -- I mean come on. It took the Allies how long to acquire prop-interrupter tech from the Germans in the First World War?
And make up your mind. Is the KDF's unique thing supposed to be raiders, cloaks, or carriers?
AMEN! to all you people saying NO, how about we do away with battle cloaks? escorts? tactical cruisers?
the reason i say that is you want to cramp MY play style why not make EVERYONE miserabel and nerf what THEY like.
each faction should have a sci eng and tac based full carrier. this is already done for the KDF. Fed should be a set similar to the Odyssey. even if CBS says no to a fed designed carrier (and please link where that is written) make a tac carrier of either Bajoran or Xindi design, with a dang frigate pet that doesn't require the most expensive lockbox in game to get.
although i would be happy with a frigate pet that can be used on ANY carrier useable by the federation
Well and the fact it looks like a giant blue phallic shaped ship.... not sure who designed the ship.. but I wonder what they were thinking about when they did j/k
Well, I guess a lot of "Ramming Speed" is in order then. :D
Well, I hate to say it, but sure, why not. Might as well give the KDF a bunch more ships. Honestly, I'm not sure why Cryptic isn't doing that. AFAIK, there are plenty of preexisting models...so...
I'd like to think that it's because the Klingon playerbase is so annoying that the devs don't want to do anything for them, but I really need to tone down the Klingon Defense Flaming, so. And that's probably not likely anyway, as I think a few of the devs have expressed a desire for more KDF ships anyway.
or maybe because there are over a hundred Fed toons for every KDF toon? they put their money wehre they will get the highest return
Neither them nor the Akira was a carrier. There are no fighter-carriers in Starfleet.
If you look at the Technical Manuals (and don't cop out via "it's not canon", it's the closest we have cosnidering that on-screen we never ever see a single hint or mention of a carrier ever) none of those kitbashes did have any specific purpose. The manual states that due to the imminent threat most of those ships were scrambled from the individual shipyards, made of whatever was accessible. Many of those hulls were at least tactically very inefficient (The Yeager-Type, for example, is equipped with type-8 phasers, which were shuttlecraft weapons) - the same is true for the attack fighters. Those were civilian vessels refitted to have something at hand (the class isn't even mentioned in the manual, but the introductionary text of the chapter mentions the scrambling and hasty assembling of ships which were scrapped/rebuild to be their original class after the conflict was over in case they survived).
The term "fighter" in star Trek doesn't mean "Starfighter" in the star Wars sense. A attack/strike fighter is a fully operational starship (including the federation attack fighters, which are based on civilian couriers which CAN travel far distances) that does not need to be carried. They are not shuttles. And shuttles, which are far superior to sub-warp craft, are not a match for Starships in combat and thus not used under nromal circumstances.
The Akira wasn't a carrier on-screen or in the manual. It's a heavy cruiser.
In fact, the only vessel that is labeled a "carrier" in the manual is the Klingon Negh'Var - and we don't know what the term is supposed to mean in the first place. Maybe it just means that the ship is capable of carrying (ground) troops.
Star Trek terminology is not the same as 21st century terran terminology. See the "Antares Class Carrier" which is a transport vessel.
and to extrapolate further, several novels indicate federation carriers exist as well as the old paper SFB game and the computer follow on Star Fleet Command series of games.
the simple fact is that the response from the naysayers are because 1. they are PVPers who cannot figure out how to beat a carrier with frigate pets flying their raider, or they are simply have a childish MINE MINE MINE mentality.
Do you think for a moment that the British and American navies said, nope not gonna build submarines or carriers because we didn't build them first?
Well and the fact it looks like a giant blue phallic shaped ship.... not sure who designed the ship.. but I wonder what they were thinking about when they did j/k
Well, doesn't a typical starfleet ship consist of 3 phalluses and a breast?
The Caitan's are just a part of the Federation, so naturally, there ship is also only one part...
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
lets point out the obvious.. star trek invasion (PS1) warf captained a Fed carrier.. the design was very basic and straight forward, thus its not here.. was still better looking than the phallic purple thing we got... Mirandas as the fed opening frigates (band aid to a long standing imbalance ).
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
The point being, that the majority of people who bought into this game when it was announced was really not expecting Star Wars. Thats all.
Did you ever watch Voyager or DS9? Half of Voyager is a running battle to get back to Federation space; and there was a big old war in the middle of DS9 that involved the Big 3 Alpha and Beta "empires" teaming up to drive out the Dominion.
I will simply say that people's expectations are entirely tarnished by whatever Trek was their favorite in the past. For example, if your favorite was DS9 then you certain were not into exploration.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
I would slightly disagree as I think Voyager was more about exploration and "getting home" than war. DS9 in my opinion was less about war per se, as war was more of a backdrop to the show then the shows focus. The focus from what I was able to gleam was more about simply trying to make a show about life on a space station, as a change of pace to the more traditional "on a ship" series we had sen in the past. Because of its largly stationary location one has to put something in it to keep it from becomming "Melroes place in the furture" I would qualify this by asking how many full scale, all out, ships all over the place, fighting in fleet actions do we see on that show?
Understanding that we are playing a video game and as such combat tends to keep folks intrested in mind I would only put forward the idea that when you continue to add more and more and more military type vessles to a game with a huge bloat already you drift further and further away from what seperates Star Trek from any number of other Sci-Fi franchises.
I would slightly disagree as I think Voyager was more about exploration and "getting home" than war. DS9 in my opinion was less about war per se, as war was more of a backdrop to the show then the shows focus. The focus from what I was able to gleam was more about simply trying to make a show about life on a space station, as a change of pace to the more traditional "on a ship" series we had sen in the past. Because of its largly stationary location one has to put something in it to keep it from becomming "Melroes place in the furture" I would qualify this by asking how many full scale, all out, ships all over the place, fighting in fleet actions do we see on that show?
Understanding that we are playing a video game and as such combat tends to keep folks intrested in mind I would only put forward the idea that when you continue to add more and more and more military type vessles to a game with a huge bloat already you drift further and further away from what seperates Star Trek from any number of other Sci-Fi franchises.
You are not talking into account several things here, the first being that each of those new ships added is wanted by someone. Everyone here wants to fly their own perfect version of the ship. So I would simply point out that they are adding more and more "military" vehicles because people want to play them - and I will not even go into the debate of whether or not the Galaxy was one of the most powerful and war-capable ships in Starfleet.
I will also point out that those of us who have been here since STO was announced have know the game was centered around the Fed and KDF being at war with each other. So I will simply say again that no, the people who came to this game were not expecting it to be all about exploration. We knew what the game was about going in.
Ultimately you are simply saying this is not the type of Star Trek game you want to play, and that is fine; but it is the type of Star Trek game it has always been, from the day it was announced to now.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
those who play a Fed character want a true carrier that looks like a Fed built ship period
The Romulans want one as well
personally i dont like any of the klingon carriers on looks alone
All 3 factions need a new carrier with improved stats to match the power creep along the stat lines of the jem hadar dreadnought carrier....like the mogh and avengers were released
Carriers that looks like something there facton would make
While a good ship the Atrox doesnt look like a fed ship and has little appeal to many
And no empire used fighters because of there zero surviability in combat against starships....cutters and corvetts yes
Dont respawn any fighters and you will see what i mean...........you cant replicate crew/pilots and complex things like fighters..They got that wrong as well
Frigates were the size of heavy cruisers carrying troops..STO got that just plain wrong lol ... like a lot of things
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
and to extrapolate further, several novels indicate federation carriers exist as well as the old paper SFB game and the computer follow on Star Fleet Command series of games.
the simple fact is that the response from the naysayers are because 1. they are PVPers who cannot figure out how to beat a carrier with frigate pets flying their raider, or they are simply have a childish MINE MINE MINE mentality.
Do you think for a moment that the British and American navies said, nope not gonna build submarines or carriers because we didn't build them first?
None of what you bring up has any meaning.
What ships exist in novels or games (computer or otherwise) has no impact whatsoever on the IP since all of those works can make up whatever they want, it doesn't make more sense or influence show canon in any way, shape or form.
I am a "naysayer" and I don't even PvP. Carriers have no meaning in Star Trek, the mechanics of space battle established by the shows completely contradict this kind of vessel. That does not hinder STO from doing what it wants, yet it doesn't make it any more "right" and I will continue to bring up that there are no carriers in-universe whenever the topic comes up
And your last sentence doesn't make sense either. Star Trek is not our present day reality and our standards don't apply. It is fiction which has already been written. It's set in a universe that has been defined, the shows and technical manuals illustrated the way things work there - they don't work like things do on our earth in the early 21st century. And I think that a game or novel or whatever that wants to use the IP should expand on the IP reasonable using established mechanics - introduction of starfighters and carriers because they are "cooler" is not reasonable.
That is however all I'm saying. STO can still do whatever it wants, even if it is stupid
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The point being, that the majority of people who bought into this game when it was announced was really not expecting Star Wars. Thats all.
And they didn't get it. Not a lightsabre in sight, but they've got beams from the Enterprise to the "Big Bad of the Week" just like the Star Trek shows. That's all.
And they didn't get it. Not a lightsabre in sight, but they've got beams from the Enterprise to the "Big Bad of the Week" just like the Star Trek shows. That's all.
Now, now, I still have my lightbat'leth.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
What ships exist in novels or games (computer or otherwise) has no impact whatsoever on the IP since all of those works can make up whatever they want, it doesn't make more sense or influence show canon in any way, shape or form.
I am a "naysayer" and I don't even PvP. Carriers have no meaning in Star Trek, the mechanics of space battle established by the shows completely contradict this kind of vessel. That does not hinder STO from doing what it wants, yet it doesn't make it any more "right" and I will continue to bring up that there are no carriers in-universe whenever the topic comes up
And your last sentence doesn't make sense either. Star Trek is not our present day reality and our standards don't apply. It is fiction which has already been written. It's set in a universe that has been defined, the shows and technical manuals illustrated the way things work there - they don't work like things do on our earth in the early 21st century. And I think that a game or novel or whatever that wants to use the IP should expand on the IP reasonable using established mechanics - introduction of starfighters and carriers because they are "cooler" is not reasonable.
That is however all I'm saying. STO can still do whatever it wants, even if it is stupid
I dunno. There are things you aren't taking into account, those being factors in the ST universe that would also affect fighter combat. Remember, we have things like transporters. Most pilots are probably beamed out before their fighters are destroyed.
Also, fighters have a niche. They're fast enough that they're hard to hit, computers or no computers. And they can be replicated (presumably), so they can swarm enemy ships in large numbers. As far as I can tell, they're basically a cheaper method of eliminating large ships.
On the other hand, I should note that Peregrine-class fighters weren't originally a Starfleet design. The Peregrine was built as a courier ship. The Maquis took captured vessels, tacked weapons onto them, and used them as fighters. When the Dominion War began, Starfleet decided to run with the idea.
Nonetheless. I need to put this in my signature or something: STO's goal should not be to live up to Star Trek. It should be to surpass it. If you want to have STO be much like TNG because TNG was good, then so be it. But we should never limit ourselves. This isn't TNG. This is nearly a century afterward. It's set in the same universe, true. And we need to make sure it's consistent. But the devs should never cripple their efforts by making their goal to develop a game that's similar to a series of television shows that, frankly, were often mediocre. Even if they were teh most awesomest things ever, that's no excuse not to attempt to be even better.
Am I saying that carriers necessarily are part of making STO better than the rest of Trek? No. I like carriers, and I think they have a place in STO. But my point is broader than that.
Comments
At this point its just because there are so many ships to choose from everyone wants their 'perfect'
But i'll say this.
If the next ships are not a new weight class of ship to deal with the threat of undine planet killers i'm gonna be disappointed.
There you have it, ladies and gentlemen - kelshando: loresinger, military specialist, clairvoyant, Klingon historian, canon aficionado and the man that was Gene Roddenberry before Gene Roddenberry.
Its about time you admitted it....:P
I think the "frigate pet zkDF zomg imba" issue is more of a BFAW problem than a frigate pet issue.
That, and Atrox isnt Armitage.
How about 2hangar Escort pet-spewing Fedscort that copies the Scimitar in all other aspects besides hangar and turn?
/also, starfleet transporter technology has eliminated the need to TRIBBLE.
IKS Korrasami (Fleet B'rel Bird of Prey Retrofit T5-U)
Wow.. love the symbols.. like looking at some of these posts are like a foriegn laguage that BabbleFish won't translate.. For those of us that don't speak geek-an-ese please
I think the main reason why people tend to disregard the Atrox is the lack of frigate pets. I use Elite Scorpions on my Atrox, I would prefer frigate pets that are either Caitian in design or at least Starfleet. Otherwise the Atrox is pretty much a Vo'quv with a different skin.
Well and the fact it looks like a giant blue phallic shaped ship.... not sure who designed the ship.. but I wonder what they were thinking about when they did j/k
AMEN! to all you people saying NO, how about we do away with battle cloaks? escorts? tactical cruisers?
the reason i say that is you want to cramp MY play style why not make EVERYONE miserabel and nerf what THEY like.
each faction should have a sci eng and tac based full carrier. this is already done for the KDF. Fed should be a set similar to the Odyssey. even if CBS says no to a fed designed carrier (and please link where that is written) make a tac carrier of either Bajoran or Xindi design, with a dang frigate pet that doesn't require the most expensive lockbox in game to get.
although i would be happy with a frigate pet that can be used on ANY carrier useable by the federation
Well, I guess a lot of "Ramming Speed" is in order then.
or maybe because there are over a hundred Fed toons for every KDF toon? they put their money wehre they will get the highest return
i see far more avengers than moghs out there
and to extrapolate further, several novels indicate federation carriers exist as well as the old paper SFB game and the computer follow on Star Fleet Command series of games.
the simple fact is that the response from the naysayers are because 1. they are PVPers who cannot figure out how to beat a carrier with frigate pets flying their raider, or they are simply have a childish MINE MINE MINE mentality.
Do you think for a moment that the British and American navies said, nope not gonna build submarines or carriers because we didn't build them first?
The Caitan's are just a part of the Federation, so naturally, there ship is also only one part...
Well and KDF ships look like multi pronged sex toys.....
Man Star Trek is nasty.... oh wait.. nah... star trek is a bunch of virgin geeks.. it all fits now!!:D
I will simply say that people's expectations are entirely tarnished by whatever Trek was their favorite in the past. For example, if your favorite was DS9 then you certain were not into exploration.
Understanding that we are playing a video game and as such combat tends to keep folks intrested in mind I would only put forward the idea that when you continue to add more and more and more military type vessles to a game with a huge bloat already you drift further and further away from what seperates Star Trek from any number of other Sci-Fi franchises.
.. and found artifacts of the 3rd Borg dynasty? Yeah, that wasn't so great. I'd rather fight dinosaurs with lasers on their heads.
I will also point out that those of us who have been here since STO was announced have know the game was centered around the Fed and KDF being at war with each other. So I will simply say again that no, the people who came to this game were not expecting it to be all about exploration. We knew what the game was about going in.
Ultimately you are simply saying this is not the type of Star Trek game you want to play, and that is fine; but it is the type of Star Trek game it has always been, from the day it was announced to now.
I remember when we went to unexplored, random systems, and fought against whoever got there first. :P
The Romulans want one as well
personally i dont like any of the klingon carriers on looks alone
All 3 factions need a new carrier with improved stats to match the power creep along the stat lines of the jem hadar dreadnought carrier....like the mogh and avengers were released
Carriers that looks like something there facton would make
While a good ship the Atrox doesnt look like a fed ship and has little appeal to many
And no empire used fighters because of there zero surviability in combat against starships....cutters and corvetts yes
Dont respawn any fighters and you will see what i mean...........you cant replicate crew/pilots and complex things like fighters..They got that wrong as well
Frigates were the size of heavy cruisers carrying troops..STO got that just plain wrong lol ... like a lot of things
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
None of what you bring up has any meaning.
What ships exist in novels or games (computer or otherwise) has no impact whatsoever on the IP since all of those works can make up whatever they want, it doesn't make more sense or influence show canon in any way, shape or form.
I am a "naysayer" and I don't even PvP. Carriers have no meaning in Star Trek, the mechanics of space battle established by the shows completely contradict this kind of vessel. That does not hinder STO from doing what it wants, yet it doesn't make it any more "right" and I will continue to bring up that there are no carriers in-universe whenever the topic comes up
And your last sentence doesn't make sense either. Star Trek is not our present day reality and our standards don't apply. It is fiction which has already been written. It's set in a universe that has been defined, the shows and technical manuals illustrated the way things work there - they don't work like things do on our earth in the early 21st century. And I think that a game or novel or whatever that wants to use the IP should expand on the IP reasonable using established mechanics - introduction of starfighters and carriers because they are "cooler" is not reasonable.
That is however all I'm saying. STO can still do whatever it wants, even if it is stupid
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
And they didn't get it. Not a lightsabre in sight, but they've got beams from the Enterprise to the "Big Bad of the Week" just like the Star Trek shows. That's all.
I dunno. There are things you aren't taking into account, those being factors in the ST universe that would also affect fighter combat. Remember, we have things like transporters. Most pilots are probably beamed out before their fighters are destroyed.
Also, fighters have a niche. They're fast enough that they're hard to hit, computers or no computers. And they can be replicated (presumably), so they can swarm enemy ships in large numbers. As far as I can tell, they're basically a cheaper method of eliminating large ships.
On the other hand, I should note that Peregrine-class fighters weren't originally a Starfleet design. The Peregrine was built as a courier ship. The Maquis took captured vessels, tacked weapons onto them, and used them as fighters. When the Dominion War began, Starfleet decided to run with the idea.
Nonetheless. I need to put this in my signature or something: STO's goal should not be to live up to Star Trek. It should be to surpass it. If you want to have STO be much like TNG because TNG was good, then so be it. But we should never limit ourselves. This isn't TNG. This is nearly a century afterward. It's set in the same universe, true. And we need to make sure it's consistent. But the devs should never cripple their efforts by making their goal to develop a game that's similar to a series of television shows that, frankly, were often mediocre. Even if they were teh most awesomest things ever, that's no excuse not to attempt to be even better.
Am I saying that carriers necessarily are part of making STO better than the rest of Trek? No. I like carriers, and I think they have a place in STO. But my point is broader than that.