test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Building the Jupiter

1141517192025

Comments

  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    natejam101 wrote: »
    I have not seen ANY posts requesting a Federation Science Carrier..The T5-U fleet Atrox is almost identical to this "new" ship..slow moving, slow turning science carriers do not work in the current setting of this game.

    Please change the BOFF layout, add weapon slot..something!

    Until then no money from me, and from the looks of it, from alot of people...just sayin

    like many including me suggested, it should be changed, to make it work for most People, but of course the Sellfish / Ignorant / White Knights who say "works for me, so i dont give a TRIBBLE whether or not it works for you, so if you dont like it gtfo" (and countless other insults towards "us" who we are not happy, cause it abolutely does not fit our Playstyle, and we are not few, we are many, yet still we are being ignored..........)

    The Best Idea here from someone was the 3 Pack

    one more Weapon on the Front +

    Tac Version= LtComEng to LtComUni
    Eng Version= LtTac to LtEng and LtComEng to LtComUni
    Sci Version= Same as Tac Version

    those are not the only Issues BUT the Important ones, so "fixing" those would make the Ship appeal to so much more People, instead of only a smal Portion.......yet when you say this, the Persistent Holy Knights / Defenders will Jump at your Neck, Swearing and Insulting you.....its mind-boggling, really........

    LOL

    I'm sorry...I can't help but laugh at this post...you calling people who like the ship selfish...if anyone is selfish its the people who want to turn this ship into yet another boring generic Tac ship.

    Why stop there? Why not just turn every ship in the game Tac? Why have a Engineer or Science Commander? Why not just make everything Tactical?

    and you are a Prime example of those Thick Headed People i just mentioned, we both speak the same language, yet you refuse to understand "us" or maybe you are just not able to understant it....

    NO ONE wants to change what you want to fly /use, and THATS why a 3 Pack would make so much sense, you want to fly the ship EXACTLY the way it is? well THAN USE THE Science Version, see? you have what you want, happy? yes?

    THAN WHY THE FRIGGING HELL not let us also have a eng and tac Version so we also can be happy? let me tell ya, cause like i also said before YOU and the likes of you are Ignorant and Sellfish YOU have what you want and YOU dont want us to also have something that fits us!!! a blind could tell this, you guys make ZERO Sense.
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,887 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    natejam101 wrote: »
    I have not seen ANY posts requesting a Federation Science Carrier..The T5-U fleet Atrox is almost identical to this "new" ship..slow moving, slow turning science carriers do not work in the current setting of this game.

    Please change the BOFF layout, add weapon slot..something!

    Until then no money from me, and from the looks of it, from alot of people...just sayin

    like many including me suggested, it should be changed, to make it work for most People, but of course the Sellfish / Ignorant / White Knights who say "works for me, so i dont give a TRIBBLE whether or not it works for you, so if you dont like it gtfo" (and countless other insults towards "us" who we are not happy, cause it abolutely does not fit our Playstyle, and we are not few, we are many, yet still we are being ignored..........)

    The Best Idea here from someone was the 3 Pack

    one more Weapon on the Front +

    Tac Version= LtComEng to LtComUni
    Eng Version= LtTac to LtEng and LtComEng to LtComUni
    Sci Version= Same as Tac Version

    those are not the only Issues BUT the Important ones, so "fixing" those would make the Ship appeal to so much more People, instead of only a smal Portion.......yet when you say this, the Persistent Holy Knights / Defenders will Jump at your Neck, Swearing and Insulting you.....its mind-boggling, really........

    LOL

    I'm sorry...I can't help but laugh at this post...you calling people who like the ship selfish...if anyone is selfish its the people who want to turn this ship into yet another boring generic Tac ship.

    Why stop there? Why not just turn every ship in the game Tac? Why have a Engineer or Science Commander? Why not just make everything Tactical?

    and you are a Prime example of those Thick Headed People i just mentioned, we both speak the same language, yet you refuse to understand "us" or maybe you are just not able to understant it....

    NO ONE wants to change what you want to fly /use, and THATS why a 3 Pack would make so much sense, you want to fly the ship EXACTLY the way it is? well THAN USE THE Science Version, see? you have what you want, happy? yes?

    THAN WHY THE FRIGGING HELL not let us also have a eng and tac Version so we also can be happy? let me tell ya, cause like i also said before YOU and the likes of you are Ignorant and Sellfish YOU have what you want and YOU dont want us to also have something that fits us!!! a blind could tell this, you guys make ZERO Sense.

    Maybe I don't want to wait for them to make two more skins? To come up with two more consoles? For them to come up with 2 good consoles? Or dozens or other reasons that will give people like you yet more reasons to say the ship sucks and it isn't worth the cash?

    Maybe I'm sick of people who need to show off their e-peen and they can apparently only get respectable DPS on ships stuffed with nothing but Tac consoles and slots and more weapons?

    Maybe I'm sick of people calling something useless just because it isn't THEE BEST?

    Maybe I'm sick of the entitlement people have?

    Take your pick...and I've got more if you want them.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    grtiggy wrote: »
    well luckily the stats were posted well in advance to release so that they can be changed, ya know, cause this is a community built ship right?

    and they wouldnt post a big " DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change. " in there if they were not up to changing it right?

    Yes a Community build ship (not really since we only "build" the shell...more or less, but lets go with that) but right now for only a small portion of the "Comminity" when EVERYONE was Involved in this (at least everyone who participated) Tac Captains, Engineering Captains AND Science Captains, but interestingly enough both Tac and Eng Captains are Neglected / Ignored now even so that they also Voted and were Excited????

    So yea a Ship that was build WITH the Community FOR the Community, should appeal to everyone in that mentioned Community (the mentioned 3 Pack) but to many People here are Blind / Deaf and WAY to Thick Headed to understand that, instead all they can do is saying "NOES NOES NOES" pointing with their Fingers at you, yelling at you and Insulting you, they have what they want, and dont want us to also have fun with what we also helped to create....so why did we also participated again? :/:/:|

    blog3.jpg

    Wow! You somehow beat Cryptic's science ships for feds "joke". Tell me how many cruisers and escorts is there to science ships for all three factions? This whole thread is why I call science the "KDF" of the three classes.
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    natejam101 wrote: »
    I have not seen ANY posts requesting a Federation Science Carrier..The T5-U fleet Atrox is almost identical to this "new" ship..slow moving, slow turning science carriers do not work in the current setting of this game.

    Please change the BOFF layout, add weapon slot..something!

    Until then no money from me, and from the looks of it, from alot of people...just sayin

    like many including me suggested, it should be changed, to make it work for most People, but of course the Sellfish / Ignorant / White Knights who say "works for me, so i dont give a TRIBBLE whether or not it works for you, so if you dont like it gtfo" (and countless other insults towards "us" who we are not happy, cause it abolutely does not fit our Playstyle, and we are not few, we are many, yet still we are being ignored..........)

    The Best Idea here from someone was the 3 Pack

    one more Weapon on the Front +

    Tac Version= LtComEng to LtComUni
    Eng Version= LtTac to LtEng and LtComEng to LtComUni
    Sci Version= Same as Tac Version

    those are not the only Issues BUT the Important ones, so "fixing" those would make the Ship appeal to so much more People, instead of only a smal Portion.......yet when you say this, the Persistent Holy Knights / Defenders will Jump at your Neck, Swearing and Insulting you.....its mind-boggling, really........

    LOL

    I'm sorry...I can't help but laugh at this post...you calling people who like the ship selfish...if anyone is selfish its the people who want to turn this ship into yet another boring generic Tac ship.

    Why stop there? Why not just turn every ship in the game Tac? Why have a Engineer or Science Commander? Why not just make everything Tactical?

    and you are a Prime example of those Thick Headed People i just mentioned, we both speak the same language, yet you refuse to understand "us" or maybe you are just not able to understant it....

    NO ONE wants to change what you want to fly /use, and THATS why a 3 Pack would make so much sense, you want to fly the ship EXACTLY the way it is? well THAN USE THE Science Version, see? you have what you want, happy? yes?

    THAN WHY THE FRIGGING HELL not let us also have a eng and tac Version so we also can be happy? let me tell ya, cause like i also said before YOU and the likes of you are Ignorant and Sellfish YOU have what you want and YOU dont want us to also have something that fits us!!! a blind could tell this, you guys make ZERO Sense.

    Maybe I don't want to wait for them to make two more skins? To come up with two more consoles? For them to come up with 2 good consoles? Or dozens or other reasons that will give people like you yet more reasons to say the ship sucks and it isn't worth the cash?

    Maybe I'm sick of people who need to show off their e-peen and they can apparently only get respectable DPS on ships stuffed with nothing but Tac consoles and slots and more weapons?

    Maybe I'm sick of people calling something useless just because it isn't THEE BEST?

    Maybe I'm sick of the entitlement people have?

    Take your pick...and I've got more if you want them.

    you are not just Thick Headed...but Armor Thick Headed......

    I am 100% sure that People would be ok if ALL 3 Versions would have the exact same Design (see Odyssey 3 Pack) other than that, so just because YOU and the likes of you dont want to wait a little longer is reason enough to Neglect / Ignore 2/3 of the Playerbase? HOLY TRIBBLE thats so NOT Sellfish at all!

    So just because People ask for a Eng and Tac Version too means that they want to show off their e-peen huh?
    Well i am SICK of People who dont give a TRIBBLE about others, as long as they got what they like / wanted, cause Reasons that were mentioned time after time here!

    Most People (or many) did not call it useless in general (yea some did) BUT for their Character and Playstyle, cause gues what, NOT EVERYONE PLAYS WITH A SCIENCE CHAR, SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Entitlement? thats what you call it? if EVERYONE in the community was Involved in building this Ship (voted for the designs) than well yea EVERYONE should benefit from it in the end, you call this entitlement? i call it FAIRNESS!

    Now you can take a pick, we can go on like this forever....even so its a waste of time, cause you just DONT want to understand, you see your point as the just one, and everyone elses Point is WRONG, you have what you want and you like it, and we that we ask for versions that fit us, have to either take it or GTFO, thats your narrow minded Logic, yea the Logic of a SELLFISH and IGNORANT Person, you get that? i doubt it, iam sorry for you but i cant help you with that.

    You and the likes of you are definately people that no one wants to be around in real life, all about me me me and more me, others? what others? what do i care for others? they can go to hell!...am i right? maybe a little bit overdone, but basically your understanding of justice....... :|
  • sharpie65sharpie65 Member Posts: 679 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    @highlandrise You keep saying to give the Jupiter "more Tac" or "more weapons", but what reason(s) have you given for doing so? It's not as if it needs them anyway - if you're just saying that to make the CARRIER more appealing to you and other like-minded individuals who seem to be incapable of dealing any kind of indirect/non-weapon damage to your targets, then please stop trying to ruin what is a perfectly good setup for the role it's supposed to be.

    If you need that clarifying further, it is first and foremost a role of support; I can't see how it needs to be any more blatantly obvious - other than through the console the ship comes with - that this ship is unable to and never should be able to slaughter everything in it's path single-handedly like an escort.

    If you want an affordable dreadnought carrier, well it sucks to be you (and me, and anybody else who never got one) - this is a science carrier, and there's not a damned thing you can do that will change that.
    As somebody else so eloquently put it, maybe we're tired of every cruiser and science vessel being given an unhealthy dose of tactical just to make it appeal to the DPS crowd - although I doubt we see many pure-tactical, high-ranking DPS-crowd builds these days anyhow.

    EDIT: Considering how you're labelling anybody whose view opposes your own a "white knight" or "thick-headed" because you're too stubborn to accept other points of view as acceptable, I agree with other people - because the ship doesn't exactly fit your playstyle, you want to change it to the extent that it ruins the identity of said ship, and thus making it less suitable for the playstyle of another person. The same thing happened with the Valiant - because the stats showed it couldn't directly compete with the Pilotscorts straight outta the box, it meant that the ship was irrelevant to you and you subsequently wanted it changing to better reflect YOUR IDEA of what the Defiant should be.

    There's a reason we have exotic damage in this game - to give players another avenue to explore instead of repeating the same old tried-and-tested methods of dealing damage. If your brain can't process how to make those abilities work for you, then I'm afraid that path is unsuitable for you and your ilk.

    EDIT 2: I find I feel the need to disagree with your signature - the Defiant was a "Tough Little Ship" in DS9 and First Contact because of plot armour. You could quite easily make a survivable Defiant build in-game focusing on speed as your best defence, and yet because it can't take the same hits that it could in the show it's apparently not such a "Tough Little Ship" in STO.
    MXeSfqV.jpg
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,887 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    natejam101 wrote: »
    I have not seen ANY posts requesting a Federation Science Carrier..The T5-U fleet Atrox is almost identical to this "new" ship..slow moving, slow turning science carriers do not work in the current setting of this game.

    Please change the BOFF layout, add weapon slot..something!

    Until then no money from me, and from the looks of it, from alot of people...just sayin

    like many including me suggested, it should be changed, to make it work for most People, but of course the Sellfish / Ignorant / White Knights who say "works for me, so i dont give a TRIBBLE whether or not it works for you, so if you dont like it gtfo" (and countless other insults towards "us" who we are not happy, cause it abolutely does not fit our Playstyle, and we are not few, we are many, yet still we are being ignored..........)

    The Best Idea here from someone was the 3 Pack

    one more Weapon on the Front +

    Tac Version= LtComEng to LtComUni
    Eng Version= LtTac to LtEng and LtComEng to LtComUni
    Sci Version= Same as Tac Version

    those are not the only Issues BUT the Important ones, so "fixing" those would make the Ship appeal to so much more People, instead of only a smal Portion.......yet when you say this, the Persistent Holy Knights / Defenders will Jump at your Neck, Swearing and Insulting you.....its mind-boggling, really........

    LOL

    I'm sorry...I can't help but laugh at this post...you calling people who like the ship selfish...if anyone is selfish its the people who want to turn this ship into yet another boring generic Tac ship.

    Why stop there? Why not just turn every ship in the game Tac? Why have a Engineer or Science Commander? Why not just make everything Tactical?

    and you are a Prime example of those Thick Headed People i just mentioned, we both speak the same language, yet you refuse to understand "us" or maybe you are just not able to understant it....

    NO ONE wants to change what you want to fly /use, and THATS why a 3 Pack would make so much sense, you want to fly the ship EXACTLY the way it is? well THAN USE THE Science Version, see? you have what you want, happy? yes?

    THAN WHY THE FRIGGING HELL not let us also have a eng and tac Version so we also can be happy? let me tell ya, cause like i also said before YOU and the likes of you are Ignorant and Sellfish YOU have what you want and YOU dont want us to also have something that fits us!!! a blind could tell this, you guys make ZERO Sense.

    Maybe I don't want to wait for them to make two more skins? To come up with two more consoles? For them to come up with 2 good consoles? Or dozens or other reasons that will give people like you yet more reasons to say the ship sucks and it isn't worth the cash?

    Maybe I'm sick of people who need to show off their e-peen and they can apparently only get respectable DPS on ships stuffed with nothing but Tac consoles and slots and more weapons?

    Maybe I'm sick of people calling something useless just because it isn't THEE BEST?

    Maybe I'm sick of the entitlement people have?

    Take your pick...and I've got more if you want them.

    you are not just Thick Headed...but Armor Thick Headed......

    I am 100% sure that People would be ok if ALL 3 Versions would have the exact same Design (see Odyssey 3 Pack) other than that, so just because YOU and the likes of you dont want to wait a little longer is reason enough to Neglect / Ignore 2/3 of the Playerbase? HOLY TRIBBLE thats so NOT Sellfish at all!

    So just because People ask for a Eng and Tac Version too means that they want to show off their e-peen huh?
    Well i am SICK of People who dont give a TRIBBLE about others, as long as they got what they like / wanted, cause Reasons that were mentioned time after time here!

    Most People (or many) did not call it useless in general (yea some did) BUT for their Character and Playstyle, cause gues what, NOT EVERYONE PLAYS WITH A SCIENCE CHAR, SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Entitlement? thats what you call it? if EVERYONE in the community was Involved in building this Ship (voted for the designs) than well yea EVERYONE should benefit from it in the end, you call this entitlement? i call it FAIRNESS!

    Now you can take a pick, we can go on like this forever....even so its a waste of time, cause you just DONT want to understand, you see your point as the just one, and everyone elses Point is WRONG, you have what you want and you like it, and we that we ask for versions that fit us, have to either take it or GTFO, thats your narrow minded Logic, yea the Logic of a SELLFISH and IGNORANT Person, you get that? i doubt it, iam sorry for you but i cant help you with that.

    You and the likes of you are definately people that no one wants to be around in real life, all about me me me and more me, others? what others? what do i care for others? they can go to hell!...am i right? maybe a little bit overdone, but basically your understanding of justice....... :|

    Sorry...all I see is people whining for "MOAR TAC"

    Plus clearly delusional...I can guarantee 110% if they did not make 3 different models people would be whining that it isn't fair since almost every since 3 ship single faction pack comes with original parts...there is no doubt in my mind they'd call Crysptic lazy...or worse.

    Well guess what? Not everyone plays a Tac...not everyone needs 4 Tac consoles and 4/4 to make something work.

    Just cut the BS and stop pretending this is about being fair to all the classes...why don't you admit you just want 4 Tac consoles and a Lt Cmdr Tac like everyone else? That you can't perform with anything but Tac filled to the brim?

    It can't be anything else...because it already has a Lt Cmdr Eng and if you want more Engineering you have the Lt Uni...it has plenty of Science...so the only thing it isn't as strong on is Tac...which is exactly what you want, just like every other whiny little child in this thread who is complaining that the new toy doesn't have enough PEW PEW to make up for their inadequacies.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    OMFG, you guys cant be helped for Life, i could answer one by one to all your Points again, but its so tiresome and wasted time.
    But to repeat this one again, what is so hard to understand of the 3 Pack Concept?

    @sharpie65 "you want to change it to the extent that it ruins the identity of said ship, and thus making it less suitable for the playstyle of another person."

    can you even READ? do you understand what 3 PACK MEANS?! NO? it has a ENG Focused one, it has a TAC Focused one AND it has the SCI Focused on that YOU and Sci Captains want to use, so WHERE the HELL are we asking to change the base ship?!!!! you and others who want it the way it is, can DO SO NO PROBLEMO! So for crying out load HOW IS ANYTHING ruined here?!

    Reading all the BS from some of you people makes me wonder if we rally live on the same Planet, where the same logic is taking place? i start to doubt that.

    I said it before and i say it again, you guys CANT be helped! IGNORANT, SELLFISH and STUBBORN DOWN TO THE BONES!! JEEZ! :o

    EDIT: Another one Yick Yacking about my Signature......so i say it here to, NOT THE TOPIC and NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
    Post edited by highlandrise on
  • matthewfelixmatthewfelix Member Posts: 52 Arc User
    Personally I think if they just turned the LtC Eng/Intel position into a LtC Univ/Intel and the Lt Univ into a Lt Eng then the ship would be 'flexible enough' to support a LtC Tac spot, although I'd still probably toss in an Engineer there to have more engineering abilities, as ship this sluggish NEEDs to have a buff to engineering so it can maneuver better than a brick.

    Although the trait could be hilarious... with the right torpedo using hangar pets.
    12 Transported Plasma Torps (Scorpions) or Thermomic (Tholian Fighters), etc... could be rather amusing. And those are both rep fighters that anyone can unlock. Remember transport warheads also has a secondary function based on warhead type, find the right type of warhead and it could prove rather effective if you lack the tactical slots to slot HY or TS. And the Jupiter only has a Lt Tactical spot if you use the Universal spot for Eng (to gain room for Intel powers without loosing all your eng slots) or Science.

    I'm not sure I'll get this ship since my 'carrier captain' already has a Tholian Recluse (I love the Mesh weavers) and the Breen Carrier (I launch Frigates almost as large as my ship... I'm flying an ugly TARDIS!)

    I do think that the Scratch the pain 'ability' should be added to ALL hangar pets not just the new fed frigates as the Pet AI is not smart enough to get away from a ship about to explode.
  • sharpie65sharpie65 Member Posts: 679 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    snipped for length

    Here's a thought - maybe not everybody supporting the ship as-is wants it for their science characters? Possibly unlike yourself, I main a Fed Eng who's doing rather well for himself as a tank, despite it being an "obsolete" role - just because one isn't chasing absolute DPS, does it mean they're bad at the game? I think not - exotic/torpedo builds on science characters have the potential to outclass the DPS of those who prefer the heavy-hitting, low-survivability tactical playstyle; on the flipside, a well-built tank is very capable of holding it's own for the entire team whilst comfortably sitting in the top 3 in an STF.

    Ignorant? You seem to be presenting that rather well yourself, considering how we (those who support the ship) keep presenting you with solid counter-arguments as to why something wouldn't be viable - in retaliation you bring up the same points over and over again..it gets a tad monotonous, doesn't it?

    Selfish? Again, just because you yourself won't use the ship in it's current state you demand that it be changed* to satisfy your own personal demands and desires for a God-Ship. *Including the additional release of a Tac/Eng variant.

    The only thing I'll admit to is being stubborn, and even then I'm not going to back down on my equally-valid point of view.

    EDIT: Oh, and another thing - resorting to insults to get your opinion across only reinforces my belief that your only desire for this release is to see your own wants and requirements for a ship set in stone for others to dislike an/or berate the devs for at a later time.
    MXeSfqV.jpg
  • sorceror01sorceror01 Member Posts: 1,042 Arc User
    Okay...... hold up a second.....

    Has everyone simply forgotten that basic carriers have always had a Science-main/Engine Secondary bent to their BOff seating? Like, are we just forgetting how the Vo'Quv and the Atrox, ostensibly the most basic and easily available carriers at T5, have Commander Science seats, subsystem targeting, and lots of HP and a 3/3 weapon layout?

    The Jupiter is essentially the bar setter for T6 Carriers, of which it is the first if I may point out. It is not surprising in the slightest that it's going to be a basic model Carrier, and not a Tactical Carrier or anything exotic.
    ".... you're gonna have a bad time."
  • cuchulainn74cuchulainn74 Member Posts: 831 Arc User
    Your logic and sound reasoning are wasted here. This has devolved into a religious debate only, and all of us are preaching only to the choir. Best to let it die a quiet death.
    Fleet Admiral CuChulainn - U.S.S. Aegis KT Intel Dreadnought Cruiser
    vGdvFsX.jpg


  • sharpie65sharpie65 Member Posts: 679 Arc User
    sorceror01 wrote: »
    Okay...... hold up a second.....

    Has everyone simply forgotten that basic carriers have always had a Science-main/Engine Secondary bent to their BOff seating? Like, are we just forgetting how the Vo'Quv and the Atrox, ostensibly the most basic and easily available carriers at T5, have Commander Science seats, subsystem targeting, and lots of HP and a 3/3 weapon layout?

    The Jupiter is essentially the bar setter for T6 Carriers, of which it is the first if I may point out. It is not surprising in the slightest that it's going to be a basic model Carrier, and not a Tactical Carrier or anything exotic.

    That's the point I was trying to get across to our good friend highlandrise, unfortunately they don't seem to be taking the hint very well (ships of the same type don't get changed a great deal from their lower-tier counterparts when/if they get uprated - T2-T5 was the exception to the rule in this case).
    Your logic and sound reasoning are wasted here. This has devolved into a religious debate only, and all of us are preaching only to the choir. Best to let it die a quiet death.

    So it would seem. I just want the ship to be released so that somebody can prove him/her wrong about the entire thing via a PvP beatdown.
    MXeSfqV.jpg
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.
  • xxxseadog117xxxxxxseadog117xxx Member Posts: 131 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    I like the ship. The community doesn't since it doesn't satisfy their needs for "tac this" and "tac that". Has everyone forgotten that PURE [NOT DREADNOUGHT] carriers have:

    -6 weapons slots
    -Sci Oriented
    -Subsystem targeting
    -2 hangars

    They never said that this ship would be a DREADNOUGHT anything since the beginning. They said CARRIER, community said "YES COMMUNITY DESIGNED SHIP" and now are ranting at their own work. You should've criticized at the beginning of this event, while everyone else complained how ugly the designs are.

    Alas, this post will be lost in time. Like tears... in the rain...
    Kurland Here Kurland Here This is Kurland Kurland Kurland Here Kurland, Do you copy?

    chiyoumiku wrote: »
    Here's a Tissue for your Issue.
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,887 Arc User
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.

    cant read? cant understand? or else you would understand the THREE Versions TAC / ENG / SCI, everyone could choose what fits him, the "base model" so the sci heavy one would be the same that the ship is right now, there is nothing turned around, everyone can have the version he likes, everyone is happy, but i gues some people really lack the brain capacity to see something so simple as that, and with that issue i unfortunately cant help you guys.
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,887 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.

    cant read? cant understand? or else you would understand the THREE Versions TAC / ENG / SCI, everyone could choose what fits him, the "base model" so the sci heavy one would be the same that the ship is right now, there is nothing turned around, everyone can have the version he likes, everyone is happy, but i gues some people really lack the brain capacity to see something so simple as that, and with that issue i unfortunately cant help you guys.

    See...the ship has plenty of Sci and plenty of Eng...only thing the ship doesn't have a ton of is Tac...so this BS about making three versions is a thinly veiled plea for "moar tac" If you asking for anything than a Cmdr Sci...well you're fooling yourself because that will never happen.

    So which is it..."Moar Tac" or "Never gonna happen"?
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.

    cant read? cant understand? or else you would understand the THREE Versions TAC / ENG / SCI, everyone could choose what fits him, the "base model" so the sci heavy one would be the same that the ship is right now, there is nothing turned around, everyone can have the version he likes, everyone is happy, but i gues some people really lack the brain capacity to see something so simple as that, and with that issue i unfortunately cant help you guys.

    A few key points against this.

    1. Creating two new ships would take time, ie the Jupiter that almost everyone is ok with would take longer to release
    2. The skins for the other two skins would be put toward better use. Maybe giving everyone that Typhoon that they want
    3. This one is pretty weak but I'm putting it here because TRIBBLE it, everyone gets their soapbox so I should get mine. Cryptic should not feel forced to change their ideas just because someone's feeling might get hurt. Sometimes you just suck at a sport, or just not smart enough, or someone simply picked someone else over you for a date. It does not mean that everything should be for everyone.
    4. This is a little bit like three. Where was this call for a 3 pack when all these cruisers and escorts was released?
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.

    cant read? cant understand? or else you would understand the THREE Versions TAC / ENG / SCI, everyone could choose what fits him, the "base model" so the sci heavy one would be the same that the ship is right now, there is nothing turned around, everyone can have the version he likes, everyone is happy, but i gues some people really lack the brain capacity to see something so simple as that, and with that issue i unfortunately cant help you guys.

    See...the ship has plenty of Sci and plenty of Eng...only thing the ship doesn't have a ton of is Tac...so this BS about making three versions is a thinly veiled plea for "moar tac" If you asking for anything than a Cmdr Sci...well you're fooling yourself because that will never happen.

    So which is it..."Moar Tac" or "Never gonna happen"?

    for *Censored* sake have you even read all the other comments before? all that basicaly is asked for is either the 3 Pack OR at the BARE MINIMUM, changing the LtComEng to a LtComUni (NOT THE DAMN COMMANDER!) TRIBBLE the fourth weapon on the front (even so it would be needed but whatever) Just the LtComUni and most / majority of the People will be OK with it

    You say THIS TINY LITTLE Change is TO MUCH?!!!!! as a uni you can STILL put a Engineer in the Slot and have EXACTLY what it is now, but others can also choose to put a Tac OR even a Science Boff in there, tell me what, WHAT could be your and everyone elses Problem with that???? Will it HURT you? does it take away something from you? or is your only Problem with it the fact that everyone (most) would have something out of that, and you dont want that??? what is it?????
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,887 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    lianthelia wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    you guys dont get it do you? why even present me with your so awesome ways of builds? do i care? no? if it works for you, fine, why not let others have their way? how can some people so unbelivably ignorant and sellfish, i gues understanding this is something impossible.....so yes i now see that we dont speak the same language, or that there are worlds between your logic and mine (including all the other people who are also not happy) you are sad people, i wish you enlightment one day, till than, have fun.

    You're the only one being selfish around here because you must turn the ship into yet another Tac ship.

    cant read? cant understand? or else you would understand the THREE Versions TAC / ENG / SCI, everyone could choose what fits him, the "base model" so the sci heavy one would be the same that the ship is right now, there is nothing turned around, everyone can have the version he likes, everyone is happy, but i gues some people really lack the brain capacity to see something so simple as that, and with that issue i unfortunately cant help you guys.

    See...the ship has plenty of Sci and plenty of Eng...only thing the ship doesn't have a ton of is Tac...so this BS about making three versions is a thinly veiled plea for "moar tac" If you asking for anything than a Cmdr Sci...well you're fooling yourself because that will never happen.

    So which is it..."Moar Tac" or "Never gonna happen"?

    for *Censored* sake have you even read all the other comments before? all that basicaly is asked for is either the 3 Pack OR at the BARE MINIMUM, changing the LtComEng to a LtComUni (NOT THE DAMN COMMANDER!) TRIBBLE the fourth weapon on the front (even so it would be needed but whatever) Just the LtComUni and most / majority of the People will be OK with it

    You say THIS TINY LITTLE Change is TO MUCH?!!!!! as a uni you can STILL put a Engineer in the Slot and have EXACTLY what it is now, but others can also choose to put a Tac OR even a Science Boff in there, tell me what, WHAT could be your and everyone elses Problem with that???? Will it HURT you? does it take away something from you? or is your only Problem with it the fact that everyone (most) would have something out of that, and you dont want that??? what is it?????

    So...it's "moar tac" then? That's the only thing that would go in there...there is already a Lt Cmdr Eng...not even full on Sci would put a Sci in that slot. Cmdr, Lt Cmdr and Lt Sci is a bit overboard...so logically you want a Lt Cmdr Tac but you're trying to sound noble and justified under the thinly veiled flag of diversity.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • annahielannahiel Member Posts: 5 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    Not sure if you people follow podcasts but the devs has said several times they cant add any ship they wish, even if for reasons for fairness or balance, unless CBS agrees to it. If CBS wishes the Romulans and Klingons to have fewer ships and that STO be a Federation biased game, it shall be so.

    The player's desire for faction ships to fill conceptual holes are irrelevant. CBS (owner of Star Trek TV rights) and Paramount (owner of Star Trek movie rights) are the awkward foster guardians of Star Trek Online and their will is supreme. Unwise are those that fault and attack Cryptic for doing the best they can with what little they have in this sensitive adoption process. Those that do follow the podcasts know that Cryptic do try to calmly and professionally fight the bias and reservations of CBS and Paramount. At times, they had to be clever, trick/mislead and snuck content under CBS' and Paramount's radar.

    Cryptic is not Blizzard and can not plan ahead or redress conceptual issues in STO because they dont own the IP. They are not Bioware as Cryptic does not enjoy the same strong relationship with CBS/Paramount as Bioware has with Disney/EA nor do they enjoy their love which comes with cross promotions, funding and specialized long term resources.

    Tis wise to be grateful for every little Cryptic victory and advancement. The Star Trek property and fanbase is shrinking, not growing compared to the Disney machine fueling 9 new Star Wars movies, 2 TV series and 3 upcoming games. Wisdom is KDF congratulating every boon the FED players receive and for the FED players to not be envious for not having a monopoly on all features.

    17 pages of raging tears of jealous players; a betrayal of the spirit of Star Trek on so many levels. I hope this thread is not deleted. It should be a shameful monument of a community's self serving decent, starving for pride and scrapping boons of its fellow fans. Truly, many of you hang on every STO news as if its the last and assassinate each other's dignity as if no horizon is beyond the now. Such a lack of faith in your own IP and your game is disturbing.
  • whisperorwhisperor Member Posts: 71 Arc User
    Okay, this thread is getting out of control.
    May I suggest Trendy just notes some suggestions and then close it permanently before it get really ugly.

    Oh and...
    c24.gif
    or rather "Out B4 the Lock"
  • antibakantibak Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    Saving my money here once again! :(

    Note= You could of probably tripled your potential sales of this design if it came 'close' to a Scimitar in capability! I'm waiting, and waiting and waiting..........

    I like the looks of the ship but that is it. It is gimped for DPS on so many levels and a liability in any elite STF and several advanced ones. (My thoughts will be in an STF if I see this: "Great there is Carrier that we need to carry"! Sorry but your conservative ratings on most consoles tells me this new one will have a marginal effect on the group DPS. Will it match the Iconian set group bonus? I don't think so, at least not likely based on your past history on most console stats. Also all FED pets and this new one based on its weapon loadout have poor DPS!!! Nothing here fixes that. Plus the Pet AI is just horrible. I rarely bother launching my pets on command ships anymore:( And why a science heavy vessel with no secondary deflector? Also very poor maneuverability to make it a Torpedo boat with a high aux focus. This thing is just a huge slow target but a very sexy looking garbage scow;)
  • atroxmortisatroxmortis Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    I am so gonna get one, that much I know. But I am hoping that we will see some loven to the KDF and ROM side as well, the KDF have a few carriers, but the only decent one, imho, is the Vo'Quv but its antiquated now and definitly needs an update if it is to help out in fleet situations. And the roms have many a ships that can carry one pet, but again fall behind when it comes to that much pirepower taht the new jupiter class will be able to bring to bear.

    Now comes the hard bit, waiting for the things arrival and seeing what kinda officer I shall make to pilot her.
  • johnwatson71johnwatson71 Member Posts: 187 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    This is honestly so entertaining. this is a VIDEO GAME. None of the stuff in the game is real. It is fictional. Imaginary. Virtual.

    And this how y'all react to something that doesn't even exist unless your computer is turned on? That is just...sad. Like bordering on unhealthy, neurotic obsession with a space ship that doesn't really exist.

    Maybe y'all need to turn your computer off. Go outside. Jump in some leaves. And maybe call a psychologist and work through these clearly deep seated issues you have with virtual content that you, for some reason, feel FORCED to pay for, as if Cryptic is holding a gun to your heads saying "But our new ship or you will die!"

    Please get help. Love yourselves man. Have some self respect.

    People flaming about things this way is why mmo's are usually so unpleasant to play. Because if the dev team is not catering to your exact whims, then you make it miserable for everyone else who is either content or happy.

    Here is a concept, now I know it might be hard to understand. But please, do try.

    A game. Is a thing. Meant to be fun.

    you still with me?

    A fun thing. But when a thing stops being fun. It's usually a good idea, to stop doing the thing that is only making you upset.

    almost done, deep breath, long and slow. You're doing a great job.

    If you're not having fun with the thing anymore. Stop doing it. Take a break. Play another game that only brings you enjoyment. But this? Boys please. All sarcasm aside from me. Get a life. One that doesn't hinge on virtual space ships maybe.
    7aamriW.png
  • yorethelyorethel Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    I have a few questions, 1 why does it have a CDR Science seat? surely as a Dreadnought Carrier it would be Tactical and would likely be a Command ship given it's size. We already have a science orientated carrier the Atrox, I dunno but this seems wrong as this combo. In any case I'll be buying it, if only to sport the new frigates.

    BTW any news when the KDF will get a T6 Vo'Quv? my KDF science Admiral is sitting in the Breen Dreadnought and I'd prefer to be in a Klingon ship sporting Bop's.

    A suggestion though for a carrier mod, give them a weapons pod with a 360 degree field of fire for one weapon of their choice (Whatever they socket becomes 360 deg firing), that would give the underpowered science DPS and would be a new thing in game. Though I realize that science DPS should come from exotic damage, try getting a ship in your forward arc and keep it there for these abilities when your piloting this behemoth, it's tricky at best and damn near impossible most of the time.
  • johnwatson71johnwatson71 Member Posts: 187 Arc User
    yorethel wrote: »
    I have a few questions, 1 why does it have a CDR Science seat? surely as a Dreadnought Carrier it would be Tactical and would likely be a Command ship given it's size. We already have a science orientated carrier the Atrox, I dunno but this seems wrong as this combo. In any case I'll be buying it, if only to sport the new frigates.

    BTW any news when the KDF will get a T6 Vo'Quv? my KDF science Admiral is sitting in the Breen Dreadnought and i'd prefer to be in a Klingon ship sporting Bop's.

    no there is currently no news about KDF or Roms getting new ships. Trendy is trying to work with the devs to make this happen. And just to skip over any uncertainty, it will mostly likely NOT be a fast process.
    7aamriW.png
  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    yorethel wrote: »
    I have a few questions, 1 why does it have a CDR Science seat? surely as a Dreadnought Carrier it would be Tactical and would likely be a Command ship given it's size. We already have a science orientated carrier the Atrox, I dunno but this seems wrong as this combo. In any case I'll be buying it, if only to sport the new frigates.

    BTW any news when the KDF will get a T6 Vo'Quv? my KDF science Admiral is sitting in the Breen Dreadnought and I'd prefer to be in a Klingon ship sporting Bop's.

    A suggestion though for a carrier mod, give them a weapons pod with a 360 degree field of fire for one weapon of their choice (Whatever they socket becomes 360 deg firing), that would give the underpowered science DPS and would be a new thing in game. Though I realize that science DPS should come from exotic damage, try getting a ship in your forward arc and keep it there for these abilities when your piloting this behemoth, it's tricky at best and damn near impossible most of the time.

    It's not a dreadnought carrier
  • yorethelyorethel Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    Well we the community voted for this ship, perhaps Cryptic should have given us a vote on whether it was mainly tac/sci/eng, orientated and int/pil/com, combination? just a thought
  • johnwatson71johnwatson71 Member Posts: 187 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    yorethel wrote: »
    Well we the community voted for this ship, perhaps Cryptic should have given us a vote on whether it was mainly tac/sci/eng, orientated and int/pil/com, combination? just a thought

    If they wanted us to vote on boff seating and consoles, then we would have during this thing. Obviously they didn't, because they had their own ideas for this ship.

    What they should have done was tell us clearly, in no uncertain terms, that our only part was to vote for the outside aesthetic design. That would have solved some problems we are facing now.

    This kind of dissent is what happens when people create expectations based on personal desire. It almost always ends in disappointment. That and having extremely one track and narrow minded views of playstyle.

    Its funny because Starfleet is not military. Starfleet is not about tactical war stuff. What are we? The mirror universe? Nope. This ship fits in perfectly for what Starfleet is about. And yet thats what everyone is mad about. A ship that is more true to what star trek and Starfleet is really about instead of ANOTHER pure war machine.

    This is a very hypocritical player base. That's for sure.
    7aamriW.png
Sign In or Register to comment.