test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

It's Time For Supercarriers

lordgyorlordgyor Member Posts: 2,820 Arc User
It's Time For Supercarriers, ships with 3 Hangar Bays.

What do you guys think?

I think bringing in the Voq'ue as a Supercarrier would be awesome. 6 BoPs flying around it.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
«1

Comments

  • lordmerc22lordmerc22 Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    I dont disagree but they should have strictly 3/3 weapons - the old carriers that fit in that category could be a candidate but they need to work on their server to reduce lag too as well

    In other words like the VoQuv I just think mainly the undergunned ones should get updated with it and become "true" carriers
  • godimasgodimas Member Posts: 70 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    The big temporal super dreadnoughts (universe class and friends) might be a good place to start tinkering here. They are already big enough to house a small fleet of other ships inside of them.

    I would also vote for 4 hangar bays and cutting down the weapon bays to a 3/3 or a 3/2... you are putting a lot of your damage in the hands of the AI by doing this.

    Also, total side note, changing ships around that folks already own will probably make some grumpy. So unless things are just being added, then I would hope that whatever changes may get made to existing ships are either optional or strictly "buffs" of some sort
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    I disagree. Why? Not every ship needs 96 (simulated) pets just because the disconnie has that. Way too much clutter.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • wraithmeisterwraithmeister Member Posts: 397 Arc User
    Gimme a death star with 20 hanger bays!
    And Tribble bridge officers!
  • trekkiejedigirl#9564 trekkiejedigirl Member Posts: 163 Arc User
    godimas wrote: »
    Also, total side note, changing ships around that folks already own will probably make some grumpy. So unless things are just being added, then I would hope that whatever changes may get made to existing ships are either optional or strictly "buffs" of some sort

    Yes, changes made to ships especially Carriers (as they are the main thing I fly) I already own wouldn't be received well - by me or others. So I hope any future changes wouldn't affect ships we already own. :)

  • trekkiejedigirl#9564 trekkiejedigirl Member Posts: 163 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    Gimme a death star with 20 hanger bays!
    And Tribble bridge officers!

    This is Star Trek, not Star Wars.

    Hey I love Star Wars too and even play SWTOR. But that's not my point. You can't put a Star Wars ship or weapon in a Star Trek game, it just wouldn't work for sooooo many reasons they are too numerous to mention. :)
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    I am not convinced more hangar bays is a good idea. Carriers certainly need a little bit added now that flight deck cruisers get 2 bays and basically lose nothing compared to the Carrier.
    Maybe:
    • Commander Engineering Carrier => 2 Cruiser Commands
    • Commander Science Carrier => Secondary Deflector
    • Commander Tactical Carrier => Experimental Weapon Slot
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 5,051 Arc User
    Sure, but only if they also upgraded some enemies to launch pets.

    Right now with all the stuff we can launch it sometimes appears that players don't even have to use their main ships in some normal level queues or battlezones.

    Being able to launch more ships from dedicated carriers is fine with me, but only if they also increase the risk for those fleets of fighters.
  • lordmerc22lordmerc22 Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    godimas wrote: »
    Also, total side note, changing ships around that folks already own will probably make some grumpy. So unless things are just being added, then I would hope that whatever changes may get made to existing ships are either optional or strictly "buffs" of some sort

    Yes, changes made to ships especially Carriers (as they are the main thing I fly) I already own wouldn't be received well - by me or others. So I hope any future changes wouldn't affect ships we already own. :)

    Unless the change was a clear upgrade like what is happening with flight-decks
  • lordmerc22lordmerc22 Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    I am not convinced more hangar bays is a good idea. Carriers certainly need a little bit added now that flight deck cruisers get 2 bays and basically lose nothing compared to the Carrier.
    Maybe:
    • Commander Engineering Carrier => 2 Cruiser Commands
    • Commander Science Carrier => Secondary Deflector
    • Commander Tactical Carrier => Experimental Weapon Slot

    Yes or make the subsystem target tier 3 and not tier 1 that it is now so it can be more effective but I like your suggestion
  • xyquarzexyquarze Member Posts: 2,120 Arc User
    How about a carrier which can carry two supercarriers?
    My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
  • trekkiejedigirl#9564 trekkiejedigirl Member Posts: 163 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    I am not convinced more hangar bays is a good idea. Carriers certainly need a little bit added now that flight deck cruisers get 2 bays and basically lose nothing compared to the Carrier.
    Maybe:
    • Commander Engineering Carrier => 2 Cruiser Commands
    • Commander Science Carrier => Secondary Deflector
    • Commander Tactical Carrier => Experimental Weapon Slot

    Yes, I too like this suggestion. Now changes like these I don't think we'd mind to ships we already own (especially the Experimental Weapon slot for Command Tactical Carriers). It is changes that further limit the ships ability in combat that would cause a problem. :)
  • tyler002tyler002 Member Posts: 1,586 Arc User
    Considering Carriers aren't exactly known for being heavily armed battleships, I think most of the existing Carriers in the game could probably be considered "Supercarriers" to some extent.
    tumblr_p7auh1JPC61qfr6udo4_500.gif
  • wraithmeisterwraithmeister Member Posts: 397 Arc User
    Gimme a death star with 20 hanger bays!
    And Tribble bridge officers!

    This is Star Trek, not Star Wars.

    Hey I love Star Wars too and even play SWTOR. But that's not my point. You can't put a Star Wars ship or weapon in a Star Trek game, it just wouldn't work for sooooo many reasons they are too numerous to mention. :)

    Oops, that was a mega-typo.
    I really meant to say "First Federation Death Star"...you know..that big honkin ship that was in the TOS: Corbomite Maneuver, which launched Balok's smaller ship (if each of those nodules on the large ship is a smaller ship, it really is a super-carrier. We have this fenced-off section of stars in Alpha quadrant labeled "First Federation"...STO should do something with that at some point.

  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,572 Arc User
    Less regular weapons Slots but built in Point Defense Systems.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    l don't know.
    l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
    That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • trekkiejedigirl#9564 trekkiejedigirl Member Posts: 163 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    ;)

    Oops, that was a mega-typo.
    I really meant to say "First Federation Death Star"...you know..that big honkin ship that was in the TOS: Corbomite Maneuver, which launched Balok's smaller ship (if each of those nodules on the large ship is a smaller ship, it really is a super-carrier. We have this fenced-off section of stars in Alpha quadrant labeled "First Federation"...STO should do something with that at some point.

    Lol, he, he, he - nice save. ;)
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,896 Arc User
    edited August 2019
    angrytarg wrote: »
    I disagree. Why? Not every ship needs 96 (simulated) pets just because the disconnie has that. Way too much clutter.

    So the Flight Deck Carriers should be allowed 8 weapons...Cruiser Commands, and two hangar bays, while Carriers get 6 weapons and what...subsystem targeting which is pretty much useless unless you're using one specific starship trait?

    Carriers need something to be able to compete with the FDCs now or they're completely useless.

    Don't want to give true carriers a 3rd hangar bay? Then how about Enhanced Weapon Systems and Enhanced Particle Generators to truly give them a boost without more hangar spam?
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • duasynduasyn Member Posts: 492 Arc User
    You want super? Make every weapon slot on carriers able to hold a hanger. Someone could come out with a totally weaponless ship. But have 8-10 hangers. ;)
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,284 Arc User
    serversplosion in 3...2...1...​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #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!"
    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.
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    xyquarze wrote: »
    How about a carrier which can carry two supercarriers?

    giphy.gif


    XzRTofz.gif
  • postagepaidpostagepaid Member Posts: 2,899 Arc User
    Why would you want to wallow about like a beached whale in the jupiter when a revamped cruiser can actually fly and brings more toys to the table.

    Given that actual carriers tend to field frigates I'm not entirely convinced on the it'll cause lag argument against a thrid bay. One carrier with frigates is 4 pets flying about vaguely somewhere in the vicinity of the mothership.

    Fighter bays produce more per wing so full compliment means more of them per ship/player. Unless the assumption is that as they're made of wet tissue paper and love to despawn due to refusal to keep up the full deployment will rarely happen during a tfo run.

    Likewise if they want to reduce lag maybe look into the overly spammy abilities that already makes gameplay a bit of a chore with the visual apocalypse that can fill the screen.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    So the Flight Deck Carriers should be allowed 8 weapons...Cruiser Commands, and two hangar bays, while Carriers get 6 weapons and what...subsystem targeting which is pretty much useless unless you're using one specific starship trait?

    Carriers need something to be able to compete with the FDCs now or they're completely useless.

    Don't want to give true carriers a 3rd hangar bay? Then how about Enhanced Weapon Systems and Enhanced Particle Generators to truly give them a boost without more hangar spam?

    I really don't care pig-2.gif You know why? Because my characters that have a carrier - lo and behold - still have the same carrier as literally nothing changed for them at all. They are neither nerfed nor useless. I really, really do not get what you and others are talking about when they say that.

    But what could possibly be changed, well since the FDC are "engineering carriers" and the carriers we have are supposed to be "science carriers" they could get sensor analysis for example. Or a second deflector. Or I liked the wingman-idea that they get a slot for two wingman-ships that could maybe changed so there would be a combat wingman or a shield drone or something like that.

    But a third hangar slot is just too much clutter in my opinion.​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • lordmerc22lordmerc22 Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    So the Flight Deck Carriers should be allowed 8 weapons...Cruiser Commands, and two hangar bays, while Carriers get 6 weapons and what...subsystem targeting which is pretty much useless unless you're using one specific starship trait?

    Carriers need something to be able to compete with the FDCs now or they're completely useless.

    Don't want to give true carriers a 3rd hangar bay? Then how about Enhanced Weapon Systems and Enhanced Particle Generators to truly give them a boost without more hangar spam?

    I really don't care pig-2.gif You know why? Because my characters that have a carrier - lo and behold - still have the same carrier as literally nothing changed for them at all. They are neither nerfed nor useless. I really, really do not get what you and others are talking about when they say that.

    But what could possibly be changed, well since the FDC are "engineering carriers" and the carriers we have are supposed to be "science carriers" they could get sensor analysis for example. Or a second deflector. Or I liked the wingman-idea that they get a slot for two wingman-ships that could maybe changed so there would be a combat wingman or a shield drone or something like that.

    But a third hangar slot is just too much clutter in my opinion.​​

    I think having subsystem targetting rank 3(they got rank 1 now) without shared CD with other tactical abilities would be enough to make them better. Sensor scan is tied to sec deflector, if not wrong, and then they will have a new problem: Because of carrier s getting the sec deflector and the sensor scan the pure ships and multi-mission sci ships could end up inferior
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    So the Flight Deck Carriers should be allowed 8 weapons...Cruiser Commands, and two hangar bays, while Carriers get 6 weapons and what...subsystem targeting which is pretty much useless unless you're using one specific starship trait?

    Carriers need something to be able to compete with the FDCs now or they're completely useless.

    Don't want to give true carriers a 3rd hangar bay? Then how about Enhanced Weapon Systems and Enhanced Particle Generators to truly give them a boost without more hangar spam?

    I really don't care pig-2.gif You know why? Because my characters that have a carrier - lo and behold - still have the same carrier as literally nothing changed for them at all. They are neither nerfed nor useless. I really, really do not get what you and others are talking about when they say that.​​
    It's jealousy at <not their favorite ship> getting something. Nothing more.
  • lopequillopequil Member Posts: 1,226 Arc User
    There’s more to it than that. It’s about carriers being made less useful because smaller ships are getting the carriers’ main feature. Why fly a carrier if a smaller and faster ship can do the same things?

    We would see similar complaints if they added raider flanking to escorts.

    For my own two penneth I’d like to see full carriers getting one (or two) extra hangars, and upgrade the Annorax/Tarantula types to two.

    I’ve also long been a proponent for something like a “broadside” weapon slot for larger dreadnoughts, whereby we could slot a beam array (or even DBB) and it would have a 90’ firing arc on either side.

    The removal of the distance limit on pets has been a boon for carriers, but we really need to see some improvement to fighter pet controls; it’s ridiculous that we can’t have fighters attack or defend anything that isn’t also the carrier’s current target. That’s to say nothing of pets that still don’t respond to the commands we currently have.
    Q9BWcdD.png
  • This content has been removed.
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,896 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    So the Flight Deck Carriers should be allowed 8 weapons...Cruiser Commands, and two hangar bays, while Carriers get 6 weapons and what...subsystem targeting which is pretty much useless unless you're using one specific starship trait?

    Carriers need something to be able to compete with the FDCs now or they're completely useless.

    Don't want to give true carriers a 3rd hangar bay? Then how about Enhanced Weapon Systems and Enhanced Particle Generators to truly give them a boost without more hangar spam?

    I really don't care pig-2.gif You know why? Because my characters that have a carrier - lo and behold - still have the same carrier as literally nothing changed for them at all. They are neither nerfed nor useless. I really, really do not get what you and others are talking about when they say that.

    But what could possibly be changed, well since the FDC are "engineering carriers" and the carriers we have are supposed to be "science carriers" they could get sensor analysis for example. Or a second deflector. Or I liked the wingman-idea that they get a slot for two wingman-ships that could maybe changed so there would be a combat wingman or a shield drone or something like that.

    But a third hangar slot is just too much clutter in my opinion.​​

    Sorry my already weak favorite ships are getting weaker and get no compensation while ships that already perform better are getting even stronger?

    In case you haven't noticed this game REVOLVES around dps....basic carriers were already the weakest as they're the slowest, have the least weapons, and are generally very lacking in tactical ability.

    Flight deck cruisers are faster, stronger, and have more ability. Now ships that don't even need a boost are getting one while the weakest ships are left in the dust, but I guess that is business as usual and I guess if you don't fly them you could care less?

    What you're proposing will just take from Science ships and make them even weaker....I've given several ways that doesn't take from one class of ship and leave them in the dust. But it seems like you don't want that.

    My guess is you love this flight deck carrier change because it benefits you and you don't want any real changes because it will take away from your new toys.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    What the squeal are you even talking about? I adressed all of that in the post you quoted.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,572 Arc User
    What about '... AT THIS TIME...' don't people get about this change. They are not addressing Full Carriers AT THIS TIME.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    l don't know.
    l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
    That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • jslynjslyn Member Posts: 1,790 Arc User
    Gimme a death star with 20 hanger bays!
    And Tribble bridge officers!


    That would, ironically, be weak against hanger pets.
This discussion has been closed.