test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Rework for Jupiter Class and similar Carriers?
solhaen
Member Posts: 7 Arc User
It has been about a year since Flight Deck Cruisers were upgraded to have two hangar bays, giving them all the benefits of both Cruisers and Carriers, with none of the drawbacks. This has made ships like the Jupiter Class and other purpose-built "Carriers" woefully obsolete. Does Cryptic have plans to give these ships a rework and make them viable again?
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And/or a third hangar.
Modern (super)carriers don't sail solo, they usually always have a couple escorts with them at all times.
Wing Commander's TCS Tiger's Claw generally operated alone, and was actually designed for it. The Bengal class Strike Carrier was designed for independant operation. The later Midway class Megacarrier TCS Midway followed that. Although I personally feel that a carrier that's longer than an Imperial Star Destroyer and designed to replace an entire battlegroup feels a bit too much like an "all eggs in one basket" approach.
To me battlegroups still have their versitility because you can spread out the escorts as well. Having a few carrier designs able to operate independantly is fine, but I wouldn't replace battlegroups in naval combat doctrine.
If anyone brings up the BWS Intrepid from Wing Commander 4, I didn't count her because she was originally designed as a destroyer and converted into a pocket carrier, so I compare her more to the Strike Wing Escorts in STO.
Battlestar Galactica, at least in the original version of the show, was definitely a solo carrier.
The 'rag-tag fleet' was made up of civilian vessels (cargo, transport, and cruise ships).
˅Edit: I already know that's what I'm referring to.
The Jupiter has a lot of problems in my opinion, it's one ship that can definitely use some type of buff. I would however, be surprised to see it happen. They're more likely to make a whole new Carrier and put it in a box or sell it for Zen.
I think a Battlestar, both classic and reboot, was designed as a battleship/carrier hybrid right off the bat. Even without their Vipers, a Battlestar is a significant threat to anything its pointed at. She is force projection on her own.
While I don't have a Jupiter, I do kinda agree that Intel seating just doesn't feel like it meshes well with Carrier gameplay. Command, on the other hand, does IMO. I got a Sarco KDF side, and I feel that the Command seating gives more options for Carrier gameplay. Suppression Barrage and Overwhelm Emitters synergize very well with fighter attacks.
And for the record I use Elite Slavers, so I don't have to worry too much about them spending most of their time not firing their main weapon like cannon hanger pets tend to do.
To play the counterpoint: I think we're talking about the ship type as a whole, and less about individual ships. There is presedent for ship archetypes to see improvements if they're found lacking. Cruisers received Communication Arrays; Escorts received Experimental Weapons; Science Vessels received Secondary Deflectors.
While this is my subjective opinion, I do find all other carriers in the game to be inferior to the Jem Hadar Vanguard Carrier because of its native wingmen. (It also has excellent tactical and science capabilities for a carrier, and comes with another very respectable combat pet via its console that further synergizes with pet/ally enhancing builds.)
Even if non-JHV carriers only receive a single wingman instead of two, I still think it would be a considerable improvement to the carrier archetype's playstyle. It would also lend more identity to 'true carriers' over the hybrids by carving out more of a 'summoner' playstyle niche.
They may say that the MW Flight Deck Carriers do because of their squadron pets, but each of those squadrons is still one unit, and function as one unit. They just have the appearance of multiple craft.
So... to count how many minions a properly set up Vanguard Carrier can have (and for sake of argument lets give it to a fully leveled Sci)...
- 12 fighters
- 2 wingmen
- 1 seperation pet
- 3 photonic starships
And last but not least eitherAnd that's not counting any other summons involving consoles.
So... math says at least... the potential for 18 pets, give or take. On a Sci that goes up to around 21 due to Photo Fleet.
Would be interesting to see the chaos with a full team of 5 Carriers like that...
Mechanics wise it would be nice, but style wise it would be very iffy. The Dominion has the rigid highly vertical cast system that would reasonably lead to that kind of Posleen-style don't-think,-just shoot-at-what-command-does doctrine, but none of the other PC factions do (in fact getting Klingons to do something like that would be worse than herding cats).
Saying that I agree fully agree Carriers need fixing. Full Carriers come with many negatives to make up for having pets yet Flight Deck Carriers don't have those negative and equal for pets. Its a bit odd full carriers are worse then the light mini carriers.
This is basically the idea I was going for with my original post; it's the Carrier archetype itself that needs fixing, not so much individual ships. I myself usually fly a JH Vanguard Carrier because it's basically a less tanky, but more offense- and utility-oriented version of the Jupiter. The options the Vanguard wingmen give you are invaluable at times, and the cannon spam ability meshes wonderfully with a well-placed, powerful Gravity Well.
While the JHV Carrier is a beast, and I love its power and versatility, a lot of the features that make it so strong are not because it's a carrier, but because of the Vanguard-specific wingmen that mesh well with the Carrier archetype.
I'm also admittedly a basic TRIBBLE Starfleet fanboy, and have a heavy preference for playing Federation ships; I was overjoyed when the Jupiter was first released back in 2015, and from the moment I bought it until now, I was like, "This is my ship." When the Flight Deck Cruisers were upgraded to the overly redundant Flight Deck Carriers, I felt that the whole "true" Carrier archetype had been nerfed significantly in comparison, as the one feature that had defined Carriers for years--having two hangar bays--was now no longer unique, and the ship type that stole it also had more weapons, Cruiser commands, and was more mobile to boot, making them empirically superior.
Any more, aside from sheer personal preference (disregarding the now inherent drawbacks), the only reason one would play a "true" Carrier over a Flight Deck Carrier would be if you really wanted a Commander Tactical or Science seat and still have those two hangar bays.
As for how to fix it? I personally am very much for adding more hangar bays--particularly, bays that are strictly for the frigates that are specific to each carrier. I feel that this would address multiple issues at once, such as buffing the Carrier archetype, and making practically unused frigates relevant once more. I also think that adding frigate bays would be less "broken" than having four bays of fighters, as frigates inherently have lower DPS (but more survivability, and therefore less micromanagement). A revamped Carrier would be able to field up to 12 fighters and 4 frigates all at once, which I feel would be a formidable, yet more balanced fleet.
If you're reading this, Cryptic, whatever you decide to do, I hope you do give your "true" Carriers (and their fans) some love!
Uff.. Wing Commander, i'll love to do a remake for that game...