test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Nebula Class (cloak detection)?????

13

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Ankah wrote: »
    Torpedo, singular

    And if im cloaked your what,,, that's right fully shielded

    I still have problems figuring the logic of being able to fire a torp while cloaked against a fully shielded vessel.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Klingons are only over-powered in thier experience with how to play pvp. You can't nerf experience and the feds only have the Devs to blame for it. If I had a little more variety in what I can do mission-wise I would not spend so much time shooting feds. Though I do like the pretty explosions.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    I guess it ultimately depends on what torpedo you're able to fire and if it is limited specificaly to torpedo's or if you can fire mines as well - and if it is just torps, then the new reward torpedo may well be beneficial to fire while cloaked as it splits up into lots of mines - though again if the target has shields there's little point to it besides pretty explosions.

    You could argue that if working in tandem with a bigger ship it would be useful since the BoP can remain cloaked and safe and fire off something like a trico torp when your ally eats your target's shields - but then if you already have an ally helping there seems little benefit to remaining cloaked since 1 torpedo will never compare to the damage your guns can do.

    So yeah, I agree, unless they are giving us some kind of special torpedo (i.e. something that can disable a target far longer than a trico does) it seems quite a useless ability.

    But then again, did we expect anything else from them? They're giving us ships, they couldn't actually give us USEFUL ships, imagine how much heat that woudl generate from the United Federation of Whine.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Apples to oranges, the Cloaked torpedo shooting will be a built in power and unchangeable.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I still have problems figuring the logic of being able to fire a torp while cloaked against a fully shielded vessel.

    I look at it this way ... 3 cloaked special BoPs ... all firing cloaked torps at once ... can make a game of it? Maybe? Depends on how it works. If it's just a spinal phaser lance type of gimmick, then it won't do much other than be a funny gimmick.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    Apples to oranges, the Cloaked torpedo shooting will be a built in power and unchangeable.

    Then its still as I said above. Without knowing what the torpedo stats are, its impossible to say how useful it is.

    There are already transphasic torpedoes with shield penetration, so it may well have a higher SP to these thereby making it useful, it may even have similar effects to the trico torp with disabling an opponent again giving it some worth (in that you can disable the target before they even get to fire a shot).

    It may not even be a special as you are predicting, as we have absolutely no evidence that that is the case, and may simply be an innate ability to fire while cloaked period.

    Point is, we know absolutely nothing about this ability other than the fact that its working on some internal build. What is the point arguing over its worth before we even know its actual stats?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Then its still as I said above. Without knowing what the torpedo stats are, its impossible to say how useful it is.

    There are already transphasic torpedoes with shield penetration, so it may well have a higher SP to these thereby making it useful, it may even have similar effects to the trico torp with disabling an opponent again giving it some worth (in that you can disable the target before they even get to fire a shot).

    It may not even be a special as you are predicting, as we have absolutely no evidence that that is the case, and may simply be an innate ability to fire while cloaked period.

    Point is, we know absolutely nothing about this ability other than the fact that its working on some internal build. What is the point arguing over its worth before we even know its actual stats?

    I was not disagreeing, and merely made my statement based on the "special powers" of other ships the Dev's have made.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Serpieri wrote: »
    The part where you or anybody can hazaard a guess as what Klingons recieved from the Feds since they now have our cloaks and universal slots.

    Were oh were did it ever say anywhere that's uni slots are a klink thing plz show me were it is written by any one.
    on and feds didn't get a battle cloak and the reg cloak is junk and if you want it back take it its worthless.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    UFP-Magnis wrote: »
    I do understand some of you klingon players have forgotten canon but lets be clear. The klingons dont have alot of versions of ships because they are not the federation. They are a brut force who believe in attacking head on. Their ships are agile and for those that arent well try taking them down. If you are looking to have the same number of ships as the federation well then you should know its never going to happen. First off the klingons are a dieing race. secondly the federation is not all based upon earth. Its technology from many various groups and organizations from the federation. I can say cryptic is going good on canon with the ship role outs. I would think they would give you guys more BO powers but they gave you another carrier and soon a ship that can fire while cloaked. Do remember you have a tail pipe though. You also have ships from the other races you conquered. Stop gripping about the federation. its bigger and has way more technology so its obvious we will need more ships.

    If any klingon players can come up with a canon reason of whats wrong with the klingons im all ears. If your missing any ships from the shows or abilities lets hear it and stop talking about how the federation gets this and that. The federation in game is 95% canon. The new cosmetic ships dont do anything special.



    k'vort for one.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    wrote:
    [/U][/B]

    k'vort for one.
    The K'Vort is a B'rel with Gigantism. I think that adding a K'Vort would be a very "cheap" approach. Maybe it deserves to be in, but it's not a new Klingon ship design. Maybe that could be Cryptic's "cheap way" out - Feds get refits, Klingons get "Gigantism". Color me disappointed if that happens.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    The K'Vort is a B'rel with Gigantism. I think that adding a K'Vort would be a very "cheap" approach. Maybe it deserves to be in, but it's not a new Klingon ship design. Maybe that could be Cryptic's "cheap way" out - Feds get refits, Klingons get "Gigantism". Color me disappointed if that happens.

    You'd be amongst the few then. There are a couple of big fan-favourite Klingon ships and the K'Vort is quite easily one of them and in fan favourite rankings it would probably even tip the B'Rel due to its greater screen time. K't'inga, K'Vort, Vor'Cha, B'Rel, Negh'Var - these are the ships that should always have defaulted to being the first Klingon ships appearing in any game. It is a massive lack of forsight and clear lack of knowledge in the IP that Cryptic failed in this regard.

    I annoys me with this obsession players have for new designed ships. Throughout Trek the Klingon Empire has been seen to use and re-use its designs to the point where its quite happy to have a design lasting 100's of years, and even re-use the same design in different sizes (B'rel -> K'Vort, D7 -> K't'inga, even Vor'Cha -> Negh'Var to some degree), so if in over 200 years of pretty intense warfare there are not that many Klingon designed craft, why would they suddenly have lots in the space of 30? Its not only unrealistic, it is about as far from cannon as the KDF using the Enterprise A.

    This whole obsession with new craft is made even worse by the fact that, so far, Cryptic seems unable to design new Klingon ships which retain a real Klingon feel - frankly the Vo Quv is probably the only Cryptic design that even remotely looks Klingon - and its not like this is a particularly hard area of ship design either. Look at the D-7, K't'inga, Vor'Cha and Negh'Var and you see some very clear very obvious design elements that has remained throughout its range of cruisers. Look at the Raptor and the Bird of Prey and again you'll see very clear design elements that remain throughout its scout ships. Pretty much all of Cryptic's own designs have failed to retain those features - even the General level BoP has seemingly lost its ability to adjust ist wing position, one of the BoP's primary functions.

    But in regards to the whole "Klingons want equal ships to Feds" argument, that isn't really what Klingon players are saying - most of us are just asking for an equal playing field in regards to ship abilities (i.e. giving us a counter to Tachyon Grid), to give us missing ships (like the K'Vort), and to give us back lower-level designs at General just as feds have recieved.

    There are 49 playerable federation ships in-game right now. That will be 51 when the Nebula is added. 54 if you count the refits as different ships. 23 (24 with the Nebula) of which are playerable at Admiral ranks.

    There are 20 Klingon ships currently in-game, soon to be 23 when the refits are added if you count them as new ships, 8 of which are playerable at General, soon to me 11. That means in total there are less Klingon ships than throughout all Levels than what Fed players get at just Admiral.

    So are Klingon players asking for 54 Klingon ships? Of course not. We're really just asking for 23 ships to chose from at General - most of which could very easily just be refits of what already exists, most of us would happily except that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    Were oh were did it ever say anywhere that's uni slots are a klink thing plz show me were it is written by any one.
    on and feds didn't get a battle cloak and the reg cloak is junk and if you want it back take it its worthless.

    Where Oh Where does it say that Federation has stronger hulls and shields then the Klingons. Where Oh Where does it say that the Defiant and Intrepid class come standardized with cloaks and ablative armor now? Where oh where does it say that battle cruisers don't have true cloaks. Let me help you on this one, Cryptic split the cloaks up saying it was a balance issue. So now that you have cloaks and universal slots that were originally Klingon only. It’s only fair, that the cloaks become battle cloaks, and our hulls and shields are brought into line with the federation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    The K'Vort is a B'rel with Gigantism. I think that adding a K'Vort would be a very "cheap" approach. Maybe it deserves to be in, but it's not a new Klingon ship design. Maybe that could be Cryptic's "cheap way" out - Feds get refits, Klingons get "Gigantism". Color me disappointed if that happens.

    The K'Vort is not a Bird of Prey Class, it's a battle cruiser.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK9rNhQTrn4&feature=related

    Go to 1:15.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Serpieri wrote: »
    Where Oh Where does it say that Federation has stronger hulls and shields then the Klingons. Where Oh Where does it say that the Defiant and Intrepid class come standardized with cloaks and ablative armor now? Where oh where does it say that battle cruisers don't have true cloaks. Let me help you on this one, Cryptic split the cloaks up saying it was a balance issue. So now that you have cloaks and universal slots that were originally Klingon only. It’s only fair, that the cloaks become battle cloaks, and our hulls and shields are brought into line with the federation.

    Were did they say klingon only You are making a argument on no proof except what you feel in your mind is right. what you feel is klink only and you have still not shown me your proof you can say oh were oh were till the cows come home but no written proof no argument just a lot of whinnying that will only make people mad and when you do have a valid argument or point people are not going to listen or care.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    Were did they say klingon only You are making a argument on no proof except what you feel in your mind is right. what you feel is klink only and you have still not shown me your proof you can say oh were oh were till the cows come home but no written proof no argument just a lot of whinnying that will only make people mad and when you do have a valid argument or point people are not going to listen or care.

    You’re the one making the argument, I made an observation on what was available to both sides at launch. You are aware that Klingons were given less hull and shields due to the cloak, and the bop was adjusted many times due to its universal slots/battle cloak. So now that both sides have access to them, those adjustments are now invalid but feel free to keep whinning sice most of your are Feds and that seems to work for you.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Serpieri wrote: »
    You’re the one making the argument, I made an observation on what was available to both sides at launch. You are aware that Klingons were given less hull and shields due to the cloak, and the bop was adjusted many times due to its universal slots/battle cloak. So now that both sides have access to them, those adjustments are not invalid but feel free to keep whinning sice most of your are Feds and that seems to work for you.

    I am not whining if you want bop the way they were before cool i have a klink toon to i do hope you enjoy kvk pvp cause that's all you will have. the bop was way oped, and still is the most maneuverable ship in game witch in pvp is 40% of the battle plus battle cloak plus cannons plus uni slots so yea they need a look at , feds didnt get battle cloak so your argument there is mute and the neb turns worse than ANY klink ship and it doesnt have a cloak . klinks ships were given less shield and hull cause they were more maneuverable than any fed ship plus had cloak plus cannons on all ships. You say the feds whine but its the klinks that hijack all threads and say what about klinks what do we get no matter what the threads about , and I cant speak for anyone but myself but I can say this it gettin to the point that when you see that u just pass over that one and keep going and even if you had a valid point its now mute.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    I am not whining if you want bop the way they were before cool i have a klink toon to i do hope you enjoy kvk pvp cause that's all you will have. the bop was way oped, and still is the most maneuverable ship in game witch in pvp is 40% of the battle plus battle cloak plus cannons plus uni slots so yea they need a look at , feds didnt get battle cloak so your argument there is mute and the neb turns worse than ANY klink ship and it doesnt have a cloak . klinks ships were given less shield and hull cause they were more maneuverable than any fed ship plus had cloak plus cannons on all ships. You say the feds whine but its the klinks that hijack all threads and say what about klinks what do we get no matter what the threads about , and I cant speak for anyone but myself but I can say this it gettin to the point that when you see that u just pass over that one and keep going and even if you had a valid point its now mute.

    The only argument that is mute is yours, and my point still stands Klingons have not received anything to offset the loss of cloaking and boff slots to the federation. Where is our ablative armor, where is our phaser lance, where is our ship separation, where is our battlecruiser with the Lt.Commander Tactical slot, where is our tachyon pulse which can easily defeat the Nebula's Tachyon Detection Grid, and where are our so called new ships? What you call a whine is players asking for bare essentials that the Federation has in abundance. Knowing you federation players, you’ll be asking for Thalaron Generators, Breen Null Rays, and Omega Devices soon.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Serpieri wrote: »
    The K'Vort is not a Bird of Prey Class, it's a battle cruiser.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK9rNhQTrn4&feature=related

    Go to 1:15.

    It is a Bird of Prey that grew too big and is now called a BattleCruiser. It's the same model, just usually with the wings in the up-position. (But the B'rel can have the same position, see Startrek IV). It's a great example for budget limitations leading to "creative" choices.
    You'd be amongst the few then. There are a couple of big fan-favourite Klingon ships and the K'Vort is quite easily one of them and in fan favourite rankings it would probably even tip the B'Rel due to its greater screen time. K't'inga, K'Vort, Vor'Cha, B'Rel, Negh'Var - these are the ships that should always have defaulted to being the first Klingon ships appearing in any game. It is a massive lack of forsight and clear lack of knowledge in the IP that Cryptic failed in this regard.
    Of course they are fan favorites, but they can't be everything, because then every Klingon will fly the same ship with no visual differences. One of the things I dislike most (after the lack of PvE) content is that the ships have little too no customization options.
    Sure, I want "refits" of these ships availabe at tier 5. But there has to be more.

    Just because Startrek didn't have the budget to create dozens of different ship designs doesn't mean there would logically be more.

    The first "Cryptic" designs were bad, even if they recreated canon ships. (Just look at AngelSilhouettes thread). Not just for Klingons, for Feds, too. But I trust the current team around CapnLogan to identify the crucial design elements of the KDF and create new, Klingon-looking ships. I trust them to find the Klingon's design "voice" and give us interesting customization options. If they are given the chance to do so.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    They cried about cloaks being unfair and got 2 ships with cloaking ability. They whined about Uni slots being unfair... so now they have a ship with Uni slots. The thing is... these abilities are unique to Klinks and should stay Klink. As stated before, we give up shield and hull to have those special abilities.

    But let me digress... just like the Feds getting the ability to cloak, they are going to find out that it is not an instant "WIN" button. Oh, how many Feddies cried when they learned their precious Galaxy-X wasn't worth that $25 bucks they spent.

    The only true instant WIN in this game is achieved through teamwork and great team play. A ship doesnt win battles. BO abilities dont win battles. A proper build, while it can help, doesnt flat-out win a battle. It's the one thing that Klink players accel at.... Teamwork, that wins battles. QA'PLA! :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Indeed. Although I'm just starting to get into PvP I found it more enjoyable on the Klingon side.
    There is more teamwork, helping out each other and so on while on the Fed side everybody seems to race towards the waiting Klingons or to split up so being picked apart ship by ship. I should have started playing PvP before I reached BG1 :cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    Were oh were did it ever say anywhere that's uni slots are a klink thing plz show me were it is written by any one.
    on and feds didn't get a battle cloak and the reg cloak is junk and if you want it back take it its worthless.

    I thought cloak was OPd, that the ability to chose your battles were OPd?

    I thought the only reason Klingons won, was because of cloak?

    Face it, outside T1+2 there are other ships on the field but BOPs (you did know the only ship having battlecloak is the BOP... Right? And that it have less hull, less shields, less consoles and less weapons, than the Fed ships... Right?

    T4 BOP = 3/2 Weapons - Escorts have 4/2
    T5 BOP = 4/2 Weapons - Escorts have 4/3

    Now, I dont fly a BOP, to fragile for my taste - But my Raptor will tear you a new one, even with its "worthless" cloak :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    It is a Bird of Prey that grew too big and is now called a BattleCruiser. It's the same model, just usually with the wings in the up-position. (But the B'rel can have the same position, see Startrek IV). It's a great example for budget limitations leading to "creative" choices.

    Regardless of the FX choices to enlarge the model, its very realistic for a war-like government to re-use existing designs and super size them.

    If you want evidence of that, you only need look as far as our real world Navy's. If we humans didn't do this supersize trick, then you wouldn't have had the magnificent vessels like the HMS Victory.

    There are visual differences between the K'Vort and the B'Rel besides the positioning of the wing and its size - things like the paintwork as well. The K'Vort had completly green wings, as where the B'Rel had the red and brown feathers, for example. Sure its nothing big, since it was the same model, but its enough to make it visualy different.

    Of course they are fan favorites, but they can't be everything, because then every Klingon will fly the same ship with no visual differences. One of the things I dislike most (after the lack of PvE) content is that the ships have little too no customization options.
    Sure, I want "refits" of these ships availabe at tier 5. But there has to be more.

    I agree, there does have to be more, but as I said before the first stroke should always have been ensuring the fan favourites and the cannon vessels are in place - and until the K'Vort is added, that clearly won't have happened.
    Just because Startrek didn't have the budget to create dozens of different ship designs doesn't mean there would [not] logically be more..

    And it doesn't mean the reverse either. If an Empire is still using the same designs and, in many cases, the same ships 100's of years later than it its a fairly good bet that there isn't 100's of different designs being used.

    Put it this way - when you are spending so much money on a military, and we already know that the Klingon economy can barely finance the military it operates, you simply don't have the funds to pay for 100's of new unique ship designs.

    Again we need only look as far as our own navy to see the reality of this. There may well be lots of different ships in the navies right now, but the majority of the variance comes from the smaller less important cheaper ships - how many variants of destroyers are there in the US navy? How many aircraft carriers?

    It simply makes little sense for there to be lots of Klingon ships, it doesn't fit the people. Does that mean Cryptic can't add more? Of course not, but imo these new ships should be few and far between. Variations of existing ships like what has been done for the Negh'Var B'Rel and K't'inga already, on the other hand, is free game - so long as they don't detract too far from the original vessel.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    thagmort wrote:
    They cried about cloaks being unfair and got 2 ships with cloaking ability. They whined about Uni slots being unfair... so now they have a ship with Uni slots. The thing is... these abilities are unique to Klinks and should stay Klink. As stated before, we give up shield and hull to have those special abilities.

    I disagree on principle that any mechanics should be considered unique to any side (especially uni slots - cloak runs into setting issues, but that mechanic doesn't even have canonical representation). The array of K-side gimmicks also does precisely TRIBBLE to improve the quality of actual playable content on the KDF side, and railing against their proliferation doesn't win anyone over to supporting the KDF's pleas for parity.


    I thought cloak was OPd, that the ability to chose your battles were OPd?

    It is if properly used. This has been known since The Art of War. It's also not so much OPed as annoying when the majority of ships on one side can easily sit on their hands and do nothing until they feel they have an advantage.

    That said I think the Nebula's super-size cloak-nullification bubble is the stupidest way possible that they could have implemented a counter, not to mention that anti-submarine warfare... err, anti-cloak warfare shouldn't be limited to just one ship (and thus side).

    That it hasn't decreased victory margins is mainly just testament to inexperienced PvPers Fed-side feeling emboldened to test the waters, and then either not bothering again or playing catchup against the generally more experienced side.
    I thought the only reason Klingons won, was because of cloak?

    Face it, outside T1+2 there are other ships on the field but BOPs (you did know the only ship having battlecloak is the BOP... Right? And that it have less hull, less shields, less consoles and less weapons, than the Fed ships... Right?

    T4 BOP = 3/2 Weapons - Escorts have 4/2
    T5 BOP = 4/2 Weapons - Escorts have 4/3

    Now, I dont fly a BOP, to fragile for my taste - But my Raptor will tear you a new one, even with its "worthless" cloak :)

    What I do wonder is if the cloaking Defiant and the T5 Raptor have the same stats or at least a balanced set of differences. Comparing it to the BoP, which has battle cloak, is apples and peanuts - comparing it to a Raptor is at least apples and oranges.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    I disagree on principle that any mechanics should be considered unique to any side (especially uni slots - cloak runs into setting issues, but that mechanic doesn't even have canonical representation). The array of K-side gimmicks also does precisely TRIBBLE to improve the quality of actual playable content on the KDF side, and railing against their proliferation doesn't win anyone over to supporting the KDF's pleas for parity.





    It is if properly used. This has been known since The Art of War. It's also not so much OPed as annoying when the majority of ships on one side can easily sit on their hands and do nothing until they feel they have an advantage.

    Cloak will never be OPd, there are ways of countering it.. More ways are coming, since its appearantly very hard.. In any case.. Cloak are usually a oneshot deal.. Survive the initial onslaught and you have a very good chance of coming out victorious.. Federation ships are superior in capabilities after all.

    That said I think the Nebula's super-size cloak-nullification bubble is the stupidest way possible that they could have implemented a counter, not to mention that anti-submarine warfare... err, anti-cloak warfare shouldn't be limited to just one ship (and thus side).

    I disagree... Cloak should have been Klingon only, and the counter Fed only.. That said, I dont really mind the Nebulas ability being Fed only.. When I play my Fed toons, I dont have huge problems with cloaked ships.


    That it hasn't decreased victory margins is mainly just testament to inexperienced PvPers Fed-side feeling emboldened to test the waters, and then either not bothering again or playing catchup against the generally more experienced side.

    See.. Now you come to the core of it.. Klingon players have generally 100s upon 100s upon 100s of PvP matches behind them.. Since the PvE content for KDF have been.. Lacking, to put it mildly.. Many of us have levelled *primarily* through PvP.. Do you know how many matches it take to level though LtC1 through 11?

    What I do wonder is if the cloaking Defiant and the T5 Raptor have the same stats or at least a balanced set of differences. Comparing it to the BoP, which has battle cloak, is apples and peanuts - comparing it to a Raptor is at least apples and oranges.

    The Tactical Escort Refit and the Q'in Raptor are more or less identical.. TER have superior turning and are quite a bit smaller.. All in all, I consider the TER the best escort in the game.


    10 characters
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    I disagree on principle that any mechanics should be considered unique to any side (especially uni slots - cloak runs into setting issues, but that mechanic doesn't even have canonical representation). The array of K-side gimmicks also does precisely TRIBBLE to improve the quality of actual playable content on the KDF side, and railing against their proliferation doesn't win anyone over to supporting the KDF's pleas for parity.
    Agreed.
    "So what, you got 50 PvE storyline missions that you can use to level from Ensign to Vice Admiral. We got Universal Slots! Hah! " rings very hollow. "Enjoy your universal slots grinding exploration missions fighting the dreadful tribble infestations on Klingon outpusts why I suffer with my fixed BO slots through this voice-overed mission involving time travel and the past of your race."
    It is if properly used. This has been known since The Art of War. It's also not so much OPed as annoying when the majority of ships on one side can easily sit on their hands and do nothing until they feel they have an advantage.
    I think we will need another look at cloak for Open PvP. In Arena and Capture and Hold maps, it is useful, but not OP (considering they come with disadvantages) in my experience. Because in Arena you know there are enemies (and how many), and in Capture & Hold, there are natural points to "meet" (and you can't cap cloaked). The surprise factor is good, but you can actually react to it (well, some can.) The hated "Fedball" works. The distances in C&H are not far enough that a KLingon can really run a full-scale sneak attack and the opponents can't react.

    Open PvP could change that a lot. It invites the feared "ganking" behavior where a group of players prey on a weak unsuspecting player.

    But we'll see if it will be relevant. It's quite possible that Open PvP will contain anti-cloak measures. After all, the Federation has them since the development of those tachyon grids. And warp signatures could often be detected despite cloaking.
    That said I think the Nebula's super-size cloak-nullification bubble is the stupidest way possible that they could have implemented a counter, not to mention that anti-submarine warfare... err, anti-cloak warfare shouldn't be limited to just one ship (and thus side).
    It looks to me as if it was mostly driven by canon information on the Nebula - the ship O'Brien served on seemed to have a special sensor ability.
    What I do wonder is if the cloaking Defiant and the T5 Raptor have the same stats or at least a balanced set of differences. Comparing it to the BoP, which has battle cloak, is apples and peanuts - comparing it to a Raptor is at least apples and oranges.

    They don't have the same stats. Raptors have more hull, Defiant has a higher maneuverability. I don't unfortuantely know if or which shield modifiers apply to each. I seem to remember Fed escorts getting more shields and Raptors more hull since 1.2.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    Were did they say klingon only You are making a argument on no proof except what you feel in your mind is right. what you feel is klink only and you have still not shown me your proof you can say oh were oh were till the cows come home but no written proof no argument just a lot of whinnying that will only make people mad and when you do have a valid argument or point people are not going to listen or care.

    When the Klingon faction was designed for the game before release, universal slots could only be found on the BoP. Thats the ingame proof they were Klingon only in the begining, by Dev design.
    Canonically speaking and the proof that your a asking for about universal slot in the genre doesn't exist as no evidence has been offered to support or deny that any race had universal BO stations on any of thier vessels. Therefore there is no need to prove what never existed.
    Universal slots are a Dev design feature for the BoP to reflect its multi-tasking capabilities.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    the bop was way oped, and still is the most maneuverable ship in game witch in pvp is 40% of the battle plus battle cloak plus cannons plus uni slots so yea they need a look at
    I disagree, the low hull and low shields makes the BoP way crunchy and weak in sustained combat, and is the only balancing it needs.
    You say the feds whine but its the klinks that hijack all threads and say what about klinks what do we get no matter what the threads about

    This is a Klingon thread in the Klingon section of the forums, why would klingons not chime in here?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    I disagree, the low hull and low shields makes the BoP way crunchy and weak in sustained combat, and is the only balancing it needs.
    The original bop before the nerf is what i am talking about was way over board.


    This is a Klingon thread in the Klingon section of the forums, why would klingons not chime in here?

    and yes this thread but what about the 90 other threads on the boards
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Matunus wrote:
    Roach wrote: »

    and yes this thread but what about the 90 other threads on the boards

    Just following the example set by others.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    When the Klingon faction was designed for the game before release, universal slots could only be found on the BoP. Thats the ingame proof they were Klingon only in the begining, by Dev design.
    Canonically speaking and the proof that your a asking for about universal slot in the genre doesn't exist as no evidence has been offered to support or deny that any race had universal BO stations on any of thier vessels. Therefore there is no need to prove what never existed.
    Universal slots are a Dev design feature for the BoP to reflect its multi-tasking capabilities.

    My point is no one ever said that uni was a klink trait only yes the bops has uni to make it a uni ship, but no one said that the feds couldn't have a uni slot and if you don't need proof then the feds can have a uni slot. and the cloak thing its 2 ships and its not even a battle cloak . and both are canon I am all for klink stuff in game and for klink ships and klink content i have a genral klink toon and a lt cmd klink toon.
Sign In or Register to comment.