test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Devs: Any consideration given to a Cruiser adjustment?

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I'm wondering if the Devs have given any consideration to a cruiser adjustment, now that the Excelsior has been out for a while.

The people who have pointed out that the Assault Cruiser is not nearly as attractive anymore, compared to the Excelsior, I feel have a point.

There ought to be some parity in the ships, and a definitive choice as well in choosing an Assault/Excelsior over a Star Cruiser.

So what about an adjustment like this?

Assault Cruiser - Less defense, more offense.
Star Cruiser - More defense, less offense.

Any consideration to something like this:

Assault Cruiser and Excelsior

Hull: 39000
Turn: 8 Deg / Sec
Weapons: 4/4
Consoles: 4 Eng / 2 Sci / 3 Tac
Officers:
  • Ens Engineer
  • Lt Engineer
  • Cmdr Engineer
  • Lt Cmdr Tactical
  • Lt Science

Star Cruiser

Hull: 42000
Turn: 6 Deg / Sec
Weapons: 5/5
Consoles: 4 Eng / 3 Sci / 2 Tac
Officers:
  • Ens Engineer
  • Lt Engineer
  • Cmdr Engineer
  • Lt Cmdr Science
  • Lt Tactical

Would really love to know if there is any consideration being given to bringing parity to the variety of Federation Cruisers, and if so, when we might see revised specs hit Holodeck.

Thank you for your time.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I'm wondering if the Devs have given any consideration to a cruiser adjustment, now that the Excelsior has been out for a while.

    The people who have pointed out that the Assault Cruiser is not nearly as attractive anymore, compared to the Excelsior, I feel have a point.

    There ought to be some parity in the ships, and a definitive choice as well in choosing an Assault/Excelsior over a Star Cruiser.

    So what about an adjustment like this?

    Assault Cruiser - Less defense, more offense.
    Star Cruiser - More defense, less offense.

    Any consideration to something like this:

    Assault Cruiser and Excelsior

    Hull: 39000
    Turn: 8 Deg / Sec
    Weapons: 4/4
    Consoles: 4 Eng / 2 Sci / 3 Tac
    Officers:
    • Ens Engineer
    • Lt Engineer
    • Cmdr Engineer
    • Lt Cmdr Tactical
    • Lt Science

    Star Cruiser

    Hull: 42000
    Turn: 6 Deg / Sec
    Weapons: 5/5
    Consoles: 4 Eng / 3 Sci / 2 Tac
    Officers:
    • Ens Engineer
    • Lt Engineer
    • Cmdr Engineer
    • Lt Cmdr Science
    • Lt Tactical

    Would really love to know if there is any consideration being given to bringing parity to the variety of Federation Cruisers, and if so, when we might see revised specs hit Holodeck.

    Thank you for your time.

    To what end? Why do you see a need to change things up? Saying that there isn't much to clearly define the ships is inaccurate so I can wager as to why you really want to see a change here.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Myrdden74 wrote:
    To what end? Why do you see a need to change things up? Saying that there isn't much to clearly define the ships is inaccurate so I can wager as to why you really want to see a change here.

    So...why do you think I want to see a change?

    Personally, I feel the Excelsior has more of a tactical advantage than the Assault Cruiser. The current role of the Star Cruiser is pretty clear, as is the Excelsior, therefore, it seems the Assault Cruiser has fallen into a sort of hole, where it's not as effective Tactically, as the Excelsior, and it is not nearly as effective Defensively as the Star Cruiser.

    Therefore, there is no real reason to choose an Assault Cruiser. If you want firepower, you choose the Excelsior. If you want a true tank, you take the Star Cruiser.

    And this isn't about me wanting an Excelsior for free either. I already own one, bought from the C-Store. So I have no dog in the fight that way.

    I would just like to see the Assault Cruiser have just as much of a reason to be chosen as the Excelsior has.

    But, if that happens, then the Star Cruiser looses some of it's luster. Therefore, a modification to the Star Cruiser, to rebalance, would be necessary, and through that rebalance, based on the example specs I gave, it would be easier to make a choice on which ship a player wants to fly.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Why would i want to give up my glorious Lt.Cmdr engineer slot?

    And your reasoning is flawed, there is plenty of reason to choose a star cruiser over other ships.
    Which is pretty self-evident by the fact that there are still a crapload of VA1 sovereigns flying around.

    The one change i would want to see though is functionality added to the Quantum Turret under the saucer.
    Something like a HYT III Quantum Power as part of the ship.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    Why would i want to give up my glorious Lt.Cmdr engineer slot?

    And your reasoning is flawed, there is plenty of reason to choose a star cruiser over other ships.
    Which is pretty self-evident by the fact that there are still a crapload of VA1 sovereigns flying around.

    The one change i would want to see though is functionality added to the Quantum Turret under the saucer.
    Something like a HYT III Quantum Power as part of the ship.

    Sovereigns aren't Star Cruisers. They are Assault Cruisers.

    The Quantum Turret idea is a good one, and I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but then there would need to be an offset abilitity given to Star Cruisers.

    Personally I'd like to see all T5 ships (Escorts and Science included) given some sort of special abilities.

    But I still feel the Assault Cruisers are rather bland compared to the Star Cruisers and the tactically superior Excelsiors.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I'd be happy if the Excelsior lost 3000 base hull, like how the Negh'var compares to the Vor'cha. Lose something for that extra turn rate. Truthfully 3000 hull is barely noticeable when you have so many engineering slots, but it would at least seem to balance out the Excelsior.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Sovereigns aren't Star Cruisers. They are Assault Cruisers.

    The Quantum Turret idea is a good one, and I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but then there would need to be an offset abilitity given to Star Cruisers.

    Personally I'd like to see all T5 ships (Escorts and Science included) given some sort of special abilities.

    But I still feel the Assault Cruisers are rather bland compared to the Star Cruisers and the tactically superior Excelsiors.

    A mere slip of the tounge. :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Foxrocks wrote:
    I'd be happy if the Excelsior lost 3000 base hull, like how the Negh'var compares to the Vor'cha. Lose something for that extra turn rate. Truthfully 3000 hull is barely noticeable when you have so many engineering slots, but it would at least seem to balance out the Excelsior.

    I don't think the hull is the real problem.

    Hull plays so little of a role in this game that it's really negligible.

    The Excelsior's advantages come from a Lt. Cmdr. BO and a turn rate that is higher than other cruisers.

    So, there needs to be a balancing applied. If the Excelsior had the higher turn rate (due to it being a smaller ship) but having the Tactical slots the Sovereign has, then it wouldn't be so tactically superior. Then, if the Sovereign had the Lt. Cmdr. BO, but kept it's higher turn rate, you'd be fairly balanced.

    Ultimately though, I'd like to see the Sovereign have tactical superiority over an Exclesior, or at the very least, be equal with the Excelsior, leaving the Star Cruisers in their current role of defensive beasts.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Didn't Dan say the Excelsior set the bar for how they want Cruisers to be set in the future and that they ultimately do want to go back and tweak the rest? Or was that thrown out?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Didn't Dan say the Excelsior set the bar for how they want Cruisers to be set in the future and that they ultimately do want to go back and tweak the rest? Or was that thrown out?

    That is essentially what I'm trying to find out.

    My proposal specs are really more for discussion purposes, but the intent of the thread is to try and find out if Cruisers are going to get a looking at, or if they are being looked at, or if Cryptic likes them how they are.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    What really needs to happen is that BO slots need to be attached to ship class, not individual ships.

    Better yet make all BO slots 'upgradable' in a manner.

    Think of it like having 'points' to spend to up-rank the BO slots you want.

    You should not have to use an Excelsior if you want an offensive cruiser, you should not even have to use an assault cruiser. Any cruiser should do. That choice should be mostly left to player preference.

    The type and number of BO slots should not change, but you should be able to have your tac slot LC rank instead of your Engi slot etc.

    For example.....

    All cruisers have 5 BO slots
    If you count each rank of each slot- All cruisers have 12 ranks.

    Each BO slot would start at ensign, using up 5 ranks.
    Leaving you with 7 ranks to assign to the BO slots YOU want.

    This would tailor the ship to it's crew, after all the crew of the Enterprise has made extensive modifications over the years. The Enterprise in by no means the same ship that rolled out of the shipyard.
    Essentialy if you want to increase the rank of one slot, you have to reduce the rank of another. With ensign being the minimum rank.

    Make it part of the "ship customization" process.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    What really needs to happen is that BO slots need to be attached to ship class, not individual ships.

    Better yet make all BO slots 'upgradable' in a manner.

    Think of it like having 'points' to spend to up-rank the BO slots you want.

    You should not have to use an Excelsior if you want an offensive cruiser, you should not even have to use an assault cruiser. Any cruiser should do. That choice should be mostly left to player preference.

    The type and number of BO slots should not change, but you should be able to have your tac slot LC rank instead of your Engi slot etc.

    For example.....

    All cruisers have 5 BO slots
    If you count each rank of each slot- All cruisers have 10 ranks.

    Each BO slot would start at ensign, using up 5 ranks.
    Leaving you with 5 ranks to assign to the BO slots YOU want.

    If you wanted, you could have all 5 BO slots at Lt rank.
    Essentialy if you want to increase the rank of one slot, you have to reduce the rank of another. With ensign being the minimum rank.

    Make it part of the "ship customization" process.

    That could be a pretty good idea. basically you choose how you want to allocate BOs in order to create the specialization you want.

    And as you progress through the levels, you gain additional points.

    Couple this with a way to add 1 or 2 weapon slots and consoles, and you'd have a viable refit program for lower tiered ships like the Nova.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    What i think needs to happen is that a lot of BO abilities be given to the ships or ship classes, and keep only the really special and unique ones as BO abilities.

    I mean c'mon, its pretty ridicolous that you need to have a BO with a tractor beam skill to use a tractor beam... when virtually every single ship in the Star Trek universe has one with a few exceptions.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    What i think needs to happen is that a lot of BO abilities be given to the ships or ship classes, and keep only the really special and unique ones as BO abilities.

    I mean c'mon, its pretty ridicolous that you need to have a BO with a tractor beam skill to use a tractor beam... when virtually every single ship in the Star Trek universe has one with a few exceptions.

    I completely and totally agree on this.

    Tractor beam especially. Even Kirk knew that!
    Kirk: You left spacedock without a tractor beam?
    Harriman: It doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

    Also the torpedo abilities should be pretty standard too. Firing a salvo or a spread should be considered a default ability for every ship. (Provided you have torpedoes outfitted of course)
Sign In or Register to comment.