From (unconfirmed information) what I hear it's currently not possible to put more than 4 weapons in a single facing.
I still hope we'll get some kind of "anti-carrier" on the KDF side.
IMHO the K't'inga would have been an excellent ship to turn into an "escort cruiser".
Utilizing, the comapared to its own size, large forward torpedo launcher for some kind of "flak torp launcher" particularly useful against fighters.
Well, maybe we'll get a C-Store version with such a weapon.:(
From (unconfirmed information) what I hear it's currently not possible to put more than 4 weapons in a single facing.
I still hope we'll get some kind of "anti-carrier" on the KDF side.
IMHO the K't'inga would have been an excellent ship to turn into an "escort cruiser".
Utilizing, the comapared to its own size, large forward torpedo launcher for some kind of "flak torp launcher" particularly useful against fighters.
Well, maybe we'll get a C-Store version with such a weapon.:(
As far as I know this is entirely correct. The system is hardcoded with only 4 weapon slots front and aft possible.
I am relatively sure that when they ever think about an increase of the level cap and later XIV equipment that would have to go. On the other hand there is the power problem then as well if you had something like 10 weapon slots as a cruiser that wants to run beams.
As far as I know this is entirely correct. The system is hardcoded with only 4 weapon slots front and aft possible.
I am relatively sure that when they ever think about an increase of the level cap and later XIV equipment that would have to go. On the other hand there is the power problem then as well if you had something like 10 weapon slots as a cruiser that wants to run beams.
Well, they could either increase power levels on higher-level ships of they could add Mk XIII or MkXIV weapons with reduced power requirements.
Oh, and don't give me that BS about 'oh, it won't be easy to make it turn properly, but it's possible'. I know it's possible (as I clearly explained). . .but at the expense of any pretense towards survivability on the part of the raptor, because they have to devote 1-2 of their engineering slots towards this nonsense.
If the turn rate isn't to be addressed then perhaps an additional 2 engineering slots so one can equip the necessary consoles without having to sacrifice survivability. I'd prefer the turn rate to be addressed however. I don't run Raptors for that particular reason of it's poor turn rate compared to Fed escorts.
Support the Game by Supporting the KDF, equality and uniqueness for all factions!
If the turn rate isn't to be addressed then perhaps an additional 2 engineering slots so one can equip the necessary consoles without having to sacrifice survivability. I'd prefer the turn rate to be addressed however. I don't run Raptors for that particular reason of it's poor turn rate compared to Fed escorts.
Its turn rate is fine. Evidently its the Turn Pivot which according to others is becuase the Raptor is built open a Cruiser frame instead of an Escort one. Making its nose slow to turn.
Though an additional two Engineer slots would not hurt my feelings.:P
HMM, well that could be an interesting idea for Romulan ships: don't give them Dual Cannons forward, give them Dual Dannons to the rear.:P
On my little BOP I pack turrets on the back. If no one's behind me it lets me fire them forward along with my other cannons. If someone is behind me, popping rapid fire with the turrets tends to do the job of whittling down their shields as I come around to bring the rest of my weapons to join in.
A high yield transphasic volley in the face does wonders while the rest of my cannons are high speed pewpewing.
This^^^. The Raptor only falls short in its turn pivot. Takes way too long for that nose to travel to target.
All Escorts out turn it and even the Armitage can out turn it.
Thats sad and needs to be addresed, or they can make the Raptor the first 5/2 weapons set up to compensate.
Until one other or the other is done, the KDF has a subpar version of an escort compared to every other escort in game.
I would LOVE to see the Raptor get a significant bump up on hull, personally. More than the Bug for the Qin. That's the point, isn't it? The first Raptor we see is sitting so deep in a gas giant's gravity well they could barely reach it. This is a HEARTY ship.
...well, hull along with converting all KDF ships to having an additional console and coming with a Cloaking Universal Console, so I can trash it and drop in an RCS.
Wampaq@Jnoh, Fleet Leader: ..Bloodbath and Beyond[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]'Iw HaH je Hoch! ALL HOLDINGS FINISHED! - Starbase 5-5-5-5 || Embassy 3-3-3 || Mine 3-3-3 || Spire 3-3-3 A laid back KDF fleet welcoming independent, casual, & part-time players and groups. Roms & alts welcome. Send in-game mail to Wampaq@Jnoh, visit our recruitment thread and FB page for more info.
This is a textbook example of missing the point.
Nobody here asks for ships to be identical.
Nobody asked to be integrated into the Federation.
What people ask is:
"why are Klingon Raptors at best comparable in some parts and certainly inferior in others?"
Because last time I checked "balance" is achieved by giving a unit (as a general term) a certain number of characteristics with a certain number of advantages and disadvantages that should even each other out.
In this case we have Raptors with the same strengths as their Federation counterparts and an additional weakness.
Why the heck is this weakness not compensated by something (for example by fixing the turn axis)?
That's the point you're missing.
I haven't missed the point, I know there is an issue with the pivot point of the raptors as it is now, one that would be nice to have fixed.
Or, they could dump the pointless raptor class and buff the BoPs to be able to do the work of BoPs and raptors combined. Then put in a dedicated science vessel line. That'd be a great improvement, right off the bat. BoPs that don't crumple in the face of Fed Escorts, and actual science ships (not the varied C-store only ships they've passed onto us).
And that point is, the raptor class should not be dropped and have the bop buffed to fill both the raider and escort roles.
Also, after more thought, checking the base stats of fed escorts at t4/t5 and the qin raptor, as well as the recollection of another post somewhere in these forums, I have come to another conclusion. And that is:
Fed escorts should out turn kdf raptors, the base turn rate of the AE, MVAE, and the blockade escort is 16 vs the raptors base of 15, the turn rate of any defiant model at any rank is 17 base, the only one that has matching turn rate is the HEC.
Considering the above with the fact that raptors are one of the oldest class and model of ships in the kdf lore and history, as mentioned in another post in these forums somewhere, it really comes as no surprise that the raptor is where it is now.
At the end of the day, each ship has it's strengths and it's weaknesses, it is then up to the individual pilot to utilize those strengths, and negate or defend against the weaknesses.
As for not mirroring the fed escorts, asking for a line of ships to behave the same comeing from 2 different cultures with completely different outlooks on performance is asking for just that.
As an addendum, I don't recall seeing the raptor being called an escort, I do recall seeing it referred to as an escort cruiser (or was that cruiser escort) in a KDF only mission.
we need to make it more bang for buck to play kdf that way they might start making kdf ships
As sad as it sounds, it takes the same amount of man-hours to make a Fed or KDF ship, but the Fed ship is going to sell several times more units. If it takes 200 man-hours to make a ship and you have the choice of selling 15,000 copies or 5,000 you don't need a business degree to know which ship is going to get made - and the same goes for Uniforms and the like.
Would KDF players be willing to pay for new ships if they cost $5.00 more then comparable Fed ships? I know that sounds harsh but Cryptic's just looking at the manpower versus ROI, IMO.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Exactly.
We KDF have been set aside again so Cryptic could focus on more pressing concerns, like endgame, but we where not forgotten or left to die. Oddly enough rumor from Vegas says we KDF fans are desired to continue our campaign for completion so they changes we desire can be pushed and proven needed to the hihher ups.
I compensate for the Raptors weak turn pivot, not rate mind you but pivot point that makes the nose too slow (meaning that all escorts ingame can turn inside you in a dog fight- a glaring weakness in any escort class vessel) to come to target.
I use twin ApO to get the turn boost up as much as possible or I sacrifice armor for RCS consoles and I always use my impulse engine speed to make for as tight a turn as possible. I even carry Engine batteries to use to get as much turn as possible becuase in a dog fight turning is key to victory.
My complaint about the Raptor is that in all respects it is a copy paste of the Defiant-R and a poorer shadow of the other fed escorts that gains nothing to call its on unique flavor. Not even Cloaking.
If the vessel is not to be a dog fighter or scrapper, with the ability to turn tight and swiftly to keep its opponent always in its sights, then it need to be the Brute or warrior of the line rushing headlong into the face of battle with guns blazzing, ready to come around for another pass to decimate any foes left standing from its first onslaught.
I already experience the need to do wide sweeping turns to get those passes down, especially with the vessels long nose travel. Unfortunately the Raptor does not fall into iether description due to this and is niether scrapper or brute.
If the turn pivot is not to be addressed and one must keep the long nose travel to keep the Raptor different from the fed escort designs then its time the Raptor had a strictly KDF design of mostly forward weapons points.
Give it a 5/2 set-up weapons set-up so the charge it has to make is more inline with how it has to be flown. The slower turning brute to the faster turning fed scrappers. No otehr change would ever be needed.
If that is the case then an analogy like the skies over China in WWII would be appropriate. The P40 Warhawk could not turn with the Zero, but could out run a Zero in a dive. Also the P40 did not have the defensive roll rate of the Zero, but it had the armor in spades.
Take the Defiant as the Zero and go from there to make the slower turning Raptor Chennault's P40. Up armor the Raptor, leave the pivot point and turn rate where they are, increase the Raptor's inertia. Now you can use the punch through, run on, turn back and repeat method that Chennault taught the Flying Tigers to use and a Defiant is supposed to do, while preserving and enhancing the "unique feel" of flying the Raptor.
Sorry just my take on the disparity of the turn rate issue created by the Raptor's pivot point being there to make it feel different to fly than the Defiant.
If you are a pickle in a pickle jar you know every pickle's different, sort of, but really they're all just pickles...
-snip- At the end of the day, each ship has it's strengths and it's weaknesses, it is then up to the individual pilot to utilize those strengths, and negate or defend against the weaknesses. -snip-
The thing is, the 'strengths' of the raptor (more hull and shields, another tac console and weapon slot) don't compensate for the crippling turn point/pivot point deficiency. Hence, we have an inferior ship in overall (a ship that is technically supposed to be the KDF's response to heavy escorts). It's neither a good tank, nor a nimble DPSer. It's mediocre, and it shows.
My PvP toon is Krov, of The House of Snoo. Beware of my Hegh'ta of doom.
The thing is, the 'strengths' of the raptor (more hull and shields, another tac console and weapon slot) don't compensate for the crippling turn point/pivot point deficiency. Hence, we have an inferior ship in overall (a ship that is technically supposed to be the KDF's response to heavy escorts). It's neither a good tank, nor a nimble DPSer. It's mediocre, and it shows.
They could assign then Qin/Somraw raptors higher turn stats so while the nose travel would still exist, hopefully it would snap around a bit faster on target.
But I do agree it is niether a remarkable escort or cruiser and has a very mediocre feel that does not lend it standing out as iether.
Possibly a damage bonus of sorts, as well.
If that is the case then an analogy like the skies over China in WWII would be appropriate. The P40 Warhawk could not turn with the Zero, but could out run a Zero in a dive. Also the P40 did not have the defensive roll rate of the Zero, but it had the armor in spades.
Take the Defiant as the Zero and go from there to make the slower turning Raptor Chennault's P40. Up armor the Raptor, leave the pivot point and turn rate where they are, increase the Raptor's inertia. Now you can use the punch through, run on, turn back and repeat method that Chennault taught the Flying Tigers to use and a Defiant is supposed to do, while preserving and enhancing the "unique feel" of flying the Raptor.
Sorry just my take on the disparity of the turn rate issue created by the Raptor's pivot point being there to make it feel different to fly than the Defiant.
It is rumor I liked as well. I can only hope it is true. I do trust the source though.
I have fun flying the Qin and find it has a fine burst capability, but that 4 second nose travel when you when you drop the throttle amd swing it makes my teeth itch as those seconds count slowly by.
Back on the 2nd Anniversary of STO, the KDF side was awarded with the Bortas class which later was re-released as the Bortasqu'. It was to go along side the new Federation Odyssey class. But lets face it, while a beautiful design it's not what we hopped. It seems a lot of Fan fans don't like it, it's a brick a slow turning brick.
We are told they the KDF ships don't sell, that they don't have time to make models and such for the KDF etc. Well when ships like this are released is it any wonder? I recommend that we are due for a flagship(s) that live up to the KDF population expectations while remaining balanced. We don't want god ships, we want new fun and competitive vessels.
So we're told they don't have the time to spend on the KDF faction, yet they found the time to produce 3 new ships for season 6. These designs are great looking designs that could be re-purposed for players as perhaps a new line of flagships or heavy battlecruisers.
On the one hand you're saying the Bortasqu is not liked because it is a slow turning brick - and then on the other hand you chose three massive dreadnought class ships that are most likely to have roughly the same brick like play as the Bortasqu.
I'm just not sure I understand what it is you're looking for here, Dreadnoughts are not zippy - the NPC versions of these ships included (you'll notice they just fly in a straight line usually).
HMM, well that could be an interesting idea for Romulan ships: don't give them Dual Cannons forward, give them Dual Dannons to the rear.:P
Yes, the more yogurt in the rear the better. Words to live by. :P
__________________________________
STO Forum member since before February 2010. STO Academy's excellent skill planner here: Link I actually avoid success entirely. It doesn't get me what I want, and the consequences for failure are slim. -- markhawman
I haven't missed the point, I know there is an issue with the pivot point of the raptors as it is now, one that would be nice to have fixed.
The point I am trying to make is in response to:
And that point is, the raptor class should not be dropped and have the bop buffed to fill both the raider and escort roles.
Also, after more thought, checking the base stats of fed escorts at t4/t5 and the qin raptor, as well as the recollection of another post somewhere in these forums, I have come to another conclusion. And that is:
Fed escorts should out turn kdf raptors, the base turn rate of the AE, MVAE, and the blockade escort is 16 vs the raptors base of 15, the turn rate of any defiant model at any rank is 17 base, the only one that has matching turn rate is the HEC.
Considering the above with the fact that raptors are one of the oldest class and model of ships in the kdf lore and history, as mentioned in another post in these forums somewhere, it really comes as no surprise that the raptor is where it is now.
At the end of the day, each ship has it's strengths and it's weaknesses, it is then up to the individual pilot to utilize those strengths, and negate or defend against the weaknesses.
As for not mirroring the fed escorts, asking for a line of ships to behave the same comeing from 2 different cultures with completely different outlooks on performance is asking for just that.
As an addendum, I don't recall seeing the raptor being called an escort, I do recall seeing it referred to as an escort cruiser (or was that cruiser escort) in a KDF only mission.
That the Raptor is an old class is basically BS.
This is a backup of the original description for the Raptor from the STO website.
-new design from 2397
-destroyer, not cruiser or anyhting of that kind.
-fast, maneuverable
so my questions:
Why should the Fed escorts outturn the Raptor?
and
Why, if it were some kind of escort-cuiser-whatever, does it have no cruiserlike characteristics?
-new design from 2397
-destroyer, not cruiser or anyhting of that kind.
-fast, maneuverable
so my questions:
Why should the Fed escorts outturn the Raptor?
and
Why, if it were some kind of escort-cuiser-whatever, does it have no cruiserlike characteristics?
I did some searching on memory alpha and beta, and with that release note for the raptor it brings about a change on my viewpoint.
I still say we need the raptor. I also still maintain that a correction to it's pivot points would make a world of difference to the ship line, it could still be out turned by all t4 and t5 escorts except for the HEC before skills factor in.
How ever, based on what I have read about the raptors in the last 12 hrs, it fails to do what it was meant to as is canon source as being a scout class, and it fails to perform as said in the release note as a destroyer. Both of which I find dissapointing.
New question, can a raptor out turn our own battle cruisers of the same level? or any level? Has anyone checked this?
All I can be sure of is, going by base stats, it should. But given that it's pivot points more match that of our battle cruisers, and in the light of the paper stat errors showing up with fleet ships, I wonder if when they put it on what appears to be the cruiser flight mechanic they didn't actually make the adjustment to the turn rates.
Addendum: my mention of the escort cruiser thing was not to say that's what it is meant to be, just that is what I have seen the game call it such in a FE mission. The more I think on this, the more I wonder if the devs at the time didn't just shortcut to hell and beyond to get the raptor in the game, remember the issues with the HEC for stfs and weapons? If the model for the raptor was just a copy and paste on to the battle cruiser set up that would cover allowing it to enter stfs, and equipping weapons like DHC's with minimal fuss/time doing so.
And to me, it does have a cruiser characteristic, the way it turns (even tho it shouldn't turn in that manner)
Maybe if the pivot is unfixable at this point they could just give the Raptor class a +15 weapons and +10 engines bonus to give it the impression of being fast and heavy hitting instead nimble?
Fed escorts would still be the 3 hat trick of heavy hitting, nimble and fast so no toes would be stepped on and no kirkisms bruised.
I'd like to have a dev look into the posted and actual base turn rates of the Qin raptor now.
Just did a test with a fleet member, me on my engi in the vor'cha refit, him on tac in a qin, no rcs consoles on either ship, 71/50 engine power for me, 67/50 for the qin, 6/9 in ship impluse thrusters for me, 9/9 for fleetie.
I couldn't out turn the qin as i expected, but what i didn't expect was how much i was able to keep the vor'cha on target, until APA APO and evasive popped up that is.
My feelings after that, not so even, test match are that the actual base turn rate of a Qin is from 2 to 5 degrees lower than the stats suggest it to be.
If someone else wishes to do a more even matched pairing of the 2 feel free to do so.
I'd like to have a dev look into the posted and actual base turn rates of the Qin raptor now.
Just did a test with a fleet member, me on my engi in the vor'cha refit, him on tac in a qin, no rcs consoles on either ship, 71/50 engine power for me, 67/50 for the qin, 6/9 in ship impluse thrusters for me, 9/9 for fleetie.
I couldn't out turn the qin as i expected, but what i didn't expect was how much i was able to keep the vor'cha on target, until APA APO and evasive popped up that is.
My feelings after that, not so even, test match are that the actual base turn rate of a Qin is from 2 to 5 degrees lower than the stats suggest it to be.
If someone else wishes to do a more even matched pairing of the 2 feel free to do so.
Yeah. Basically, the raptors are somewhere between the Vorcha and the slowest-turning Fed escorts in terms of practical turning ability. It works ok-ish against cruisers, but escorts usually fly circles around it. I suspect that if the pivot issue was fixed, maneuvering against escorts would be noticeably easier.
My PvP toon is Krov, of The House of Snoo. Beware of my Hegh'ta of doom.
We cant keep up with federation escort in a dogfight.
Srsly now kdf got major problem when it comes to escort/raptor class
The new destroyer class is also slow turn rate its 17 instead of 15 turn rate of raptor.
Srsly now we got a MAJOR problem here
Cant you just give us a decent escort with a decent turn rate and a lt commander engineer so it got some decent survival and maybe a hangar bay and maybe some tractor pets???
Yeah once again i ask what most KDF players require both in game and in forums, an kdf raptor/destroyer carrier with a lt commander engineer and a hangar bay and keep the turn rate at 17 or same as the fed escort carrier.
Fleet raptor and fleet destroyer are mega fail ships (ok they are not mega fail just not good enough to compensate with the federation ones) and you wont take our money so easily.
You gave federation an extremely overpower ship both in papper and in action!!!!!!!
You gave federation escort carrier OP Ship and you give us those crappy raptors and destroyer and you expect us to spent RL money or in game money to buy this TRIBBLE?????
YOU HAVE TO TRY HARDER IF YOU WANT OUR MONEY
THATS IT FOR ME PATIENCE RUN OUT NO MORE MONEY FROM ME OR MY RL FRIENDS EVER AGAIN UNLESS U START GIVING KDF SOME DECENT ESCORT SHIPS PERIOD.
YOU THERE PWE GREEDY DUDES? NO KDF SHOULD EVER PAY YOU UNLESS U START SHOWING SOME ATTENTION TO KDF SIDE!!!!
Theres like 3 okay ships but there is no discount and it is per character so nothing like a good money grab before they toss the game to the curb. The important thing for fed only players to remember as they have stopped development of the KDF... The federation and the game as a whole is next
Well actually there is a real battlecruiser, and it's called the fleet Vor'cha.
Maybe a few more ships are needed but currently every single interesting possibility exists for the KDF side. There are huge slow tanks, more escorts than the feds have, something similar to the Jemmie bug (the Qin raptor), some BoPs, two carriers and a science vessel (one and the feds have one only too, so it's a problem related to the priorities the management choose).
Of course, some new designs would be cool but they are no "missing" ships in the shipyard. Let's admit it, we just want new skins, not new ships.
Well actually there is a real battlecruiser, and it's called the fleet Vor'cha.
Maybe a few more ships are needed but currently every single interesting possibility exists for the KDF side. There are huge slow tanks, more escorts than the feds have, something similar to the Jemmie bug (the Qin raptor), some BoPs, two carriers and a science vessel (one and the feds have one only too, so it's a problem related to the priorities the management choose).
Of course, some new designs would be cool but they are no "missing" ships in the shipyard. Let's admit it, we just want new skins, not new ships.
What about a Ferasan one?
You're joking if you consider the Bird of Prey class to be 'escorts'. Federation escorts out-tank and out-DPS the Hegh'ta and the B'rel, only the Fleet Hoh'sus can come close to competing. There's a reason BoPs have to fight in pairs or in groups.
My PvP toon is Krov, of The House of Snoo. Beware of my Hegh'ta of doom.
Comments
I still hope we'll get some kind of "anti-carrier" on the KDF side.
IMHO the K't'inga would have been an excellent ship to turn into an "escort cruiser".
Utilizing, the comapared to its own size, large forward torpedo launcher for some kind of "flak torp launcher" particularly useful against fighters.
Well, maybe we'll get a C-Store version with such a weapon.:(
As far as I know this is entirely correct. The system is hardcoded with only 4 weapon slots front and aft possible.
I am relatively sure that when they ever think about an increase of the level cap and later XIV equipment that would have to go. On the other hand there is the power problem then as well if you had something like 10 weapon slots as a cruiser that wants to run beams.
Well, they could either increase power levels on higher-level ships of they could add Mk XIII or MkXIV weapons with reduced power requirements.
If the turn rate isn't to be addressed then perhaps an additional 2 engineering slots so one can equip the necessary consoles without having to sacrifice survivability. I'd prefer the turn rate to be addressed however. I don't run Raptors for that particular reason of it's poor turn rate compared to Fed escorts.
Its turn rate is fine. Evidently its the Turn Pivot which according to others is becuase the Raptor is built open a Cruiser frame instead of an Escort one. Making its nose slow to turn.
Though an additional two Engineer slots would not hurt my feelings.:P
R.I.P
...No, haven't tried an all-out tailgunner yet, but have surprised a few when they got a Har'Pheng in the face (while staring at my rear).
Awoken Dead
Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
HMM, well that could be an interesting idea for Romulan ships: don't give them Dual Cannons forward, give them Dual Dannons to the rear.:P
On my little BOP I pack turrets on the back. If no one's behind me it lets me fire them forward along with my other cannons. If someone is behind me, popping rapid fire with the turrets tends to do the job of whittling down their shields as I come around to bring the rest of my weapons to join in.
A high yield transphasic volley in the face does wonders while the rest of my cannons are high speed pewpewing.
Awoken Dead
Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
And the Warbird becomes "da Minebird".
I would LOVE to see the Raptor get a significant bump up on hull, personally. More than the Bug for the Qin. That's the point, isn't it? The first Raptor we see is sitting so deep in a gas giant's gravity well they could barely reach it. This is a HEARTY ship.
...well, hull along with converting all KDF ships to having an additional console and coming with a Cloaking Universal Console, so I can trash it and drop in an RCS.
ALL HOLDINGS FINISHED! - Starbase 5-5-5-5 || Embassy 3-3-3 || Mine 3-3-3 || Spire 3-3-3
A laid back KDF fleet welcoming independent, casual, & part-time players and groups. Roms & alts welcome.
Send in-game mail to Wampaq@Jnoh, visit our recruitment thread and FB page for more info.
I haven't missed the point, I know there is an issue with the pivot point of the raptors as it is now, one that would be nice to have fixed.
The point I am trying to make is in response to:
And that point is, the raptor class should not be dropped and have the bop buffed to fill both the raider and escort roles.
Also, after more thought, checking the base stats of fed escorts at t4/t5 and the qin raptor, as well as the recollection of another post somewhere in these forums, I have come to another conclusion. And that is:
Fed escorts should out turn kdf raptors, the base turn rate of the AE, MVAE, and the blockade escort is 16 vs the raptors base of 15, the turn rate of any defiant model at any rank is 17 base, the only one that has matching turn rate is the HEC.
Considering the above with the fact that raptors are one of the oldest class and model of ships in the kdf lore and history, as mentioned in another post in these forums somewhere, it really comes as no surprise that the raptor is where it is now.
At the end of the day, each ship has it's strengths and it's weaknesses, it is then up to the individual pilot to utilize those strengths, and negate or defend against the weaknesses.
As for not mirroring the fed escorts, asking for a line of ships to behave the same comeing from 2 different cultures with completely different outlooks on performance is asking for just that.
As an addendum, I don't recall seeing the raptor being called an escort, I do recall seeing it referred to as an escort cruiser (or was that cruiser escort) in a KDF only mission.
Would KDF players be willing to pay for new ships if they cost $5.00 more then comparable Fed ships? I know that sounds harsh but Cryptic's just looking at the manpower versus ROI, IMO.
Makes me happy to hear this.
If that is the case then an analogy like the skies over China in WWII would be appropriate. The P40 Warhawk could not turn with the Zero, but could out run a Zero in a dive. Also the P40 did not have the defensive roll rate of the Zero, but it had the armor in spades.
Take the Defiant as the Zero and go from there to make the slower turning Raptor Chennault's P40. Up armor the Raptor, leave the pivot point and turn rate where they are, increase the Raptor's inertia. Now you can use the punch through, run on, turn back and repeat method that Chennault taught the Flying Tigers to use and a Defiant is supposed to do, while preserving and enhancing the "unique feel" of flying the Raptor.
Sorry just my take on the disparity of the turn rate issue created by the Raptor's pivot point being there to make it feel different to fly than the Defiant.
The thing is, the 'strengths' of the raptor (more hull and shields, another tac console and weapon slot) don't compensate for the crippling turn point/pivot point deficiency. Hence, we have an inferior ship in overall (a ship that is technically supposed to be the KDF's response to heavy escorts). It's neither a good tank, nor a nimble DPSer. It's mediocre, and it shows.
They could assign then Qin/Somraw raptors higher turn stats so while the nose travel would still exist, hopefully it would snap around a bit faster on target.
But I do agree it is niether a remarkable escort or cruiser and has a very mediocre feel that does not lend it standing out as iether.
Possibly a damage bonus of sorts, as well.
R.I.P
It is rumor I liked as well. I can only hope it is true. I do trust the source though.
I have fun flying the Qin and find it has a fine burst capability, but that 4 second nose travel when you when you drop the throttle amd swing it makes my teeth itch as those seconds count slowly by.
R.I.P
On the one hand you're saying the Bortasqu is not liked because it is a slow turning brick - and then on the other hand you chose three massive dreadnought class ships that are most likely to have roughly the same brick like play as the Bortasqu.
I'm just not sure I understand what it is you're looking for here, Dreadnoughts are not zippy - the NPC versions of these ships included (you'll notice they just fly in a straight line usually).
Yes, the more yogurt in the rear the better. Words to live by. :P
STO Forum member since before February 2010.
STO Academy's excellent skill planner here: Link
I actually avoid success entirely. It doesn't get me what I want, and the consequences for failure are slim. -- markhawman
Oooooohhhhhhh I so tempted to snap a joke on this......but do not wish to get banned.
R.I.P
That the Raptor is an old class is basically BS.
This is a backup of the original description for the Raptor from the STO website.
http://www.warcry.com/news/view/89845-Star-Trek-Online-Klingon-Raptor-Revealed
important cliffnotes:
-new design from 2397
-destroyer, not cruiser or anyhting of that kind.
-fast, maneuverable
so my questions:
Why should the Fed escorts outturn the Raptor?
and
Why, if it were some kind of escort-cuiser-whatever, does it have no cruiserlike characteristics?
I did some searching on memory alpha and beta, and with that release note for the raptor it brings about a change on my viewpoint.
I still say we need the raptor. I also still maintain that a correction to it's pivot points would make a world of difference to the ship line, it could still be out turned by all t4 and t5 escorts except for the HEC before skills factor in.
How ever, based on what I have read about the raptors in the last 12 hrs, it fails to do what it was meant to as is canon source as being a scout class, and it fails to perform as said in the release note as a destroyer. Both of which I find dissapointing.
New question, can a raptor out turn our own battle cruisers of the same level? or any level? Has anyone checked this?
All I can be sure of is, going by base stats, it should. But given that it's pivot points more match that of our battle cruisers, and in the light of the paper stat errors showing up with fleet ships, I wonder if when they put it on what appears to be the cruiser flight mechanic they didn't actually make the adjustment to the turn rates.
Addendum: my mention of the escort cruiser thing was not to say that's what it is meant to be, just that is what I have seen the game call it such in a FE mission. The more I think on this, the more I wonder if the devs at the time didn't just shortcut to hell and beyond to get the raptor in the game, remember the issues with the HEC for stfs and weapons? If the model for the raptor was just a copy and paste on to the battle cruiser set up that would cover allowing it to enter stfs, and equipping weapons like DHC's with minimal fuss/time doing so.
And to me, it does have a cruiser characteristic, the way it turns (even tho it shouldn't turn in that manner)
Fed escorts would still be the 3 hat trick of heavy hitting, nimble and fast so no toes would be stepped on and no kirkisms bruised.
R.I.P
Just did a test with a fleet member, me on my engi in the vor'cha refit, him on tac in a qin, no rcs consoles on either ship, 71/50 engine power for me, 67/50 for the qin, 6/9 in ship impluse thrusters for me, 9/9 for fleetie.
I couldn't out turn the qin as i expected, but what i didn't expect was how much i was able to keep the vor'cha on target, until APA APO and evasive popped up that is.
My feelings after that, not so even, test match are that the actual base turn rate of a Qin is from 2 to 5 degrees lower than the stats suggest it to be.
If someone else wishes to do a more even matched pairing of the 2 feel free to do so.
Yeah. Basically, the raptors are somewhere between the Vorcha and the slowest-turning Fed escorts in terms of practical turning ability. It works ok-ish against cruisers, but escorts usually fly circles around it. I suspect that if the pivot issue was fixed, maneuvering against escorts would be noticeably easier.
We cant keep up with federation escort in a dogfight.
Srsly now kdf got major problem when it comes to escort/raptor class
The new destroyer class is also slow turn rate its 17 instead of 15 turn rate of raptor.
Srsly now we got a MAJOR problem here
Cant you just give us a decent escort with a decent turn rate and a lt commander engineer so it got some decent survival and maybe a hangar bay and maybe some tractor pets???
Yeah once again i ask what most KDF players require both in game and in forums, an kdf raptor/destroyer carrier with a lt commander engineer and a hangar bay and keep the turn rate at 17 or same as the fed escort carrier.
Fleet raptor and fleet destroyer are mega fail ships (ok they are not mega fail just not good enough to compensate with the federation ones) and you wont take our money so easily.
You gave federation an extremely overpower ship both in papper and in action!!!!!!!
You gave federation escort carrier OP Ship and you give us those crappy raptors and destroyer and you expect us to spent RL money or in game money to buy this TRIBBLE?????
YOU HAVE TO TRY HARDER IF YOU WANT OUR MONEY
THATS IT FOR ME PATIENCE RUN OUT NO MORE MONEY FROM ME OR MY RL FRIENDS EVER AGAIN UNLESS U START GIVING KDF SOME DECENT ESCORT SHIPS PERIOD.
YOU THERE PWE GREEDY DUDES? NO KDF SHOULD EVER PAY YOU UNLESS U START SHOWING SOME ATTENTION TO KDF SIDE!!!!
ENOUGH!
Theres like 3 okay ships but there is no discount and it is per character so nothing like a good money grab before they toss the game to the curb. The important thing for fed only players to remember as they have stopped development of the KDF... The federation and the game as a whole is next
Maybe a few more ships are needed but currently every single interesting possibility exists for the KDF side. There are huge slow tanks, more escorts than the feds have, something similar to the Jemmie bug (the Qin raptor), some BoPs, two carriers and a science vessel (one and the feds have one only too, so it's a problem related to the priorities the management choose).
Of course, some new designs would be cool but they are no "missing" ships in the shipyard. Let's admit it, we just want new skins, not new ships.
What about a Ferasan one?
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
You're joking if you consider the Bird of Prey class to be 'escorts'. Federation escorts out-tank and out-DPS the Hegh'ta and the B'rel, only the Fleet Hoh'sus can come close to competing. There's a reason BoPs have to fight in pairs or in groups.