its your oppinion that they are supposed to tank. Cryptic stated and no i cant get a direct link to this, that before launch and after, that the term tank doesn't mean trinity tank but ability to absorb damage, they used tank because people understood that concept.
Wrong again. It is my opinion that Cruisers are the jack of all trades of Star Trek. Not once have I suggested they should tank. The "Escort fanboys" are the ones who claim that Cruisers should stick to tanking, and leave the dps role to Escorts.
In a way, this thread points out that the so-called trinity no longer exists, and that this will only become more evident as time goes on.
I fully agree.
Trying to put Star Trek ships into the so called "trinity" was a bad idea from the beginning.
It's just another indication of how little some devs understand about Star Trek ships IMO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
And I suppose I'll drop my customary "Cruisers are fine, its beams that are broken, use single cannons and L2P" here.
And I suppose I'll drop my customary "What do cruisers do better than other ship types" in response.
It's not just beams either: Eng BOff skills are a bit iffy compared to Tactical and Science.
As for game-breaking... perhaps you should consider the idea a little further before rushing to judge it. All I have suggested is to replace two existing seats on each Fed cruiser with universals, and to switch over one Engineering console slot to Universal. The former is something that has already been put into practice.
And I suppose I'll drop my customary "What do cruisers do better than other ship types" in response.
It's not just beams either: Eng BOff skills are a bit iffy compared to Tactical and Science.
As for game-breaking... perhaps you should consider the idea a little further before rushing to judge it. All I have suggested is to replace two existing seats on each Fed cruiser with universals, and to switch over one Engineering console slot to Universal. The former is something that has already been put into practice.
I think your idea is not that far-fetched.
Since we all know that Cruisers should be "jack of all trades" they need some way to become more versatile.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Between all the cruisers that have been released they've pretty much covered all the configurations, so more universal slots do not mean versatility, just doing the same thing with a different skin if you want. A cosmetic change at best, and destroying the individuality of each cruiser at worst.
The console portion is essentially advocating that every cruiser swaps an engineering console for a tactical one. Because that's the only thing anyone would ever use a universal console slot for.
So I guess the suggestion boils down to a tiny bit more weapon damage, faster turning, and 'let me fly my galaxy like a sovereign pretty please'. I'm sure many people would welcome the first two, but they just don't seem necessary nor particularly effective at combating the perceived 'weaknesses' of cruisers.
Between all the cruisers that have been released they've pretty much covered all the configurations, so more universal slots do not mean versatility, just doing the same thing with a different skin if you want. A cosmetic change at best, and destroying the individuality of each cruiser at worst.
In a certain sense, i don't see any big individuality in STO when it comes to ships. Most poeple fly their preferred BOFF&Console Layout not the actual ship they like.
And Yes universal BOFF slots do mean more versatility for each individual ship.
The console portion is essentially advocating that every cruiser swaps an engineering console for a tactical one. Because that's the only thing anyone would ever use a universal console slot for.
Thats just a indication of the DPS focus of STO in general, If there where more usable and offenive focussed Engineering powers or even Consoles, people wouldn't be so fixated on Tactical Consoles.
So I guess the suggestion boils down to a tiny bit more weapon damage, faster turning, and 'let me fly my galaxy like a sovereign pretty please'. I'm sure many people would welcome the first two, but they just don't seem necessary nor particularly effective at combating the perceived 'weaknesses' of cruisers.
I think the problem lies much deeper.
Cryptic obviously put Star Trek ships into a Game Mechanic which forces them to work completely different as they are supposed to.
Apart from the MMO player mass which obviously prefers Escorts as "Master of everything", some like Crusiers more. Those (including me) are of course disappointed about how wrong/weak/teethless Cryptic made the primary Star Trek ships in their game. I think it'sunderstandable that those people want to make the best of their ships, even if it's something little as an additional tactical Console or a slightly different BOFF layout.
But as long as people are in charge who prefer to fly Escorts themselves, we certainly won't see any big change.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Between all the cruisers that have been released they've pretty much covered all the configurations, so more universal slots do not mean versatility, just doing the same thing with a different skin if you want. A cosmetic change at best, and destroying the individuality of each cruiser at worst.
The console portion is essentially advocating that every cruiser swaps an engineering console for a tactical one. Because that's the only thing anyone would ever use a universal console slot for.
So I guess the suggestion boils down to a tiny bit more weapon damage, faster turning, and 'let me fly my galaxy like a sovereign pretty please'. I'm sure many people would welcome the first two, but they just don't seem necessary nor particularly effective at combating the perceived 'weaknesses' of cruisers.
I actually prefer the Sovereign to the Galaxy.
The point of my suggestion is to bring Federation cruisers closer to the multipurpose role as they have traditionally been depicted in canon material. I believe that the function of cruisers is no longer applicable, as carriers seem to surpass them entirely. At this rate, I believe that the current specification for the cruiser will no longer become viable.
If you have gone back to my original post, you'll notice that the Universal BOff stations would not completely replace existing specializations. My suggestion is such that the Commander Engineering is always retained, and that there would be at least two specialized BOff stations regardless. The point is to introduce a little more flexibility to cruiser gameplay, because cruisers at present do lack individuality, primarily due to the limitations of the Engineering BOff abilities that they are forced to specialize at.
Undoubtedly, many people would turn a Universal Console slot into a Tactical one, but not all. Not too much to be done about that...
I completely disagree with the idea but if your gonna push for these changes on the feds its only fair that the KDF battle cruisers are also similarily buffed to maintane gameplay feel and factional differences.
I completely disagree with the idea but if your gonna push for these changes on the feds its only fair that the KDF battle cruisers are also similarily buffed to maintane gameplay feel and factional differences.
Probably, but KDF battlecruisers presently have advantages that Federation cruisers do not. They'd still have access to cloaking and DHC/DC, not to mention the fact that KDF already have a craft with Universal stations all across, as opposed to the limited Universals I'm suggesting here.
In any case, I hope you have a more substantial reason for disagreeing than most of the naysayers so far.
What BoPs have (or don't have) is really irrelevant to a cruiser discussion. Especially in light of the fact that the KDF doesn't have their own science ships.
Probably, but KDF battlecruisers presently have advantages that Federation cruisers do not. They'd still have access to cloaking and DHC/DC, not to mention the fact that KDF already have a craft with Universal stations all across, as opposed to the limited Universals I'm suggesting here.
In any case, I hope you have a more substantial reason for disagreeing than most of the naysayers so far.
Only that its not really needed as the feds have cruisers choices that allow for diversity and already cover those listed KDF advantages ingame.
Turn buff would be welcome but a 2 point buff would make ded cruisers turn equal to many KDF BCs and we would need a equal buff to keep that advantage and difference of gameplay.
A universal console slot for cruisers is an interesting idea.
What BoPs have (or don't have) is really irrelevant to a cruiser discussion. Especially in light of the fact that the KDF doesn't have their own science ships.
Tell that to the person who posted before the post that I have made, because I wasn't the one who started the argument of "if x on that side, then x on this side". As for science ships, KDF isn't exactly missing out in that respect, and the Varanus is pretty damn close to a science ship in all respects but name.
Only that its not really needed as the feds have cruisers choices that allow for diversity and already cover those listed KDF advantages ingame.
Turn buff would be welcome but a 2 point buff would make ded cruisers turn equal to many KDF BCs and we would need a equal buff to keep that advantage and difference of gameplay.
A universal console slot for cruisers is an interesting idea.
The only cruiser choice that allows for any degree of diversity is the Odyssey line; Federation cruiser builds are essentially limited to tanking, for most part. Even cruisers that feature a tactical focus have difficulty cranking out damage.
Again, the reason I suggest these changes have less to do with comparing Federation cruisers to KDF battlecruisers and more to do with their specific design being far too restrictive. While the Klingons have similar problems to some extent, they're not nearly as restricted where damage-dealing is concerned and can still provide tanking and support. They're big heavy bruisers, and their slightly better turn rate makes everything (from shooting to support or whatever) so much easier.
That being said, I do think that my concerns regarding Federation cruisers apply to Klingon battlecruisers to some extent. They could use at least one universal BOff station on each of their battlecruisers, as well as a universal console. But again, if we were to go back to fluff and role within their faction, they're not in the same situation as Federation cruisers where they don't do anything that another ship can do better. I don't think that changes should go nearly to the same extent as what I suggest for Federation cruisers.
What to cruisers do better then any other ship type?
Apparently attract captans that like to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NANANANANANA" when the people who know how to fly a cruiser pop their heads into threads and say "Umm.. I'm not sure what is going on with you guys, but I'm putting out some mad numbers with this build, so I'm not sure why you are having problems breaking 3k."
I'll never understand why when somebody says they can't do something, their first instinct when shown a way to achieve what they first thought they could not is to get offended and cling to their original premise instead of growing and realizing that possibly somebody else might be doing it right...
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
What to cruisers do better then any other ship type?
Apparently attract captans that like to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NANANANANANA" when the people who know how to fly a cruiser pop their heads into threads and say "Umm.. I'm not sure what is going on with you guys, but I'm putting out some mad numbers with this build, so I'm not sure why you are having problems breaking 3k."
I'll never understand why when somebody says they can't do something, their first instinct when shown a way to achieve what they first thought they could not is to get offended and cling to their original premise instead of growing and realizing that possibly somebody else might be doing it right...
I've never used a combat parser (so I can't give you exact numbers) but I can safely tell you that my offensive Regent is at least capable of doing threatening damage in PvP. In any case, I don't think you appreciate how much harder it is for a cruiser to deal decent damage: a bad build means that you will melt very fast and still fail to do damage close to an escort's level. I don't say that it is impossible, but it is difficult and you do get comparatively less out of it.
I'm not going to dispute that cruisers are absolutely boss at tanking and support compared to science vessels or escorts. But with the introduction of the Atrox and increasing proliferation of carriers, what do they do better, exactly? With the Atrox, you have access to Transfer Shield Strength 3 and Hazard Emitters 3 in a ship that has decent Engineering, is tougher than a cruiser, and can also launch pets for support. Granted, its mobility characteristics manage to be even worse, but Federation cruisers aren't much better off either.
Oddly, the Atrox doesn't tank as well as it looks on paper. I think it has to do with its speed.
The Atrox suffers not only from a low turn rate, but low inertia rating and top speed. Given the same gear I'm still going to suffer more hits and crits then a cruiser.
I'm not saying the Atrox isn't da bomb, just its a flimsier tank then you would expect her to be, a heavy sci cruiser could match her tricks and eat fire that would smoke my Atrox in one shot. Of course the Atrox would out DPS it, but that is ok, because if the Atrox took the hit instead of the cruiser the Atrox wouldn't have lived to do that DPS, and it wouldn't be a huge DPS margin in the best of cases.
The beauty of the Atrox is, as opposed to a ship like the Ody that can spec hard down any one road and do very well, the Atrox can soak an apprecable amount of damage, deal a crazy amount of damage, heal like a woman possesed, and have a full complement of sci tricks all at the same time. It suffers by not hitting quite the peak in any one of those areas ever. (Well, unless your in a pug of bads. A good Atrox can do more then an entire group of bads combined...)
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Tell that to the person who posted before the post that I have made, because I wasn't the one who started the argument of "if x on that side, then x on this side". As for science ships, KDF isn't exactly missing out in that respect, and the Varanus is pretty damn close to a science ship in all respects but name.
Bitemepwe's point was that a huge change was asked for in regards to Federation cruisers, and to maintain parity the exact same change should be implemented for the KDF equivalent.
There was absolutely nothing in there about "well, the Feds get XYZQ and W, therefore all of that should be added to KDF ships".
Secondly, do you really want to defend the position that there's no science ship disparity when the only KDF science ship is one you have to drop twenty bucks on?
Only that its not really needed as the feds have cruisers choices that allow for diversity and already cover those listed KDF advantages ingame.
Turn buff would be welcome but a 2 point buff would make ded cruisers turn equal to many KDF BCs and we would need a equal buff to keep that advantage and difference of gameplay.
A universal console slot for cruisers is an interesting idea.
If you hint to the Hull Hitpoint bonus Starfleet Cruisers have, then i would say, make them equal in order to get other advantages for Starfleet Cruisers.
Because some 1000 more hull hitpoints is really not a real big advantage if you could have DHCs and a higher turnrate and more tactical BOFF&Console layout in exchange.
Healing and Resistances is already so high in STO, some thousand more Hull Hitpoints don't carry much weight IMO. Originally Starfleet Cruisers got more hull in order to wear an enemy down the longer a fight lasted, but today even a Escorts can outheal a Starfleet cruisers weapons damage with ease.
So i would say Cryptics devs should increase Klingon Cruiser Hull to make them equal to Starfleet Cruisers Hull Hitpoints. Starfleet Cruiser should get a turn Rate Boost+Dual Cannons.
So KDF Cruiser still had a superior BOFF & Console Layout and Dual HEAVY cannons. So there would be no reason to moan for the Klingons, they still would have the Better Cruisers. But Starfleet Cruisers finally had some means of fighting back.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I would have empathy for the KDFs lack of sci ships, but...
I've bought and flown a *LOT* of ships. I know what its like to buy a ship thinking "This is the one, this is going to rock" and then... meh... in dry dock with the rest...
The VQ and the Kar'Fi both blow any Fed sci ship out of the water. The Atrox is the only one even in the running, and while I favor her, the VQ is technically the better ship. Even the mighty Vesta is a poor substitute for a well flown carrier.
If the KDF were to get more sci ships, it would be more ships in mothball, and more under performing ships in pugs...
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Oddly, the Atrox doesn't tank as well as it looks on paper. I think it has to do with its speed.
The Atrox suffers not only from a low turn rate, but low inertia rating and top speed. Given the same gear I'm still going to suffer more hits and crits then a cruiser.
I'm not saying the Atrox isn't da bomb, just its a flimsier tank then you would expect her to be, a heavy sci cruiser could match her tricks and eat fire that would smoke my Atrox in one shot. Of course the Atrox would out DPS it, but that is ok, because if the Atrox took the hit instead of the cruiser the Atrox wouldn't have lived to do that DPS, and it wouldn't be a huge DPS margin in the best of cases.
The beauty of the Atrox is, as opposed to a ship like the Ody that can spec hard down any one road and do very well, the Atrox can soak an apprecable amount of damage, deal a crazy amount of damage, heal like a woman possesed, and have a full complement of sci tricks all at the same time. It suffers by not hitting quite the peak in any one of those areas ever. (Well, unless your in a pug of bads. A good Atrox can do more then an entire group of bads combined...)
Caitian has the same impulse modifier as other Federation cruisers, so I doubt it will take more hits and crits. Turnrate may be worse, but then Federation cruisers aren't much better off either. And inertia only affects how fast changes in movement take place, so I doubt that it will affect defence value.
The only plausible explanation as to why you are not surviving nearly as well is because of the lesser Engineering capability. Regardless, the fact is that you're still putting out a lot better than a cruiser in almost every imaginable way. In a match as an Engineer with a Star Cruiser purely specced towards healing and support, I wound up with 800k heals against 1.1 mil heals from a Tactical captain flying an Atrox, and did less damage to boot. I died once, but the other guy didn't.
Furthermore, the Atrox can afford to make extensive use of Science debuffs, which not only helps your team, but also yourself. If you've flown cruisers for any period of time, you'll appreciate just how vulnerable cruisers are to being pushed around or stopped dead in their tracks.
Bitemepwe's point was that a huge change was asked for in regards to Federation cruisers, and to maintain parity the exact same change should be implemented for the KDF equivalent.
There was absolutely nothing in there about "well, the Feds get XYZQ and W, therefore all of that should be added to KDF ships".
Secondly, do you really want to defend the position that there's no science ship disparity when the only KDF science ship is one you have to drop twenty bucks on?
There's only about three science vessels that actually see regular use in PvP, primarily because the rest are trash. One of them is a lockbox ship, and the other two you have to pay for. Again, the KDF aren't missing out on a lot there, and are arguably in a better position to use some science abilities.
I'm asking for a significant change to the function of Federation cruisers because I feel that at present, their specifications are far too restrictive and are becoming obsolete with changes to overall gameplay and fresh content additions. There's simply too much of a single-minded focus on Engineering, which isn't really good at anything but self-buffing and repair support. Building for damage is possible, but very tricky; using non-healing sci abilities are almost never an option. Escorts and science vessels are not nearly as inflexible cruisers are in this respect, and even KDF battlecruisers are slightly better off there than Federation cruisers.
That's why I suggest replacing some specialized slots on Federation cruisers with a Universal Console slot and two Universal BOff stations, along with an increase in turn rate. They will retain their Cmdr Eng station and require at least two BOff stations to be a set specialization, but two other stations would be changed over to either two Lts or one Lt Cmdr and one Ens.
Thanks for the info about the impulse modifier, I was curious if that was the reason, It must be something else.
I have spent much time in a cruiser, I just don't find the problems to be as severe as made out to be. 90% of the problem can be fixed by using a single cannon build and dropping the beams other then one for BO or the romulan beam for BO and the 3pc. Beams I dislike. I've never found a way to make them perform adequatlely.
I wonder why my Atrox splats so much more often, then. Must be the eng skills meaning more then I valued them.
Edit: Or I might get a god complex behind helm and take on more then I can handle /giggle.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Without wanting to get into the debate as to what might (or might not) improve cruisers, I have to question the initial poster's premise -
"With the introduction of increasing numbers of heavy carrier vessels..."
Really, where are all these carrier vessels? I ask this because in my experience I don't see them being played. Yes, you do see the occasional one, but Id say that in the Federation faction at least, they're pretty rare. :-)
Most people see a strong carrier pilot, go OMG OP!!!!, rush out, gear one up, and then... They seem to disappear.
The Carriers themselves rock, but piloting one is a labor of love at times. Even I say TRIBBLE it and hop in my Beta Vector for a change, and I love my Atrox.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Without wanting to get into the debate as to what might (or might not) improve cruisers, I have to question the initial poster's premise -
"With the introduction of increasing numbers of heavy carrier vessels..."
Really, where are all these carrier vessels? I ask this because in my experience I don't see them being played. Yes, you do see the occasional one, but Id say that in the Federation faction at least, they're pretty rare. :-)
Well, there are a lot more carrier vessels out there now than there have been since the beginning of the last year, both in terms of overall number and type.
The point of concern that I have is that a lot of carriers have similar characteristics and capabilities as Federation cruisers while being able to do more. At this rate, I feel that cruisers are going to be in a position where the entire type becomes more or less pointless because there are ships out there that do everything they do and more.
Comments
Wrong again. It is my opinion that Cruisers are the jack of all trades of Star Trek. Not once have I suggested they should tank. The "Escort fanboys" are the ones who claim that Cruisers should stick to tanking, and leave the dps role to Escorts.
I fully agree.
Trying to put Star Trek ships into the so called "trinity" was a bad idea from the beginning.
It's just another indication of how little some devs understand about Star Trek ships IMO.
I'm still laughing...
I might need to make that my sig...
Edit: Yup, I had too!
And I suppose I'll drop my customary "Cruisers are fine, its beams that are broken, use single cannons and L2P" here.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
And I suppose I'll drop my customary "What do cruisers do better than other ship types" in response.
It's not just beams either: Eng BOff skills are a bit iffy compared to Tactical and Science.
As for game-breaking... perhaps you should consider the idea a little further before rushing to judge it. All I have suggested is to replace two existing seats on each Fed cruiser with universals, and to switch over one Engineering console slot to Universal. The former is something that has already been put into practice.
Since we all know that Cruisers should be "jack of all trades" they need some way to become more versatile.
The console portion is essentially advocating that every cruiser swaps an engineering console for a tactical one. Because that's the only thing anyone would ever use a universal console slot for.
So I guess the suggestion boils down to a tiny bit more weapon damage, faster turning, and 'let me fly my galaxy like a sovereign pretty please'. I'm sure many people would welcome the first two, but they just don't seem necessary nor particularly effective at combating the perceived 'weaknesses' of cruisers.
And Yes universal BOFF slots do mean more versatility for each individual ship. Thats just a indication of the DPS focus of STO in general, If there where more usable and offenive focussed Engineering powers or even Consoles, people wouldn't be so fixated on Tactical Consoles. I think the problem lies much deeper.
Cryptic obviously put Star Trek ships into a Game Mechanic which forces them to work completely different as they are supposed to.
Apart from the MMO player mass which obviously prefers Escorts as "Master of everything", some like Crusiers more. Those (including me) are of course disappointed about how wrong/weak/teethless Cryptic made the primary Star Trek ships in their game. I think it'sunderstandable that those people want to make the best of their ships, even if it's something little as an additional tactical Console or a slightly different BOFF layout.
But as long as people are in charge who prefer to fly Escorts themselves, we certainly won't see any big change.
I actually prefer the Sovereign to the Galaxy.
The point of my suggestion is to bring Federation cruisers closer to the multipurpose role as they have traditionally been depicted in canon material. I believe that the function of cruisers is no longer applicable, as carriers seem to surpass them entirely. At this rate, I believe that the current specification for the cruiser will no longer become viable.
If you have gone back to my original post, you'll notice that the Universal BOff stations would not completely replace existing specializations. My suggestion is such that the Commander Engineering is always retained, and that there would be at least two specialized BOff stations regardless. The point is to introduce a little more flexibility to cruiser gameplay, because cruisers at present do lack individuality, primarily due to the limitations of the Engineering BOff abilities that they are forced to specialize at.
Undoubtedly, many people would turn a Universal Console slot into a Tactical one, but not all. Not too much to be done about that...
R.I.P
Probably, but KDF battlecruisers presently have advantages that Federation cruisers do not. They'd still have access to cloaking and DHC/DC, not to mention the fact that KDF already have a craft with Universal stations all across, as opposed to the limited Universals I'm suggesting here.
In any case, I hope you have a more substantial reason for disagreeing than most of the naysayers so far.
Only that its not really needed as the feds have cruisers choices that allow for diversity and already cover those listed KDF advantages ingame.
Turn buff would be welcome but a 2 point buff would make ded cruisers turn equal to many KDF BCs and we would need a equal buff to keep that advantage and difference of gameplay.
A universal console slot for cruisers is an interesting idea.
R.I.P
Tell that to the person who posted before the post that I have made, because I wasn't the one who started the argument of "if x on that side, then x on this side". As for science ships, KDF isn't exactly missing out in that respect, and the Varanus is pretty damn close to a science ship in all respects but name.
The only cruiser choice that allows for any degree of diversity is the Odyssey line; Federation cruiser builds are essentially limited to tanking, for most part. Even cruisers that feature a tactical focus have difficulty cranking out damage.
Again, the reason I suggest these changes have less to do with comparing Federation cruisers to KDF battlecruisers and more to do with their specific design being far too restrictive. While the Klingons have similar problems to some extent, they're not nearly as restricted where damage-dealing is concerned and can still provide tanking and support. They're big heavy bruisers, and their slightly better turn rate makes everything (from shooting to support or whatever) so much easier.
That being said, I do think that my concerns regarding Federation cruisers apply to Klingon battlecruisers to some extent. They could use at least one universal BOff station on each of their battlecruisers, as well as a universal console. But again, if we were to go back to fluff and role within their faction, they're not in the same situation as Federation cruisers where they don't do anything that another ship can do better. I don't think that changes should go nearly to the same extent as what I suggest for Federation cruisers.
Apparently attract captans that like to stick their fingers in their ears and go "NANANANANANA" when the people who know how to fly a cruiser pop their heads into threads and say "Umm.. I'm not sure what is going on with you guys, but I'm putting out some mad numbers with this build, so I'm not sure why you are having problems breaking 3k."
I'll never understand why when somebody says they can't do something, their first instinct when shown a way to achieve what they first thought they could not is to get offended and cling to their original premise instead of growing and realizing that possibly somebody else might be doing it right...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
I've never used a combat parser (so I can't give you exact numbers) but I can safely tell you that my offensive Regent is at least capable of doing threatening damage in PvP. In any case, I don't think you appreciate how much harder it is for a cruiser to deal decent damage: a bad build means that you will melt very fast and still fail to do damage close to an escort's level. I don't say that it is impossible, but it is difficult and you do get comparatively less out of it.
I'm not going to dispute that cruisers are absolutely boss at tanking and support compared to science vessels or escorts. But with the introduction of the Atrox and increasing proliferation of carriers, what do they do better, exactly? With the Atrox, you have access to Transfer Shield Strength 3 and Hazard Emitters 3 in a ship that has decent Engineering, is tougher than a cruiser, and can also launch pets for support. Granted, its mobility characteristics manage to be even worse, but Federation cruisers aren't much better off either.
The Atrox suffers not only from a low turn rate, but low inertia rating and top speed. Given the same gear I'm still going to suffer more hits and crits then a cruiser.
I'm not saying the Atrox isn't da bomb, just its a flimsier tank then you would expect her to be, a heavy sci cruiser could match her tricks and eat fire that would smoke my Atrox in one shot. Of course the Atrox would out DPS it, but that is ok, because if the Atrox took the hit instead of the cruiser the Atrox wouldn't have lived to do that DPS, and it wouldn't be a huge DPS margin in the best of cases.
The beauty of the Atrox is, as opposed to a ship like the Ody that can spec hard down any one road and do very well, the Atrox can soak an apprecable amount of damage, deal a crazy amount of damage, heal like a woman possesed, and have a full complement of sci tricks all at the same time. It suffers by not hitting quite the peak in any one of those areas ever. (Well, unless your in a pug of bads. A good Atrox can do more then an entire group of bads combined...)
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Bitemepwe's point was that a huge change was asked for in regards to Federation cruisers, and to maintain parity the exact same change should be implemented for the KDF equivalent.
There was absolutely nothing in there about "well, the Feds get XYZQ and W, therefore all of that should be added to KDF ships".
Secondly, do you really want to defend the position that there's no science ship disparity when the only KDF science ship is one you have to drop twenty bucks on?
Because some 1000 more hull hitpoints is really not a real big advantage if you could have DHCs and a higher turnrate and more tactical BOFF&Console layout in exchange.
Healing and Resistances is already so high in STO, some thousand more Hull Hitpoints don't carry much weight IMO. Originally Starfleet Cruisers got more hull in order to wear an enemy down the longer a fight lasted, but today even a Escorts can outheal a Starfleet cruisers weapons damage with ease.
So i would say Cryptics devs should increase Klingon Cruiser Hull to make them equal to Starfleet Cruisers Hull Hitpoints. Starfleet Cruiser should get a turn Rate Boost+Dual Cannons.
So KDF Cruiser still had a superior BOFF & Console Layout and Dual HEAVY cannons. So there would be no reason to moan for the Klingons, they still would have the Better Cruisers. But Starfleet Cruisers finally had some means of fighting back.
I've bought and flown a *LOT* of ships. I know what its like to buy a ship thinking "This is the one, this is going to rock" and then... meh... in dry dock with the rest...
The VQ and the Kar'Fi both blow any Fed sci ship out of the water. The Atrox is the only one even in the running, and while I favor her, the VQ is technically the better ship. Even the mighty Vesta is a poor substitute for a well flown carrier.
If the KDF were to get more sci ships, it would be more ships in mothball, and more under performing ships in pugs...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Caitian has the same impulse modifier as other Federation cruisers, so I doubt it will take more hits and crits. Turnrate may be worse, but then Federation cruisers aren't much better off either. And inertia only affects how fast changes in movement take place, so I doubt that it will affect defence value.
The only plausible explanation as to why you are not surviving nearly as well is because of the lesser Engineering capability. Regardless, the fact is that you're still putting out a lot better than a cruiser in almost every imaginable way. In a match as an Engineer with a Star Cruiser purely specced towards healing and support, I wound up with 800k heals against 1.1 mil heals from a Tactical captain flying an Atrox, and did less damage to boot. I died once, but the other guy didn't.
Furthermore, the Atrox can afford to make extensive use of Science debuffs, which not only helps your team, but also yourself. If you've flown cruisers for any period of time, you'll appreciate just how vulnerable cruisers are to being pushed around or stopped dead in their tracks.
There's only about three science vessels that actually see regular use in PvP, primarily because the rest are trash. One of them is a lockbox ship, and the other two you have to pay for. Again, the KDF aren't missing out on a lot there, and are arguably in a better position to use some science abilities.
I'm asking for a significant change to the function of Federation cruisers because I feel that at present, their specifications are far too restrictive and are becoming obsolete with changes to overall gameplay and fresh content additions. There's simply too much of a single-minded focus on Engineering, which isn't really good at anything but self-buffing and repair support. Building for damage is possible, but very tricky; using non-healing sci abilities are almost never an option. Escorts and science vessels are not nearly as inflexible cruisers are in this respect, and even KDF battlecruisers are slightly better off there than Federation cruisers.
That's why I suggest replacing some specialized slots on Federation cruisers with a Universal Console slot and two Universal BOff stations, along with an increase in turn rate. They will retain their Cmdr Eng station and require at least two BOff stations to be a set specialization, but two other stations would be changed over to either two Lts or one Lt Cmdr and one Ens.
I have spent much time in a cruiser, I just don't find the problems to be as severe as made out to be. 90% of the problem can be fixed by using a single cannon build and dropping the beams other then one for BO or the romulan beam for BO and the 3pc. Beams I dislike. I've never found a way to make them perform adequatlely.
I wonder why my Atrox splats so much more often, then. Must be the eng skills meaning more then I valued them.
Edit: Or I might get a god complex behind helm and take on more then I can handle /giggle.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
"With the introduction of increasing numbers of heavy carrier vessels..."
Really, where are all these carrier vessels? I ask this because in my experience I don't see them being played. Yes, you do see the occasional one, but Id say that in the Federation faction at least, they're pretty rare. :-)
Most people see a strong carrier pilot, go OMG OP!!!!, rush out, gear one up, and then... They seem to disappear.
The Carriers themselves rock, but piloting one is a labor of love at times. Even I say TRIBBLE it and hop in my Beta Vector for a change, and I love my Atrox.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Well, there are a lot more carrier vessels out there now than there have been since the beginning of the last year, both in terms of overall number and type.
The point of concern that I have is that a lot of carriers have similar characteristics and capabilities as Federation cruisers while being able to do more. At this rate, I feel that cruisers are going to be in a position where the entire type becomes more or less pointless because there are ships out there that do everything they do and more.