test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Fix the turn rate for the D'Deridex

2456789

Comments

  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Somebody suggested being the underdog in another thread by rolling a D'd with an Eng...I posted this in return.
    Fleet D'deridex...
    Omega Torp, Experimental Array, 2x Caustic Arrays
    Hyper Torp, Cutting Beam, 2x Caustic Arrays
    3x Plasma Infusers
    Tachyo, Borg, 0Point, Nukara
    Embassy PartG [Pla], Molecular Inverter, Projected Singularity
    TS1/THY1, FAW2/BO2, APO1
    TT1

    EPtS1, RSP1, EWP1, AtS3
    EPtW1

    PH1, HE2, TSS3
    MAS(EWP), 3x DCE(EPtX), SDO(BFI)
    MACO Deflector
    MACO Shields
    Nukara Engine
    Field Stabilizing Singularity Core [OLoad]
    New Rom - Precision, Sensor Assault, Quantum Manipulation
    Omega - Weapon Training, Shield Repair
    Nukara - Shield Pen, Aux Offense, Cascade

    I don't remember if I was trying to be serious or not...and I haven't had enough caffeine yet to look at it to see if I was trying to be serious or not.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Have to figure that Cryptic didn't do themselves any favors by giving players the D'deridex as they fight the Elachi, eh?

    (OO) D'deridex
    <xx> Elachi

    (OO) facing the <xx>

    Second later...

    <xx> behind (OO)

    Then having to turn the behemoth around...

    ...yeah, have to figure Cryptic didn't do themselves any favors with that.
  • dirlettiadirlettia Member Posts: 1,632 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    This scenario is actually why I loved the DD when fighting the Elachi. As a side on beam boat, I could carry on fighting when it jumped as my beams were still targeted on it. Had I gone for cannons it would have been an issue.

    Still waiting to be able to use forum titles
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    What pisses me off to no end are the people who bring canon into this. "Oh the D'deridex is slower than the gal, and its big, so it should turn slow according to canon"

    Yeah, well according to canon, the bug ship is a fragile little POS with a single polaron beam out the nose, ships fired dual beams out the sides and back, torpedos hurt shields , and the D had 360 degree beam arrays.

    Why is this the one thing that must adhere to canon?

    Yes, there are some people who claim the D'deridex is just fine. I would also bet that those people do not PvP.

    The fact is, there is no reason to ever fly one. Everything that it can do, can be done much better on another ship.

    Yeah, RCS consoles and the stupid zen console it comes with help a tiny bit, but if they offer a +2 turn rate console with the stupid zen version, why didn't they just make the base turn 7.5? because when you apply any RCS consoles to it, it goes off the base.

    A MkXII purple RCS giving you 40% (5.5 * .4) = 2.2 for each console. 7.5 base would be 3 turn for each one. Its still TRIBBLE, but a bit better. With 4 consoles at the current turn rate would give you 2.2 * 4 = 8.8 + 5.5 + 2 (Console) = 16.3. Add in Impulse thrusters, EPtE, and maybe even a Tachyo, and you are barely breaking 19, maybe 20. And that is with using every single console space you have for turn rate.

    That is just utter TRIBBLE for turning, especially for DHCs, battle cloak or no battle cloak.

    Low turn = Not fun for the majority of players. What part of this do you not understand?

    And don't give me some BS about having to balance the ship because of Battle cloak and the singularity powers. Where was that "balancing out" factor when it came to the escorts? BoPs had to lose a lot of hull, shield mod, and a Boff slot to balance out them having BC. Romulan escorts get what, a tiny decrease in their power? Oh noes, look out.


    It is just another way for the devs to iterate that they detest cruisers and/or love escorts.

    Nobody is asking for the damn thing to handle like an escort. What we are asking for is a cruiser with a competitive turn rate like almost every single KDF cruiser. Most of us would GLADLY take a hull hit or shield mod hit instead of a turn rate hit as far as balance goes.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Low turn = Not fun for the majority of players. What part of this do you not understand?

    They do understand that. That's why they provide so many ships that turn much better than they should.

    While the majority of folks might be more than happy to have STO be some form of Space TPS...it's still Star Trek Online.

    So yep - they provide ships for both those that want to play Star Trek Online and those that want to play Starfighter Online.
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    They do understand that. That's why they provide so many ships that turn much better than they should.

    While the majority of folks might be more than happy to have STO be some form of Space TPS...it's still Star Trek Online.

    So yep - they provide ships for both those that want to play Star Trek Online and those that want to play Starfighter Online.

    Again, I do not want a starfighter. I do not want to fly an escort. I want to fly a god damn cruiser fed side that doesn't suck. And I am not alone. I don't want to fly a zippy turn rate escort. We want decent cruisers. LoR was the answer for that, until they made the turn rate 5.5. Now its WORSE than fed side.

    edit - damnit virus, you keep changing your sig on me. And you changed your avatar! Wish I could. guess you gotta pay for that.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Again, I do not want a starfighter. I do not want to fly an escort. I want to fly a god damn cruiser fed side that doesn't suck. And I am not alone. I don't want to fly a zippy turn rate escort. We want decent cruisers. LoR was the answer for that, until they made the turn rate 5.5. Now its WORSE than fed side.

    So the people that fly Fed Cruisers and are fine...er...there's something wrong with those people?
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    So the people that fly Fed Cruisers and are fine...er...there's something wrong with those people?

    If they are content with their ships being out matched, out gunned, and out performed, then maybe there is.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    edit - damnit virus, you keep changing your sig on me. And you changed your avatar! Wish I could. guess you gotta pay for that.

    Nah, it's not a paid thing.

    On the forums there should be a link for User CP - just above the Post Reply button at the top of this thread as you're reading this.

    Open that link in another tab and you'll have the options for editing your avatar and signature, etc, etc, etc.
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Nah, it's not a paid thing.

    On the forums there should be a link for User CP - just above the Post Reply button at the top of this thread as you're reading this.

    Open that link in another tab and you'll have the options for editing your avatar and signature, etc, etc, etc.

    *facepalm*

    How did I not see that?

    Oh well. Fixed now, thanks a ton mate!

    Also by the way. I have been looking all over for your thread on the new consoles for the rommie ships. Do you have a link or still have the info on the consoles and their specifics?
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    If they are content with their ships being out matched, out gunned, and out performed, then maybe there is.

    Hey, I'm not going to lie and say that I fly Fed Cruisers and think they're fine. It's just I think problem is not that Cruisers turn too slow but rather Escorts turn too fast. If there were no Escorts in the game, would Cruisers feel like they turn slow? I don't think they would.

    It's when you compare them to Escorts that suddenly they become epic snails...meh.

    If an Escort could turn twice as fast as a Cruiser (kind of like they look at base) and even if a Raider could turn three times as fast (kind of like they look at base)...I think it would be a different story. But when they're turning 4-6x as much...tada, there's a glaring issue.

    Imagine if the Cruiser after gearing/skills was turning 10-14 or so and the Escort was turning 20-30...it's a different world than 10-14 vs. 40-60+.
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Hey, I'm not going to lie and say that I fly Fed Cruisers and think they're fine. It's just I think problem is not that Cruisers turn too slow but rather Escorts turn too fast. If there were no Escorts in the game, would Cruisers feel like they turn slow? I don't think they would.

    It's when you compare them to Escorts that suddenly they become epic snails...meh.

    If an Escort could turn twice as fast as a Cruiser (kind of like they look at base) and even if a Raider could turn three times as fast (kind of like they look at base)...I think it would be a different story. But when they're turning 4-6x as much...tada, there's a glaring issue.

    Imagine if the Cruiser after gearing/skills was turning 10-14 or so and the Escort was turning 20-30...it's a different world than 10-14 vs. 40-60+.

    I don't disagree with out at all on this. But the underlying problem is then still that cruiser turn too slow compared to escorts. However, you must keep in mid that there is a base line number that cruisers are able to still be slower than escorts, but still be agile enough to be competitive. KDF cruisers meet that baseline. Holodeck Feds to not. However even if they did, they are still stuck with beams, which makes them toothless, especially fed engineers.

    Giving a 5.5 turn rate cruiser access to DHCs is like getting a $250,000 sports car, only to find out it's powered by a hamster wheel. It is functionally worthless.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Also by the way. I have been looking all over for your thread on the new consoles for the rommie ships. Do you have a link or still have the info on the consoles and their specifics?

    Not sure I ever had one with the actual specifics. I did link/quote the stuff archon said about the 2pc bonuses...other than that, I had just tried to put some of the generic info they had available together in an easier place to read. Really wish that information was made available by Cryptic though...course, they get hammered for posting stats in general. I think bran's posts now comprise of 1 line of stats and 30 lines of subject to change, lol.

    Hrmm, yeah - this blog on the ships and their consoles just provides narratives: http://sto.perfectworld.com/news/?p=883911

    Even this blog on the 2pc sets only provides narratives: http://sto.perfectworld.com/news/?p=887721

    This is where archon gave stats on the 2pc sets:
    Here are the current set bonus values.

    Enhanced Projectile Efficiency Set (T'varo)
    +10% Projectiles Damage
    25% Cooldown Reduction for Projectiles

    Enhanced Defensive Systems Set (Dhelan)
    Increases Defense by up to 10 based on flight speed
    +5 to Shield Power

    Enhanced Weapon Systems Efficiency (Mogai)
    25% Resistance to Weapon Power Drain (including from weapon fire)
    +5 Weapon Power

    Enhanced Maneuvering Systems (D'deridex)
    +2 Turn Rate
    +10 Engine Power

    Note that these are all potentially subject to change at any time, etc. etc.

    And yep, there's the subject to change thing. Notice even the "etc, etc" on it? Lol...I think they're getting tired of having to say it every single time cause somebody gets their panties bunched up if there is a change to something.

    STOwiki...er, STOgamepedia is trying to get info out there - so if folks do have it, would be nifty if they could get it posted there. Course, they need to update their Haakona stats to reflect the changes to that ship that have since taken place (was always silly to see that Cmdr Eng with 2 Eng Consoles...lol).
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Ahh perfect thank you! Sorry I thought it was you that posted the info.

    Anyway, I don't want to hijack the thread with this stuff.

    Back to the D'deridex and why its turn sucks!

    the "Canon" argument makes no sense.
  • szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    It's the size of a Bortas, maybe larger, and handles like one(out of cloak).

    I've been tinkering with and testing the ship, and I have to say I love the way the ship handles and what it's capable of. If it could turn any faster, it would probably be as 'OP' as a torpedo-Vesta.

    If you're wanting something a bit more nimble, but still quite stocky, the Mogai fits that role very, very well.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Giving a 5.5 turn rate cruiser access to DHCs is like getting a $250,000 sports car, only to find out it's powered by a hamster wheel. It is functionally worthless.

    But they gave DHCs to:

    The Vo'Quv which turns even slower.
    The Recluse which turns the same.
    The Bortasqu' boats which turn the same.
    The Jem Dread which has +0.5 Turn.

    Can't remember if the Kitty Karrier can...hrmm.

    /cough

    Not saying it's right or anything, just saying it's not new.

    I haven't kept up with drunk's latest posts on improving Cruiser turn, but imho (and I want to state this here - should probably make it my sig - but lots of things I say are just that, my opinion - they're no more valuable or less valuable than any other opinion - they're just opinions)...er, yeah, imho...neither the Bortasqu' boats nor the D'deridex should have a turn of 5.5...

    That may (or may not be) fine for a Carrier...but for a non-Carrier, it's out of place. Think that some of the ships are in need of a small boost (and that the Escort thing needs to be addressed)...and while it wouldn't be perfect, it could be better. Just an opinion. :)

    Kind of like my scratching my head at why the D'deridex has Carrieresque BOFF seating...just saying.
  • deadspacex64deadspacex64 Member Posts: 565 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    while i do agree the D needs a slight turn rate buff, not by much.

    and for all those quoting physics, it's inertia that's the turn killer, the D has plenty of that with it's large bulbous nose, if it's center of mass is about the middle of the model, even a little forward, trying to whip that ship about it's axis would put extreme stress on the fore section.

    plenty of canon eps and lines to back that up where someone wanted to perform a drastic action and was told the ship would get ripped apart by stresses trying to maneuver too fast. internal inertial dampners work for the objects inside so they don't get plastered to the bulkheads...they don't help the internal structure of the ship against induced stress.

    so 6 or 7 would/should be max for the D, with the bonus for cloaked turn rate...which cloak seems to take ships partially out of the universe into one with different rules >.>
    i ran a beam boat D myself, so the elachi were no issue, but still, after a speedy escort getting stuck in that thing was just ugh. a slight bumt to turn rate wouldn't hurt.

    a bort has a very good reason to have a slow turn rate, it's extended section and it's apparent center of mass are separated by the entire neck, a rapid turn would send that hammerhead on a journey of it's own. voq, less so, it center is much smaller, but as a carrier, it contains very heavy objects within, and doubtful high speed maneuvers would leave the hangers and the ships in good repair.

    the D has no real reason to have so a poor turn rate when compared to other cruisers. neither it's design, over all size or anything else indicates that it should be so slow.

    random bit:
    and that brings me back to a thing that's been bugging me for awhile...why aren't siege destroyers known as vomit comets or stomach destroyers? when they do their little transformation that looks cool and everything...what about the crew inside? O.o
    Dr. Patricia Tanis ~ "Bacon is for sycophants and products of incest."
    Donate Brains, zombies in Washington DC are starving.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    the "Canon" argument makes no sense.

    Heh, in one of the arguments...er...discussions on "Canon" in regard to the D'deridex - I was arguing against it being some sort of assault battleship that could conquer the Universe by itself (yes, that's how the other side came across to me).

    In that discussion though, they pointed to Tin Man and what it did to the Enterprise. I wrote that off as a plot mechanic to move the story along. I still do.

    However, what Tin Man does provide...is EPIC EVIDENCE that the D'deridex turns much better than Cryptic has it turning. Canon evidence that it turns much better. It's right there on the Enterprise's viewscreen...watch the D'deridex turn. That's straight up better turn. It's not the "better turn" that is often pointed out by folks where it's actually a combination of camera movement and the ship turning giving the appearance of better turn...it's straight up better turn from a fixed position.
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    But they gave DHCs to:

    The Vo'Quv which turns even slower.
    The Recluse which turns the same.
    The Bortasqu' boats which turn the same.
    The Jem Dread which has +0.5 Turn.

    Can't remember if the Kitty Karrier can...hrmm.

    /cough

    Not saying it's right or anything, just saying it's not new.

    I haven't kept up with drunk's latest posts on improving Cruiser turn, but imho (and I want to state this here - should probably make it my sig - but lots of things I say are just that, my opinion - they're no more valuable or less valuable than any other opinion - they're just opinions)...er, yeah, imho...neither the Bortasqu' boats nor the D'deridex should have a turn of 5.5...

    That may (or may not be) fine for a Carrier...but for a non-Carrier, it's out of place. Think that some of the ships are in need of a small boost (and that the Escort thing needs to be addressed)...and while it wouldn't be perfect, it could be better. Just an opinion. :)

    Kind of like my scratching my head at why the D'deridex has Carrieresque BOFF seating...just saying.

    Yeah, the key thing to note in every single ship you mentioned. They are all carriers. Now, I don't fly carriers so I have no idea if the turn rate is an issue for them, but I would wager that most don't bother putting DHCs on them.
  • szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Bortas is not a carrier(it would be a wonderful ship if it had even a single hanger though), and the tactical variant has a decloaking alpha strike potential that only a few other ships can match when armed with DHCs(at least before Romulans come onto the scene).
  • focht666focht666 Member Posts: 0
    edited May 2013
    Honestly the biggest problem is the D'Deridex is the iconic Romulan ship.
    Its shown to be tougher, slower and much more agile then the Galaxy and probably better armed to boot. (The Galaxy is not a warship)

    Honestly most people should wait for the Scimitar with its fighter bays, firing everything while cloaked and utterly over powered double shields.

    People want a viable D'Deridex that can be used well in pvp as a Battlecruiser. With its current turn rate its just not that useful of a ship.
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ppl do this wrong when come to battlecruiser or cruiser instead of asking for faster turning ship lets face it BIG ships do not turn like a BoP or a defiant so instead of asking for that lets ask to make the ships more tanky
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • cha0s1428cha0s1428 Member Posts: 416 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    daan2006 wrote: »
    ppl do this wrong when come to battlecruiser or cruiser instead of asking for faster turning ship lets face it BIG ships do not turn like a BoP or a defiant so instead of asking for that lets ask to make the ships more tanky

    Nobody is asking for it to turn like a BoP or a defiant. Surely there has to be some kind of middle ground between 5.5 and 23? Maybe say 9-10 like we have been asking for?

    Another point is take a look at some of the escorts in this game compared to cruisers size wise. A fleet patrol is almost as big as say a Cheyenne, but for some reason it has a much higher turn rate. The Breen ship is as big as many fed cruisers and can turn much better. Your point is not invalid.

    Asking for ships to be more tanky? For one thing, ships are plenty tanky as it is. Second, making a cruiser more tanky just further exacerbates the problem of them being less useful in pvp.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Nobody is asking for it to turn like a BoP or a defiant. Surely there has to be some kind of middle ground between 5.5 and 23? Maybe say 9-10 like we have been asking for?

    Doing so would require a complete turn rate rebalance for all Federation cruisers. Thusly, it's not going to happen.
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    The faults in the game mechanics running NPC opponents. I've cloaked, gone outside the 10km limit and literally watched NPC ships continue to shoot me (and kill me cuz the shields are down) after I should be untargetable and out of range.

    It happens so often I refuse to bother using cloak at all unless it's on a mission with objectives I can stealth to avoid combat.

    That would be becasue you cloaked while they were still firing at you. you should have cloaked when you were outside their firing range and waited till they went though their weapons cycle since any weapon fired before you cloak will still get you.

    That's the problem some people forget with battle cloak, you can't just cloak while being fired on.
    GwaoHAD.png
  • daan2006daan2006 Member Posts: 5,346 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    That would be becasue you cloaked while they were still firing at you. you should have cloaked when you were outside their firing range and waited till they went though their weapons cycle since any weapon fired before you cloak will still get you.

    That's the problem some people forget with battle cloak, you can't just cloak while being fired on.

    with romulan 99% of the time due to the singularity core level higher it is easy you are to find
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    swimwear off risa not fixed
    system Lord Baal is dead
    macronius wrote: »
    This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    That's the problem some people forget with battle cloak, you can't just cloak while being fired on.

    Well you can, it's just stupid and suicidal. But that's how you know who the good pilots are.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Well you can, it's just stupid and suicidal. But that's how you know who the good pilots are.

    Definitely going to make it easier to call targets. :)
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Nobody is asking for it to turn like a BoP or a defiant. Surely there has to be some kind of middle ground between 5.5 and 23? Maybe say 9-10 like we have been asking for?

    You want a D'Deridex to have a 10 turn rate?

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • commanderkassycommanderkassy Member Posts: 1,005 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    cha0s1428 wrote: »
    Again, I do not want a starfighter. I do not want to fly an escort. I want to fly a god damn cruiser fed side that doesn't suck. And I am not alone. I don't want to fly a zippy turn rate escort. We want decent cruisers. LoR was the answer for that, until they made the turn rate 5.5. Now its WORSE than fed side.

    edit - damnit virus, you keep changing your sig on me. And you changed your avatar! Wish I could. guess you gotta pay for that.

    Equip an RCS and hit your freakin' cloak, it improves your turn rate by an incredible level.
    ♪ I'm going around not in circles but in spirographs.
    It's pretty much this hard to keep just one timeline intact. ♪
Sign In or Register to comment.