test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Upgrading "old" ships
mirrorshatner
Member Posts: 149 Arc User
So apparently it is bad form to post in old threads (I have not "necro'd" any threads myself, but have followed after others).
So this is a new thread on the same topic as:
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=196499
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=789121
I wouldn't mind having the ability to upgrade the lower tier ships.
It wouldn't be about "an ancient TOS-Connie or NX" "being able to beat the TRIBBLE out of a Sovereign"
Some sort of upgrading system like Gran Turismo.
You can upgrade the hull, add weapon slots and upgrade Boff slots, but the maximum potential of higher Tier ships is always higher.
I.e. an upgraded Tier 1 ship is "as good" as a base Tier 4 ship.
an upgraded Tier 5 ship is the equivalent of a base Tier 7 ship (if they existed)
I would like to be able to fly the lower tier ships in just normal PvE situations at level 50.
It could be a "way around" the "ban" on a higher level Constitution class
So this is a new thread on the same topic as:
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=196499
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=789121
I wouldn't mind having the ability to upgrade the lower tier ships.
It wouldn't be about "an ancient TOS-Connie or NX" "being able to beat the TRIBBLE out of a Sovereign"
Some sort of upgrading system like Gran Turismo.
You can upgrade the hull, add weapon slots and upgrade Boff slots, but the maximum potential of higher Tier ships is always higher.
I.e. an upgraded Tier 1 ship is "as good" as a base Tier 4 ship.
an upgraded Tier 5 ship is the equivalent of a base Tier 7 ship (if they existed)
I would like to be able to fly the lower tier ships in just normal PvE situations at level 50.
It could be a "way around" the "ban" on a higher level Constitution class
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Post edited by mirrorshatner on
0
Comments
perhaps upgrading it to only 2 tiers above it so that a constitution could be used at late level 3/early 4 content, but not up against the sovy
It would make me more inclided to purchase a C store low level ship if i could use it later on as well
Yes I can see your sarcasm and contempt, but fleet modules aren't an upgrade path, they are a currency to buy a better ship.
Gran Turismo upgrades are like
Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage 3 options, with Chassis Reinforcement, Window Weight Reduction, Carbon Hood, and Carbon Hood Body Color as options.
So for any ship in STO this could be:
Stage 1 hull upgrade. Stage 2 hull upgrade.
Stage 1 front weapon upgrade (+1 slot). Stage 2 weapon upgrade (+1 slot)
Stage 1 Boff upgrade (increase Lt slot to Lt commander slot), Stage 2 Boff upgrade (increase Lt commander slot to Commander slot).
P.S. your rudeness does your credibilty no favours.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Gran Turismo was designed from day 1 to allow you to upgrade cars. It's a car simulation.
Star Trek Online was designed from day 1 to replace ships, it's a Star Trek themed MMO. It is not a Star Trek Simulation.
Fleet versions of ships is the closest we're getting to upgrading, just give the new one the same name and number and consider it a refit.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
No, but the Defiant Warp Core was itty bitty and could easily fit a Connie or Miranda. Quite seriously the statistics for low end Cruisers are flat out silly with their inability to turn and react like the Escorts that are even bigger than them. Turning an Exeter into a Cruiser/Escort crossbreed isn't beyond the realms of the imagination, especially considering how small the Avenger Battlecruiser is.
About the bit with the WW2 battleships... we DID that (well 90's tech). The only reason we haven't been upgrading them further is because the hull type of battleships itself is obsolete. You can fulfill the same role (missile cruisers) with a ship much much smaller. Which means less crew, expenses and the ability to produce more faster. Which key since, one cruise missile WILL sink a ship (unless your lucky and have really good damage control).
By your logic then the Klinks are using "obsolete" tech as well because I still see BoPs that are several hundred years old and Cruisers that are even older. And those BoPs are TINY little bugs...
Also, no duh a Constitution wouldn't fit a Galaxy warp core, but would it NEED one? The Defiant has a tiny little warp core yet it's described as having so much power that it couldn't cloak properly...
At least do a little research, please and thank you...
-Starfleet Historical Research Department
They did that before. They decommissioned the ships in the 50s. Brought them back in the 80s with latest missiles and other tech. Then finally decommissioned them permanently. After their role was no longer needed. As air and missiles took their place. Some of the American battleships was decommissioned more than once and brought back.
The connie won't need a Galaxy size core. Look at the Defiant and other smaller ships. Star Fleet uses ships of all sizes. Did Voyager have a Galaxy size core? So size don't matter as their is a role for them. If not then they are dropped. Look at the Excalibur/Vesper. Same size as Connie. All new for 2409.
And to kill off the nearly 200 year old ship theory. If you build it from the frame up with all new components and materials. Then it won't be 200 something years old. Only the blueprint would be that old that you based it off. Like take a 65 Mustang. I use all new sheet metal all parts etc. It will look like one due to I went off those blue prints. But it won't be 48 years old.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
So true, my Klingon has used his T5 K'Tinga for a while. Only put it away the other week since I got the Carrier from the gift week. When I decided to try out a carrier ship. And plan on getting back on my K'Tinga again in the future. I have no issues taking out ships.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Now Stop Beating On A Dead Horse ... At This Rate It More Like Mush Then A Horse
Now see if you had just said that instead of making up facts you might not have been instantly slapped in the back of the head by several people... :P
There's no dead horse being beaten here.
I've been suggesting an upgrade system that complements the existing ship tiers and applies to all ships.
Only a few people posting in this thread have actually comprehended that concept. You are not one of them.
Now now, if you get the mush just right you can pour it into a horse shaped mold.
Seriously though they could sell upgrade kits the way they do fleet modules and people would eat them up to bring a Miranda, Connie, or similar low tier vessel to the higher levels. I know I would love to use the Connie as a theme through the Romulan arc at minimum. The T'liss would be great to use past Nimbus. Oddly not as much attachment in me for the Klingon ships. . . . hmm.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
What I would like to see as an upgrade. Is like buy a Bridge Officer station upgrade. You get 1 per ship. That way if you want a little more Eng, Tac, or Sci ability added. Then you can get it. Some ships could use a station upgrade in some areas.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
So next I thought I would outline a possible framework for the upgrade system.
Coding
Assume that a ship can be upgraded the equivalent of three "Stages"
Hidden slots are disabled until the "stage" upgrades are applied
Existing game mechanics used:
* The Arkif got a hangar bay added after release - so there is precedent for changes
* Expansion to inventory and Boff slots are hidden until unlocked/purchased
Gameplay
Monetization
Benefits
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
Heresy you say? A lack of immersion you say? I argue that any players who don't want their immersion ruined need to paste their eyes shut. We have timeships and breen ships and elachi oh my! (pardon the tweeked wizard of oz quote) My point is unfortunately Immersion went out the airlock several years ago.
A modest upgrade to these ships isn't going to kill anything at this point.
[/SIGPIC]
I would also ask why the Connie and T'liss are tier 1 but the Klingon D7 is tier 3?
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
The battleships were recommissioned and upgraded as a cheaper and faster alternative to adding aircraft carriers. remember this was the era of Reagan wanting a 600 ship Navy. yes thery were expensive to run, but they were awesome at what they did, show the flag and American might. FYI, the battleships did not receive the full upgrade. the original upgrade design removed the after 16 inch turret and fitted a massive vertical launch facility. essentially they became mobile missile silos, capable of lanunching a couple hundred tomahawks, and still having enough VLS space to be a spare magazine for the Aegis cruiser's AAW capability.
and in the case of the battleships. it would take a lot more than one cruise missile to sink one. in fact, one captain was asked what he would do if his ship was hit by a missile. he replied "man Sweepers", because with very few exceptions, there isn't a cruise missile out there that can penetrate the armor. the battleships were decommissioned for political and fical reasons, not because they are antiquated or outdated.
Uh sir, I think they detect the torpedoes in the magazine, sir.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Geko once explained why and it's actually pretty simple:
The T'varo as it appeared on "Enterprise" was a massive anachronism.
The ship with all its details and colour is absolutely perfect as a companion for the Mogai and D'deridex in the 24th century.
That's the reason why it's in STO: because its appearance in the 22nd century was, to be blunt, total BS. And obviously CBS agrees with this assesment.
As for the Raptor: the one from "Enterprise" and the one from STO have very little to do with each other. The one in STO is actually over 100 meters bigger and a new design.
Here's the background article on the ship as it used to be available on the STO homepage:
http://www.warcry.com/news/view/89845-Star-Trek-Online-Klingon-Raptor-Revealed
To go with the aircraft comparison,
the B52 design was commissioned in the 1950s and the design is expected to have a useful life into the 2040s.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-52-life.htm
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13639_3-57413883-42/sixty-years-on-the-b-52-is-still-going-strong/
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/b8ae1a9bb99f
And that's just for the useful life of the existing airframes. If new airframes were produced then the "wear and tear" issue would be a non-factor if the design is still considered serviceable.
It might prevent it from being completely outdated by the Avenger
You'll also notice that the only designs that go so long are carriers and strategic bombers like the B-52 and the Tu-95. That's because neither of them are expected to ever get under fire. Carriers stay out of the enemy's effective range and strategic bombers are only used after air-defenses have been demolished and air superiority has been achieved. And those two tasks are not done by fighters from the 50's for a reason.;)