test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
State of the fleets: Please keep them unique
caocaopuff
Member Posts: 36 Arc User
Not quite sure if this is the place to post this. Here I go anyways.
I was browsing through the respective race ship threads and noticed a lot of requests along the lines of "Well this side has X so you should also give us X in the interests of game balance". I am personally against this and I would like to give my humble opinion of the state of each faction's fleet lineup and give suggestions for a few small changes to preserve the uniqueness of each ship class.
Since fed and KDF ships are easiest to directly compare I'll start with those. First the "cruiser types"
If we look at fed cruisers we see
- More versatile BoFF seating
- Full array of cruiser commands
- Generally lower turnrate
- Inability to mount cannons
When we look at KDF Battlecruisers we see
- Cannon mounting
-Generally better turnrate
- Innate cloaking
- More limited BoFF seating options
-Limited cruiser commands
In general I would say that these should stay as they are with respect to general concept. The turn, cloaking, and cannons of the KDF cruisers are what set them apart and I do not believe that the federation should gain access to these abilities. All canon reasons aside, to take these would diminish the uniqueness of the battlecruiser class as a whole.
With the avenger/mogh, each side made a foray into the other's territory. The federation obtained a high turn cannon mounting cruiser and the KDF obtained a cruiser capable of running aux2batt with a ltc tactical slot. While these ships have been long awaited and celebrated, I would not like to see this become the norm. They're both fine ships, just please don't make all future cruisers "crossbreeds". They should remain a rare occurrence. Also, I realize I didn't mention flight deck cruisers. This is intentional.
The cruisers for each faction also perform slightly different roles. While the federation cruiser dabbles in damage, support, healing, etc. The KDF cruiser has the odd position of holding the middle ground between escort and true cruiser due to the KDF's lack of an "escort" class, hence their higher turn, cannons, and cloaks. I'll stop here before moving to escort type ships.
I was browsing through the respective race ship threads and noticed a lot of requests along the lines of "Well this side has X so you should also give us X in the interests of game balance". I am personally against this and I would like to give my humble opinion of the state of each faction's fleet lineup and give suggestions for a few small changes to preserve the uniqueness of each ship class.
Since fed and KDF ships are easiest to directly compare I'll start with those. First the "cruiser types"
If we look at fed cruisers we see
- More versatile BoFF seating
- Full array of cruiser commands
- Generally lower turnrate
- Inability to mount cannons
When we look at KDF Battlecruisers we see
- Cannon mounting
-Generally better turnrate
- Innate cloaking
- More limited BoFF seating options
-Limited cruiser commands
In general I would say that these should stay as they are with respect to general concept. The turn, cloaking, and cannons of the KDF cruisers are what set them apart and I do not believe that the federation should gain access to these abilities. All canon reasons aside, to take these would diminish the uniqueness of the battlecruiser class as a whole.
With the avenger/mogh, each side made a foray into the other's territory. The federation obtained a high turn cannon mounting cruiser and the KDF obtained a cruiser capable of running aux2batt with a ltc tactical slot. While these ships have been long awaited and celebrated, I would not like to see this become the norm. They're both fine ships, just please don't make all future cruisers "crossbreeds". They should remain a rare occurrence. Also, I realize I didn't mention flight deck cruisers. This is intentional.
The cruisers for each faction also perform slightly different roles. While the federation cruiser dabbles in damage, support, healing, etc. The KDF cruiser has the odd position of holding the middle ground between escort and true cruiser due to the KDF's lack of an "escort" class, hence their higher turn, cannons, and cloaks. I'll stop here before moving to escort type ships.
Post edited by caocaopuff on
0
Comments
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
When you look at fed escorts you see
- high turn
- versatile BoFF seating
- 4/3 weapons layout
- medium shields
If you look at KDF raptors you see
- high turn
- tac focused BoFF seating
- 4/3 weapons layout
- weaker shields than an escort
-cloaking
And finally KDF BoP
- Insane turn
- Universal BoFF seating
- Battle cloaking
-4/2 weapons layout
- Weakest shields + weak hull
Fed escorts continue the trend of the federation towards versatility. They all have Com tac slots, but some have Ltc sci and eng slots. With one exception they share 4/3 weapons and can fly a wide variety of different builds. I really don't see a reason to change anything here. They should remain versatile and flexible damage dealers with at least one type leaning towards a given bias (tac, eng, sci)
Compared to this, the KDF raptors fall sadly behind. They have no defining traits whatsoever and lose out in terms of shields and versatility. I would like to see KDF raptors become more like the Kumari. I believe that Cryptic intended the raptors to embody the aggressive spirit of the KDF with their exclusive tactical focus. However, they not been able to fulfill this role. I would propose giving them an offensive edge of some kind while preserving their weaknesses in the form of weaker shields and exclusive ltc and com tac slots with no ltc eng or sci. An extra fore weapon to bring the raptors up to 5/2 would fulfill this well, cementing their role as a highly focused attack vessel with limited healing or support ability. As it stands now, raptors have no place to call their own.
KDF BoPs. I feel that these are fine as is. I have heard people asking for 5 forward weapons or a defensive boost. The BoP have battle cloaks, incredible versatility, and now have a flanking bonus. They do not need any more offensive power. They are not supposed to go toe to toe with a larger ship and expect to come out victorious in a straight slugfest. I am aware that an excellent BoP pilot is well able to compensate for any shortcomings in defense. However, I would not mind a small boost in the defensive bonus which the BoP gains from speed, or possibly just a flat out speed multiplier. I have found that many BoPs have their "attack runs' become "suicide runs" after being unable to cloak without being slowed and/or vaporized by the sci abilities and FAW that is becoming more prevalent as of late.
The KDF needs a good, dedicated science vessel. And I've always felt that the Raptors should be close to the standards of Federation escorts, since that's what they technically are: escorts.
The Avenger Class was a step in the right direction for the Federation. I wouldn't mind seeing a few more good concepts, pioneered by other powers, experimented with by Starfleet. And vice versa.
This.
I feel like it was beautiful that the KDF got a new ship, but it really should have been more like the Star Cruiser - A Science focused, tanky and powerful support ship. Like a true cruiser. This 1-time (as it should be) "swap" of starship tech should bring a taste of each side to its other. What basically happened was the Fed's got the KDF's krabby patty secret formula and the KDF stole it back (and didn't actually get anything NEW besides 5 fore weapon slots.
Things that set the federation sci vessels apart are
-Innate subsystem targeting
-Medium turn
-High shields
-Low hull
Fed sci vessels are able to support friendly vessels with healing, but more importantly can bring huge numbers of debuff and control abilities into play. On top of that, they are maneuverable and well shielded enough to follow up using their own weapons if needed. The Vesta is the ultimate non lockbox science ship and embodies every one of these qualities. In my opinion, these ships should always stand at the top of the debuff and control type ships while being able to supplement these abilities with weapon damage.
The veranus is a bit of an oddball, but it's an older ship so I see no reason to go back and bother it now. In terms of canon, you can justify KDF sci ships with gorn or orion ships, but I believe that they should take a different route altogether. KDF "support" has nothing to do with creating anomalies or cowardly sensor bursts. Their "support" comes in the form of waves of fighter craft which rip the enemy to bits. Sadly, the full carrier category seems to be dominated by lockbox ships. I propose that we expand an improve upon an existing KDF unique carrier type: the battle carrier.
At current, this type is exemplified by a single vessel, the Kar'fi battle carrier. While supporting a full two hangars, it also mounts a battlecruiser like turnrate and a tactical focus. Expanding this type with 1 or 2 more ships seems like a good way to introduce an aggressive KDF support (science?) ship without intruding upon federation science vessel territory. The shields would not be as heavy as a fed sci vessel and they wouldnt turn as fast which would limit them to a support role, but they would be markedly more aggressive than ponderous behemoths like the atrox.
In addition maybe more traits to benefit either sci or carrier captains would further distinguish these two unique approaches to fleet support
The romulans are in crippling need of a dedicated science vessel. Please make it warbird and invent a unique mechanic for it. Please do not copy/paste a fed science ship and give it a singularity core and battle cloak.
As a closing note, I realize that many players want to fly "crossbreed' ships. And I have no problem with a few. In fact, a few already exist. I just do not want the trend to slip towards more and more of them. This is what lockbox ships are for. They are meant to let you fly a ship which may be totally out of character for your faction. This is the reason I have no problem with the voth battlecloak or cannon mounted lockbox battlecruisers. I am just asking that the main lineup of ships concentrates on refining and expanding their strengths instead of borrowing the strengths of other ship types.
I do agree that the KDF needs support (aka science) vessels. See my revived battle carrier concept. All I am against is them copy pasting the lineup of fed sci ships with new consoles as the KDF support lineup.
As to your second point. In the real world this is absolutely how it works. You learn from your enemies, adapt, and develop. It's how tech advances.
However, for the sake of the game I would like to keep these cross faction concepts separate with a few exceptions like the avenger. If both sides have both cannon armed battlecruisers and versatile full cruisers... wheres the uniqueness? It'll be perfect balance... perfect boring balance.
So, I'd say the Fed superiority in sci vessels, is fairly slim, with the edge going to the KDF, with it's bulk of sci carriers.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
I had the Vo'quv in mind actually. It's an awesome ship, especially when you consider its BoP pets. Carriers started as a KDF unique ship and so following that line they should maintain carrier superiority. I was just fumbling around for a carrier type that is unique to the KDF. Didn't mean to seem like I was ignoring it
I agree that the normal recon and DSSV don't hold a candle to the Vo'quv.
However, I would say its more or less even. The vesta and fleet recon sci even it out IMO.