The problem as I see it, and why many people might be crying "moar tac" is not necessarily due to feelings of entitlement like others are trying to point out but the current state of the game and how its been for quite a while now.
I'm a support player at my core. I've always played support roles (mostly tanking or team buffing sometimes healing). The problem is support roles have little to no use for most of the game in its current state. I wish that wasn't the case honestly, however aside from a few elite queues support isn't really needed. There is very little a group of escorts or battlecruisers can't do on their own without support craft. In fact, there are instances where lack of dps from one player can negatively affect the out come of the queue. A lot of the game is geared to doing as much damage as possible whether gated that way or being overrun when not killing fast enough.
I play tanking roles in the game in space and on ground, lets face it dps is still the most effective way of gaining and sustaining aggro. Most to all ships have their own way of self sustaining and healing and only on the hardest queues is there a real need for a dedicated healer.
People are calling for more tactical options because that's the direction the game has pushed us. My main is a tactical officer that has been playing since beta and leveled up in science ships for RP and support purposes. I'm not the type of person that yells MOAR PEW PEW. I prefer support and wish there was a bigger need for balanced teams. But there is little need for dedicated support craft. That is where my disappointment stems from with this ship. I understand the need to keep the stats above par with lock box ships but seeing the vonph stats on paper makes this ship look silly with where the game stands currently.
It's OK to have different camps on the subject but I wish people wouldn't attack each other and just look at it logically. But I guess this is the internet and that's what happens.
People act like this game is so hard its impossible to play without high DPS, its not, its not a hard game at all, the Jupiter Carrier will still deal more then enough damage to blow up your enemies.
I am so torn on this ship. I only have 2 fed characters, 7 KDF, and 3 Romulans.
I also love dreadnought carriers. My KDF main has the Narcine & SheShar, while my Ferasan Tact has the Jem Dreadnought & HEC.
So I certainly want the KDF & Rom to get some carrier love.
That said my primary Fed is still rocking her T5U Fleet Nebula and occasionally her Yamato.
The Jupiter while not visually preferable, is the perfect platform for sliding my Nebula build over. I lose the secondary deflector, 3 base turn, and SA, while gaining Intel abilities & 2 hangar bays.
I'm not sure yet whether I want the trait or to just skip to the Fleet Version.
Using Yellowstones and transporting Chroniton torps over could be fun.
Thanks for the Advanced Light Cruiser, Allied Escort Bundles, Jem-Hadar Light Battlecruiser, and Mek'leth
New Content Wishlist
T6 updates for the Kamarag & Vor'Cha
Heavy Cruiser & a Movie Era Style AoY Utility Cruiser
We could have saved a lot of tempers fraying, fractious arguments and free time wasted if the design process had of had more tiers.
Phase 1: Choose the skin (check).
Phase 2: Choose the hull, shield, turn rate, defence, weapons, console and hangar set up.
Phase 3: Choose the Boff layout.
In theory for phase 2 you could have 8 models for each where an increase in slots for one thing impacts radically on what you have available for the other. Players choosing the trade-off.
Phase 3 would be where you experiment with different primary layouts and give alternative options for the specialization.
The advantage of this is that the devs can retain a degree of control over what options are offered and after the event, the only people that those unsatisfied with the outcome can moan at... is the player base itself... and it would be self defeating because they would have de facto already lost the argument by way of democratic voting.
the problem with letting players vote for 2 and 3 is that the community would no doubt abuse that to create something terribly OP that would eventually be changed anyway. I mean look what everyone is asking for. People want this to be a super special awesome god like war carrier with super tactical abilities and a turn rate unbefitting its size. where the pets are just there to look pretty. People wanted a carrier where they have to put no thought into HOW to play it, where they can just shoot and turn on a dime and basically do the same thing as they have with all other ships.
Boring. God forbid the devs should actually CHALLENEGE the players to having to use their poor under developed male brains for once. oops but i forgot that guys don't like to use those things. God forbid you should have to actually strategize to use a ship that requires a different style of play. Maybe you'd even like doing something different for once.
That the only thing Cryptic got wrong, was thinking its players had any kind of imagination.
We could have saved a lot of tempers fraying, fractious arguments and free time wasted if the design process had of had more tiers.
Phase 1: Choose the skin (check).
Phase 2: Choose the hull, shield, turn rate, defence, weapons, console and hangar set up.
Phase 3: Choose the Boff layout.
In theory for phase 2 you could have 8 models for each where an increase in slots for one thing impacts radically on what you have available for the other. Players choosing the trade-off.
Phase 3 would be where you experiment with different primary layouts and give alternative options for the specialization.
The advantage of this is that the devs can retain a degree of control over what options are offered and after the event, the only people that those unsatisfied with the outcome can moan at... is the player base itself... and it would be self defeating because they would have de facto already lost the argument by way of democratic voting.
the problem with letting players vote for 2 and 3 is that the community would no doubt abuse that to create something terribly OP that would eventually be changed anyway. I mean look what everyone is asking for. People want this to be a super special awesome god like war carrier with super tactical abilities and a turn rate unbefitting its size. where the pets are just there to look pretty. People wanted a carrier where they have to put no thought into HOW to play it, where they can just shoot and turn on a dime and basically do the same thing as they have with all other ships.
Boring. God forbid the devs should actually CHALLENEGE the players to having to use their poor under developed male brains for once. oops but i forgot that guys don't like to use those things. God forbid you should have to actually strategize to use a ship that requires a different style of play. Maybe you'd even like doing something different for once.
That the only thing Cryptic got wrong, was thinking its players had any kind of imagination.
Yeah, but look at what they did with the visual design: They offered us eight predetermined variants and let us vote the best (least repulsing) out of them. They could have done the same with the boff layout - limiting the choice to stuff that sits in line with their idea of a fed carrier, but with small variations. People still wouldn't be able to turn it into an over-tac'd dreadnaught carrier, but they would at least be able to influence the carrier's flavour to hopefully be more to their liking...
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
Well we the community voted for this ship, perhaps Cryptic should have given us a vote on whether it was mainly tac/sci/eng, orientated and int/pil/com, combination? just a thought
To be honest, when they first mentioned this who community built ship ... I was left feeling like they were going to include the community in having a voice of what powers / boff seats would be on this bird.
Of course, they may have felt it would have left us with a TAC ship and wanted to avoid that ... or ... thought it would have caused a bunch of arguing and forum fires.
But I guess we could look at it this way. They may be frustrated with the conversations and arguments, but likely are listening to what people are saying ... AND ... it wasn't released this week so there is still time to tinker under the hood if they wanted to.
They could have done the same with the boff layout - limiting the choice to stuff that sits in line with their idea of a fed carrier, but with small variations. People still wouldn't be able to turn it into an over-tac'd dreadnought carrier, but they would at least be able to influence the carrier's flavour to hopefully be more to their liking...
Thank you. Yes, this is along the lines of what I was driving at. This is what I meant when I said devs could retain a degree of control over the evolution by only allowing a few options (I nominally went for 8 variants of console/setup and boff layout simply because that matched the number of skin templates.... there's no reason why it couldn't be less options if it were more practicable).
And obviously the boff and console/setup tier selection wouldn't be concurrent. The Devs could temper the 3rd tier to ensure that the danger of overpowering could be held in check.
Now maybe my initial concept of including things like the hangar numbers, secondary deflector, hull, shield, defence, power bonus and turn all together were a bit extreme (I was trying to meet everybody halfway - guess it's the quickest way to pee off hardliners on both sides of the fence), but it's the principle that was the important part of what I'm saying.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
So is it really too much to ask that the Jupiter V2.0 is actually a Jupiter V2.0, and not an Atrox V1.5?
Yes. It is. Because you were told, from the very beginning, that this was going to be a carrier. Not a Dreadnought. Not explicitly an upgraded Jupiter. A carrier. You idiots voted for the Jupiter-esque design, decided for yourselves it would be a Jupiter Dreadnought, and are acting disappointing when it turned out to be exactly the thing they promised instead of the thing you deluded yourselves into thinking it was going to be.
You know, I don't appreciate being called an idiot, especially by someone who doesn't know me, and who I haven't done anything to offend you (If my post really did offend you, I'm sorry, but even still JUST SKIP IT NEXT TIME!!!).
And besides, am I the only one who read the Dev Blog? Cause it states, and I quote: "Very early on, we were pretty sure this ship could potentially replace the Jupiter classDreadnought."
And this right here is a quote from Cryptic themselves, so excuse me getting excited of the potential of this ship.
Granted, it only says potentially, but even still, is it too much to assume that this ship could be both a Carrier and a Dreadnought (Narcine, for example)?
P.S. On a side note to Cryptic: Saw the Jupiter model in the Foundry. Got to say I really love it. It's the perfect Carrier with its size and those hangers. I might buy it, despite my reservations primarily about the Boff layout, simply because its possibly the best designed carrier in-game thus far.
P.P.S. After reading through most of the forum, I guess I should make it clear that I'm not a Tac player, and I don't want this carrier to be any more tactical. I'm an engineer. I just want it to be called a Dreadnought Carrier for the sake of the original Jupiter-class.
I would also like it if the Lt. Sci was another universal instead.
Oh look, now I can have both hull and shield healing AND intel slots (really should be command, though).
"sighs" this again?
The NPC version of the Jupiter is classified as a Dreadnought...since there is no player version it has no player classification.
The NPC version of the Vo'Quv is also classified as a Dreadnought...but there is a player version of the Vo'Quv and what is it? I'm glad you asked! The player Vo'Quv is a Sci heavy carrier...just like this new Jupiter!
So there you go...you got a replacement to the Jupiter Dreadnought!
This is a bogus argument... that's like saying.. there is a Defiant escort NPC.. but when the player version came out it was a carrier... but because there was no player defiant that the player defiant can be classed as anything...
don't bring up the NPC uses sci ability's.. as all player ships in STO can use sci powers.. sci powers, consoles, bridge officers are able to be used on any ship.
No it isn't...just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it isn't
So is it really too much to ask that the Jupiter V2.0 is actually a Jupiter V2.0, and not an Atrox V1.5?
Yes. It is. Because you were told, from the very beginning, that this was going to be a carrier. Not a Dreadnought. Not explicitly an upgraded Jupiter. A carrier. You idiots voted for the Jupiter-esque design, decided for yourselves it would be a Jupiter Dreadnought, and are acting disappointing when it turned out to be exactly the thing they promised instead of the thing you deluded yourselves into thinking it was going to be.
You know, I don't appreciate being called an idiot, especially by someone who doesn't know me, and who I haven't done anything to offend you (If my post really did offend you, I'm sorry, but even still JUST SKIP IT NEXT TIME!!!).
And besides, am I the only one who read the Dev Blog? Cause it states, and I quote: "Very early on, we were pretty sure this ship could potentially replace the Jupiter classDreadnought."
And this right here is a quote from Cryptic themselves, so excuse me getting excited of the potential of this ship.
Granted, it only says potentially, but even still, is it too much to assume that this ship could be both a Carrier and a Dreadnought (Narcine, for example)?
P.S. On a side note to Cryptic: Saw the Jupiter model in the Foundry. Got to say I really love it. It's the perfect Carrier with its size and those hangers. I might buy it, despite my reservations primarily about the Boff layout, simply because its possibly the best designed carrier in-game thus far.
P.P.S. After reading through most of the forum, I guess I should make it clear that I'm not a Tac player, and I don't want this carrier to be any more tactical. I'm an engineer. I just want it to be called a Dreadnought Carrier for the sake of the original Jupiter-class.
I would also like it if the Lt. Sci was another universal instead.
Oh look, now I can have both hull and shield healing AND intel slots (really should be command, though).
"sighs" this again?
The NPC version of the Jupiter is classified as a Dreadnought...since there is no player version it has no player classification.
The NPC version of the Vo'Quv is also classified as a Dreadnought...but there is a player version of the Vo'Quv and what is it? I'm glad you asked! The player Vo'Quv is a Sci heavy carrier...just like this new Jupiter!
So there you go...you got a replacement to the Jupiter Dreadnought!
This is a bogus argument... that's like saying.. there is a Defiant escort NPC.. but when the player version came out it was a carrier... but because there was no player defiant that the player defiant can be classed as anything...
don't bring up the NPC uses sci ability's.. as all player ships in STO can use sci powers.. sci powers, consoles, bridge officers are able to be used on any ship.
No it isn't...just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it isn't
Dur.. you proved my point... When the Vo'Quv came out there was no such thing as a player dreadnought.. we now have them.. so if anything its Vo'Quv player ship that's miss labeled and is need of a update.. gee a employee of cryptic has said they are going to be adding a KDF and Romulan version... it would be a great time to fix a issue that's been there.. and bring a slow turn rate 3/3 weapon, hybrid sci, massive ships up to par with what end game is now..... you hardly ever see a Vo'Quv or Atrox in end game advanced game play.. do to them being way below the curve... in fact I think its been over a year since i've seen a Vo'Quv in any mode even basic 5 man and longer then that for the Atrox.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
So is it really too much to ask that the Jupiter V2.0 is actually a Jupiter V2.0, and not an Atrox V1.5?
Yes. It is. Because you were told, from the very beginning, that this was going to be a carrier. Not a Dreadnought. Not explicitly an upgraded Jupiter. A carrier. You idiots voted for the Jupiter-esque design, decided for yourselves it would be a Jupiter Dreadnought, and are acting disappointing when it turned out to be exactly the thing they promised instead of the thing you deluded yourselves into thinking it was going to be.
You know, I don't appreciate being called an idiot, especially by someone who doesn't know me, and who I haven't done anything to offend you (If my post really did offend you, I'm sorry, but even still JUST SKIP IT NEXT TIME!!!).
And besides, am I the only one who read the Dev Blog? Cause it states, and I quote: "Very early on, we were pretty sure this ship could potentially replace the Jupiter classDreadnought."
And this right here is a quote from Cryptic themselves, so excuse me getting excited of the potential of this ship.
Granted, it only says potentially, but even still, is it too much to assume that this ship could be both a Carrier and a Dreadnought (Narcine, for example)?
P.S. On a side note to Cryptic: Saw the Jupiter model in the Foundry. Got to say I really love it. It's the perfect Carrier with its size and those hangers. I might buy it, despite my reservations primarily about the Boff layout, simply because its possibly the best designed carrier in-game thus far.
P.P.S. After reading through most of the forum, I guess I should make it clear that I'm not a Tac player, and I don't want this carrier to be any more tactical. I'm an engineer. I just want it to be called a Dreadnought Carrier for the sake of the original Jupiter-class.
I would also like it if the Lt. Sci was another universal instead.
Oh look, now I can have both hull and shield healing AND intel slots (really should be command, though).
"sighs" this again?
The NPC version of the Jupiter is classified as a Dreadnought...since there is no player version it has no player classification.
The NPC version of the Vo'Quv is also classified as a Dreadnought...but there is a player version of the Vo'Quv and what is it? I'm glad you asked! The player Vo'Quv is a Sci heavy carrier...just like this new Jupiter!
So there you go...you got a replacement to the Jupiter Dreadnought!
This is a bogus argument... that's like saying.. there is a Defiant escort NPC.. but when the player version came out it was a carrier... but because there was no player defiant that the player defiant can be classed as anything...
don't bring up the NPC uses sci ability's.. as all player ships in STO can use sci powers.. sci powers, consoles, bridge officers are able to be used on any ship.
No it isn't...just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it isn't
Dur.. you proved my point... When the Vo'Quv came out there was no such thing as a player dreadnought.. we now have them.. so if anything its Vo'Quv player ship that's miss labeled and is need of a update.. gee a employee of cryptic has said they are going to be adding a KDF and Romulan version... it would be a great time to fix a issue that's been there.. and bring a slow turn rate 3/3 weapon, hybrid sci, massive ships up to par with what end game is now..... you hardly ever see a Vo'Quv or Atrox in end game advanced game play.. do to them being way below the curve... in fact I think its been over a year since i've seen a Vo'Quv in any mode even basic 5 man and longer then that for the Atrox.
No...NPC ships have different labels than player ships.
The npc one is called a Dreadnought Battlecruiser where the player one is just a Battlecruiser...and the Bortasqu' was released after the Fed Dreadnought was...
So sorry...you're wrong and as much as you and the people who were wrong like to pretend they were right...bzzzz...wrong.
Figured I'd throw in some extra credit in case...so you know.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
Any other false claims you would like to make...
Awww...how cute...you tried to compare the Sarr Theln which is fleet level with the C-Store Jupiter which isn't! Sorry...you may fool the uneducated...but the fleet version has..
I like the stats of the Jupiter. That said, There is one single point of contention that I have with it: the Intel slots.
For a Carrier, one would think that it would have Command rather than Intel, simply due to it being more of a command and control type vessel.
However, after some thought, Intel Makes sense too. The Intel Spec tree is mostly shield related, one of Sci's biggest features. The skills for intel also seem very science-laced (viral impulse, the modded subnuke, intel team that allows for pinpoint strikes), whereas Command is much more engineering, and Pilot is obviously tac.
Mother of God, forgive those Dense Blind and Deaf people......
I really wanted to stay out, cause fighting against the Windmills is so tiresome, i was passivly watching the Conversation going on, but every self righteous, narrow minded, FAR from every logic and utterly stupid comment / post of you arrogant, sellfish and ignorant people was like a kick in the down section, maybe you dont noticed it but you guys are NOT the Center of the World! There are others around you too, believe it or not!
This damn Ship was Build together with the WHOLE Community (the "build your OWN ship" Contest) but when it was done, only a third (sci captains) of the community got what everyone worked on, while 2/3 or in other words everyone else got ignored got neglected got NOTHING
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
Reading the same TRIBBLE again and again hurts so badly....so changing the damn LtComEng to a LtComUni would turn that ship into a DEATHMACHINE is that what you are trying to tell us? So in your Questionable logic, EVERY ship that has a LtComTac or LtComUni is such a Deathmachine than? really? omg......and gues what...there are people who would like to fly something that has a STARFLEET Design on it, like this ship has, without having to sacrifice efficiency compared to other ships, so could you all stop that stupid argument?
Regarding the Dauntless....its a Tac Focused Science Ship and a Fine one, I DO fly it and i LIKE IT, and i have no idea what Game you Play, but in STO i see more than enough of those Flying around, at least the same amount IF not even more than Scryers!
But since the Scryer is also a heavy Science Ship that only aims for Pure Science Captains, iam not Surprised that you mentioned that thing.....
you people are pathetic, one could say whatever he wants, you would still throw every single possible counter argument known to mankind at us (valid or not) trying to justify your sellfish and self rightous arguments why ONLY YOU should be able to use that new ship that EVERYONE was involved in (building it) while EVERYONE else gets nothing but a Bitter Middlefinger.......
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
Any other false claims you would like to make...
Awww...how cute...you tried to compare the Sarr Theln which is fleet level with the C-Store Jupiter which isn't! Sorry...you may fool the uneducated...but the fleet version has..
Jupiter Fleet is 57,200 vs Sarr at 56000
Jupiter Fleet shield mod is 1.375 vs 1.2
So yeah...sorry...still wrong.
Are you really comparing 1200 hp.. really? I mean really.. that's less then a 1/3 of one beam array hit... man you guys are laughable..
How about this... you tell me how the Breen carrier.. a SCI CARRIER as its listed.. has an anyway broken the game meta.. plz show me this.. if you can prove the more tac oriented breen sci carrier broke the game ill stop arguing the point.. a ship that everyone could get for free.. a ship that more people would have then this 3000z ship or 3500 zen fleet ship.. please tell me this..
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
Any other false claims you would like to make...
Awww...how cute...you tried to compare the Sarr Theln which is fleet level with the C-Store Jupiter which isn't! Sorry...you may fool the uneducated...but the fleet version has..
Jupiter Fleet is 57,200 vs Sarr at 56000
Jupiter Fleet shield mod is 1.375 vs 1.2
So yeah...sorry...still wrong.
Are you really comparing 1200 hp.. really? I mean really.. that's less then a 1/3 of one beam array hit... man you guys are laughable..
How about this... you tell me how the Breen carrier.. a SCI CARRIER as its listed.. has an anyway broken the game meta.. plz show me this.. if you can prove the more tac oriented breen sci carrier broke the game ill stop arguing the point.. a ship that everyone could get for free.. a ship that more people would have then this 3000z ship or 3500 zen fleet ship.. please tell me this..
Not everyone can get it for free. If someone started playing STO or maybe took a break last year they would never have a chance of getting breen carrier, ever
One last attempt before I throw my hands up and simply decide that some people can and should never be pleased.
In game design there is this thing called a power curve. It indicates the average power of a given item or skill at that level of the metagame. Put something below that curve and it will never see play, because you'd be "doing it wrong". We've had this with the old Star Cruiser and Exploration Cruiser. Put something above the curve however, and nothing else will see play again, because you'd be a fool to play anything else and the power curve needs to be adjusted upwards in what we call "power creep". The Scimitar is a prime example for a ship far too high above the power curve.
Power creep led to every playable T6 cruiser having the ability to slot a LtC. Tac. But at that we're more or less at an equilibrium, which makes them balanced among each other. 4/4 weapons, LtC. Tac. Now if you introduced a ship that's 4/3 or 4/4 with a LtC. Tac., with the additional ability to field two wings of pets, guess what would happen? You'd have to be a bloody fool to fly anything else, until they introduced either the 5/5 cruiser or the 4/3 escort with two hangars.
Some of us don't want power creep. We're perfectly fine with being on the curve, which is where the Jupiter resides.
Oh what self righteous nonsense... the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought Carrier and Kar'Fi Battle Carrier and the Xindi-Aquatic Narcine Dreadnought Carrier would like to say high.. all 4/3 lt cmd tac with 2 hanger ships....
How much does the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought and Xindi-Aquatic Dreadnought sell for on the exchange? Also the Kar'Fi has a lower hull over other carriers. I'm sure if the Jupiter has the same done to it people would scream "It's so big, why does it have crappy hull points!"
Oh give me a break.. man you people are stretching... hull hit points... ya because that's such a huge thing people bring up... come up with something better for your pathetic argument... /yawn
Actually, we don't have to. This is for your benefit. We're giving you guys the courtesy of an explanation, so you may realize that your suggestions are rejected by the devs, because they are not good for the health of the game. It doesn't matter if you believe us or not. The devs got it right anyway. As for you: You can either see the merit of our points or keep stomping your feet. Whatever makes your day better.
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
Any other false claims you would like to make...
Awww...how cute...you tried to compare the Sarr Theln which is fleet level with the C-Store Jupiter which isn't! Sorry...you may fool the uneducated...but the fleet version has..
Jupiter Fleet is 57,200 vs Sarr at 56000
Jupiter Fleet shield mod is 1.375 vs 1.2
So yeah...sorry...still wrong.
Are you really comparing 1200 hp.. really? I mean really.. that's less then a 1/3 of one beam array hit... man you guys are laughable..
How about this... you tell me how the Breen carrier.. a SCI CARRIER as its listed.. has an anyway broken the game meta.. plz show me this.. if you can prove the more tac oriented breen sci carrier broke the game ill stop arguing the point.. a ship that everyone could get for free.. a ship that more people would have then this 3000z ship or 3500 zen fleet ship.. please tell me this..
Not really...but 15.5% shields is a large difference...so 15% less shields just so I can have a Lt Cmdr Tac is a big chunk.
Mother of God, forgive those Dense Blind and Deaf people......
I really wanted to stay out, cause fighting against the Windmills is so tiresome, i was passivly watching the Conversation going on, but every self righteous, narrow minded, FAR from every logic and utterly stupid comment / post of you arrogant, sellfish and ignorant people was like a kick in the down section, maybe you dont noticed it but you guys are NOT the Center of the World! There are others around you too, believe it or not!
This damn Ship was Build together with the WHOLE Community (the "build your OWN ship" Contest) but when it was done, only a third (sci captains) of the community got what everyone worked on, while 2/3 or in other words everyone else got ignored got neglected got NOTHING
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
Reading the same TRIBBLE again and again hurts so badly....so changing the damn LtComEng to a LtComUni would turn that ship into a DEATHMACHINE is that what you are trying to tell us? So in your Questionable logic, EVERY ship that has a LtComTac or LtComUni is such a Deathmachine than? really? omg......and gues what...there are people who would like to fly something that has a STARFLEET Design on it, like this ship has, without having to sacrifice efficiency compared to other ships, so could you all stop that stupid argument?
Regarding the Dauntless....its a Tac Focused Science Ship and a Fine one, I DO fly it and i LIKE IT, and i have no idea what Game you Play, but in STO i see more than enough of those Flying around, at least the same amount IF not even more than Scryers!
But since the Scryer is also a heavy Science Ship that only aims for Pure Science Captains, iam not Surprised that you mentioned that thing.....
you people are pathetic, one could say whatever he wants, you would still throw every single possible counter argument known to mankind at us (valid or not) trying to justify your sellfish and self rightous arguments why ONLY YOU should be able to use that new ship that EVERYONE was involved in (building it) while EVERYONE else gets nothing but a Bitter Middlefinger.......
Finally...you admit you just want "moar tac" like everyone else! Good for you! "pats on the head"
It ever occur to you not every ship is meant for everyone? Oh no I guess you didn't because all you can say or think is "moar tac!"
Mother of God, forgive those Dense Blind and Deaf people......
I really wanted to stay out, cause fighting against the Windmills is so tiresome, i was passivly watching the Conversation going on, but every self righteous, narrow minded, FAR from every logic and utterly stupid comment / post of you arrogant, sellfish and ignorant people was like a kick in the down section, maybe you dont noticed it but you guys are NOT the Center of the World! There are others around you too, believe it or not!
This damn Ship was Build together with the WHOLE Community (the "build your OWN ship" Contest) but when it was done, only a third (sci captains) of the community got what everyone worked on, while 2/3 or in other words everyone else got ignored got neglected got NOTHING
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
Reading the same TRIBBLE again and again hurts so badly....so changing the damn LtComEng to a LtComUni would turn that ship into a DEATHMACHINE is that what you are trying to tell us? So in your Questionable logic, EVERY ship that has a LtComTac or LtComUni is such a Deathmachine than? really? omg......and gues what...there are people who would like to fly something that has a STARFLEET Design on it, like this ship has, without having to sacrifice efficiency compared to other ships, so could you all stop that stupid argument?
Regarding the Dauntless....its a Tac Focused Science Ship and a Fine one, I DO fly it and i LIKE IT, and i have no idea what Game you Play, but in STO i see more than enough of those Flying around, at least the same amount IF not even more than Scryers!
But since the Scryer is also a heavy Science Ship that only aims for Pure Science Captains, iam not Surprised that you mentioned that thing.....
you people are pathetic, one could say whatever he wants, you would still throw every single possible counter argument known to mankind at us (valid or not) trying to justify your sellfish and self rightous arguments why ONLY YOU should be able to use that new ship that EVERYONE was involved in (building it) while EVERYONE else gets nothing but a Bitter Middlefinger.......
Finally...you admit you just want "moar tac" like everyone else! Good for you! "pats on the head"
It ever occur to you not every ship is meant for everyone? Oh no I guess you didn't because all you can say or think is "moar tac!"
*Pathetic Counter Argument Detected*......like i said thick headed, i was not expecting you or your fellow thick heads to read or god beware even to understand it......
So if some people want "MOAR TAC" and "MOAR PEW PEW" than WHO the ***are you to judge them? Who do you think that you are to say that having Maximum "Spacemagic" like this ship is is ok, but wanting just a smidgin more Flexibility is a SIN, should be Forbidden, is sooo bad? (YES Tac for some therefore LtComUni so everyone can CHOOSE)
People including me asked so often...WHAT is your Problem with that? WHAT will you Loose? UNIVERSAL means YOU can still chose to put an Engineer in that Slot and you will have EXACTLY the SAME ship that it is right now, while others could have the flexibility to choose either sci or TAC (YES YOU CAN REPEAT AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, call it MOAR TAC call it PEW PEW WHATEVER!)
and the "not every ship is meant for everyone" well:
1. Thx to 3 Packs ship can be made more appealing for EVERYONE and
in this case, this ship was built together WITH the Community, we ALL participated in its creation (how often do i have to repeat this before even the last of you get that???) so therefore yes EVERYONE should benefit from it, not just a third! Saying otherwise is nothing but SELLFISH.
Comments
I'm a support player at my core. I've always played support roles (mostly tanking or team buffing sometimes healing). The problem is support roles have little to no use for most of the game in its current state. I wish that wasn't the case honestly, however aside from a few elite queues support isn't really needed. There is very little a group of escorts or battlecruisers can't do on their own without support craft. In fact, there are instances where lack of dps from one player can negatively affect the out come of the queue. A lot of the game is geared to doing as much damage as possible whether gated that way or being overrun when not killing fast enough.
I play tanking roles in the game in space and on ground, lets face it dps is still the most effective way of gaining and sustaining aggro. Most to all ships have their own way of self sustaining and healing and only on the hardest queues is there a real need for a dedicated healer.
People are calling for more tactical options because that's the direction the game has pushed us. My main is a tactical officer that has been playing since beta and leveled up in science ships for RP and support purposes. I'm not the type of person that yells MOAR PEW PEW. I prefer support and wish there was a bigger need for balanced teams. But there is little need for dedicated support craft. That is where my disappointment stems from with this ship. I understand the need to keep the stats above par with lock box ships but seeing the vonph stats on paper makes this ship look silly with where the game stands currently.
It's OK to have different camps on the subject but I wish people wouldn't attack each other and just look at it logically. But I guess this is the internet and that's what happens.
I also love dreadnought carriers. My KDF main has the Narcine & SheShar, while my Ferasan Tact has the Jem Dreadnought & HEC.
So I certainly want the KDF & Rom to get some carrier love.
That said my primary Fed is still rocking her T5U Fleet Nebula and occasionally her Yamato.
The Jupiter while not visually preferable, is the perfect platform for sliding my Nebula build over. I lose the secondary deflector, 3 base turn, and SA, while gaining Intel abilities & 2 hangar bays.
I'm not sure yet whether I want the trait or to just skip to the Fleet Version.
Using Yellowstones and transporting Chroniton torps over could be fun.
the problem with letting players vote for 2 and 3 is that the community would no doubt abuse that to create something terribly OP that would eventually be changed anyway. I mean look what everyone is asking for. People want this to be a super special awesome god like war carrier with super tactical abilities and a turn rate unbefitting its size. where the pets are just there to look pretty. People wanted a carrier where they have to put no thought into HOW to play it, where they can just shoot and turn on a dime and basically do the same thing as they have with all other ships.
Boring. God forbid the devs should actually CHALLENEGE the players to having to use their poor under developed male brains for once. oops but i forgot that guys don't like to use those things. God forbid you should have to actually strategize to use a ship that requires a different style of play. Maybe you'd even like doing something different for once.
That the only thing Cryptic got wrong, was thinking its players had any kind of imagination.
Yeah, but look at what they did with the visual design: They offered us eight predetermined variants and let us vote the best (least repulsing) out of them. They could have done the same with the boff layout - limiting the choice to stuff that sits in line with their idea of a fed carrier, but with small variations. People still wouldn't be able to turn it into an over-tac'd dreadnaught carrier, but they would at least be able to influence the carrier's flavour to hopefully be more to their liking...
No its not "for my benefit" its a bogus argument.. No its not "rejected by the devs" Fact is the devs have not even put two words on the subject other then one that supports our side of why we are posting... here it is.. for your benefit.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
Health of the game.. lets see the power creep is already way above this ship.. Cryptic adds new ships to sell them.. selling new ships makes them money.. money IS the health of the game... if they don't make money the development time for the ship is wasted.
They created the end game meta.. so no your argument of its not good for the game is mute.
The feedback for the ship is something they can read and under stand and make adjustments.. they have in the past.. You know when a certain romulan tac ship was magically turned into a tac carrier post release. Our feed back says a lot of us don't want a Atrox 2.0 and tells them that a lot of people want more options then a sci leaning build.
We say give 3 options tac,eng,sci with the same skin and just different boff and console layout. So everyone can enjoy this ship.. not just a few...
What do we hear a few hardheaded people that make every excuse under the sun.. why having 3 options is bad... a totally illogical response.
To be honest, when they first mentioned this who community built ship ... I was left feeling like they were going to include the community in having a voice of what powers / boff seats would be on this bird.
Of course, they may have felt it would have left us with a TAC ship and wanted to avoid that ... or ... thought it would have caused a bunch of arguing and forum fires.
But I guess we could look at it this way. They may be frustrated with the conversations and arguments, but likely are listening to what people are saying ... AND ... it wasn't released this week so there is still time to tinker under the hood if they wanted to.
U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
Thank you. Yes, this is along the lines of what I was driving at. This is what I meant when I said devs could retain a degree of control over the evolution by only allowing a few options (I nominally went for 8 variants of console/setup and boff layout simply because that matched the number of skin templates.... there's no reason why it couldn't be less options if it were more practicable).
And obviously the boff and console/setup tier selection wouldn't be concurrent. The Devs could temper the 3rd tier to ensure that the danger of overpowering could be held in check.
Now maybe my initial concept of including things like the hangar numbers, secondary deflector, hull, shield, defence, power bonus and turn all together were a bit extreme (I was trying to meet everybody halfway - guess it's the quickest way to pee off hardliners on both sides of the fence), but it's the principle that was the important part of what I'm saying.
LEARN TO READ.... "lets see the power creep is already way above this ship"
No it isn't...just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it isn't
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Jupiter_Dreadnought - See...npc is a dreadnought right?
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Vo'Quv_Dreadnought - Oh would you look at that? The npc Vo'Quv is a Dreadnought too!
NEXT!
Dur.. you proved my point... When the Vo'Quv came out there was no such thing as a player dreadnought.. we now have them.. so if anything its Vo'Quv player ship that's miss labeled and is need of a update.. gee a employee of cryptic has said they are going to be adding a KDF and Romulan version... it would be a great time to fix a issue that's been there.. and bring a slow turn rate 3/3 weapon, hybrid sci, massive ships up to par with what end game is now..... you hardly ever see a Vo'Quv or Atrox in end game advanced game play.. do to them being way below the curve... in fact I think its been over a year since i've seen a Vo'Quv in any mode even basic 5 man and longer then that for the Atrox.
Except it's not. It's perfectly in line with the latest Zen-Store ships. Any stronger and they'd have to lock it in a box.
No...NPC ships have different labels than player ships.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Negh'Var_Warship
See...the npc version is called a Warship where the player one is a heavy battle cruiser.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Bortasqu'_Dreadnought_Battlecruiser
The npc one is called a Dreadnought Battlecruiser where the player one is just a Battlecruiser...and the Bortasqu' was released after the Fed Dreadnought was...
So sorry...you're wrong and as much as you and the people who were wrong like to pretend they were right...bzzzz...wrong.
Figured I'd throw in some extra credit in case...so you know.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Odyssey_Dreadnought_Cruiser
The Odyssey...you can't say Gal-X was released after the Oddy...so yeah...wrong.
I don't know what you guys are on.. or just have very short memory's.
Breen Sarr Theln Carrier
56,000 @ Lv 60
Shield Modifier: 1.2
3/3
oh look a LTC TAC....
Oh look 4 tac consoles
Oh look it was FREE and we all could get it....
Oh wow.. it didn't unbalance the game or break it..... what a shock...
Federation players ask that there new Carrier has more then just a sci set up.. and everyone loss's there minds..
Yeah...and it's a battle carrier...weaker shields and hull...so why don't you go use that then instead of trying to turn yet another ship into a Tac machine? They turned the Dauntless to a Tac machine and look at it now...no ones flies the thing...I never see one...but you know what I do see? I see Scryers and LRSV's!
Pretty much everyone already said. Lobi/Lockbox/Event ships break the norm
That's because it's a t6 Kar'fi and it also doesn't have access to OSS3. There's nothing wrong with the Jupiter...
oh really.. weaker hull?
Jupiter: 52,000 at level 60.. hmm.. breen ship has 56000
Jupiter: shields 1.25 breen ship 1.2
ya that's a huge difference in shields /rollseyes.. and the breen has higher hull...
So as I already said.. the Jupiter is already under par with end game ships... even another T-6 carrier.
Any other false claims you would like to make...
Awww...how cute...you tried to compare the Sarr Theln which is fleet level with the C-Store Jupiter which isn't! Sorry...you may fool the uneducated...but the fleet version has..
Jupiter Fleet is 57,200 vs Sarr at 56000
Jupiter Fleet shield mod is 1.375 vs 1.2
So yeah...sorry...still wrong.
For a Carrier, one would think that it would have Command rather than Intel, simply due to it being more of a command and control type vessel.
However, after some thought, Intel Makes sense too. The Intel Spec tree is mostly shield related, one of Sci's biggest features. The skills for intel also seem very science-laced (viral impulse, the modded subnuke, intel team that allows for pinpoint strikes), whereas Command is much more engineering, and Pilot is obviously tac.
I really wanted to stay out, cause fighting against the Windmills is so tiresome, i was passivly watching the Conversation going on, but every self righteous, narrow minded, FAR from every logic and utterly stupid comment / post of you arrogant, sellfish and ignorant people was like a kick in the down section, maybe you dont noticed it but you guys are NOT the Center of the World! There are others around you too, believe it or not!
This damn Ship was Build together with the WHOLE Community (the "build your OWN ship" Contest) but when it was done, only a third (sci captains) of the community got what everyone worked on, while 2/3 or in other words everyone else got ignored got neglected got NOTHING
Reading the same TRIBBLE again and again hurts so badly....so changing the damn LtComEng to a LtComUni would turn that ship into a DEATHMACHINE is that what you are trying to tell us? So in your Questionable logic, EVERY ship that has a LtComTac or LtComUni is such a Deathmachine than? really? omg......and gues what...there are people who would like to fly something that has a STARFLEET Design on it, like this ship has, without having to sacrifice efficiency compared to other ships, so could you all stop that stupid argument?
Regarding the Dauntless....its a Tac Focused Science Ship and a Fine one, I DO fly it and i LIKE IT, and i have no idea what Game you Play, but in STO i see more than enough of those Flying around, at least the same amount IF not even more than Scryers!
But since the Scryer is also a heavy Science Ship that only aims for Pure Science Captains, iam not Surprised that you mentioned that thing.....
you people are pathetic, one could say whatever he wants, you would still throw every single possible counter argument known to mankind at us (valid or not) trying to justify your sellfish and self rightous arguments why ONLY YOU should be able to use that new ship that EVERYONE was involved in (building it) while EVERYONE else gets nothing but a Bitter Middlefinger.......
Are you really comparing 1200 hp.. really? I mean really.. that's less then a 1/3 of one beam array hit... man you guys are laughable..
How about this... you tell me how the Breen carrier.. a SCI CARRIER as its listed.. has an anyway broken the game meta.. plz show me this.. if you can prove the more tac oriented breen sci carrier broke the game ill stop arguing the point.. a ship that everyone could get for free.. a ship that more people would have then this 3000z ship or 3500 zen fleet ship.. please tell me this..
Not everyone can get it for free. If someone started playing STO or maybe took a break last year they would never have a chance of getting breen carrier, ever
Not really...but 15.5% shields is a large difference...so 15% less shields just so I can have a Lt Cmdr Tac is a big chunk.
Finally...you admit you just want "moar tac" like everyone else! Good for you! "pats on the head"
It ever occur to you not every ship is meant for everyone? Oh no I guess you didn't because all you can say or think is "moar tac!"
http://www.stoarchive.com/
*Pathetic Counter Argument Detected*......like i said thick headed, i was not expecting you or your fellow thick heads to read or god beware even to understand it......
So if some people want "MOAR TAC" and "MOAR PEW PEW" than WHO the ***are you to judge them? Who do you think that you are to say that having Maximum "Spacemagic" like this ship is is ok, but wanting just a smidgin more Flexibility is a SIN, should be Forbidden, is sooo bad? (YES Tac for some therefore LtComUni so everyone can CHOOSE)
People including me asked so often...WHAT is your Problem with that? WHAT will you Loose? UNIVERSAL means YOU can still chose to put an Engineer in that Slot and you will have EXACTLY the SAME ship that it is right now, while others could have the flexibility to choose either sci or TAC (YES YOU CAN REPEAT AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, call it MOAR TAC call it PEW PEW WHATEVER!)
and the "not every ship is meant for everyone" well:
1. Thx to 3 Packs ship can be made more appealing for EVERYONE and
in this case, this ship was built together WITH the Community, we ALL participated in its creation (how often do i have to repeat this before even the last of you get that???) so therefore yes EVERYONE should benefit from it, not just a third! Saying otherwise is nothing but SELLFISH.
I'm having fun!