Please for the love of god. No matter how many people ask, beg, whine. A bunch of people and Myself want nothing to do with Federation Carriers. Not just because it is not Canonly possible. But because this isn't frickin Battlestar Galactica. This is Star Trek. We are the United Federation Of Planets. Not the Rebel Alliance.
So please. Cryptic. I'm asking you this. I know you have no plans for this and I'm thankful for that. But can that be indefinably?
Please for the love of god. No matter how many people ask, beg, whine. A bunch of people and Myself want nothing to do with Federation Carriers. Not just because it is not Canonly possible. But because this isn't frickin Battlestar Galactica. This is Star Trek. We are the United Federation Of Planets. Not the Rebel Alliance.
So please. Cryptic. I'm asking you this. I know you have no plans for this and I'm thankful for that. But can that be indefinably?
Thank You.
Support plz?
While I understand the feelings about this particular subject on both side of the issue...
And goodness knows I don't really care either way how this goes...
Why should how you want to play the game, be an over-riding factor in the way other's, may want to play the game??
You can't take away something people have gone accustomed to, unfortunately. No matter how much I hate Carriers conceptually for a Startrek game...
Of course you can, the game is constantly in flux. Carriers, for instance, are accustomed to having a shield bonus but that's being removed as we speak.
As far as the notion of not liking the concept within the Star Trek Universe, that milk is spilt. In this version of the Star Trek Universe Carriers are Trek, so objections on those grounds fall flat.
I'm not overly fond of the idea of Federation Carriers nor Raiders, but I am very much in favour of the Federation getting new ship types since the KDF is now up to five, having two unique vessel types and at least one of every ship type the UFP has.
So if someone doesn't want to see more Carriers in the game, perhaps the best idea isn't to simply object to the idea, but to offer constructive alternatives. If you don't want Carriers or Federation Bird-of-Prey analogues then what, pray tell, should be introduced?
Personally I'd rather see something new and interesting introduced, something that breaks with the typical BOff setup that we've seen so far.
I'd personally like to see something more along these line:
General idea here being a fast attack beam-boat, somewhere between a Cruiser and an Escort in most respects. While lacking any Commander level BOff abilities it concentrates on having a large amount of moderately powerful Engineering and Tactical abilities to give it decent firepower and staying power.
Support and Supply Ship
Hull: 39,000
Standard Shields: 6,750
Weapons: 3/3
Crew: 250
Bridge Officers:
No Cannon Use
Innate %Bonus to Bridge Officer Powers Which Buff or Heal Friendly Ships
The idea here being a pure support ship, lacking any high-power Commander level abilities and foregoing any Tactical powers in favour of dividing all of it's focus into Science and Engineering in order to focus on functioning as a support ship. It also gets an innate bonus to abilities which affect friendly ships, making it an excellent "Team Ship." Of course, this ship would fall fairly flat as a solo PvE option.
Both break with the traditional BOff scheme we've seen to date. Neither are Carriers nor Raiders yet offer something new and different to the UFP. Just tossed together with a modicum of thought to branching out beyond anything but BOff setups. I'm sure something better could be come up with, but this is more along the lines of what I'd like to see, and is more constructive than simply saying, "Carriers? NO!" and trying to argue they aren't Trek canon while they already exist in the game.
I dont really care either way about carriers, it'd be a cool ship class to fly on the fed side but whether or not they're added doesnt really matter to me.
What bothers me is the players, like the OP here, who want to take everything the federation has and give it to the klingons, while keeping all these little 'unique' factors of the KDF faction to themselves. It's just more of this "I want what you have but you cant have what I have" mentality, and it ruins games.
Honestly, the KDF already has better 'cruisers' and 'escorts' than the feds do. They managed to whine enough about not having science ships to get those too, even though the carriers - and to a lesser extent bops - already served as science ships. Feds still have no equivalent to the KDF's battlecruisers, carriers, or raiders (bops).
Just wait, when the romulan faction is released and has a couple unique ship classes of its own, the KDF will whine until they get a few of those added as well.
General idea here being a fast attack beam-boat, somewhere between a Cruiser and an Escort in most respects. While lacking any Commander level BOff abilities it concentrates on having a large amount of moderately powerful Engineering and Tactical abilities to give it decent firepower and staying power.
I like this idea and to me it has Akira retrofit written all over it.
I feel like this is how the screen portrayed Akira would probably function in a federation battle group.
There needs to be a distinction between the factions. Klingons have cloaks, but that's simply not enough. They have Birds of Prey, with universal bridge officer stations, but that is not enough (you need to slot a few of each class anyway, or you'll be easy pickings).
Carriers at T5 are the KDFs main distinction from the Feds. Science vessels from T2 are the distinction that sets the Feds apart.
If we have two factions that are exactly alike, then there is no spirit of faction loyalty will ever develop except among a few very specific Star Trek fans.
If we want this game to appeal to a broader player base, and create loyalty among faction-specific players, the factions must be different, and not just in the look of their characters and ships.
Arguing for either faction to have everything the other does plus some is suicide for this game.
What's more, combat in PvP is meant to be something of an arms race. If they use mostly Antiproton weapons, grab yourself either a Tetraburnium Hull Armor console or a Parametallic Hull Plating console, don't whine for Antiprotons to be nerfed.
If they use AoE powers, figure out how to buff yourself against them, if they spawn tons of pets, figure out how to do some AoE damage yourself.
Arms races work with more than just technology. Tactics are also key. If they due quick ambushes and raids, bulk up on heals over time and burst damage. If they cloak, use the abilities available to pull them out of cloak. if they Alpha strike, bulk up on resistance buffs and instant heals. Fed ball, or spread out, lure & ambush, do something other than whine for their stuff.
War, and the accompanied arms race, is always a battle between technology and tactics, as new technology comes available, new tactics must be utilized to defeat it.
When Germany perfected the Submarine, the Allies developed the Wolf Pack, when the Germans started lying in wait rather than actively hunt, we invented the depth charge.
PvP is designed to be done with other people, if you expect to fight Carriers or Cruiser-tanks all by your lonesome, you're wrong. I'm sorry, you just are. Learn to work in a group, play well with others, and work together towards the common goal of blowing them out of the sky.
There is an old Klingon proverb that has been passed down from generation to generation that has made Klingons that work in a group the most feared in the galaxy.
Roughly translated it reads; "Everybody target the same ship."
There is no sane, logical reason for the Federation to get Carriers.
There needs to be a distinction between the factions. Klingons have cloaks, but that's simply not enough. They have Birds of Prey, with universal bridge officer stations, but that is not enough (you need to slot a few of each class anyway, or you'll be easy pickings).
Carriers at T5 are the KDFs main distinction from the Feds. Science vessels from T2 are the distinction that sets the Feds apart.
Raiders are absolutely a distinct class. You can slot varying amounts of the different power types, and I do that quite a lot. My BoP doesn't function like an Escort, nor like a Science Vessel, nor like a Cruiser. It is entirely unique. They also have the best manoeuvrability and a cloak that (although a mixed bag) can be handy if you build specifically toward using it.
The Raider cannot be written off. The UFP has nothing of it's ilk.
Yes, the Carrier is also a distinct KDF, and again the UFP has nothing of it's ilk.
Now, the Science Vessel is hardly what one would call unique. We have the Fleet Support Gorn Vessel. We have the Vo'Quv with high level Science Powers and subsystem targeting as a default. The fundamentals of the Science Vessel are present in the KDF. They are no longer a distinguishing factor of the UFP, the Feds simply do it better, and the KDF does a number of things better than the UFP as well, so it's not a valid argument to say that simply having an edge in this respect is enough.
Please for the love of god. No matter how many people ask, beg, whine. A bunch of people and Myself want nothing to do with Federation Carriers. Not just because it is not Canonly possible
Funnily, the "good" writer/producer on DS9 was Ronald D. Moore who went on to make the BSG remake.
And Braga gave us Insurrection, Nemesis, and Voyager.
Funnily, the "good" writer/producer on DS9 was Ronald D. Moore who went on to make the BSG remake.
See, he did the smart thing - he wanted a Carrier and went to the franchise that had one, instead of shoehorning it into one that didn't have them.
I wouldn't mind a (more or less additional) unique ship class for the Federation, but it might be noted that Excelsior and Nebula are also pretty unique due to their BO combinations and special abilities (arguably, only the Nebula has both.)
That said, for me the Federation is kinda the baseline. They should have the "big 3" ships as their main classes, and other races should have ships that are not merely copies of that and have a different focus. I'd even they even have the best of these 3 big classes already.
It makes sense to me that, compared to the Klingons, they have a lot of Science options, since if there is any focus that makes canonical sense, it is Exploration and Science for the Federation. Which is not to say other races don't have Scientists or science vessels, just that the Federation has more and makes it a goal to focus on these aspects.
See, he did the smart thing - he wanted a Carrier and went to the franchise that had one, instead of shoehorning it into one that didn't have them.
I wouldn't mind a (more or less additional) unique ship class for the Federation, but it might be noted that Excelsior and Nebula are also pretty unique due to their BO combinations and special abilities (arguably, only the Nebula has both.)
That said, for me the Federation is kinda the baseline. They should have the "big 3" ships as their main classes, and other races should have ships that are not merely copies of that and have a different focus. I'd even they even have the best of these 3 big classes already.
It makes sense to me that, compared to the Klingons, they have a lot of Science options, since if there is any focus that makes canonical sense, it is Exploration and Science for the Federation. Which is not to say other races don't have Scientists or science vessels, just that the Federation has more and makes it a goal to focus on these aspects.
Romulans definitely have a carrier.
You'd think in the 40 years since Nemesis' events, Feds and Klingons would see whether it was viable during a war - even if the carrier was a transport ship designed to aid colonies and shuttle supplies back and forth.
Ok first of all the whole argument that Fed didn't have Carriers argument is technincaly not true, Orginal the Akira, Nebula, as well as the Excellsior (sp on all 3?) were at one point or anther calssifed as carriers. It has also been suggested some were ( i read it a while back but don't rember were) that most of the modern ships in Star Fleet, have at least 1 if not 2 or 3 squadrons of fighters ( and from what i can find a Squadron is consider 4 fighter by Star Fleet standards) so to say its not cannons may be streching it just a little bit.
But now on to topic, I agree the Feds, don't need a carrier, but at the same time something that my be a decent counter to it. Say like the Hypiorn Class Battleship (please do not give us that Jupiter Dreadnought its a pretty big eye sore). That is just my opion though
...but it might be noted that Excelsior and Nebula are also pretty unique due to their BO combinations and special abilities (arguably, only the Nebula has both.)
Which I'd generally agree with except that they follow the moulds too closely. While there is some divergence, it's small, greater than we see between, say, the Star and Assault Cruisers but nowhere near what we see with stuff like the Raider or Carriers, which diverge from everything else in many, often drastic, ways.
That said, for me the Federation is kinda the baseline.
In implementation. That, however, is only because that's how it's been done, not because it fits the UFP. And really, it doesn't.
If anything we see should be seeing more variety in Fed ships, quite simply because they are a broader group who tend to perform more varied tasks. Meanwhile the Klingon Empire is a warrior race, who mostly see ships and service in the KDF as a path to glory through battle. Despite this we see the most varied and versatile ship relegated to the KDF. That doesn't make a lot of sense.
They should have the "big 3" ships as their main classes, and other races should have ships that are not merely copies of that and have a different focus. I'd even they even have the best of these 3 big classes already.
Problem here is that copies is exactly what we're seeing. The KDF has Cruisers but with cannons and cloaking. They have Escorts, but with cloaking. They now have a Science Vessel. They also have a Science-Themed Carrier and a multi-purpose Raider on top of the aforementioned copies.
It makes sense to me that, compared to the Klingons, they have a lot of Science options, since if there is any focus that makes canonical sense...
But do they really?
If you want to have Science as a focus as a Fed you get to use... a Science Vessel. That's your type. Period. You can choose a class, your flavor, but that's it. You have options, but the differences are comparatively minimal. Still, you have four choices:
Advanced Research Vessel Retrofit
Deep Space Science Vessel
Reconnaissance Science Vessel
Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit
If you're in the KDF and you want to go Science you have the option of one of the Carriers, the Fleet Support Vessel, or one of the Birds-of-Prey. You have three distinct options, and two of those have a couple of flavours. And for the KDF you have five options total:
Hegh'ta Heavy Bird-of-Prey
Vo'quv Carrier
B'rel Bird-of-Prey Retrofit
Varanus Fleet Support Vessel
Kar'Fi Battle Carrier
Now admittedly we have the Vulcan Science Vessel on the way to even those numbers, but if Science is supposed to be the UFP's bag... shouldn't they be outstripping the opposition here? Shouldn't their options also be much broader? Because they don't seem to be.
Yes, some of the KDF options aren't exactly universally lauded, but you also don't see much love for several of the UFP flavours either...
OK first of all the whole argument that Fed didn't have Carriers argument is technically not true, Originally the Akira, Nebula, as well as the Excelsior (sp on all 3?) were at one point or anther classified as carriers. It has also been suggested some were ( I read it a while back but don't remember were) that most of the modern ships in Star Fleet, have at least 1 if not 2 or 3 squadrons of fighters ( and from what i can find a Squadron is consider 4 fighter by Star Fleet standards) so to say its not canon may be stretching it just a little bit.
As I understand it (and I may very well be mistaken), hard canon is only things from on-screen in the shows and movies. Soft canon is novels, comics, video games (including STO), production notes, production models, and deleted scenes. Everything else, fan hypotheses, fan-fiction, interviews, un-done storyline, cast & crew interviews, etc.. Is non-canon. Having no standing.
There is a significant gray area, after all, what would you call a rejected script for an episode released as a novel by the original writer? Is that soft canon, or is it non-canon? What about a scene that was not originally released in TMP, but made it into the Directors cut, is it soft canon or hard canon? However, as a general rule of thumb, I think the standards above are pretty much how most people think about these things.
That makes the Akira Carrier intention (having been gleaned from a crew interview) non-canon. It's inclusion in other Trek games as a Carrier makes it soft canon.
The order of preference goes hard, soft, and then non-canon. Making the Akira (or the Nebula or the Excelsior) on-screen non-carrier use in Star Trek the reigning reality barring a carrier-functional version appearing in a show or Film.
Now, this game is soft canon, however, that only weakens the argument for pulling in Carrier-functional ships. We don't draw from soft canon to create soft canon, you draw from hard canon to create soft canon, and you draw from hard and soft canon if you're crafting fanfic.
The newest class of ship we've seen in canon is the Prometheus, and it was in no way made out to be a Carrier of any kind. If you "read it somewhere", that makes it, at best, soft canon, not hard canon, and can be safely ignored. And if you're pulling from fanfic, we get to laugh at you.
You'd think in the 40 years since Nemesis' events, Feds and Klingons would see whether it was viable during a war - even if the carrier was a transport ship designed to aid colonies and shuttle supplies back and forth.
Since when do the Romulans have a carrier?
Seriously when?
While I'm writing this I'm beginning to assume you mean the Scimitar, which had based on the hangar scene from Nemesis some 30-40 Scorpoin class Flyers which are, based on their size, roughly comparable to TNG shuttlepods (note:Shuttlepods, not Shuttlecraft)
Since the Scimitar is rather large, comparable to an Imperial Star Destroyer in volume,
I think this does not actually qualify as a carrier.
The Galaxy Class, which is small compared to the Scimitar, is listed in the TNG Manual as having a standard complement of 10 Personnell shuttles, 10 cargo shuttles, 5 special huttles like the Sphinx class and 12 shuttlepods.
That makes 37 altogether...as standard complement and it's said there is still room for more depending on the mission.
So the 30-40 we see in the 890 meter long and 1350 meter wide Scimitar is not really screaming carrier unless you consider everything that has more than 1 shuttle a carrier.
I'm looking forward to using my Miranda class Light Tactical Assault Carrier next time I make a new char.:)
If I am mistaken and you call everything that carries...something a carrier I think we'll have a sudden influx of auxilliary carriers that cna't do anything but hang in space and look boring.
As I understand it (and I may very well be mistaken), hard canon is only things from on-screen in the shows and movies. Soft canon is novels, comics, video games (including STO), production notes, production models, and deleted scenes. Everything else, fan hypotheses, fan-fiction, interviews, un-done storyline, cast & crew interviews, etc.. Is non-canon. Having no standing.
There is a significant gray area, after all, what would you call a rejected script for an episode released as a novel by the original writer? Is that soft canon, or is it non-canon? What about a scene that was not originally released in TMP, but made it into the Directors cut, is it soft canon or hard canon? However, as a general rule of thumb, I think the standards above are pretty much how most people think about these things.
That makes the Akira Carrier intention (having been gleaned from a crew interview) non-canon. It's inclusion in other Trek games as a Carrier makes it soft canon.
The order of preference goes hard, soft, and then non-canon. Making the Akira (or the Nebula or the Excelsior) on-screen non-carrier use in Star Trek the reigning reality barring a carrier-functional version appearing in a show or Film.
Now, this game is soft canon, however, that only weakens the argument for pulling in Carrier-functional ships. We don't draw from soft canon to create soft canon, you draw from hard canon to create soft canon, and you draw from hard and soft canon if you're crafting fanfic.
The newest class of ship we've seen in canon is the Prometheus, and it was in no way made out to be a Carrier of any kind. If you "read it somewhere", that makes it, at best, soft canon, not hard canon, and can be safely ignored. And if you're pulling from fanfic, we get to laugh at you.
Not that I don't agree with you, cuase i do. What am suggesting is instead of a Carrier, let current ships have a squardon or two of Fighters (cuase it has been proven Star Ships can carry more shuttle type crafts, then what is shown in a shuttle bay) and give then Federation a Battle ship like the Tyhpon (SP? and yes i know i called it a Hypiron earlier that was my mistake)
... hard canon is only things from on-screen in the shows and movies. [...]
That makes the Akira Carrier intention (having been gleaned from a crew interview) non-canon. It's inclusion in other Trek games as a Carrier makes it soft canon.
Absolutely.
However, as Darren has stated, you can't take not seeing the Akira function that way as an indication that it can't. The idea of the Akira not being a carrier is also non-canon until it is established otherwise through evidence, not simply suggested through lack of evidence.
Although we haven't seen Federation carriers that doesn't mean they don't exist, just that we haven't seen them used. We haven't seen klingons use either fighters nor carriers, yet both of these exist in the game for the klingons.
Essentially this leaves the door open for things to go either way.
We've seen romulan carriers in hard canon. They've implemented klingon carriers in the game. We've seen the Federation field light and smaller vessels in the Dominion War. There is nothing stopping Starfleet from adopting the ship type, and if it has been shown to be effective they might very well be prone to do so.
So the notion of carriers has already been embraced in this version of the Star Trek Universe, and though I don't particularly fancy the idea of a Starfleet carrier, there's certainly enough reason for them to exist in this game, if not in hard canon.
The Galaxy Class, which is small compared to the Scimitar, is listed in the TNG Manual as having a standard complement of 10 Personnell shuttles, 10 cargo shuttles, 5 special huttles like the Sphinx class and 12 shuttlepods.
That makes 37 altogether...as standard complement and it's said there is still room for more depending on the mission.
Going off a technical manual here? Those aren't quite canon and I don't recall the number of on board vessels ever being established in an episode.
However, as Darren has stated, you can't take not seeing the Akira function that way as an indication that it can't. The idea of the Akira not being a carrier is also non-canon until it is established otherwise through evidence, not simply suggested through lack of evidence.
Although we haven't seen Federation carriers that doesn't mean they don't exist, just that we haven't seen them used. We haven't seen klingons use either fighters nor carriers, yet both of these exist in the game for the klingons.
Essentially this leaves the door open for things to go either way.
We've seen romulan carriers in hard canon. They've implemented klingon carriers in the game. We've seen the Federation field light and smaller vessels in the Dominion War. There is nothing stopping Starfleet from adopting the ship type, and if it has been shown to be effective they might very well be prone to do so.
So the notion of carriers has already been embraced in this version of the Star Trek Universe, and though I don't particularly fancy the idea of a Starfleet carrier, there's certainly enough reason for them to exist in this game, if not in hard canon.
Going off a technical manual here? Those aren't quite canon and I don't recall the number of on board vessels ever being established in an episode.
Regardless, The Independence class aircraft carrier fielded during WWII only carried 30 some odd planes, that didn't make it any less a carrier.
Where have we seen a Romulan carrier in hard-canon, please?
The Galaxy main hangar has more than one deck, if were are to believe the manua.
Of course since the very idea that the Akira is supposed to have carrier ability comes from background, you should also dismiss this idea if you also intend to dismiss the TNG manual.
Besides, the shuttlepods are just 7 or 8 meters long.
The Paragrine fighter is in the 30 meters range (remeber it has a cockpit wide enough for 2 people side-by side), which would mean there are onyl ver few ship that would be even remotely capable of getting on into a hangar bay.
Independence: 190 meters long, 11000 tons.
Galaxy Class 642.5 meters, 4500000 tons (unless you want to dismiss these specs as well since they'were never stated exactly like this on screen either)
See the difference between them?
One is small (smaller in fact that most Star Trek ships) and has some 30 fighters and is specifically designed to use them therefore it is a carrier.
The other is considerably larger and has a similar number of small craft as one of several differnt features.
That is not even remotely the same.
The Yamato had a small hangar for altogether 7 planes.
Was she a carrier because of this as well?
Of course since the very idea that the Akira is supposed to have carrier ability comes from background, you should also dismiss this idea if you also intend to dismiss the TNG manual.
Please read more closely.
I have stated that we have no hard evidence one way or the other on the Akira. We have hard evidence of a single level to the hanger bay (the picture in my post).
Independence: 190 meters long, 11000 tons.
Galaxy Class 642.5 meters, 4500000 tons (unless you want to dismiss these specs as well since they'were never stated exactly like this on screen either)
See the difference between them?
Yes. One launched fighters and bombers against enemies. The other didn't.
Not that I don't agree with you, cuase i do. What am suggesting is instead of a Carrier, let current ships have a squardon or two of Fighters (cuase it has been proven Star Ships can carry more shuttle type crafts, then what is shown in a shuttle bay) and give then Federation a Battle ship like the Tyhpon (SP? and yes i know i called it a Hypiron earlier that was my mistake)
But where is there any kind of Hard Canon source for justifying actual fighters being a part of a Starfleet ships complement of carried craft?
The only Federation fighters we've ever seen onscreen were the Federation attack fighter see in DS9. They were warp-capable, and didn't need any kind of Carrier. Now, based on what we have seen of what Starfleet ships carry with them, I could maybe support a worker-bee functionality that repairs the ship out of battle, or maybe some Type 6 or better-armed Type 8 shuttles that go and gather anomalies (that send out distress calls if they're attacked0 or maybe Type 7 shuttles that will go and pick up important, mission-specific personnel instead of detouring the ship proper, or maybe even some Class 2 shuttles for short range reconnaissance (giving you number, type, and location of ships outside the normal sensor range). But fighters? No, I don't see it, and I don't want it.
Also, I would want all of these shuttles to be player-pilot-able if you so choose. I read somewhere here on the forums a proposal to fit all kinds of carried craft into the framework we have.
I'm not going to find it (mad props to the original poster, credit where it's due, this isn't my original idea), but the basic idea would an inventory per-ship based on a point system. Say you're flying a Galaxy Class, you have three shuttle bays capable of storing a large number of auxiliary craft. So you have, say, 30 points.
Each worker-bee you carry costs you 1 point. Every Shuttle-pod costs you 2, Class 2 Shuttles cost you three, Type 6 & 8 Shuttles cost you 4, Delta Flyer-like craft cost you 6, Type 8 Shuttles cost you 8, and Runabouts cost you 10. You can build up whatever variety you like within your point budget. Swapping out Shuttles requires a Starbase and a fee based on what you get.
Smaller ships, like, say, the Intrepid, have fewer points to spend because they have smaller Shuttlebays (though the actual size of Voyagers Shuttlebay is often misunderstood, look here, and then look here, the back of the main bay has a large door leading to more storage area, even for more shuttles).
Imagine warping into a new system, and your Science Officer (post crew system) says that there a number of anomalies, then, your Tactical officer chimes in that there are reports of Klingon activity in this system, but that it's accuracy can not be guaranteed. So, you decide to launch some Class 2 scouts. They give you the clear, no Klingons in-system. You launch some Type 6 shuttles to gather the anomalies while you investigate the destroyed Transports (your actual reason for being in-system).
After determining what happened, the local government asks if you would be willing to find and punish the brigands who did the deed. You call back your shuttles, and warp out. You go through sector space to the brigands base of operations. Upon warping in, you send out the Class 2 scouts again, and after a few minutes, you have the location and strength of the enemy patrols on your map, even the ones beyond your sensor range. Using that information, you fly on the outskirts of the system, to take a way in that encounters the fewest patrols. One of the patrols is more potent than you feared, with cloaked allies your scouts couldn't detect. You're severely damaged, you release a few worker-bees, and you gain a regen buff while they're deployed. They repair your ship with time to spare before you get to the next patrol.
You hit the Brigands base, and capture their leader. He's injured, and he needs the medical facilities only a Starbase can provide, at the same time, a transport sends a distress call from the far side of the system. What to do?
Dispatch a Type 7 shuttle with medical and security personnel to take the prisoner to the nearest Starbase, while your main ship goes to save the Transport. After saving the Transport and defeating the raiders who attacked it, you go out in a Type 8 shuttle, with it's better maneuverability, to gather any anomalies in-system. Some of the raiders were still cloaked, and decide to pounce on you then. You send out a distress call to your ship, and it comes barreling in to save you. You and they drop shields momentarily to do an emergency beam out, and you lose the shuttle, but are again in command of your ship. You mop up the raiders, rendezvous with your Type 7 shuttle, and take the prisoner back to face justice.
That's a Trek experience if you ask me.
But Starfleet Carriers, or Starfleet ships with dedicated fighter craft? No.
While I'm hard core Akira = Gunboat, I don't think they made it big enough to be the carrier they wanted it to be. Deck 12 is too small to hold anything but the smallest of shuttlecraft. Now, if we had marines, they would make excellent landing craft or hull breech craft...but that's another story.
At any rate, I fly an escort and I want the next escort to be something other than a flying beehive.
I don't even know why people are arguing canonicity,we're 40 years past anything canon and there already a ton of ships and such ingame that are non-canonical, whether or not carriers are canon for feds/klingons/romulans matters not, not a single damn bit.
Cryptic have stated before that if players want something they'll try to add it, fact is whether you like it or not a ton of players would enjoy flying a federation carrier class ship, if you don't, then don't fly one if they get added, nobody is forcing you, it won't hurt you in any way whatsoever.
Comments
While I understand the feelings about this particular subject on both side of the issue...
And goodness knows I don't really care either way how this goes...
Why should how you want to play the game, be an over-riding factor in the way other's, may want to play the game??
Good point.
So you're petitioning for Carriers to be removed from the game entirely? The KDF hardliners aren't going to like that.
Not Entirely. Only on the fed side. with how much people want them. they are bound to happen. I hope they dont.
Also if you read the title of the thread im saying NO FED Carriers. Not NO ANY carriers.
KDF Carriers aren't canon either. It would seem odd to object to one side making the game like Battlestar Galactica but not the other.
no carrier !
Of course you can, the game is constantly in flux. Carriers, for instance, are accustomed to having a shield bonus but that's being removed as we speak.
As far as the notion of not liking the concept within the Star Trek Universe, that milk is spilt. In this version of the Star Trek Universe Carriers are Trek, so objections on those grounds fall flat.
I'm not overly fond of the idea of Federation Carriers nor Raiders, but I am very much in favour of the Federation getting new ship types since the KDF is now up to five, having two unique vessel types and at least one of every ship type the UFP has.
So if someone doesn't want to see more Carriers in the game, perhaps the best idea isn't to simply object to the idea, but to offer constructive alternatives. If you don't want Carriers or Federation Bird-of-Prey analogues then what, pray tell, should be introduced?
Personally I'd rather see something new and interesting introduced, something that breaks with the typical BOff setup that we've seen so far.
I'd personally like to see something more along these line:
(Tier 5-Style Stats)
Frigate/Patrol Ship
Hull: 35,000
Standard Shields: 4,750
Weapons: 4/4
Crew: 500
Bridge Officers:
Lt.Commander - 1 Engineering, 1 Tactical
Lieutenant - 1 Engineering, 1 Tactical, 1 Science
Ensign - None
Consoles:
Tactical - 4
Science - 1
Impulse Modifier: 0.20
Inertia rating: 50
Power Bonuses:
+5 Weapons
+5 Engines
+0 Aux
General idea here being a fast attack beam-boat, somewhere between a Cruiser and an Escort in most respects. While lacking any Commander level BOff abilities it concentrates on having a large amount of moderately powerful Engineering and Tactical abilities to give it decent firepower and staying power.
Support and Supply Ship
Hull: 39,000
Standard Shields: 6,750
Weapons: 3/3
Crew: 250
Bridge Officers:
Lt.Commander - 2 Engineering, 2 Science
Lieutenant - None
Ensign - None
Consoles:
Tactical - 1
Science - 4
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Inertia rating: 40
Power Bonuses:
+0 Weapons
+5 Engines
+5 Aux
Innate %Bonus to Bridge Officer Powers Which Buff or Heal Friendly Ships
The idea here being a pure support ship, lacking any high-power Commander level abilities and foregoing any Tactical powers in favour of dividing all of it's focus into Science and Engineering in order to focus on functioning as a support ship. It also gets an innate bonus to abilities which affect friendly ships, making it an excellent "Team Ship." Of course, this ship would fall fairly flat as a solo PvE option.
Both break with the traditional BOff scheme we've seen to date. Neither are Carriers nor Raiders yet offer something new and different to the UFP. Just tossed together with a modicum of thought to branching out beyond anything but BOff setups. I'm sure something better could be come up with, but this is more along the lines of what I'd like to see, and is more constructive than simply saying, "Carriers? NO!" and trying to argue they aren't Trek canon while they already exist in the game.
What bothers me is the players, like the OP here, who want to take everything the federation has and give it to the klingons, while keeping all these little 'unique' factors of the KDF faction to themselves. It's just more of this "I want what you have but you cant have what I have" mentality, and it ruins games.
Honestly, the KDF already has better 'cruisers' and 'escorts' than the feds do. They managed to whine enough about not having science ships to get those too, even though the carriers - and to a lesser extent bops - already served as science ships. Feds still have no equivalent to the KDF's battlecruisers, carriers, or raiders (bops).
Just wait, when the romulan faction is released and has a couple unique ship classes of its own, the KDF will whine until they get a few of those added as well.
I like this idea and to me it has Akira retrofit written all over it.
I feel like this is how the screen portrayed Akira would probably function in a federation battle group.
Carriers at T5 are the KDFs main distinction from the Feds. Science vessels from T2 are the distinction that sets the Feds apart.
If we have two factions that are exactly alike, then there is no spirit of faction loyalty will ever develop except among a few very specific Star Trek fans.
If we want this game to appeal to a broader player base, and create loyalty among faction-specific players, the factions must be different, and not just in the look of their characters and ships.
Arguing for either faction to have everything the other does plus some is suicide for this game.
What's more, combat in PvP is meant to be something of an arms race. If they use mostly Antiproton weapons, grab yourself either a Tetraburnium Hull Armor console or a Parametallic Hull Plating console, don't whine for Antiprotons to be nerfed.
If they use AoE powers, figure out how to buff yourself against them, if they spawn tons of pets, figure out how to do some AoE damage yourself.
Arms races work with more than just technology. Tactics are also key. If they due quick ambushes and raids, bulk up on heals over time and burst damage. If they cloak, use the abilities available to pull them out of cloak. if they Alpha strike, bulk up on resistance buffs and instant heals. Fed ball, or spread out, lure & ambush, do something other than whine for their stuff.
PvP is designed to be done with other people, if you expect to fight Carriers or Cruiser-tanks all by your lonesome, you're wrong. I'm sorry, you just are. Learn to work in a group, play well with others, and work together towards the common goal of blowing them out of the sky.
There is no sane, logical reason for the Federation to get Carriers.
Raiders are absolutely a distinct class. You can slot varying amounts of the different power types, and I do that quite a lot. My BoP doesn't function like an Escort, nor like a Science Vessel, nor like a Cruiser. It is entirely unique. They also have the best manoeuvrability and a cloak that (although a mixed bag) can be handy if you build specifically toward using it.
The Raider cannot be written off. The UFP has nothing of it's ilk.
Yes, the Carrier is also a distinct KDF, and again the UFP has nothing of it's ilk.
Now, the Science Vessel is hardly what one would call unique. We have the Fleet Support Gorn Vessel. We have the Vo'Quv with high level Science Powers and subsystem targeting as a default. The fundamentals of the Science Vessel are present in the KDF. They are no longer a distinguishing factor of the UFP, the Feds simply do it better, and the KDF does a number of things better than the UFP as well, so it's not a valid argument to say that simply having an edge in this respect is enough.
Funnily, the "good" writer/producer on DS9 was Ronald D. Moore who went on to make the BSG remake.
And Braga gave us Insurrection, Nemesis, and Voyager.
I wouldn't mind a (more or less additional) unique ship class for the Federation, but it might be noted that Excelsior and Nebula are also pretty unique due to their BO combinations and special abilities (arguably, only the Nebula has both.)
That said, for me the Federation is kinda the baseline. They should have the "big 3" ships as their main classes, and other races should have ships that are not merely copies of that and have a different focus. I'd even they even have the best of these 3 big classes already.
It makes sense to me that, compared to the Klingons, they have a lot of Science options, since if there is any focus that makes canonical sense, it is Exploration and Science for the Federation. Which is not to say other races don't have Scientists or science vessels, just that the Federation has more and makes it a goal to focus on these aspects.
Romulans definitely have a carrier.
You'd think in the 40 years since Nemesis' events, Feds and Klingons would see whether it was viable during a war - even if the carrier was a transport ship designed to aid colonies and shuttle supplies back and forth.
But now on to topic, I agree the Feds, don't need a carrier, but at the same time something that my be a decent counter to it. Say like the Hypiorn Class Battleship (please do not give us that Jupiter Dreadnought its a pretty big eye sore). That is just my opion though
this.
it's obnoxious self-entitled players like the op that are ruining this community. "I don't like X so X better not be in the game, you hear me devs!"
anyway, for me +1 for carriers. would love to play one on the fed side.
Which I'd generally agree with except that they follow the moulds too closely. While there is some divergence, it's small, greater than we see between, say, the Star and Assault Cruisers but nowhere near what we see with stuff like the Raider or Carriers, which diverge from everything else in many, often drastic, ways.
In implementation. That, however, is only because that's how it's been done, not because it fits the UFP. And really, it doesn't.
If anything we see should be seeing more variety in Fed ships, quite simply because they are a broader group who tend to perform more varied tasks. Meanwhile the Klingon Empire is a warrior race, who mostly see ships and service in the KDF as a path to glory through battle. Despite this we see the most varied and versatile ship relegated to the KDF. That doesn't make a lot of sense.
Problem here is that copies is exactly what we're seeing. The KDF has Cruisers but with cannons and cloaking. They have Escorts, but with cloaking. They now have a Science Vessel. They also have a Science-Themed Carrier and a multi-purpose Raider on top of the aforementioned copies.
But do they really?
If you want to have Science as a focus as a Fed you get to use... a Science Vessel. That's your type. Period. You can choose a class, your flavor, but that's it. You have options, but the differences are comparatively minimal. Still, you have four choices:
Advanced Research Vessel Retrofit
Deep Space Science Vessel
Reconnaissance Science Vessel
Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit
If you're in the KDF and you want to go Science you have the option of one of the Carriers, the Fleet Support Vessel, or one of the Birds-of-Prey. You have three distinct options, and two of those have a couple of flavours. And for the KDF you have five options total:
Hegh'ta Heavy Bird-of-Prey
Vo'quv Carrier
B'rel Bird-of-Prey Retrofit
Varanus Fleet Support Vessel
Kar'Fi Battle Carrier
Now admittedly we have the Vulcan Science Vessel on the way to even those numbers, but if Science is supposed to be the UFP's bag... shouldn't they be outstripping the opposition here? Shouldn't their options also be much broader? Because they don't seem to be.
Yes, some of the KDF options aren't exactly universally lauded, but you also don't see much love for several of the UFP flavours either...
As I understand it (and I may very well be mistaken), hard canon is only things from on-screen in the shows and movies. Soft canon is novels, comics, video games (including STO), production notes, production models, and deleted scenes. Everything else, fan hypotheses, fan-fiction, interviews, un-done storyline, cast & crew interviews, etc.. Is non-canon. Having no standing.
There is a significant gray area, after all, what would you call a rejected script for an episode released as a novel by the original writer? Is that soft canon, or is it non-canon? What about a scene that was not originally released in TMP, but made it into the Directors cut, is it soft canon or hard canon? However, as a general rule of thumb, I think the standards above are pretty much how most people think about these things.
That makes the Akira Carrier intention (having been gleaned from a crew interview) non-canon. It's inclusion in other Trek games as a Carrier makes it soft canon.
The order of preference goes hard, soft, and then non-canon. Making the Akira (or the Nebula or the Excelsior) on-screen non-carrier use in Star Trek the reigning reality barring a carrier-functional version appearing in a show or Film.
Now, this game is soft canon, however, that only weakens the argument for pulling in Carrier-functional ships. We don't draw from soft canon to create soft canon, you draw from hard canon to create soft canon, and you draw from hard and soft canon if you're crafting fanfic.
The newest class of ship we've seen in canon is the Prometheus, and it was in no way made out to be a Carrier of any kind. If you "read it somewhere", that makes it, at best, soft canon, not hard canon, and can be safely ignored. And if you're pulling from fanfic, we get to laugh at you.
Since when do the Romulans have a carrier?
Seriously when?
While I'm writing this I'm beginning to assume you mean the Scimitar, which had based on the hangar scene from Nemesis some 30-40 Scorpoin class Flyers which are, based on their size, roughly comparable to TNG shuttlepods (note:Shuttlepods, not Shuttlecraft)
Since the Scimitar is rather large, comparable to an Imperial Star Destroyer in volume,
http://www.st-v-sw.net/images/Trek/Movies/Nemesis_ship_comparison_800.jpg
I think this does not actually qualify as a carrier.
The Galaxy Class, which is small compared to the Scimitar, is listed in the TNG Manual as having a standard complement of 10 Personnell shuttles, 10 cargo shuttles, 5 special huttles like the Sphinx class and 12 shuttlepods.
That makes 37 altogether...as standard complement and it's said there is still room for more depending on the mission.
So the 30-40 we see in the 890 meter long and 1350 meter wide Scimitar is not really screaming carrier unless you consider everything that has more than 1 shuttle a carrier.
I'm looking forward to using my Miranda class Light Tactical Assault Carrier next time I make a new char.:)
If I am mistaken and you call everything that carries...something a carrier I think we'll have a sudden influx of auxilliary carriers that cna't do anything but hang in space and look boring.
Not that I don't agree with you, cuase i do. What am suggesting is instead of a Carrier, let current ships have a squardon or two of Fighters (cuase it has been proven Star Ships can carry more shuttle type crafts, then what is shown in a shuttle bay) and give then Federation a Battle ship like the Tyhpon (SP? and yes i know i called it a Hypiron earlier that was my mistake)
Remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Absolutely.
However, as Darren has stated, you can't take not seeing the Akira function that way as an indication that it can't. The idea of the Akira not being a carrier is also non-canon until it is established otherwise through evidence, not simply suggested through lack of evidence.
Although we haven't seen Federation carriers that doesn't mean they don't exist, just that we haven't seen them used. We haven't seen klingons use either fighters nor carriers, yet both of these exist in the game for the klingons.
Essentially this leaves the door open for things to go either way.
We've seen romulan carriers in hard canon. They've implemented klingon carriers in the game. We've seen the Federation field light and smaller vessels in the Dominion War. There is nothing stopping Starfleet from adopting the ship type, and if it has been shown to be effective they might very well be prone to do so.
So the notion of carriers has already been embraced in this version of the Star Trek Universe, and though I don't particularly fancy the idea of a Starfleet carrier, there's certainly enough reason for them to exist in this game, if not in hard canon.
Going off a technical manual here? Those aren't quite canon and I don't recall the number of on board vessels ever being established in an episode.
Besides, the main shuttle bay certainly doesn't seem big enough to hold that much, and we've seen the smaller shuttle bays, which couldn't hold a fraction of that, and were mostly empty. Also, I'm seeing a lot of listed ships but not fighters or bombers that the Galaxy would be likely to deploy to combat.
Regardless, The Independence class aircraft carrier fielded during WWII only carried 30 some odd planes, that didn't make it any less a carrier.
Where have we seen a Romulan carrier in hard-canon, please?
The Galaxy main hangar has more than one deck, if were are to believe the manua.
Of course since the very idea that the Akira is supposed to have carrier ability comes from background, you should also dismiss this idea if you also intend to dismiss the TNG manual.
Besides, the shuttlepods are just 7 or 8 meters long.
The Paragrine fighter is in the 30 meters range (remeber it has a cockpit wide enough for 2 people side-by side), which would mean there are onyl ver few ship that would be even remotely capable of getting on into a hangar bay.
Independence: 190 meters long, 11000 tons.
Galaxy Class 642.5 meters, 4500000 tons (unless you want to dismiss these specs as well since they'were never stated exactly like this on screen either)
See the difference between them?
One is small (smaller in fact that most Star Trek ships) and has some 30 fighters and is specifically designed to use them therefore it is a carrier.
The other is considerably larger and has a similar number of small craft as one of several differnt features.
That is not even remotely the same.
The Yamato had a small hangar for altogether 7 planes.
Was she a carrier because of this as well?
And we aren't. We've seen the main hanger bay, open to outside, in the series and it was one deck.
Please read more closely.
I have stated that we have no hard evidence one way or the other on the Akira. We have hard evidence of a single level to the hanger bay (the picture in my post).
Yes. One launched fighters and bombers against enemies. The other didn't.
No because it only carried three to four for scouting or reconnaissance. It didn't launch fighters or bombers into combat.
But where is there any kind of Hard Canon source for justifying actual fighters being a part of a Starfleet ships complement of carried craft?
The only Federation fighters we've ever seen onscreen were the Federation attack fighter see in DS9. They were warp-capable, and didn't need any kind of Carrier. Now, based on what we have seen of what Starfleet ships carry with them, I could maybe support a worker-bee functionality that repairs the ship out of battle, or maybe some Type 6 or better-armed Type 8 shuttles that go and gather anomalies (that send out distress calls if they're attacked0 or maybe Type 7 shuttles that will go and pick up important, mission-specific personnel instead of detouring the ship proper, or maybe even some Class 2 shuttles for short range reconnaissance (giving you number, type, and location of ships outside the normal sensor range). But fighters? No, I don't see it, and I don't want it.
Also, I would want all of these shuttles to be player-pilot-able if you so choose. I read somewhere here on the forums a proposal to fit all kinds of carried craft into the framework we have.
I'm not going to find it (mad props to the original poster, credit where it's due, this isn't my original idea), but the basic idea would an inventory per-ship based on a point system. Say you're flying a Galaxy Class, you have three shuttle bays capable of storing a large number of auxiliary craft. So you have, say, 30 points.
Each worker-bee you carry costs you 1 point. Every Shuttle-pod costs you 2, Class 2 Shuttles cost you three, Type 6 & 8 Shuttles cost you 4, Delta Flyer-like craft cost you 6, Type 8 Shuttles cost you 8, and Runabouts cost you 10. You can build up whatever variety you like within your point budget. Swapping out Shuttles requires a Starbase and a fee based on what you get.
Smaller ships, like, say, the Intrepid, have fewer points to spend because they have smaller Shuttlebays (though the actual size of Voyagers Shuttlebay is often misunderstood, look here, and then look here, the back of the main bay has a large door leading to more storage area, even for more shuttles).
Imagine warping into a new system, and your Science Officer (post crew system) says that there a number of anomalies, then, your Tactical officer chimes in that there are reports of Klingon activity in this system, but that it's accuracy can not be guaranteed. So, you decide to launch some Class 2 scouts. They give you the clear, no Klingons in-system. You launch some Type 6 shuttles to gather the anomalies while you investigate the destroyed Transports (your actual reason for being in-system).
After determining what happened, the local government asks if you would be willing to find and punish the brigands who did the deed. You call back your shuttles, and warp out. You go through sector space to the brigands base of operations. Upon warping in, you send out the Class 2 scouts again, and after a few minutes, you have the location and strength of the enemy patrols on your map, even the ones beyond your sensor range. Using that information, you fly on the outskirts of the system, to take a way in that encounters the fewest patrols. One of the patrols is more potent than you feared, with cloaked allies your scouts couldn't detect. You're severely damaged, you release a few worker-bees, and you gain a regen buff while they're deployed. They repair your ship with time to spare before you get to the next patrol.
You hit the Brigands base, and capture their leader. He's injured, and he needs the medical facilities only a Starbase can provide, at the same time, a transport sends a distress call from the far side of the system. What to do?
Dispatch a Type 7 shuttle with medical and security personnel to take the prisoner to the nearest Starbase, while your main ship goes to save the Transport. After saving the Transport and defeating the raiders who attacked it, you go out in a Type 8 shuttle, with it's better maneuverability, to gather any anomalies in-system. Some of the raiders were still cloaked, and decide to pounce on you then. You send out a distress call to your ship, and it comes barreling in to save you. You and they drop shields momentarily to do an emergency beam out, and you lose the shuttle, but are again in command of your ship. You mop up the raiders, rendezvous with your Type 7 shuttle, and take the prisoner back to face justice.
That's a Trek experience if you ask me.
But Starfleet Carriers, or Starfleet ships with dedicated fighter craft? No.
While I'm hard core Akira = Gunboat, I don't think they made it big enough to be the carrier they wanted it to be. Deck 12 is too small to hold anything but the smallest of shuttlecraft. Now, if we had marines, they would make excellent landing craft or hull breech craft...but that's another story.
At any rate, I fly an escort and I want the next escort to be something other than a flying beehive.
+1
Cryptic have stated before that if players want something they'll try to add it, fact is whether you like it or not a ton of players would enjoy flying a federation carrier class ship, if you don't, then don't fly one if they get added, nobody is forcing you, it won't hurt you in any way whatsoever.