3.1.4 suggestions

posted on December 1st, 2010, 2:55 am

1- Add avalon to both Fed avatars, just restrict it more for Mayson
2- Remove Dom Bug's ability to ram fighters. As nice as it is to ahve the AI remove ships shooting at me, it's silly for an undamaged bug to ram a fighter.
3- Return the Galaxy class to retaining the standard model at all levels, and at the level were it currently switches to the venture refit model, add an option to refit it as a venture type refit for a small ammount of supply, and have the venture refit have a few additonal weapons lacking in the normal galaxy class (quantums prehaps).

posted on December 1st, 2010, 3:03 am

You mean 3.1.5 suggestions, they are not gonna rerelease 3.1.4 unless there is something in dire need of fixing like what happened with Tunngle support.

posted on December 1st, 2010, 3:16 am

Lol 3.1.4 has only been out for a few hours .  Let it sink in 

posted on December 1st, 2010, 3:17 am

1 - It makes the fed avatars more unique if only one gets a carrier.  I do admit, though, that I woyuldn't mind seeing more carriers in general, especially because I find Mayson's torpedo turret a bit lacking (in 3.1.3 at least it generally wasn't worth building).
2 - FO is a mod balanced for multiplayer.  There aren't any problems with ramming there, so I don't see a reason to remove it.  It adds more flavor to the Dominion.
3 - This seems like a good idea to me.

posted on December 1st, 2010, 3:18 am

3- Return the Galaxy class to retaining the standard model at all levels, and at the level were it currently switches to the venture refit model, add an option to refit it as a venture type refit for a small ammount of supply, and have the venture refit have a few additonal weapons lacking in the normal galaxy class (quantums prehaps).

Alternatively, the Venture refit could be a rarer warp-in than the standard Galaxy with slightly higher stats or a different special.

posted on December 1st, 2010, 3:35 am

Ruanek, re-read what I wrote.

I didnt say raming, just make it so the fighters cant be rammed, as thats a great way for the AI to waste a ship.

Now I'm not complaining, when the AI rams all my fighters and ignores my carrier so it can escape I'm happy. But it kinda lowers the aesthetic quality when they ram fighters like that.


Cabal- True, however the whole refit system is mostly just Romulan, with a few other ships like the Fed repair ship making use of it, while the Venture is a VERY well known and cannon refit, just seems like a totally wasted chance to make cannon use of the refit command.

Ruanek, as for the carriers, yeah, more carriers would be cool. Prehaps a limited number of smaller ships for the Federation (and other races too) able to carry a few fighters. Prehaps allow a few carrier refits for smaller vessels, and have it all be limtied numbers wise. Federation wise, Galaxy Akira and Norway would make the best of the carriers, Akira/Norway are carriers to start with to an extent, Galaxy is simply huge. Then have light carriers, ships with 1-2 fighters and longer respawn period for the fighters, for the Federation, ships like The Intrepid and Ambasador and Sovergn would be good examples (not saying make them all carriers but they have the hanger space.... )

So an example:
Fleet Carrier - Avalon class. Limit 8, carries 4 fighters
Carrier Refit - Galaxy/Venture/Akira. Carries 2 fighters. Have it cost a a few hundred Dilith/Metal to upgrade a ship to carrier.
Light Carrier Refit- Norway/Intrepid/Sovereign. Adds 2 fighters with very slow respawn periods.

Now, theres allready a limit for 8 Avalons, for the lighter carriers, prehaps have them cound as a part of the limit, or add a second limit for those vessels.

Have them be created by first getting the ship, then selecting to refit it.


Also, hangerbay refit updates for most races starbases, prehaps mining stations too, would be neat.

[Tyler]

posted on December 1st, 2010, 10:12 am

Last edited by Tyler on December 1st, 2010, 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

3- Return the Galaxy class to retaining the standard model at all levels, and at the level were it currently switches to the venture refit model, add an option to refit it as a venture type refit for a small ammount of supply, and have the venture refit have a few additonal weapons lacking in the normal galaxy class (quantums prehaps).

You'll already get an option to upgrade, it's called 'veteran' level. I do not agree with making a minor variation of a class into an entirely seperate ship. Only one vessel of this refit was in the show, which fits with the low number of veterans. Seems they decided to not make this a veteran thing.

Quantums for it I do agree with, I suggested the same.

posted on December 1st, 2010, 11:29 am

My point was that ramming isn't an issue in multiplayer, so it's not a big problem.  My guess is they'd have to completely redesign ramming and/or fighters to make it the way you want (not that I'm an expert).

For carriers, what you're suggesting makes them way too common.  They should be rare, especially if they're limited to certain factions.  I don't want them to be essential to the Federation's strategy (even in normal Star Trek they weren't that important).

[Tok`ra]

posted on December 1st, 2010, 8:38 pm

Last edited by Tok`ra on December 1st, 2010, 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My point was that ramming isn't an issue in multiplayer, so it's not a big problem. 

Then you should either be silent, or demand that single player be removed.

You'll already get an option to upgrade, it's called 'veteran' level. I do not agree with making a minor variation of a class into an entirely seperate ship. Only one vessel of this refit was in the show, which fits with the low number of veterans. Seems they decided to not make this a veteran thing.

Quantums for it I do agree with, I suggested the same.

Yeah making it a veteran only thing I'd agree with too, infact that'd make even more sense.

And Runanek as far as carriers go that WOULDNT make them common. READ what people write, it helps. I specificly stated that the new ones should be tied into a limit.

Avalons are limited to 8 ships. Change it so Avalons cost 3 carrier slots, and change it to 24 carrier slots.
Make the medium carriers cost 2 slots, teh light carriers 1 slot.

This means you may have more ships carrying fighters, but other than that you dont really have many more ships carrying them, and the reduced compliments are low enough to make it not over powerd.

Now, theres allready a limit for 8 Avalons, for the lighter carriers, prehaps have them cound as a part of the limit, or add a second limit for those vessels.

Common indeed 

posted on December 1st, 2010, 9:24 pm

I don't know i mean really  Trek isn't a Fighter universe that goes to Star Wars  Star Trek is more like  World War 1 Naval battle SHIP vs SHIP     Star Wars is World War II  Ship vs Ship VS a bajillion Fighters
I'm not to inclined to have Fleet ops turn into Star Wars with trek ships.  I'm happy with the current set up for fighters and carriers. 


edit fixed typos

posted on December 1st, 2010, 11:01 pm

1 - It makes the fed avatars more unique if only one gets a carrier.  I do admit, though, that I woyuldn't mind seeing more carriers in general, especially because I find Mayson's torpedo turret a bit lacking (in 3.1.3 at least it generally wasn't worth building).

What do avatar-specific units have to do with Maysons Torp-turret? Since 3.1.2, Mayson's specific units are the Nova and the Norway. Since then, both avatars have the full spectrum of turrets, just with altered armament (Risner has old-school-fed-weaponry, Mayson has the modern (Quantum- and Type 15-)stuff).

Can't say I understand the point of your statement well, so correct me if I'm wrong in any way 

And Runanek as far as carriers go that WOULDNT make them common. READ what people write, it helps. I specificly stated that the new ones should be tied into a limit.

It wouldn't make carriers common in the federation to give them to both (or all 4 in the end) avatars, just capped differently? This way, the Avalon would be just as common as the hyperspace-artillery is. It would not be avatar-specific anymore and available to all feds. Risners may be capped by 5 as usual, Maysons capped by 3, Lewitts by 1. So what? This is just as common as the Hyperspace-artillery is for the Dominion-avatars.
it's available to both avatars and simply capped differently. I think Ruanek didn't misunderstand the point here. You should stop to sound like bitching at people for giving their opinion in an open forum-thread.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 12:29 am

What do avatar-specific units have to do with Maysons Torp-turret? Since 3.1.2, Mayson's specific units are the Nova and the Norway. Since then, both avatars have the full spectrum of turrets, just with altered armament (Risner has old-school-fed-weaponry, Mayson has the modern (Quantum- and Type 15-)stuff).

Can't say I understand the point of your statement well, so correct me if I'm wrong in any way 




It wouldn't make carriers common in the federation to give them to both (or all 4 in the end) avatars, just capped differently? This way, the Avalon would be just as common as the hyperspace-artillery is. It would not be avatar-specific anymore and available to all feds. Risners may be capped by 5 as usual, Maysons capped by 3, Lewitts by 1. So what? This is just as common as the Hyperspace-artillery is for the Dominion-avatars.
it's available to both avatars and simply capped differently. I think Ruanek didn't misunderstand the point here. You should stop to sound like bitching at people for giving their opinion in an open forum-thread.

Or you could bother to read whats going on instead of trying (poorly at that) to start a flame war.

[Ruanek]

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:29 am

Last edited by Ruanek on December 2nd, 2010, 2:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Then you should either be silent, or demand that single player be removed.

Sorry, but my opinion is valid.  I'm allowed to voice it.  The AI crashing into fighters is certainly an issue.  I just can't see it being a high priority to fix, especially when any battle against the AI is bugged in other ways anyway.

And Runanek as far as carriers go that WOULDNT make them common. READ what people write, it helps. I specificly stated that the new ones should be tied into a limit.

Avalons are limited to 8 ships. Change it so Avalons cost 3 carrier slots, and change it to 24 carrier slots.
Make the medium carriers cost 2 slots, teh light carriers 1 slot.

This means you may have more ships carrying fighters, but other than that you dont really have many more ships carrying them, and the reduced compliments are low enough to make it not over powerd.

Common indeed   :thumbsup:

Making multiple ships able to be carriers would make them more common.  Not only would they not be limited to late game, but they'd also be more available (in the sense that these classes are all different, so while you may not want an Avalon you could want an Akira).   That would make them more common.  And giving them to all Federation avatars would obviously make them more common.

I did read what you wrote.  You just assumed I had no justification behind my argument.

What do avatar-specific units have to do with Maysons Torp-turret? Since 3.1.2, Mayson's specific units are the Nova and the Norway. Since then, both avatars have the full spectrum of turrets, just with altered armament (Risner has old-school-fed-weaponry, Mayson has the modern (Quantum- and Type 15-)stuff).

Can't say I understand the point of your statement well, so correct me if I'm wrong in any way 

@ Tok'ra: This is a valid point.

@RedEyedRaven: I forgot that the torpedo turret was no longer Mayson-only.  But my main point there still stands in that I don't want carriers to be common.  I wouldn't mind seeing one more, but I like the way it is.

I think Ruanek didn't misunderstand the point here. You should stop to sound like bitching at people for giving their opinion in an open forum-thread.

Or you could bother to read whats going on instead of trying (poorly at that) to start a flame war.

Guys.  Calm down.  No one's trying to start a flame war here.  It's easy to assume that someone didn't understand something if they didn't explain themselves adequately, which I didn't.  And I was wrong about the torpedo turrets.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 2:59 am

Soltution: Add later mid game to early late game research for fighters, which adds the ability to refit as a carrier to some classes. It's not avalible until the avalon would be AND requires separate research.

posted on December 2nd, 2010, 3:29 am

What's wrong with the Avalon being the only carrier, though?  If other ships can double as carriers, why would anyone get the Avalon?