Proteus Class

posted on February 6th, 2011, 3:17 pm

There's nothing even remotely 'god-like' about the design. It's exactly what the Sovereign was when it first came out, do you also consider the Sovereign an OP godship? The only slightly 'overdone' thing is the Slipstream, which likely wouldn't be in a FO version since it doesn't exist there.

If you don't like the design, just focus your post about the 'personal view' thing. No need to make an exaggerated OP claim.

We can argue back and forth all day long, but if you propose a future design with "the latest in Starfleet weaponry and shield geometry" designed for "multipurpose roles ranging from patrolling the outer reaches of Federation space to long range tactical missions" you imply a vessel which has stats equal or above the Defiant level.

In my book that comes dangerously close to OP or Godlike. If you add that the design is (again IMO) plain ugly then IMO this class should not be added.

Feel free to get it in a personal mod, but don't clutter FO with it.

[Tyler]

posted on February 6th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Last edited by Tyler on February 6th, 2011, 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We can argue back and forth all day long, but if you propose a future design with "the latest in Starfleet weaponry and shield geometry" designed for "multipurpose roles ranging from patrolling the outer reaches of Federation space to long range tactical missions" you imply a vessel which has stats equal or above the Defiant level.

In my book that comes dangerously close to OP or Godlike. If you add that the design is (again IMO) plain ugly then IMO this class should not be added.

Feel free to get it in a personal mod, but don't clutter FO with it.

You may have not noticed, but the FO Defiant isn't the monster supership Sisko commanded and is quite balanced, making the comparison irrelevent. Looking ugly is not a valid reason to discriminate. Again, a pointless argument. STO ships are only an exception because it's a common consensus that they suck by default.

I will suggest it (and have, obviously) for FO and several people support it. The devs are the ones to convince, however. Calling it 'clutter' is from your opinion of the ship, don't forget that opinion isn't fact and isn't always best especially with personal bias influencing it.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 4:51 pm

You may have not noticed, but the FO Defiant isn't the monster supership Sisko commanded and is quite balanced, making the comparison irrelevant. Looking ugly is not a valid reason to discriminate. Again, a pointless argument. STO ships are only an exception because it's a common consensus that they suck by default.

I will suggest it (and have, obviously) for FO and several people support it. The devs are the ones to convince, however. Calling it 'clutter' is from your opinion of the ship, don't forget that opinion isn't fact and isn't always best especially with personal bias influencing it.

I know the defiant isn't the Sisko supership, but it is still one of the more powerful ships in FO.
You argued for the addition of the Proteus and its model which makes the description and look a valid argument pro/con. If the vessel, by description, would be a battleship in a small package then this borders on being OP.

If you suggest to add the model of the Proteus then the looks are a relevant argument. Not only does it not look good, but it looks out of place compared to the current FO models.

Your bias towards this ship doesn't make it a worthy addition however. IMO this ship would be OP, or at least very hard to balance, the model doesn't look good by itself and doesn't fit in with FO.

Enough reason for me to argue that it belongs in a personal mod and not stock FO.

[Tyler]

posted on February 6th, 2011, 5:07 pm

Last edited by Tyler on February 6th, 2011, 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I know the defiant isn't the Sisko supership, but it is still one of the more powerful ships in FO.
You argued for the addition of the Proteus and its model which makes the description and look a valid argument pro/con. If the vessel, by description, would be a battleship in a small package then this borders on being OP.

Put the Proteus in your game using the ScaleSOD size set in the A2Files download; it ain't small!

If you suggest to add the model of the Proteus then the looks are a relevant argument. Not only does it not look good, but it looks out of place compared to the current FO models.

Several others would disagree on it not looking good, considering the support its appearance got so far. Looks still aren't relevent to the quality of the vessel and how well it fits, as that's a personal preference thing and opinions differ. They common 'it doesn't look Federation-ish is a prime example; it translates into 'I don't like it' while saying nothing about the ship in question.

Your bias towards this ship doesn't make it a worthy addition however. IMO this ship would be OP, or at least very hard to balance, the model doesn't look good by itself and doesn't fit in with FO.

I'm not bias for it; I like it and suggested it accordingly but I'm only biased towards things Galaxy-related. I'm arguing because your reasons to keep it out (weird shape mainly) aren't suffficient to ignore it.

The OP angle doesn't work; it's weapons are listed as advanced but nothing about unconventional and the only 'special' thing it has by default is a Slipstream that isn't even present in FO. The previous suggestion of a Risner-exclusive counterpart of the Descent has merit.

Enough reason for me to argue that it belongs in a personal mod and not stock FO.

Your reasons aren't very convincing in the slightest nor do they prove anything, but your opinion is your own. It's the devs view that matters in the end; they're the ones with the final say.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 5:32 pm

How does it really differ from the Avalon design Andre? It may have unconventional colours, assuming the more grayish, dark hull of FO, but it still looks cool, and it isn't out of line from the Avalon, Monsoon lineage. Even more, I have to say, there will be more unconventional designs in the near future, by just looking at the Okinawa ( though I have to admit, it looks beast ).

And I shouldn't even mention that in my opinion, FO plays in a universe where a single small invention could change the way we look at technology, par example quantum technology ( torpedoes, slipstream ). So in that photon torpedo, phaser, disruptor world a quantum pp, quantum torp., maybe a quantum phaser armed vessel could be called OP, though with the advancements in technology it is very easily imaginable, and do not stand so far away from 'canon'.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 6:31 pm

How does it really differ from the Avalon design Andre?

Thank you for mentioning another design which doesn't belong. Why not use a Galaxy variant for this class.

As for the argument about it being the Risner counterpart of the Descent this only strengthens the impression that it is a powerful, i dare say near OP, vessel.

The dark Grey on the Proteus may look "flashy" but if the design is made star fleet it would have to become broken white. Whatever aesthetic properties the proposed Proteus would have, would be negated.

It is still my opinion that the design doesn't fit with FO and it would be nearly impossible to balance.

But as i stated before, we can argue back and forth all day. IMO the Proteus belongs on a junkyard.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 6:43 pm

We can argue all day,, true, but no ammount of arguing sems able to convince you that your opinion isn't fact. Virtually your entire argument is I don't like X, therefore X is irrideemable crap and doesn't belong.

As for the argument about it being the Risner counterpart of the Descent this only strengthens the impression that it is a powerful, i dare say near OP, vessel.

Not even close. The Descent is very powerful defensively, but it's offense is very lacking in comparison. A Risner counterpart isn't even close to being OP and is supposed to be more firepower-oriented; really big guns is Risners entire focus! Her Phalanx has the highest offensive value of a Starfleet ship; the offence value of a Phalanx is even higher than a Descents defense!

posted on February 6th, 2011, 6:48 pm

the offence value of a Phalanx is even higher than a Descents defense!

really? even a vet phalanx only has 74 off, the unranked descent has 74 def

posted on February 6th, 2011, 6:51 pm

Oops, I think I got the stats the wrong way around 

It's still got the highest attack value of any Starfleet ship.

[Andre27]

posted on February 6th, 2011, 7:27 pm

Last edited by Andre27 on February 6th, 2011, 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We can argue all day,, true, but no ammount of arguing sems able to convince you that your opinion isn't fact. Virtually your entire argument is I don't like X, therefore X is irrideemable crap and doesn't belong.

We are all glad that your opinion isn't fact either and the fact that you apparently cannot counter arguments brought forward doesn't make said arguments I don't like X, therefore X is irredeemable crap and doesn't belong. Let's not call each other stupid, but try reading comprehension instead. I'm using the data and pictures you yourself provided.

Early 25th century design (let's assume that is 26th century 2500-2600), latests SF tech implies stronger weapons than "old designs" such as the Defiant & Sovereign. Since the Defiant and Sovereign are already very high up in the tech scale this implies an OP vessel.

The shape of the hull can only be compared to the Avalon which itself is design wise already an odd duck in the FO fleet. So the Proteus design doesn't fit in with the FO ship designs.

To blurt the sharp edges of the Proteus the creator of the model used black/dark Grey to draw attention away from the shape.  If the Proteus would be used in FO, then the color scheme would have to be adjusted to the FO Star fleet scheme which in turn would focus attention to the sharp edges thereby increasing the gap between the Proteus design and the FO designs.

Not even close. The Descent is very powerful defensively, but it's offense is very lacking in comparison. A Risner counterpart isn't even close to being OP and is supposed to be more firepower-oriented; really big guns is Risners entire focus! Her Phalanx has the highest offensive value of a Starfleet ship; the offence value of a Phalanx is even higher than a Descents defense!

I'm afraid it is. The one constant with the Federation is the shield strength so for the Proteus we are talking about a vessel with an incredible firepower and at least decent shields (the feds are not going to put weak shields on their precious ships).
In addition by mentioning of the Slipstream drive, a very high speed (also for the conventional drive) is implied.

Overall: if the end result is not OP, it comes close to it.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 7:37 pm

I just fail to see how a ship that doesn't have any stats in the game yet could be OP.
You also have to remember that just because a ship is designed for a specific role doesn't mean its going to be good at that role.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 7:48 pm

I just fail to see how a ship that doesn't have any stats in the game yet could be OP.
You also have to remember that just because a ship is designed for a specific role doesn't mean its going to be good at that role.

Because of the implied stats

Early 25th century design (let's assume that is 26th century 2500-2600), latests SF tech implies stronger weapons than "old designs" such as the Defiant & Sovereign. Since the Defiant and Sovereign are already very high up in the tech scale this implies an OP vessel.

Proteus Class Download, Star Trek: Armada 2 Ships

[Tyler]

posted on February 6th, 2011, 7:50 pm

Last edited by Tyler on February 6th, 2011, 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We are all glad that your opinion isn't fact either and the fact that you apparently cannot counter arguments brought forward doesn't make said arguments I don't like X, therefore X is irredeemable crap and doesn't belong. Let's not call each other stupid, but try reading comprehension instead. I'm using the data and pictures you yourself provided.

That your arguments are influenced and exaggerated by your views doesn't help. I also never use the Chewbacca Defense, you just don't put anything of any value up, just the same personal opinions (and some stat paranoia). You're the only one who replied so far that has a serious problem with it; aside from 1 neutral view, the others seem to support the ship.

Early 25th century design (let's assume that is 26th century 2500-2600), latests SF tech implies stronger weapons than "old designs" such as the Defiant & Sovereign. Since the Defiant and Sovereign are already very high up in the tech scale this implies an OP vessel.

Most advanced weapon isn't always the most powerful; power comes from the Warp core, more advanced weapons only effect things like recharge time and range. Nothing OP about the ship in weapons, as no mention of any advanced Warp core implies the power generation isn't too much different from normal.

Shields are the same in their power relation to the core, and existing passives already account for shield advances.

The shape of the hull can only be compared to the Avalon which itself is design wise already an odd duck in the FO fleet. So the Proteus design doesn't fit in with the FO ship designs.

Hardly an odd duck; the saucer is the same style as the Monsoon, Canaveral & Prometheus. The latter of which we know to be canon, meaning the hull shape even has canon basis as at least 1 canon design and 3 FO designs are the same. The nacelle layout are just like the Akira and Norway (mostly Akira) and and upside-down version of the Sovereign.

Not an odd duck in canon or FO.

To blurt the sharp edges of the Proteus the creator of the model used black/dark Grey to draw attention away from the shape.  If the Proteus would be used in FO, then the color scheme would have to be adjusted to the FO Star fleet scheme which in turn would focus attention to the sharp edges thereby increasing the gap between the Proteus design and the FO designs.

Again, at least 4 ships (one admittadly non-buildable) all have sharp saucers. No standing out there. The colors also don't need to change, just be subdued a bit to not stand out.

I'm afraid it is. The one constant with the Federation is the shield strength so for the Proteus we are talking about a vessel with an incredible firepower and at least decent shields (the feds are not going to put weak shields on their precious ships).
In addition by mentioning of the Slipstream drive, a very high speed (also for the conventional drive) is implied.

The Descent has a massive defence and roughly Sovereign-level offense. The Proteus with Phalanx-level offensive and Sovereign level defense wouldn't cause any touble on an experimental Warp-In. It wouldn't lose the Federation shield-focus, but would be Descent level in the opposite direction.

Overall: if the end result is not OP, it comes close to it.

Not really close. Give it the attack of a Phalanx, defence of a Descent and regen of a support ship build earlygame and maybe it would be. Otherwise, described as I put it any not OP, just merely powerful.

posted on February 6th, 2011, 8:08 pm

Not really close. Give it the attack of a Phalanx, defence of a Descent and regen of a support ship build earlygame and maybe it would be. Otherwise, described as I put it any not OP, just merely powerful.

As for the shape and color: IMO it would be too foreign in the FO ship arsenal, but you obviously feel this is not true. Let's leave it at that, no use in further debate about such semantics.

As for the stats, the Proteus you proposed would be a future design and as such it implies better weapons, shields and speed unless you believe that federation research in those areas stood still for roughly two decades.

With that in mind we face a very real possibility of an OP vessel. You may call it a powerful ship, but IMO it borders OP and that is something we need to look out for.

We're moving onto the same ground as the earlier proposed Achilles - DS9: Dominion Wars which was portrayed as being OP.

[Tyler]

posted on February 6th, 2011, 8:25 pm

Last edited by Tyler on February 6th, 2011, 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

As for the shape and color: IMO it would be too foreign in the FO ship arsenal, but you obviously feel this is not true. Let's leave it at that, no use in further debate about such semantics.

Yes, personal preference things are usually 'agree to disagree' around here. I did mention dulling the colors a bit; even the Defiant was mis-mached in hull color.

As for the stats, the Proteus you proposed would be a future design and as such it implies better weapons, shields and speed unless you believe that federation research in those areas stood still for roughly two decades.

A proposed future design from the same basic timeframe as FO, being set during the early 25th century itself. That means being slightly better than an average fleet warship but still rare and experimental in the same way as a Descent currently is, isn't that unbelievable.

With that in mind we face a very real possibility of an OP vessel. You may call it a powerful ship, but IMO it borders OP and that is something we need to look out for.

Not OP for exactly the same reason as the Descent isn't; excels in 1 thing, lacks in another. In this case, excelling in exactly what Risner prefers. Powerful doesn't border Op, powerful borders very powerful; OP is Scimitar, OP is Wolf 359 Cube. OP is not 'better weapons than most, only average defence'. A literal stat inversion of the Descent is still the same as the Descent balance-wise, it just hurts more before death but dies faster.

We're moving onto the same ground as the earlier proposed Achilles - DS9: Dominion Wars which was portrayed as being OP.

Portrayed as in the original game, not portrayed as in some of the more well-made mods. Hell, my Achilles is around Miranda-II levels rather than the 'Death Star' of its origin and is merely powerful.

How something is originally portrayed isn't as important as how it is portrayed in the game in question. Gameplay over canon (including game canon) has lead to the other ships being toned-down, any ship felt to be so is balanced out.

OP complaints go better after it has proven to be so, can't call something OP if it doesn't even exist yet! What's OP on the drawing board isn't always OP actually in the field. This ship describes itself as the current best, but doesn't quite go as far as calling it a godship, only the current peak.