USS Prometheus?

posted on August 28th, 2009, 7:43 pm

Looks like a pretty cool ship, i believe the Phalanx should be removed with this put in it's place, and have the Soverign class placed as the number one Federation ship in terms of tactical superiority

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Pro ... heus_class)

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on August 28th, 2009, 7:55 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on August 28th, 2009, 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't think the Devs will ever go for adding in the Prometheus, as hinted by earlier remarks that at least Optec has made.

EDIT: here's one statement at least from Optec

what crazy idea drove the storyboard authors to make the prometheus MVAM a "superweapon" is beyond my imagination Cheesy even my mobile phone can calculate 3d vectors for attacking 3 vessels, thats not much of a trick. and putting 3 power cores in one vessel to make them real combatant vessels seems like a waste to me. one could argument with modern electronic warfare mechanisms, like ECM and stuff like that. at the end of the day i think the prometheus is probably an effective tool of war - its powercores are just damn expensive!

The Prometheus will be in as a map object (and something you can get through neutral buildings in as future features). The Galaxy Seperation might be in as an emergency effect, but we do yet lack teh technology to do that as we like to. But its on todo

posted on August 28th, 2009, 8:44 pm

If you want a Prometheus in, you can edit it yourself or download one from the site. That's probably the only way you'll get one that is either buildable at a regular Yard or Warped-In.

posted on August 28th, 2009, 8:58 pm

And you won't be able to use it in Multiplayer, unless all players have it. If you intend to play against human players, install a second copy of FO, one for having the Prometheus, and one for multiplayer.

posted on August 29th, 2009, 7:08 am

i don't care about optec's technical opinion about the prometheus - it's still a cool ship
what i just don't like about it is that it can't be implemented right in armada 2. personally i don't want to have 3 single parts flying around each commendable by the player and maybe even then scattered across the map. i'd like to have mvam some kind of automated, but currently there is no proper way to achieve that. until that you won't see the prometheus as buildable object. you still have the map object version though that is already implemented with manual mvam

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:11 pm

Doca

Well, you said the fighter carrier is completely automated... couldn't you make it like that, with a selection sod to allow you to control the target it fires on (or something of that nature)?

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:22 pm

maybe, but some additional coding would be required anyway. the fighters are dispensable, a section of the prometheus is not..

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:30 pm

Hmm, so you mean the Prometheus should be invulnerable when doing MVAM?

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:36 pm

I prefer the parts to be controlable individually.

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:44 pm

Personally, No ship should be invulnerable. I was thinking of this because if the ship is stronger when in MVAM than when together (with reguards to weapon and hull stregnth) than people will capture the Prom and immediately split it up and just use it as three ships! The MVAM is purposed so it can take advantage of three parts taking on multiple ships. Not to be standard combat maneuvers. I propose that it should be much more durable as whole and a wee bit stronger in fire power. This way people won't abuse the MVAM like the buged Cascade feedback.

posted on August 29th, 2009, 3:47 pm

As I'd see it, probably MVAM would have a long cool down, and only work for a short while. Even if it is invulnerable for five seconds, that shouldn't do a lot (aka, the Phase Shield is kind of like that...invulnerable for a few seconds, but not unbalanced).

posted on August 30th, 2009, 10:43 am

Hmm, so you mean the Prometheus should be invulnerable when doing MVAM?

no no, i didn't say that. but what to do when one section of the prometheus blows up?

I was thinking of this because if the ship is stronger when in MVAM than when together (with reguards to weapon and hull stregnth) than people will capture the Prom and immediately split it up and just use it as three ships! The MVAM is purposed so it can take advantage of three parts taking on multiple ships.

yes, thats the whole point why i prefer to not have individual controllable parts but some kind of automation where you only choose a target, the prometheus splits, attacks and reintegrates again.

posted on August 30th, 2009, 5:52 pm

Ah, understood.

Just a thought, but the invulnerable idea could solve that issue (calling it tactical advantage or something silly like that). Having the Prometheus split up, attack for a few seconds, then reintegrate and be retargetable (thus destroyable) would make it unnecessary to have some system for reconciling the automated MVAM and blowing up a section issue (phew, that was an ugly sentence).... but I guess that isn't what you are looking for  . Should be interesting when we finally do see here . What kind of firepower would the vessel have in relation to the others in FO?

posted on August 30th, 2009, 5:55 pm

I still would like the ability with the promethius or a seperation ship to split apart so it can go to two different locatsaions if needed, and to split so that not all parts are lost

[Tyler]

posted on August 30th, 2009, 6:09 pm

Last edited by Tyler on August 30th, 2009, 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'd put the combined ships firepower around the level of a Sovereign. Since it never used Quantums (only a lone Photon), I'd guess it was intended for Phaser-based fighting.

It only used Phasers when seperated (it was automated, so if it was supposed to use torpedoes, it would have), so power through numbers when split?