Topic: missles (Read 13329 times)

loc621 · « **on:** January 20, 2003, 04:49:59 am »

Help i need missles, i don't understand why they were taken out, i always used drone variants, the mirak mdc+ mostly, it wupped ass in a big way. ive seen to many p-torps and q-torps miss when they really needed to hitm, i even sawa q torp miss a borg cube, now how ithe hell do you miss a borg cube they're so bloody huge

EE · « **Reply #1 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:05:45 am »

Missles were a SFB thing and not a startrek thing. How many missles did you see used in TNG or Votager? I cant remeber one.

loc621 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:12:23 am »

in that case can pls have tri-cobolt torps as demostrated in early voyager to destroy the care taker aray

Cleaven · « **Reply #3 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:35:17 am »

It's not a matter of whether Trek canon includes missles or not (even though there is enough evidence to decide in the affirmative). The plain fact is that the suicidal AI has a hard time handling direct fire weapons let alone drones, so - no drones for the AI and therefore no drones for you laddo.

Same goes for fighters by the way.

LongTooth · « **Reply #4 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:50:12 am »

As some one that plays mirak I can tell you that the MCD is no way our best ship (M-CVA is the best

)
All torps miss (try plasma youll see what I meen)some times you need to line up your shot
to hit when the chances best for it not to miss

Whiplash · « **Reply #5 on:** January 20, 2003, 09:25:49 am »

Its not even that, boys.

Missiles (and all seeking weapons) caused plenty of balance problems for SFC2. They are still having to balance plasma in SFB, and they watch drones very carefully. They just problematical.

Also, they add tactical complexity for newbies to deal with. They're harder to master the use of properly, and hard for newbies to deal with successfully. Since Taldren clearly wanted to simplify the game, they got chopped. IMO.

Personally, I think their loss makes the game tactically uninteresting. Direct-fire only leaves too few tactics to master. Games take on a dreary sameness. IMO. I'd love to see them back in the game.

W.

Alidar Jarok · « **Reply #6 on:** January 20, 2003, 10:07:12 am »

I was working on an idea to add missiles to the game, and make them balanced (if not a bit weak), I did not want them to become a major factor in the game, just a change of flavor. Here's what I came up with

Quote:

Ideas that could balance missiles

Missiles and other seeking weapons were probably not included because they were balancing problems. I was thinking of a way to make them balanced.
Would this be balanced?
Missiles do 6 damage. Like AMM, they require 1 energy point, can't be overloaded, take the place of another heavy mount, and run out/must be resupplied. They come in 3 speeds, each requiring a higher level of launcher to mount, which is more massive. The basic version launches missiles that go speed 20. The middle speed goes speed 40. The advanced goes speed 60. Missiles can only be fired when in arc.
Here's the part that should balance it the most. They would only belong to the Ferengi. The Marauder will be a DN with 3 heavy hardpoints. This means that it can launch a max of 3 (not 6-8 that Mirak ships could launch) at once. The FF would only have 1 heavy hardpoint, the DD and CL would have 2, and CA, BCH, and DN would have 3.
With the adjustments in speed, small ships can go speed 40 easily. Larger ships have the ability to withstand the impact. Missiles can be shot down and, if all else fails, you can warp away.
In fact, warp will prevent any easy missile strategies. Most players would be using tractor strategies (which ruins the seeking advantage because it reduces AV to 0 anyway), the top pilots would probably manage to use skill effectivey to hit with missiles.
AV would effect missile damage (like ECM used to do) it would be based on where the missile is when it hits, not the posistion of the ship that fired it. AV of 20 would reduce it to 5 damage, 40 - 4, 50- 3, 60- 2, <80- 1
I think that this is balanced. Only the fear of the drones from SFC2 would make anyone want to balance it more.
Ferengi ships would be able to be refitted with K-Disruptors, S-Missiles, M-Missiles, H-Missiles, Fed-Photons (without the proxy setting), Tachyon Beams, and Anti-Matter Mine Layers.
I don't think that this will be that bad.
PS: I forgot to add that the Ferengi would become playable.

Alidar Jarok

After getting a responce, I added this:

Quote:

When planning damage, I didn't think it could be less than 4, and more than 8.
6 is the equivalent of a K-Photon. Perhaps it could be 5 or 4.
About keeping them off the Federation ships. Of course. The Feds should not get a thing that makes them even more powerful. I would not want them on Klingon ships either. They should be strictly Ferengi. If the Ferengi don't become playable, it should not be in the game. And, in case anyone was wondering, I play Romulan. I do not want to be the one using these new (or should I say old) weapons. I do not want them to be the biggest factor, just an interesting change of pace.
I do not want this to be SFB, I do not want it to be SFC2. This is SFC3: DW. Very few people like the Ferengi and they won't become a super race. They will have one unique weapon that can be an X-factor, but not a cheese weapon. The Ferengi, and the Cardassians, need to have something to bring to the game, and be balanced to each other and the rest of the races. The stars of the expansion will be the Dominion. The Ferengi are a nice addition.

DONOTDELETE · « **Reply #7 on:** January 20, 2003, 10:20:47 am »

Well EE, if you want to get technical, the "Homing photon" that Spock and McCoy built in about 5 minutes, while under fire seemed much like a MISSLE/Drone, didnt it?

Not only that, it homed in on CLOAKED SHIPS!!

Talk about MAGIC PHOTONS INDEED!

In TOS "Balance of Terror" and "Nemesis" we have seen ships firing blind, laying down a pattern when attacking cloaked ships... We also saw in the TOS episode with "Nomad" that the Enterprise could absorb the energy of 90 photon torpedos with its front shield.. repeatedly!

Do you REALLY want Trek "CANON"?

In ST2:TWOK we saw a single torpedo hit from a K'Tinga take out the Energizer on the Enterprise and kill a legendary officer (Sulu)..

Do you REALLY want Trek "CANON"?

Kzintis WERE in Animated TOS, and they DID have drones. Hence, if we are using TREK "CANON" EVERYTHING ever shown on screen IS acceptable, is it not?

Then again, in Trek "CANON" ships can fight at warp speed, see TOS episode "The Balance of Terror" when the Enterprise was at "Full reverse, Emergency warp speed" while fleeing a plasma (that DID hit) and Sulu said "If we only had one phaser, we could detonate it".

Either Sulu is an idiot, or you can fire phasers at warp speed, per Trek "CANON".

As I believe I have shown, Trek "Canon" is so totally inconsistent and worthless as a guide that the mere mention of it in an argument should be grounds for the express ride to HELL, lol!

Anyhow, the base reason they took out drones is:

You have to THINK to use stuff like that, not merely point and shoot when the pretty little lights come on.

Have a nice day!

loc621 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 22, 2003, 07:58:31 am »

im sorry, you had to think to use missles. i never did think thats why i used them p-torps were a lot harder to use, all i did was fire em a point blank or range 40 and i could wup dn's and bb's in my little mdc+ which had the best size to missle ratio and got me pit against cl's and low ca's mostly, the m-cva was a carrier and fighter didn't suit my fighting style but was one hell of a hard ship

ActiveX · « **Reply #9 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:16:19 am »

How did you have to think to use missiles?

Seems to me all you did was fire and forget...

loc621 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:21:51 am »

x has a point, all you did was pick a target fire enough missles at it 50/50 chance it was dead, especialy when you fire between 6 and 10 missles in a single salvo, and no one has 10 phaser shots spare ever

Son of Technobabble · « **Reply #11 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:10:16 am »

Ok, I'll accept missiles back IF you bring back PPD too

Vysander · « **Reply #12 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:13:27 am »

going to need a wild weasel back too then

Might as well give us suicide shuttles and scatterpacks again!

Then we better get phaser G's! and ADD's! better put transporter bombs back in for drone defense too!

etc etc etc

Whiplash · « **Reply #13 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:23:07 am »

Yes, yes! Excellent suggestions, Vysander.

W.

Whiplash · « **Reply #14 on:** January 22, 2003, 10:05:45 am »

They're not even fire and forget. What you do with your ship after you fire is very important. If you intend to overwhelm, you need to stay close to them, for example.

Also, all beam weapons by definition are fire and forget. Fire and forget is not a bad thing.

W.

Mr. Hypergol · « **Reply #15 on:** January 22, 2003, 10:39:33 am »

Soooooo......

you want missles back?.......lobby Activision and Taldren to make an SFC4 Galaxies at War.

Those that don't like missles should push for an "all eras" game that has SFB based play in TOS era and more Trek like play in TNG era. The game could explore the evolution of the races, ships, and technology of Trek from Pre-TOS thru TOS all the way to TNG and Nemesis. All you anti-missle types out there could watch the demise of the missle as time passed from TOS thru to the TNG. Wouldn't that be just a pleasure.

Yes....SFC4 Galaxies at War could provide various flavors of gameplay to please everyone....just pick a year between 2150 and 2380 that suites your tastes. The year you select would define the races, map, ships, tech, and weapons available at that point in time. In the spirit of the "total war" series you could play out the great wars from Trek history from a strategic down to a tactical point of view. Just think of it.....

SFC4 Galaxies at War..........ask Activision and Taldren to make it today!!!!!!

NJAntman · « **Reply #16 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:15:11 am »

Barring a miracle with the creation of a SFC4 GAW game for every race in any time..... a "missile" solution for SFC3 could be more variation in shuttles. How about options like "ram selected target" (proxy missile) or "self-destruct at selected point" (proxy T-Bomb)? Make up for the fewer possible shuttles by allowing greater damage with exploding warp cores, or a "recall" command. A "missile" that could chase and fire but be recovered if not ultimately used would add an interesting twist for all races.
Damn shuttles don't do much except force Rom AIs to get distracted and engage as it is. Not that this is a bad thing.

Draco · « **Reply #18 on:** January 22, 2003, 12:45:12 pm »

If their range was not limited things would get very interesting. Warping would only delay the hit, or give someone a few more shots to destroy the missiles, thus soaking up firepower that would have otherwise been directed at the launching ship. For complete effectiveness however the launchers would have to have a very quick re-fire rate as well as a large capacity for the missiles in order to put out a significant number of the weapons. It would otherwise be nothing other than a fancy light show. Though for an effective counter we would need something like a t-bomb, or a torpedo that acts like a flak cannon by blowing up after traveling a predetermined distance.

Hmmm, probably not going to happen, though it might be interesting.

Dvoongar · « **Reply #19 on:** January 22, 2003, 06:18:15 pm »

The unlimited range is a good thought, but couldn't one escape by shaking detection? That is if the mothership must maintain a lock...

ActiveX · « **Reply #20 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:25:50 pm »

This would be interesting with true cloaks...hmm

Cleaven · « **Reply #24 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:03:17 pm »

It seems I did miss the bit where GR said that TAS should not be part of the Trek universe. Evidently there were half a dozen stories that on reflection went a little bit too far with their "science" so the series went out. Use of Niven's Kzinti race probably didn't help things either. Of course that hasn't stopped later ST series from using the same ideas. Probably not a wise decision in hindsight but GR wins, it's his universe.

Deviak · « **Reply #25 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:21:26 pm »

actually Tulmahk..I believe AJ was referring to the first part of the movie when they had the Kobayashi Maru simulation where Saavik was Captain. Of course, that was only a SIMULATION. *chuckle*. Ahh well, some of you should really indulge these guys, they'll say anything to justify SFB. *Sigh*, to tell the truth, I'd want to see SFC4: Galaxies at War as well. However, I don't mind if it's made either. It's Activision's call. I'm not gonna pester them about it. I'll ask about it, but won't pester them.

Deviak · « **Reply #28 on:** January 23, 2003, 12:41:54 am »

*chuckle* sorry Hype ole bud. I'm not gonna push the issue on them. Untill it's warranted and they genuinely want to know what game we want. Meaning when Erik makes the thread to ask what we want. Then I'll make the post in there. Other than that, not gonna push the issue like Whiplash who seems to be using the "Are We There Yet?" technique. Or pester tham and make references everytime it may come up like the rest of you are doing. Lol...sorry man, just know that that game isn't a life or death situation that we have to be like crackheads that need our fix.

EmeraldEdge · « **Reply #29 on:** January 23, 2003, 01:16:07 am »

Don't want to start anything here, but I see this attitude a lot. It's totally fine to have, just want to point something out. Has there every been a post prior to the game getting going, saying "What do you want?". Did they do it for SFC2, OP, or even SFC3? I don't recall seeing that post. I do know that "they" pay attention to what people are calling for, instead of saying "It's time to make a game, guess we'd better go to the people and ask what they want". ATVI owns the rights to do all the trek stuff, and if people are calling for it enough, then they will find a developer to do the game. I'd rather have it sooner than later (like 20 years later). In a lot of places, like game development, I've seen people say things like "I won't give my opinion now, I'll wait until they ask" but "they" don't usually ask, or at least not until far too late to make any major changes, so things go undone. If you want it make it known. You can do it without being a major pest, but best to keep it in the air as much as possible so "they" don't assume it's kind of dead topic. The more things are talked about, the more attention it gets. If ATVI want's to make a killer game, they are obviously would take a cue from what the fans are saying they are wanting.

As for missiles in TNG, or Trek in general, there has been LOADS of documentation about their use and mention in the series. They did exist, along with many other things that others claim aren't "Trek". Oh, well.

On the fire at cloak ship issue, it was fairly effective in BoP, wasn't it? I have the episode, they looked like they were taking some fairly decent hits there. As for the scenes in Nemesis, I haven't seen the film but have heard about it. Wasn't the cloaking device on the Scimitar a new type of cloak that was in fact a "perfect" cloak? Assuming that tech like that doesn't grow on trees most Romulan ships would have a lesser degree of cloak. Heck, the cloak in this "Finally an SFC that is just like Trek" (when in fact it really isnt') game is anything but totally invisible. Why couldn't you be given the option to fire, at a severe disadvantage, at the shadow of the cloaked ship? If you can see it, why not take a pot shot at it, especially in fleet action or when he's staying cloaked a LOT?

loc621 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 04, 2003, 09:24:55 am »

Give me my missles back i realy realy realy need em, and any one who get in my way get a photon grenade under the pillow at night

loc621 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 20, 2003, 04:49:59 am »

Help i need missles, i don't understand why they were taken out, i always used drone variants, the mirak mdc+ mostly, it wupped ass in a big way. ive seen to many p-torps and q-torps miss when they really needed to hitm, i even sawa q torp miss a borg cube, now how ithe hell do you miss a borg cube they're so bloody huge

EE · « **Reply #35 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:05:45 am »

Missles were a SFB thing and not a startrek thing. How many missles did you see used in TNG or Votager? I cant remeber one.

loc621 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:12:23 am »

in that case can pls have tri-cobolt torps as demostrated in early voyager to destroy the care taker aray

Cleaven · « **Reply #37 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:35:17 am »

It's not a matter of whether Trek canon includes missles or not (even though there is enough evidence to decide in the affirmative). The plain fact is that the suicidal AI has a hard time handling direct fire weapons let alone drones, so - no drones for the AI and therefore no drones for you laddo.

Same goes for fighters by the way.

LongTooth · « **Reply #38 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:50:12 am »

As some one that plays mirak I can tell you that the MCD is no way our best ship (M-CVA is the best

)
All torps miss (try plasma youll see what I meen)some times you need to line up your shot
to hit when the chances best for it not to miss

Whiplash · « **Reply #39 on:** January 20, 2003, 09:25:49 am »

Its not even that, boys.

Missiles (and all seeking weapons) caused plenty of balance problems for SFC2. They are still having to balance plasma in SFB, and they watch drones very carefully. They just problematical.

Also, they add tactical complexity for newbies to deal with. They're harder to master the use of properly, and hard for newbies to deal with successfully. Since Taldren clearly wanted to simplify the game, they got chopped. IMO.

Personally, I think their loss makes the game tactically uninteresting. Direct-fire only leaves too few tactics to master. Games take on a dreary sameness. IMO. I'd love to see them back in the game.

W.

DONOTDELETE · « **Reply #41 on:** January 20, 2003, 10:20:47 am »

Well EE, if you want to get technical, the "Homing photon" that Spock and McCoy built in about 5 minutes, while under fire seemed much like a MISSLE/Drone, didnt it?

Not only that, it homed in on CLOAKED SHIPS!!

Talk about MAGIC PHOTONS INDEED!

In TOS "Balance of Terror" and "Nemesis" we have seen ships firing blind, laying down a pattern when attacking cloaked ships... We also saw in the TOS episode with "Nomad" that the Enterprise could absorb the energy of 90 photon torpedos with its front shield.. repeatedly!

Do you REALLY want Trek "CANON"?

In ST2:TWOK we saw a single torpedo hit from a K'Tinga take out the Energizer on the Enterprise and kill a legendary officer (Sulu)..

Do you REALLY want Trek "CANON"?

Kzintis WERE in Animated TOS, and they DID have drones. Hence, if we are using TREK "CANON" EVERYTHING ever shown on screen IS acceptable, is it not?

Then again, in Trek "CANON" ships can fight at warp speed, see TOS episode "The Balance of Terror" when the Enterprise was at "Full reverse, Emergency warp speed" while fleeing a plasma (that DID hit) and Sulu said "If we only had one phaser, we could detonate it".

Either Sulu is an idiot, or you can fire phasers at warp speed, per Trek "CANON".

As I believe I have shown, Trek "Canon" is so totally inconsistent and worthless as a guide that the mere mention of it in an argument should be grounds for the express ride to HELL, lol!

Anyhow, the base reason they took out drones is:

You have to THINK to use stuff like that, not merely point and shoot when the pretty little lights come on.

Have a nice day!

loc621 · « **Reply #42 on:** January 22, 2003, 07:58:31 am »

im sorry, you had to think to use missles. i never did think thats why i used them p-torps were a lot harder to use, all i did was fire em a point blank or range 40 and i could wup dn's and bb's in my little mdc+ which had the best size to missle ratio and got me pit against cl's and low ca's mostly, the m-cva was a carrier and fighter didn't suit my fighting style but was one hell of a hard ship

ActiveX · « **Reply #43 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:16:19 am »

How did you have to think to use missiles?

Seems to me all you did was fire and forget...

loc621 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:21:51 am »

x has a point, all you did was pick a target fire enough missles at it 50/50 chance it was dead, especialy when you fire between 6 and 10 missles in a single salvo, and no one has 10 phaser shots spare ever

Son of Technobabble · « **Reply #45 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:10:16 am »

Ok, I'll accept missiles back IF you bring back PPD too

Vysander · « **Reply #46 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:13:27 am »

going to need a wild weasel back too then

Might as well give us suicide shuttles and scatterpacks again!

Then we better get phaser G's! and ADD's! better put transporter bombs back in for drone defense too!

etc etc etc

Whiplash · « **Reply #47 on:** January 22, 2003, 09:23:07 am »

Yes, yes! Excellent suggestions, Vysander.

W.

Whiplash · « **Reply #48 on:** January 22, 2003, 10:05:45 am »

They're not even fire and forget. What you do with your ship after you fire is very important. If you intend to overwhelm, you need to stay close to them, for example.

Also, all beam weapons by definition are fire and forget. Fire and forget is not a bad thing.

W.

Mr. Hypergol · « **Reply #49 on:** January 22, 2003, 10:39:33 am »

Soooooo......

you want missles back?.......lobby Activision and Taldren to make an SFC4 Galaxies at War.

Those that don't like missles should push for an "all eras" game that has SFB based play in TOS era and more Trek like play in TNG era. The game could explore the evolution of the races, ships, and technology of Trek from Pre-TOS thru TOS all the way to TNG and Nemesis. All you anti-missle types out there could watch the demise of the missle as time passed from TOS thru to the TNG. Wouldn't that be just a pleasure.

Yes....SFC4 Galaxies at War could provide various flavors of gameplay to please everyone....just pick a year between 2150 and 2380 that suites your tastes. The year you select would define the races, map, ships, tech, and weapons available at that point in time. In the spirit of the "total war" series you could play out the great wars from Trek history from a strategic down to a tactical point of view. Just think of it.....

SFC4 Galaxies at War..........ask Activision and Taldren to make it today!!!!!!

NJAntman · « **Reply #50 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:15:11 am »

Barring a miracle with the creation of a SFC4 GAW game for every race in any time..... a "missile" solution for SFC3 could be more variation in shuttles. How about options like "ram selected target" (proxy missile) or "self-destruct at selected point" (proxy T-Bomb)? Make up for the fewer possible shuttles by allowing greater damage with exploding warp cores, or a "recall" command. A "missile" that could chase and fire but be recovered if not ultimately used would add an interesting twist for all races.
Damn shuttles don't do much except force Rom AIs to get distracted and engage as it is. Not that this is a bad thing.

Draco · « **Reply #52 on:** January 22, 2003, 12:45:12 pm »

If their range was not limited things would get very interesting. Warping would only delay the hit, or give someone a few more shots to destroy the missiles, thus soaking up firepower that would have otherwise been directed at the launching ship. For complete effectiveness however the launchers would have to have a very quick re-fire rate as well as a large capacity for the missiles in order to put out a significant number of the weapons. It would otherwise be nothing other than a fancy light show. Though for an effective counter we would need something like a t-bomb, or a torpedo that acts like a flak cannon by blowing up after traveling a predetermined distance.

Hmmm, probably not going to happen, though it might be interesting.

Dvoongar · « **Reply #53 on:** January 22, 2003, 06:18:15 pm »

The unlimited range is a good thought, but couldn't one escape by shaking detection? That is if the mothership must maintain a lock...

ActiveX · « **Reply #54 on:** January 22, 2003, 08:25:50 pm »

This would be interesting with true cloaks...hmm

Cleaven · « **Reply #58 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:03:17 pm »

It seems I did miss the bit where GR said that TAS should not be part of the Trek universe. Evidently there were half a dozen stories that on reflection went a little bit too far with their "science" so the series went out. Use of Niven's Kzinti race probably didn't help things either. Of course that hasn't stopped later ST series from using the same ideas. Probably not a wise decision in hindsight but GR wins, it's his universe.

Deviak · « **Reply #59 on:** January 22, 2003, 11:21:26 pm »

actually Tulmahk..I believe AJ was referring to the first part of the movie when they had the Kobayashi Maru simulation where Saavik was Captain. Of course, that was only a SIMULATION. *chuckle*. Ahh well, some of you should really indulge these guys, they'll say anything to justify SFB. *Sigh*, to tell the truth, I'd want to see SFC4: Galaxies at War as well. However, I don't mind if it's made either. It's Activision's call. I'm not gonna pester them about it. I'll ask about it, but won't pester them.

Deviak · « **Reply #62 on:** January 23, 2003, 12:41:54 am »

*chuckle* sorry Hype ole bud. I'm not gonna push the issue on them. Untill it's warranted and they genuinely want to know what game we want. Meaning when Erik makes the thread to ask what we want. Then I'll make the post in there. Other than that, not gonna push the issue like Whiplash who seems to be using the "Are We There Yet?" technique. Or pester tham and make references everytime it may come up like the rest of you are doing. Lol...sorry man, just know that that game isn't a life or death situation that we have to be like crackheads that need our fix.

EmeraldEdge · « **Reply #63 on:** January 23, 2003, 01:16:07 am »

Don't want to start anything here, but I see this attitude a lot. It's totally fine to have, just want to point something out. Has there every been a post prior to the game getting going, saying "What do you want?". Did they do it for SFC2, OP, or even SFC3? I don't recall seeing that post. I do know that "they" pay attention to what people are calling for, instead of saying "It's time to make a game, guess we'd better go to the people and ask what they want". ATVI owns the rights to do all the trek stuff, and if people are calling for it enough, then they will find a developer to do the game. I'd rather have it sooner than later (like 20 years later). In a lot of places, like game development, I've seen people say things like "I won't give my opinion now, I'll wait until they ask" but "they" don't usually ask, or at least not until far too late to make any major changes, so things go undone. If you want it make it known. You can do it without being a major pest, but best to keep it in the air as much as possible so "they" don't assume it's kind of dead topic. The more things are talked about, the more attention it gets. If ATVI want's to make a killer game, they are obviously would take a cue from what the fans are saying they are wanting.

As for missiles in TNG, or Trek in general, there has been LOADS of documentation about their use and mention in the series. They did exist, along with many other things that others claim aren't "Trek". Oh, well.

On the fire at cloak ship issue, it was fairly effective in BoP, wasn't it? I have the episode, they looked like they were taking some fairly decent hits there. As for the scenes in Nemesis, I haven't seen the film but have heard about it. Wasn't the cloaking device on the Scimitar a new type of cloak that was in fact a "perfect" cloak? Assuming that tech like that doesn't grow on trees most Romulan ships would have a lesser degree of cloak. Heck, the cloak in this "Finally an SFC that is just like Trek" (when in fact it really isnt') game is anything but totally invisible. Why couldn't you be given the option to fire, at a severe disadvantage, at the shadow of the cloaked ship? If you can see it, why not take a pot shot at it, especially in fleet action or when he's staying cloaked a LOT?

loc621 · « **Reply #64 on:** February 04, 2003, 09:24:55 am »

Give me my missles back i realy realy realy need em, and any one who get in my way get a photon grenade under the pillow at night

News:

Topic: missles (Read 13329 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

loc621

EE

loc621

Cleaven

LongTooth

Whiplash

Alidar Jarok

**DONOTDELETE**

loc621

ActiveX

loc621

Son of Technobabble

Vysander

Whiplash

Whiplash

Mr. Hypergol

NJAntman

LongTooth

Draco

Dvoongar

ActiveX

Tulmahk

kitten

Cleaven

Cleaven

Deviak

Mr. Hypergol

Mr. Hypergol

Deviak

EmeraldEdge

loc621

Robb Stark

Dash Jones

Scipio_66

loc621

EE

loc621

Cleaven

LongTooth

Whiplash

Alidar Jarok

**DONOTDELETE**

loc621

ActiveX

loc621

Son of Technobabble

Vysander

Whiplash

Whiplash

Mr. Hypergol

NJAntman

LongTooth

Draco

Dvoongar

ActiveX

Tulmahk

kitten

Cleaven

Cleaven

Deviak

Mr. Hypergol

Mr. Hypergol

Deviak

EmeraldEdge

loc621

Robb Stark

Dash Jones

Scipio_66

Topic: missles (Read 13329 times)

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE