Cruiser Command

boost probably should cost more energy, make you have to think about if you really want to use it or not. I have gotten into fights with noobs about this, (yes, use boost to move the damn ship!! its more efficient, NO! turn up engines, just use the damn boost damnit!!)

My point is that if it were less efficient than the stock enginees, it would be a worthless upgrade. I would votekick for buying it lol (well, maybe not....but probably ;p)

I run power pretty much every game, unless I have someone I know and trust on the team. Sometimes I dip into the reserves VERY heavily. I've chased down opponents without needing boost, and due to the heavy firepower at our teams disposal, won without much contest. Energy reserves might get precariously low, but it works out. I'm not entirely against raising the energy cost, but nerfing it too is a bad idea.

I'll leave this thread with one statement.

It's an upgrade; it should damn well be better than the stock engine. That is all.

well a quick burst of speed at a moments notice IS an upgrade...

like i said, usally you dont want to go about just nerfing or completely changing things
i want to nerf the CD and increase it to 2:00 but increase the amount of time boost is active to about 2-3 more seconds then normal, boost to me seems like something that closes a short distance quickly but people have ben using boost instead of engines all together because it is faster then conventianal means (without jacking it up to 250 but thats alot more power consumed)

Weyoun wrote:well a quick burst of speed at a moments notice IS an upgrade...

I mean, yeah, it would still do this. It's useful for catching small ships, breaking tractor beams, and it has some monstrous acceleration which is great for dodging predator missiles.

I don't think it should replace the actual engines for non-combat travel. That's my vote, if we're voting.

DumbMarine wrote: I don't think it should replace the actual engines for non-combat travel. That's my vote, if we're voting.

This is what I agree with, it should be useful (necessary?) for combat, but it seems wrong for it to be the best method for simply moving the bc around the map.

or introduce a missile (or refit the never used 3rd on top missile that slightly drains energy and does a little damage 'forgot the name') that can cut boosts, turbos and speed transfers for a duration

Weyoun wrote:boost probably should cost more energy, make you have to think about if you really want to use it or not. I have gotten into fights with noobs about this, (yes, use boost to move the damn ship!! its more efficient, NO! turn up engines, just use the damn boost damnit!!)

I agree. The current 3k energy costs is just REALLY low. Cheaper than normal moving and much less of a hassle than raising/lowering engines power on the power console.

I would like to see energy costs somewhere in the range of 5k - 10k. Moving it to Science console is a good idea as well. As of now it's supporting the other consoles/tasks, such as core stab or harass, and engine boost would not be any different.

moving it to science console is a bad idea, you cant bring that much coordination on a team, let alone fire missiles accuratly despite excellent yamato skillz, see what i mean? no, engines has to do with power and Navigation, Science is about messing with the enemy and buffing players and doing crazy stuff

For Navigation Officer Tactical Skill reasons, I would like to see a Short Boost option.
This Boost would near instantly take the BC only 1.5 BC Lengths from it's starting location, would cost 1k Energy, and would have a cool-down of 20 seconds.

In regards to the Long Range Boost, please make its Energy Cost / Distance 2x that of regular Engines. Then increase the duration of the burn by 20%.