test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Challengers to the Resolute for Most Hated Ship prize?

124678

Comments

  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    So they actually fixed it at T6? I hadn't looked, I half-expected Cryptic to give the T6 the same attributes as the T5.

    @mustrumridcully0 said:
    > Yeah, stat-wise the BOrtasque is basically identical to the Oddy, so it can do anything the Oddy can.
    >
    > But: The Oddy looks like a beam cruiser. THe Bortasque looks like something using dual cannons. And it can't do that really.

    That's kind of missing the boat: the Bort doesn't just look like it's supposed to be able to mount cannons and use them, it legitimately can equip them because it's still classified as a battlecruiser (smaller, faster, can use cannons) despite being statted as a normal cruiser (slower and fights with beams).

    Then again, the D'Deridex is the same way.
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    As far as I know ALL KDF Cruisers are classified as Battlecruisers as well.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    To get the most out of ANY ship requires time and investment. The Borts are no different.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,196 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    But certain ships do require more time and investment than others.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    I have to admit, I thought the Resolute was the accepted universal worst T6 ship, but seems that is no longer the case.

    Some good points here, it looks like the bottom of the barrel is (in no particular order)

    Advanced Heavy Cruiser [T6] - Resolute Class
    Kobali Samsar Cruiser [T6]
    Bortasqu' [T6] "Battlecruiser"

    And I have to add..

    Vorgon Ytijara Dreadnought Cruiser [T6] because it's a steaming pile.


    I have to admit.. that is a woefully unimpressive list of ships. :smiley:
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    Endeavour (Tactical Star Cruiser [T6]) vs Martok (Tactical Battlecruiser [T6])
    • Hull: 57.000 (Level 60) vs 59.000 (Level 60)
    • Shields: 1.15 vs 1.1
    • Weapons: Both 4 Front, 4 Aft; Martok can use dual cannons
    • Device Slots: 4
    • Turn Rate: 6 vs 6.5
    • Impulse Modifier: Both 0.15
    • Inertia Rating: Both 30
    • Bonus Power: +10 weapons, +5 Shield, +5 Aux vs +10 weapons +10 engines
    • Bridge Officer Seating: Both Cmdr Engineer; Lt.Cmdr Tactical, Lt. Science, Lt.Cmdr Universal|Command, Ensign Universal
    • Cruiser Commands: All vs All except No Attract Fire
    • Special Ability: Advanced Quantum Slipstream Drive vs Cloak
    • Console Slots: Tac 4, Eng 4, Sci 3 vs Tac 5, Eng 4, Sci 2
    • Universal Console: The Same
    • Starship Mastery Differences: Rapid Repairs vs Enhnaced Weapon Slots
    • Admiralty Card: Eng 56, Tac 36, Sci 26 vs Eng 48, Tac 46, Sci 23

    Unless the Tier 6 Oddies are considered among the worst ships, the Tier 6 Bortasque can't be among the worst either.

    I understand the desire to turn it into a dual cannon wielding cruiser, but that is not a requirement to make it a competitive ship.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    I don't understand why anyone would want to use dual cannons on a ship ill-suited for narrow-arc weapons. Just because Cryptic didn't arbitrarily forbid it?
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    I don't understand why anyone would want to use dual cannons on a ship ill-suited for narrow-arc weapons. Just because Cryptic didn't arbitrarily forbid it?

    For me, because it looks the part. Also, the decloak behind the enemy and unleash a massive barrage of cannons is "Klingon" style, and if you're not flying Klingon style, why bother with playing Klingon style ships? ;)
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    warpangel wrote: »
    I don't understand why anyone would want to use dual cannons on a ship ill-suited for narrow-arc weapons. Just because Cryptic didn't arbitrarily forbid it?

    For me, because it looks the part. Also, the decloak behind the enemy and unleash a massive barrage of cannons is "Klingon" style, and if you're not flying Klingon style, why bother with playing Klingon style ships? ;)
    You can do that. It will take a bit longer with slow turn, but not like the enemies can see you cloaked. ;)

    On the other hand, people who intentionally use a strategy that they know is sub-optimal just for style shouldn't complain about it, since it was their own choice.
  • redvengeredvenge Member Posts: 1,425 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    For me, because it looks the part. Also, the decloak behind the enemy and unleash a massive barrage of cannons is "Klingon" style, and if you're not flying Klingon style, why bother with playing Klingon style ships? ;)
    The stats of all the [T6] Flagships are impressive, as are their consoles. The issues some players have with the Bortas'que is slightly more complicated than just the stats as presented.

    The Klingon faction started as the "PvP faction", and still had a large PvP base when the Bortas and Bortas'ques were released. All four of them were sub-par in PvP. Additionally, previous Klingon vessels designated "battlecruiser" had the ability to equip dual cannons and had the high turn rate and high inertia to keep targets within the narrow 45 degree arc that dual cannons required. While those ships still needed some turn-rate consoles, the Bortas line needed several. The Klingon Flagship was considered a "mindless Starfleet-style beam-boat" and was panned by much of the community. This "Starfleet-inspired Klingon Flagship" was even seen as an insult by some. The poor sales of the C-store Bortas'que were blamed as the reason the KDF did not receive new ships for over a year.

    The [T6] Bortas'ques can become dual canon platforms, but requires some very specific gear, which is seen as restrictive. Two pieces of the Flagship Technologies consoles are a must, as is a Conductive RCS console with an extra Turn mod (upgraded as high as possible for the largest Turn boost). The Polaric Modulator and the Counter Command Hyper Impulse Engines raises inertia, this reduces "sliding" while turning to maintain your target in your forward 45 degree arc and improves overall handling. Most battlecruisers don't have this low turn/low inertia issue they have to overcome.

    So, here is a ship with a rocky history with KDF players and a built-in handicap you need specific gear to overcome. I own all the ships in the Bortas'que line and while I can make it an acceptable dual cannon platform, I acknowledge it's many shortcomings. I eventually put that character in the Durgath, which has a lower turn rate (and lower inertia) than the Bortas'que so I freely admit having a bias towards these ponderous behemoths in spite of their poor performance as "battlecruisers".

    Edit: I wrote some of the inertia stuff backwards. Higher is good; lower is bad.
  • nimbullnimbull Member Posts: 1,564 Arc User
    Endeavour (Tactical Star Cruiser [T6]) vs Martok (Tactical Battlecruiser [T6])
    • Hull: 57.000 (Level 60) vs 59.000 (Level 60)
    • Shields: 1.15 vs 1.1
    • Weapons: Both 4 Front, 4 Aft; Martok can use dual cannons
    • Device Slots: 4
    • Turn Rate: 6 vs 6.5
    • Impulse Modifier: Both 0.15
    • Inertia Rating: Both 30
    • Bonus Power: +10 weapons, +5 Shield, +5 Aux vs +10 weapons +10 engines
    • Bridge Officer Seating: Both Cmdr Engineer; Lt.Cmdr Tactical, Lt. Science, Lt.Cmdr Universal|Command, Ensign Universal
    • Cruiser Commands: All vs All except No Attract Fire
    • Special Ability: Advanced Quantum Slipstream Drive vs Cloak
    • Console Slots: Tac 4, Eng 4, Sci 3 vs Tac 5, Eng 4, Sci 2
    • Universal Console: The Same
    • Starship Mastery Differences: Rapid Repairs vs Enhnaced Weapon Slots
    • Admiralty Card: Eng 56, Tac 36, Sci 26 vs Eng 48, Tac 46, Sci 23

    Unless the Tier 6 Oddies are considered among the worst ships, the Tier 6 Bortasque can't be among the worst either.

    I understand the desire to turn it into a dual cannon wielding cruiser, but that is not a requirement to make it a competitive ship.

    I'm flying the Martok and it's pretty great for beam boat'n. The looks aren't bad and my power levels are running around 125/75+/75+/75+ with my engie before buffs. The extra natural turn and engine power is nice enough for me to load the nausican torpedo launcher so I get extra umpf from the disruptor tactical consoles for it on spreads.
    Green people don't have to be.... little.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    redvenge wrote: »
    For me, because it looks the part. Also, the decloak behind the enemy and unleash a massive barrage of cannons is "Klingon" style, and if you're not flying Klingon style, why bother with playing Klingon style ships? ;)
    The stats of all the [T6] Flagships are impressive, as are their consoles. The issues some players have with the Bortas'que is slightly more complicated than just the stats as presented.

    The Klingon faction started as the "PvP faction", and still had a large PvP base when the Bortas and Bortas'ques were released. All four of them were sub-par in PvP. Additionally, previous Klingon vessels designated "battlecruiser" had the ability to equip dual cannons and had the high turn rate and high inertia to keep targets within the narrow 45 degree arc that dual cannons required. While those ships still needed some turn-rate consoles, the Bortas line needed several. The Klingon Flagship was considered a "mindless Starfleet-style beam-boat" and was panned by much of the community. This "Starfleet-inspired Klingon Flagship" was even seen as an insult by some. The poor sales of the C-store Bortas'que were blamed as the reason the KDF did not receive new ships for over a year.

    The [T6] Bortas'ques can become dual canon platforms, but requires some very specific gear, which is seen as restrictive. Two pieces of the Flagship Technologies consoles are a must, as is a Conductive RCS console with an extra Turn mod (upgraded as high as possible for the largest Turn boost). The Polaric Modulator and the Counter Command Hyper Impulse Engines raises inertia, this reduces "sliding" while turning to maintain your target in your forward 45 degree arc and improves overall handling. Most battlecruisers don't have this low turn/low inertia issue they have to overcome.

    So, here is a ship with a rocky history with KDF players and a built-in handicap you need specific gear to overcome. I own all the ships in the Bortas'que line and while I can make it an acceptable dual cannon platform, I acknowledge it's many shortcomings. I eventually put that character in the Durgath, which has a lower turn rate (and lower inertia) than the Bortas'que so I freely admit having a bias towards these ponderous behemoths in spite of their poor performance as "battlecruisers".
    But it's NOT a "built-in handicap." It's a "handicap" people made up by insisting on using cannons on it, of their own free will. Might as well say the Odyssey has a "built-in handicap" when it comes to cannons, since it's artificially restricted to singles. That would actually be more correct, even.

    Cryptic decided how the Odyssey is to be armed, while the Bortasqu leaves that choice to the player. You have a choice of going out of your way to make it an "acceptable" dual cannon platform with shortcomings, or just putting in the wide-arc weapons that slow-turning ships are normally equipped with and perform well with.

    Would it have been better if they had forbidden it from equipping dual cannons completely? To stop people putting in gear they know doesn't fit well and then blaming the ship for it.
  • redvengeredvenge Member Posts: 1,425 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    But it's NOT a "built-in handicap." It's a "handicap" people made up by insisting on using cannons on it, of their own free will. Might as well say the Odyssey has a "built-in handicap" when it comes to cannons, since it's artificially restricted to singles. That would actually be more correct, even.
    The Bortas line of ships are battlecruisers that suck at being battlecruisers. It's like a science vessel with only an Ens Sci, a Lt Sci and 2 science console slots. Sure, they call it a science vessel but it sucks at being a science vessel.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    Would it make you feel better if it was classified as a standard Cruiser rather than a Battlecruiser? Because you seem to be hung up on that detail and cannons as if it is the ONLY thing that matters period.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,794 Arc User
    The T6 Bortasqus crush the Resolute. It's not even close.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    The T6 Bortasqus crush the Resolute. It's not even close.

    I totally agree, but they seem to be about the same level of popularity.

    I can't remember the last time I have seen either one of them in game.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    Huh... wonder how one of those would do with my beam builds...
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    The T6 Bortasqus crush the Resolute. It's not even close.

    I totally agree, but they seem to be about the same level of popularity.

    I can't remember the last time I have seen either one of them in game.

    saw a Bort today...in the queue mission for Gamma.

    Parked. because he couldn't actually go anywhere on the map before the rest of us cleared the problems, but he did an appreciable job of respawning between waves.



    lol.. Nice.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,794 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    The T6 Bortasqus crush the Resolute. It's not even close.

    I totally agree, but they seem to be about the same level of popularity.

    I can't remember the last time I have seen either one of them in game.
    I see a lot more Excelsior variants but that's almost certainly because of Federation population. Ship popularity isn't necessarily indicative of how good a ship is.

    Another example of this is the Galaxy. I see tons of Galaxy ships flying around but the Galaxy isn't a great ship at all. It's barely better than the T6 Excelsior but it's popular because it's a Galaxy.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,196 Arc User
    I really wouldn't say that it is better.
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,794 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    avoozuul wrote: »
    I really wouldn't say that it is better.
    The T6 Galaxy has a universal ensign station over the Resolute's engineering ensign station. Otherwise the boff layout is the exact same. Both have 3 tac consoles for c-store. Resolute fleet version has an extra tac console though. Resolute has a slightly better turn rate but that doesn't matter since both ships will broadside.

    At c-store level, the Galaxy is clearly better. Or you could say less terrible if you prefer. The universal seat gives you another SRO that the Resolute just can't get. At fleet level, the Resolute get's a 4th tac console which makes the ships seem like a wash. I don't think the 4th tac console matters since it's already too useless to consider using to even worry about having the 4th tac console. I mean, only a Lt comm tac slot with all those useless engineering boff powers? Trash.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • redvengeredvenge Member Posts: 1,425 Arc User
    The T6 Bortasqus crush the Resolute. It's not even close.
    This is 100% factual.
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Huh... wonder how one of those would do with my beam builds...
    All the [T6] Borta'ques have different BOff layouts and lend themselves to plenty of experimentation with beams.

    The Resolute has a far more restricted BOff layout and will be worse than any other ship (with the possible exception of the Samsar).
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Would it make you feel better if it was classified as a standard Cruiser rather than a Battlecruiser? Because you seem to be hung up on that detail and cannons as if it is the ONLY thing that matters period.

    why not? the "Miracle Worker" cruisers are all cruisers. by making the Bloat-boat a 'Battlecruiser' it got all the negative traits, but not the positive ones. Being "allowed" to mount a weapon it's not "able" to use isn't a bonus, and it takes the hit all Battlecruisers take-but without the good maneuverability and combat stats.

    Thus, ending up a lesser and gimped version of a better Starfleet ship. Might as well call it a cruiser, give it the missing item slot, missing cruiser command, and cruiser restrictions (that in general, aren't a hindrance on Cruisers) and call it what it is, instead of pretending it fits in a lineup with a Vor'cha, Negh'var, D-7, K'tinga, etc. etc. etc.
    What negative traits? Not having the Attract Fire cruiser command? Someone actually uses that? What item slot is it supposed to be missing? Neither the ingame description nor the wiki says any such thing.

    At least of the T6 versions, the KDF are clearly better than the Fed versions. They have more hull, more tac consoles, a bit faster turn, a cloak and are allowed to equip dual cannons, if you really want to.

    The T5 versions are more tradeoffish (based on stats, I don't own them at T5), with the KDF a bit slower to compensate the other advantages. That's "lesser and gimped?"

    Of course, for all that they both lose miserably to the Scimitars, but such is life. :D
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    redvenge wrote: »
    The Resolute has a far more restricted BOff layout and will be worse than any other ship (with the possible exception of the Samsar).

    Funny thing... I have the T5 Excelsior, and I was able to make a rather fun Gaseous Anomaly build. Pretty much every gas venting ability I could fit on her. Did alright in the old Na'kuhl alerts. Was mostly a bit of a joke build but surpisingly it worked. Also had a full set of Dominion Polaron beams too.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
This discussion has been closed.