test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Ambassador will have to be T3?

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I'm listening to the Part 2 interview with Geko, and he says that when they release the Ambassador it will "have to be a T3 ship"(around 14 mins in). That makes no sense. The Ambassador is more advanced than the Excelsior, and the standard Excelsior is T3. That would mean standard Ambassador would have to be 3.5 at minimum.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Why can't it be both?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    The Excelsior is a tier 3 ship with the retrofit being a tier 5.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Why can't it be both?

    If you mean a standard version and a refit, I agree. However even the standard version should stronger than the standard Excelsior, which is T3. So Ambassador would be 3.5 or something.
    Heathen666 wrote: »
    The Excelsior is a tier 3 ship with the retrofit being a tier 5.

    And the Ambassador is still more advanced than the excelsior, meaning it would still be higher than T3.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Ambassador should be T4.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    If you mean a standard version and a refit, I agree. However even the standard version should stronger than the standard Excelsior, which is T3. So Ambassador would be 3.5 or something.



    And the Ambassador is still more advanced than the excelsior, meaning it would still be higher than T3.

    As is the Exeter from the flux text and that's tier 2. Being honest the only one who can answer the question is Geko and regardless of what answer he gives it will just get drowned out by people with differing opinions.

    *Shrug* A tier 4 or 5 would be nice but it won't stop me grabbing the ship to tootle around in.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Heathen666 wrote: »
    Being honest the only one who can answer the question is Geko

    There is no "question" to answer. The Ambassador class is more advanced than the standard Excelsior class in Trek canon. That is fact. The standard Excelsior class is T3 in STO. That is also fact. None of that is in question.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Ship Tiers HAVE GOT TO GO ! If there is anything being a bottleneck to ships getting put into the game it's AL maybe he needs to go too.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    There is no "question" to answer. The Ambassador class is more advanced than the standard Excelsior class in Trek canon. That is fact. The standard Excelsior class is T3 in STO. That is also fact. None of that is in question.
    The Ambassador is more advanced then the earlier Excelsior, but not more advanced then the Lakota Excelsior Refit - which is why the Refit is a T5.

    Since the Ambassador is not more advanced then the stock Galaxy - or there would be no reason to replace it with the Galaxy - at best we need to see it higher then T3 and lower then T4. So it will be a +1 ship with a configuration that will make it different enough from the T3 Excelsior to make it viable - though I think most would fly it just for its appearance.

    And I assume at some point a T5 version will be included as well - or they might even allow the T3 skin to be used on a Galaxy or Excelsior model.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    OOP wrote: »
    Ship Tiers HAVE GOT TO GO ! If there is anything being a bottleneck to ships getting put into the game it's AL maybe he needs to go too.

    Ship Tiers do need to go.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    dorko1 wrote: »
    Ship Tiers do need to go.

    Totally agree
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    dorko1 wrote: »
    Ship Tiers do need to go.
    No. What needs to go is the stupid idea that outdated ships should even be in the game or viable at end-game. I understand player nostalgia but in canon no one would expect a TOS Connie to stand against a Sovereign - or even an NX to stand against a TOS Connie. All the "Replica" TRIBBLE just distorts canon, IMO.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Ambassador better have a tier 5 Retrofit is all I have to say they made one for Excelsior and its much older than Ambassador by about 40 years. To not have a tier 5 Ambassador is a slap in the face for those of us who have waited over a year seeing it in engineering report after engineering report (before they stopped those) then you bring out the ship we longed for as a worthless piece of garbage. UNACCEPTABLE. AMBASSADOR TIER 5 RETROFIT or C-STORE BOYCOTT forever.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    UNACCEPTABLE. AMBASSADOR TIER 5 RETROFIT or C-STORE BOYCOTT forever.
    Didn't you say the same thing when they announced the Rhode Island? :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    He is nuts... ignore him...

    A T4 and a T5 variant is the way to go... If he cant see that, he should leave the good bottles alone.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    There is no "question" to answer.

    This game's development team established long ago that it absolutely LOVES the Excelsior. To the point where it makes it better than the Galaxy. Let alone the Ambassador. It's all quite annoying, but I gave up long ago trying to make sense of Geko's grasp on ship balance.

    This game launched with a clear system of tiers and ship layout. And then proceeded to spend 2 years doing everything contrary to that.

    I've now come to support the many players who say scrap that idea altogether and let people modify whichever ship they like as they level. But that doesn't fit the pay-to-win mode of the c-store. So I don't have much hope. There's the cash model that needs to be adhered to mixed in with the insanity that has given us the designs of the excelsior, the nebula, the Odyssey, and the like.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cosmic_One wrote: »
    no one would expect a TOS Connie to stand against a Sovereign - or even an NX to stand against a TOS Connie. All the "Replica" TRIBBLE just distorts canon, IMO.

    How can you say that in the exact same thread you talk about the Excelsior being A-OK at end-game?

    Rubbish. Complete rubbish. The Lakota episode doesn't even establish that it should be the case since all it did was take a jury-rigged Excelsior and have it stand up to what was a T4 Escort.

    /boggle
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cosmic_One wrote: »
    Didn't you say the same thing when they announced the Rhode Island? :)

    Not Quite and I didnt buy the Rhode Island until it was on sale and I decided to level some new toons. Ambassador is by far among my favorite ships in Star Trek TRIBBLE me out of her and their cash flow from me ends Im a lifer I dont have to spend a penny to have gold benefits and I wont if they wanna ruin stuff like that. No one in their right mind can have a rational reason why Ambassador should be a lower level ship than Excelsior. Ambassador Class was the class of the Enterprise-C Excelsior was the Enterprise-B it makes no sense in any way shape or form to have her a lower level ship.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    superchum wrote: »
    How can you say that in the exact same thread you talk about the Excelsior being A-OK at end-game?

    Rubbish. Complete rubbish. The Lakota episode doesn't even establish that it should be the case since all it did was take a jury-rigged Excelsior and have it stand up to what was a T4 Escort.

    /boggle
    I didn't build a Lakato Refit that went toe-to-toe with the Defiant. CBS did. But if I were in charge of CBS at the time it never would have happened. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cosmic_One wrote: »
    No. What needs to go is the stupid idea that outdated ships should even be in the game or viable at end-game. I understand player nostalgia but in canon no one would expect a TOS Connie to stand against a Sovereign - or even an NX to stand against a TOS Connie. All the "Replica" TRIBBLE just distorts canon, IMO.

    Yeah.... 'cause there's no way they could upgrade an old ship ship design with modern materials, systems, weapons, etc.


    Oh wait... that's exactly what they did with the Excelsior (Lakota refit). :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Heathen666 wrote: »
    The Excelsior is a tier 3 ship with the retrofit being a tier 5.

    Plausible, I guess.

    The Enterprise-B is already better than the Enterprise-E at doing what it's class designation implies, why shouldn't the Enterprise-C be just as good, if not better?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    mvs5191 wrote: »
    Plausible, I guess.

    The Enterprise-B is already better than the Enterprise-E at doing what it's class designation implies, why shouldn't the Enterprise-C be just as good, if not better?

    Exactly what Im saying Ambassador is a bigger and newer design than the Excelsior with a Retrofit there is no way she would be inferior.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    superchum wrote: »
    How can you say that in the exact same thread you talk about the Excelsior being A-OK at end-game?

    Rubbish. Complete rubbish. The Lakota episode doesn't even establish that it should be the case since all it did was take a jury-rigged Excelsior and have it stand up to what was a T4 Escort.

    /boggle

    You know the relay weird thing about that?

    The only ship to canonically be captained by a Commander was the Defiant, yet it's a Captain tier ship?

    There was pretty much no point at which the tier system was anything but arbitrary and forced.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cuatela wrote:
    Yeah.... 'cause there's no way they could upgrade an old ship ship design with modern materials, systems, weapons, etc.


    Oh wait... that's exactly what they did with the Excelsior (Lakota refit). :rolleyes:
    We should all be honest here. The only reason the Lakota was in that episode was that CBS had the model and used it to save money - cheaper to reuse then to build new. It's the same reason the Mirandas were seen in the battle for DS 9 too.

    The only reason Klingons have Birds of Prey and cloaking devices is because at the last minute the foes in the Search for Spock were changed from Romulan to Klingon. It was then retro-added that they got cloaks from an earlier alliance.

    CBS does stupid things all the time. At a certain point we have to accept that stupid is stupid.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    Cosmic_One wrote: »
    We should all be honest here. The only reason the Lakota was in that episode was that CBS had the model and used it to save money - cheaper to reuse then to build new. It's the same reason the Mirandas were seen in the battle for DS 9 too.

    The only reason Klingons have Birds of Prey and cloaking devices is because at the last minute the foes in the Search for Spock were changed from Romulan to Klingon. It was then retro-added that they got cloaks from an earlier alliance.

    CBS does stupid things all the time. At a certain point we have to accept that stupid is stupid.

    RL explanations dont really matter. When they put it on screen it becomes canon. Even so, the standard Ambassador > the standard Excelsior. And a refitted Ambassador would > the refit Excelsior.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    RL explanations dont really matter. When they put it on screen it becomes canon. Even so, the standard Ambassador > the standard Excelsior. And a refitted Ambassador would > the refit Excelsior.

    The Nagus is wise.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    RL explanations dont really matter. When they put it on screen it becomes canon. Even so, the standard Ambassador > the standard Excelsior. And a refitted Ambassador would > the refit Excelsior.
    That logic does not really hold true. Some things might not be able to be retrofitted to be substantially better. The Excelsior might have just had an original design that allowed for more added features - engineers with more foresight designed the Excelsior.

    Plus we really don't even know if the Ambassador is a good ship. All we really know about it is that one got destroyed trying to save a Klingon outpost. For all we know it was a crappy science-heavy ship and that if an Excelsior was there it would have destroyed all the Roms. :)

    It's all guesswork for both ships as neither has enough appearances to have any real canon established for them.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    I for one will refuse to buy the Ambassador in any form that it comes in until they put in a Captain's Teacup to go with the Excelsior.

    Well, unless there's a ship sale or something. Then I'll make an exception...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    mvs5191 wrote: »
    Plausible, I guess.

    The Enterprise-B is already better than the Enterprise-E at doing what it's class designation implies, why shouldn't the Enterprise-C be just as good, if not better?

    Wouldn't disagree at all...
    I for one will refuse to buy the Ambassador in any form that it comes in until they put in a Captain's Teacup to go with the Excelsior.

    Well, unless there's a ship sale or something. Then I'll make an exception...

    What about a sparkle pony?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    superchum wrote: »
    How can you say that in the exact same thread you talk about the Excelsior being A-OK at end-game?

    Rubbish. Complete rubbish. The Lakota episode doesn't even establish that it should be the case since all it did was take a jury-rigged Excelsior and have it stand up to what was a T4 Escort.

    /boggle

    I would say defiant would be T5 Defiant not the T4 since the defiant has cloak the T4 those not.

    Also keep in mind that not the only time we see Excelsior. Many of the fleet battle in Deep Space 9 had excelsior as part of fleet.

    Along with galaxy class and other ships in game.

    So ok, sure. would I prefer it to be T4 and galaxy the t5. Yup.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2012
    right, ship tiers need to go. but, honestly, i don't have any concept to replace them as of now...

    and a refit-excelsior being t5 is perfectly validated in canon, where the USS Lakota is on par with the defiant...
Sign In or Register to comment.