agreed , i play a support role as a tac in science ships , may not do the big flashy numbers all the escort-jocks like to see , but a lot can be said for effective crowd control
I say a science ship. Since there hasn't been any new ones in the C-store. The last few either been a cruiser or carrier. I know I won't get one. I'm still waiting for the Ambassador Class.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Use it for its purpose? I know thats such a hard concept for people to imagine now a days. But a dedicated Science Build can and will tear things apart in this game. DPS does not need to be King..its only King right now because people allow it to be.
Its because its built around finishing times, and the best way to accomplish times is to be fast...and the best way to be fast is do lots of damage. I do believe science ships can do some damage...but lets face it...just isn't going to do the damage of a escort shoving a CRF III down the borgs throat.
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
agreed , i play a support role as a tac in science ships , may not do the big flashy numbers all the escort-jocks like to see , but a lot can be said for effective crowd control
yes, i agree that sci peeps have great effective debuffing and shield stripping, and crowd control. however, this is the problem. giving this ship dual cannons will be op. a good sci player ( not even a great sci player, but a good one) can cause all sorts of havoc and pretty much take you one on one. adding dual cannons will keep them the same while giving them the firepower to shred you down b4 you can push a button.
imho, if they are gonna add dual weapons to this ship and it is going to be a sci ship, then you take away a weapons slot (front or back i dont care) and you take away the built in target subsystems. that would balance it.. haveing a sci ship with sensor scan, crf, and beam target sub. sys, shields with a tach beam going would be kinda redonkulous.
just my opinion. i run a temp sci vessel (as an engineer) with two canons (single) and a dual beam, and three turrets in the back. i also run both my univ. consoles as tac consoles. once i have been on someone for a few seconds i can do lots and lots of dps and have uber surviveability. (im not topping charts, but i am reaking havoc. if i had dual cannons, i would probably double my dps.
yes, i agree that sci peeps have great effective debuffing and shield stripping, and crowd control. however, this is the problem. giving this ship dual cannons will be op. a good sci player ( not even a great sci player, but a good one) can cause all sorts of havoc and pretty much take you one on one. adding dual cannons will keep them the same while giving them the firepower to shred you down b4 you can push a button.
imho, if they are gonna add dual weapons to this ship and it is going to be a sci ship, then you take away a weapons slot (front or back i dont care) and you take away the built in target subsystems. that would balance it.. haveing a sci ship with sensor scan, crf, and beam target sub. sys, shields with a tach beam going would be kinda redonkulous.
just my opinion. i run a temp sci vessel (as an engineer) with two canons (single) and a dual beam, and three turrets in the back. i also run both my univ. consoles as tac consoles. once i have been on someone for a few seconds i can do lots and lots of dps and have uber surviveability. (im not topping charts, but i am reaking havoc. if i had dual cannons, i would probably double my dps.
Al confirmed in an interview awhile back that if they let her slot cannons - which he believed they would because the designer wanted her like the books - that she will be able to slot any cannon - dual or dual heavy cannon.
She's a tiny bit smaller - only a few meters - than the Sov but designed tighter for more manuverability to use the cannons up front so I would say a 37 to 39k hull and a 12 turn
4 weapons in front 3 in the rear - 10 console slots - 4/4/2 or better 4/3/3
1.3 shield mod
3 univ BO 1 cmdr Sci 1 Lt cmd sci
Sub system targeting and enhanced sensor analysis
i would run her with 2 dual heavys up front, 1 dual beam and 1 wide angle torp and 2 turrets rear and a quatum torp
3 things you need to understand:
- $$$ is everything
-- Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls
-- Vesta launches with season 7 - she needs to be a sales smash hit going into fiscal year end.
I speculate the Vesta will cost you 2500 Zen and that the Klingons will whine about not getting a new ship too.
4 new Fed ships for every new Klingon ship. That's how it's gonna be as long as less than 20% play the Klingon faction. In my opinion this is completely fair and justified considering Cryptics scarce ressources.
Al confirmed in an interview awhile back that if they let her slot cannons - which he believed they would because the designer wanted her like the books - that she will be able to slot any cannon - dual or dual heavy cannon.
She's a tiny bit smaller - only a few meters - than the Sov but designed tighter for more manuverability to use the cannons up front so I would say a 37 to 39k hull and a 12 turn
4 weapons in front 3 in the rear - 10 console slots - 4/4/2 or better 4/3/3
1.3 shield mod
3 univ BO 1 cmdr Sci 1 Lt cmd sci
Sub system targeting and enhanced sensor analysis
i would run her with 2 dual heavys up front, 1 dual beam and 1 wide angle torp and 2 turrets rear and a quatum torp
3 things you need to understand:
- $$$ is everything
-- Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls
-- Vesta launches with season 7 - she needs to be a sales smash hit going into fiscal year end.
Is no way they are gonna make it that OP...thats a escort the size of a cruiser with a science captain.
Why do people make such a big deal about SST? I mean its a nice added bonus to science ships but I mean who really uses Auxiliary or Engine targeting except in special situations? Not to mention any escort can easily rock Target Shields III
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
levi always does this , every time a new ships coming out suddenly it has to be biggest most op because of money
said the exact same thing about the regent too
as for sst and SA , its just part of the package with science ships , suppose at an attempt of balance due to less weapon slots then any other ship
Nothing I mentioned this time is crazy
she is almost as big as the Sov - by just a few meters - so hull should be 37-39k
sci frequently has a 1.3 shield mod
she was designed for adv manuverability to use the cannons and slipstream - so a 12 turn would be reasonable
1 cmd sci and 1 lt cmdr sci is normal - and 3 uni slots is not way out there
Al said she will be able to load dual heavy cannons
her size means 4 slots up front
10 console slots for this ship which is brand new and a flagship sci + had to be paid for/lincenced would also be reasonable
and yes they are launching her with there "big" season 7 - just before year end and Christmas - which most companies try to come out with OP products to boost year end sales
so what in my comment was way out?
I hope she is the first in the next step up to Tier 6 ships - why should Starfleet or any company not keep advancing the bar? In fact every company from Apple computers to intel chips to nike running shows keeps coming out with better copies of there last thing which is a bit better than the thing they put out 6 months or a year ago - it's called American Capitalism. Car's arm made to fall apart in a few years so that you have to replace with the new better ones - it's called planned obsolesence - the cornerstone of American innovation and manufacturing.
its the three universal officers that made me chuckle
as well as the ten consoles
and why does her size mean 4 slots up front ? the nebula and DSSV are arguably bigger or as big as the sovereign , and they only have three
Oddy has 2 uni - so I would say that is the min - if they come out with just 1 and not 3 versions as they most likely will I think they will go with 3 uni BO slots
Both Nebula and DSSV are smaller - DSSV definitely and are also T5 ships - not T5.5 - so 4 slots up front would be reasonable as well.
personally I think she will be the first in the line of what could be called T6 ships so 10 slots would be resonable as well
this is the first all new sci/crusier - hard to classify - since the oddy so she will be on the OP side - and why not? As i explained in the last post it's progess - or planned obsolesence of all other ships - if you want the best you pay up - the way it is with everything else out there. You could get by just fine with your Iphone 4S from 6 months ago - but 5 million have already moved up to Iphone 5
And in every sport and competative market, etc, etc in America you have to pay to win. Why do ticket prices for games keep going up? Because you have to buy the best players to win.
Both Nebula and DSSV are smaller - DSSV definitely and are also T5 ships - not T5.5 - so 4 slots up front would be reasonable as well.
I think you're confusing the Vesta with a $20 single unlock Fleet ship attained through the Fleet system. This is almost assuredly going to be a $25 account unlock T5 ship with a $20 single unlock improved Fleet version released later (for $5 if you've previously bought the $25 version).
i think if you look at the nebula and DSSV and compare the mass of the two shipswith the vesta , they will be closer than you think , sheer length doesnt mean anything
you seem to be having a problem considering the odyssey too
that ISNT a baseline ship to which others are compared . the odyssey is the flagship .
FLAGSHIP!
its powerful with unique features for this reason . you seem to think that all ships after the odyssey will build on its power base and keep getting stronger .
this is not the case ( look at the regent )
just because the odyssey has ten consoles x number of universal bridge stations , does not necessarily mean the vesta will have this too
i think if you look at the nebula and DSSV and compare the mass of the two shipswith the vesta , they will be closer than you think , sheer length doesnt mean anything
you seem to be having a problem considering the odyssey too
that ISNT a baseline ship to which others are compared . the odyssey is the flagship .
FLAGSHIP!
its powerful with unique features for this reason . you seem to think that all ships after the odyssey will build on its power base and keep getting stronger .
this is not the case ( look at the regent )
just because the odyssey has ten consoles x number of universal bridge stations , does not necessarily mean the vesta will have this too
Well i am done speculating - there really is no point - we get what we get. And we will find out next month.
If she is OP and one up's the bar I will be very happy - the rest of the people will just have to deal with it.
you seem to be having a problem considering the odyssey too
that ISNT a baseline ship to which others are compared . the odyssey is the flagship .
FLAGSHIP!
And, according to Geko, the Odyssey was only given ten console slots to make it less problematic (read: detrimental) to slot all three Odyssey specialty consoles, thus making buying the fifty dollar three pack a more sensible option.
That's not likely to apply to the Vesta. Unless maybe you want to gut it of special properties (like cannon use) and assign those properties to three separate consoles which must be slotted to gain their utility, then divide those consoles between three separate $25 ships...
And, according to Geko, the Odyssey was only given ten console slots to make it less problematic (read: detrimental) to slot all three Odyssey specialty consoles, thus making buying the fifty dollar three pack a more sensible option.
That's not likely to apply to the Vesta. Unless maybe you want to gut it of special properties (like cannon use) and assign those properties to three separate consoles which must be slotted to gain their utility, then divide those consoles between three separate $25 ships...
As I said before Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls only! Not saying your either but I hate the balance argument - we need an arms race here in STO not balance! Good for profit as the Feregi would say and every arms manufacture in the world.
I will get back to you if I ever decide to sub for 3 years
...?
I think you're thinking of the Chimera Class, which is the 1000 Day Veteran Reward. The Vesta is going to a CStore ship released with Season Seven. Two totally different ships,
As I said before Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls only! Not saying your either but I hate the balance argument - we need an arms race here is STO not balance! Good for profit as the Feregi would say and every arms manufacture in the world.
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting themespecially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
I have to agree , cryptic cannot really do a ' tier six ' because it would basically destroy their entire catalogue of ships. noone would ever buy t5 ships anymore
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
I have to agree , cryptic cannot really do a ' tier six ' because it would basically destroy their entire catalogue of ships. noone would ever buy t5 ships anymore
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
They can theoretically do a T6... but it's going to be problematic.
The Ask Cryptic seems to hint at being able to use your other ships as NPC backup with the Admiral rank when it's introduced. So T5 ships will still, theoretically, have some utility post-T5. Even with the presence of a T6 you might buy a D'Kyr if it's the best you can get at T5 while on your way to T6 (the way you might buy a +1 ship from earlier tiers).
This does, however, make buying any T5 ship less palatable as a whole since it requires a large(r) investment (than previous tiers) for something you're only going to be using temporarily. I think we can all agree that T5 CStore ships sell more than T1 to T4 CStore ships, and if you take a look at the ship releases I think Cryptic would agree there (we don't see them padding the intermediate tiers with more ships, do we?). This is no doubt due to them being seen as "endgame" ships... something you do invalidate with a T6 being introduced.
So it will devalue their entire catalogue of T5 ships... but while it will make them less attractive to buy, it won't make them substandard options within their tiers. So there's still some reason to purchase them. It will make them viewed as worth less as opposed to nearly worthless. It just raises the question of whether or not they will have enough merit to justify a price tag ranging from $20 to $25 each for something that will only really be used temporarily and then only see a sort of very limited functionality (and I'm thinking, generally, no here, that they won't be seen as having a worth to justify the price).
So I see introducing a T6 as a bad decision, but not as foolish as obsoleting ships within a tier.
When you make ships obsolete within their own tier you're not likely to be making any sales from your backlog beyond that one ship you've crowned king. While people might invest for a temporary benefit that's made immediately invalid when you've made that potential investment inferior even for that temporary period. You might still sell a D'Kyr to someone who is Vulcan-obsessed or a ship collector, but that's about it. And you could make those sales regardless of stats. So you'd be selling to a minority which, realistically, were already a sale in the bag. The idea, of course, isn't to try and sell to people who are already sold on what you're providing, but to everyone else... and when you make a ship obsolete you all but guarantee your loss of all of those potential sales.
Now remember the whole concept of churn, and you really begin to see how bad that idea is. When players frequently aren't even around for one year your backlog becomes incredibly important since that's going to be the only catalogue that most players will ever see. They aren't going to be sticking around for years to be continually gouged by better and better ships. If you want multiple sales from these people you need past offerings to retain some degree of merit, a concept which an in-tier "arms race" system just dumps all over.
So there's some potential for new tiers (though it will be problematic), while the "arms race" idea within tiers is basically like trying to make a career out of selling your kidneys... you might be looking at a nice one-time short term gain when you release a new product, but as a career opportunity it's going to hurt in the long run...
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting themespecially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
I think you're thinking of the Chimera Class, which is the 1000 Day Veteran Reward. The Vesta is going to a CStore ship released with Season Seven. Two totally different ships,
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
And...?
Ultimately the Fleet ships are specifically there to tap people for more revenue. To hit people again for something they've essentially already paid for.
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Most people aren't here for a year. If you've been around awhile and spend time befriending new people you'd have noticed this from your friend list.
You're focused on individual, successive sales to a static base, which lacks foresight. In order to tap transient gamers multiple times Cryptic's backlog is all-important, otherwise those players only have one valid option to buy; the "OP" one. That makes all of the time and effort you put into previous offerings all but worthless, and beyond that means you have to continually be developing new product to sustain yourself as you've made all your old product anathema to consumers. It means you can no longer rely on people wanting try out your old products because you've basically boxed them up, nailed their coffins closed, and buried them in salted earth.
So you've made your potential to earn via your past work all but nil. You've made your job harder by requiring a more steady, constantly flow of product to have any chance of seeing revenue. And you've done this to try and "one up" old products in order to try and continuously tap your installed base, a stagnant and shrinking portion of your market where new players are the norm, and the more lucrative option.
So basically you've shot yourself in the foot, oh, about three times.
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Ok fine - then what is the point of releasing new ships at all? To just continue the statis quo? If you only cater to the churn then I guess there is little incentive to stay.
Let's not even think of PvP - they need to finally throw the dirt on that coffin in it's grave and bury it once and for all!
The atrox is the biggest ship in the game, that alone is worthy of a lot of love.
And ofc the freudian cigar with onions shape it has, 2up right there. You still can't mess with that.
But more than anything you simply won't find a better ship to grind stf while watching tv hands down. You don't even have to be within attack range.
On top you get the best of the dps animations, that being sci abilities, and I'd say what is there not to love ? Slow turn rate ? I don't have to move into combat myself :cool:
Comments
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Its because its built around finishing times, and the best way to accomplish times is to be fast...and the best way to be fast is do lots of damage. I do believe science ships can do some damage...but lets face it...just isn't going to do the damage of a escort shoving a CRF III down the borgs throat.
yes, i agree that sci peeps have great effective debuffing and shield stripping, and crowd control. however, this is the problem. giving this ship dual cannons will be op. a good sci player ( not even a great sci player, but a good one) can cause all sorts of havoc and pretty much take you one on one. adding dual cannons will keep them the same while giving them the firepower to shred you down b4 you can push a button.
imho, if they are gonna add dual weapons to this ship and it is going to be a sci ship, then you take away a weapons slot (front or back i dont care) and you take away the built in target subsystems. that would balance it.. haveing a sci ship with sensor scan, crf, and beam target sub. sys, shields with a tach beam going would be kinda redonkulous.
just my opinion. i run a temp sci vessel (as an engineer) with two canons (single) and a dual beam, and three turrets in the back. i also run both my univ. consoles as tac consoles. once i have been on someone for a few seconds i can do lots and lots of dps and have uber surviveability. (im not topping charts, but i am reaking havoc. if i had dual cannons, i would probably double my dps.
Al confirmed in an interview awhile back that if they let her slot cannons - which he believed they would because the designer wanted her like the books - that she will be able to slot any cannon - dual or dual heavy cannon.
She's a tiny bit smaller - only a few meters - than the Sov but designed tighter for more manuverability to use the cannons up front so I would say a 37 to 39k hull and a 12 turn
4 weapons in front 3 in the rear - 10 console slots - 4/4/2 or better 4/3/3
1.3 shield mod
3 univ BO 1 cmdr Sci 1 Lt cmd sci
Sub system targeting and enhanced sensor analysis
i would run her with 2 dual heavys up front, 1 dual beam and 1 wide angle torp and 2 turrets rear and a quatum torp
3 things you need to understand:
- $$$ is everything
-- Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls
-- Vesta launches with season 7 - she needs to be a sales smash hit going into fiscal year end.
4 new Fed ships for every new Klingon ship. That's how it's gonna be as long as less than 20% play the Klingon faction. In my opinion this is completely fair and justified considering Cryptics scarce ressources.
Is no way they are gonna make it that OP...thats a escort the size of a cruiser with a science captain.
Why do people make such a big deal about SST? I mean its a nice added bonus to science ships but I mean who really uses Auxiliary or Engine targeting except in special situations? Not to mention any escort can easily rock Target Shields III
said the exact same thing about the regent too
as for sst and SA , its just part of the package with science ships , suppose at an attempt of balance due to less weapon slots then any other ship
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Nothing I mentioned this time is crazy
she is almost as big as the Sov - by just a few meters - so hull should be 37-39k
sci frequently has a 1.3 shield mod
she was designed for adv manuverability to use the cannons and slipstream - so a 12 turn would be reasonable
1 cmd sci and 1 lt cmdr sci is normal - and 3 uni slots is not way out there
Al said she will be able to load dual heavy cannons
her size means 4 slots up front
10 console slots for this ship which is brand new and a flagship sci + had to be paid for/lincenced would also be reasonable
and yes they are launching her with there "big" season 7 - just before year end and Christmas - which most companies try to come out with OP products to boost year end sales
so what in my comment was way out?
I hope she is the first in the next step up to Tier 6 ships - why should Starfleet or any company not keep advancing the bar? In fact every company from Apple computers to intel chips to nike running shows keeps coming out with better copies of there last thing which is a bit better than the thing they put out 6 months or a year ago - it's called American Capitalism. Car's arm made to fall apart in a few years so that you have to replace with the new better ones - it's called planned obsolesence - the cornerstone of American innovation and manufacturing.
as well as the ten consoles
and why does her size mean 4 slots up front ? the nebula and DSSV are arguably bigger or as big as the sovereign , and they only have three
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Oddy has 2 uni - so I would say that is the min - if they come out with just 1 and not 3 versions as they most likely will I think they will go with 3 uni BO slots
Both Nebula and DSSV are smaller - DSSV definitely and are also T5 ships - not T5.5 - so 4 slots up front would be reasonable as well.
personally I think she will be the first in the line of what could be called T6 ships so 10 slots would be resonable as well
this is the first all new sci/crusier - hard to classify - since the oddy so she will be on the OP side - and why not? As i explained in the last post it's progess - or planned obsolesence of all other ships - if you want the best you pay up - the way it is with everything else out there. You could get by just fine with your Iphone 4S from 6 months ago - but 5 million have already moved up to Iphone 5
And in every sport and competative market, etc, etc in America you have to pay to win. Why do ticket prices for games keep going up? Because you have to buy the best players to win.
I think you're confusing the Vesta with a $20 single unlock Fleet ship attained through the Fleet system. This is almost assuredly going to be a $25 account unlock T5 ship with a $20 single unlock improved Fleet version released later (for $5 if you've previously bought the $25 version).
Season Seven doesn't even seem posed to raise the level cap to Admiral, much less Fleet Admiral. So no, you're apparently wrong.
you seem to be having a problem considering the odyssey too
that ISNT a baseline ship to which others are compared . the odyssey is the flagship .
FLAGSHIP!
its powerful with unique features for this reason . you seem to think that all ships after the odyssey will build on its power base and keep getting stronger .
this is not the case ( look at the regent )
just because the odyssey has ten consoles x number of universal bridge stations , does not necessarily mean the vesta will have this too
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Well i am done speculating - there really is no point - we get what we get. And we will find out next month.
If she is OP and one up's the bar I will be very happy - the rest of the people will just have to deal with it.
And, according to Geko, the Odyssey was only given ten console slots to make it less problematic (read: detrimental) to slot all three Odyssey specialty consoles, thus making buying the fifty dollar three pack a more sensible option.
That's not likely to apply to the Vesta. Unless maybe you want to gut it of special properties (like cannon use) and assign those properties to three separate consoles which must be slotted to gain their utility, then divide those consoles between three separate $25 ships...
As I said before Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls only! Not saying your either but I hate the balance argument - we need an arms race here in STO not balance! Good for profit as the Feregi would say and every arms manufacture in the world.
...?
I think you're thinking of the Chimera Class, which is the 1000 Day Veteran Reward. The Vesta is going to a CStore ship released with Season Seven. Two totally different ships,
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting them especially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
They can theoretically do a T6... but it's going to be problematic.
The Ask Cryptic seems to hint at being able to use your other ships as NPC backup with the Admiral rank when it's introduced. So T5 ships will still, theoretically, have some utility post-T5. Even with the presence of a T6 you might buy a D'Kyr if it's the best you can get at T5 while on your way to T6 (the way you might buy a +1 ship from earlier tiers).
This does, however, make buying any T5 ship less palatable as a whole since it requires a large(r) investment (than previous tiers) for something you're only going to be using temporarily. I think we can all agree that T5 CStore ships sell more than T1 to T4 CStore ships, and if you take a look at the ship releases I think Cryptic would agree there (we don't see them padding the intermediate tiers with more ships, do we?). This is no doubt due to them being seen as "endgame" ships... something you do invalidate with a T6 being introduced.
So it will devalue their entire catalogue of T5 ships... but while it will make them less attractive to buy, it won't make them substandard options within their tiers. So there's still some reason to purchase them. It will make them viewed as worth less as opposed to nearly worthless. It just raises the question of whether or not they will have enough merit to justify a price tag ranging from $20 to $25 each for something that will only really be used temporarily and then only see a sort of very limited functionality (and I'm thinking, generally, no here, that they won't be seen as having a worth to justify the price).
So I see introducing a T6 as a bad decision, but not as foolish as obsoleting ships within a tier.
When you make ships obsolete within their own tier you're not likely to be making any sales from your backlog beyond that one ship you've crowned king. While people might invest for a temporary benefit that's made immediately invalid when you've made that potential investment inferior even for that temporary period. You might still sell a D'Kyr to someone who is Vulcan-obsessed or a ship collector, but that's about it. And you could make those sales regardless of stats. So you'd be selling to a minority which, realistically, were already a sale in the bag. The idea, of course, isn't to try and sell to people who are already sold on what you're providing, but to everyone else... and when you make a ship obsolete you all but guarantee your loss of all of those potential sales.
Now remember the whole concept of churn, and you really begin to see how bad that idea is. When players frequently aren't even around for one year your backlog becomes incredibly important since that's going to be the only catalogue that most players will ever see. They aren't going to be sticking around for years to be continually gouged by better and better ships. If you want multiple sales from these people you need past offerings to retain some degree of merit, a concept which an in-tier "arms race" system just dumps all over.
So there's some potential for new tiers (though it will be problematic), while the "arms race" idea within tiers is basically like trying to make a career out of selling your kidneys... you might be looking at a nice one-time short term gain when you release a new product, but as a career opportunity it's going to hurt in the long run...
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
Oh okay, right on
And...?
Ultimately the Fleet ships are specifically there to tap people for more revenue. To hit people again for something they've essentially already paid for.
Most people aren't here for a year. If you've been around awhile and spend time befriending new people you'd have noticed this from your friend list.
You're focused on individual, successive sales to a static base, which lacks foresight. In order to tap transient gamers multiple times Cryptic's backlog is all-important, otherwise those players only have one valid option to buy; the "OP" one. That makes all of the time and effort you put into previous offerings all but worthless, and beyond that means you have to continually be developing new product to sustain yourself as you've made all your old product anathema to consumers. It means you can no longer rely on people wanting try out your old products because you've basically boxed them up, nailed their coffins closed, and buried them in salted earth.
So you've made your potential to earn via your past work all but nil. You've made your job harder by requiring a more steady, constantly flow of product to have any chance of seeing revenue. And you've done this to try and "one up" old products in order to try and continuously tap your installed base, a stagnant and shrinking portion of your market where new players are the norm, and the more lucrative option.
So basically you've shot yourself in the foot, oh, about three times.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Ok fine - then what is the point of releasing new ships at all? To just continue the statis quo? If you only cater to the churn then I guess there is little incentive to stay.
Let's not even think of PvP - they need to finally throw the dirt on that coffin in it's grave and bury it once and for all!
So much so I grinded my way to an f2p one
The atrox is the biggest ship in the game, that alone is worthy of a lot of love.
And ofc the freudian cigar with onions shape it has, 2up right there. You still can't mess with that.
But more than anything you simply won't find a better ship to grind stf while watching tv hands down. You don't even have to be within attack range.
On top you get the best of the dps animations, that being sci abilities, and I'd say what is there not to love ? Slow turn rate ? I don't have to move into combat myself :cool: