You're making a lot of assumptions about my observations. My schedule fluctuates and I'm on at all hours on varying days, and this isn't something I've done once, it's something I check consistently while I DOff, which is almost all I do these days, and is something I've done nearly every day since the release of this new season. And of course the general consensus seems to follow what I've seen.
So all signs point to the Assault Cruiser Refit selling poorly. If you're seeing them all the time and have conflicting data you can feel free to say so... but you don't seem to be doing that.
Beyond that, my comment was clearly prefaced with "You can likely make an educated guess..." so it's not as though I was presenting my opinion as concrete fact, but as an educated guess, which it is.
Youre still not bringing anything to the table except an opinion. No evidence, just talk. You dont have the numbers in front of you and you never will. So speculate all you want. It wont change the fact you arent a credible source of information on the topic.
Youre still not bringing anything to the table except an opinion. No evidence, just talk.
I already presented my evidence... seeing a lack of Assault Cruiser Refits. I am a witness to these events. Witness accounts are evidence.
DOffing nearly every day since the ship has been released for a few hours a day at basically every single time period, spread out, I've seen about three in Sector Space, and exactly a grand total of two ships using the proprietary aesthetic in STFs. This next to dozens upon dozens of cat carriers, Defiant-Rs, MVAMs, Odysseys, Lockbox ships, and Akira-Rs.
You see, that's what makes this an educated guess. The fact that I have collected evidence and have some knowledge on the subject. Is it perfect? No, but then if it were then it wouldn't be an educated guess... it would be a fact. Something I didn't present my opinion as.
So speculate all you want. It wont change the fact you arent a credible source of information on the topic.
I'm 100% credible, as noted by the fact that I bluntly said this was an educated guess. Unless you're suggesting that summation isn't credible, that I'm not providing an educated guess as I suggested, and you're instead insisting that what I'm actually giving out the gospel truth instead...
... but then you're just delusional if that's the case.
I already presented my evidence... seeing a lack of Assault Cruiser Refits. I am a witness to these events. Witness accounts are evidence.
DOffing nearly every day since the ship has been released for a few hours a day at basically every single time period, spread out, I've seen about three in Sector Space, and exactly a grand total of two ships using the proprietary aesthetic in STFs. This next to dozens upon dozens of cat carriers, Defiant-Rs, MVAMs, Odysseys, Lockbox ships, and Akira-Rs.
You see, that's what makes this an educated guess. The fact that I have collected evidence and have some knowledge on the subject. Is it perfect? No, but then if it were then it wouldn't be an educated guess... it would be a fact. Something I didn't present my opinion as.
I'm 100% credible, as noted by the fact that I bluntly said this was an educated guess. Unless you're suggesting that summation isn't credible, that I'm not providing an educated guess as I suggested, and you're instead insisting that what I'm actually giving out the gospel truth instead...
... but then you're just delusional if that's the case.
I've got one. But I dislike the skin and go with the Sovvy skin instead, so it's hard to spot it. Likely, most people go with the sovvy skin, it's a good ship.
I've got one. But I dislike the skin and go with the Sovvy skin instead, so it's hard to spot it. Likely, most people go with the sovvy skin, it's a good ship.
If I had it I'd do that too, but I fly an Odyssey right now.
However, as I've said before, I specifically check the tooltips on the Assault Cruisers I see to check which ones are refits because I'm interested in seeing what other people are flying. It doesn't work in STFs or Fleet Events (the tooltips are screwed there), but in Sector Space it does, and I can tell exactly what ships people are flying.
Like I said, this isn't confirmed fact, it's anecdotal evidence. But it is compelling, especially when it matches up so well with player feedback and common consensus. As I've presented it, as a hypothesis, it is in fact credible. And in lieu of more solid evidence, or even a contradictory account (which standupguy86 is decidedly not providing) it's the best that we have presented here.
But I mean, hey, if someone wants to present a dissenting point (which no one actually has) I'll be more than happy to listen to it. Or if Cryptic wants to post the ship's sales figures here, and how they compare to... say... the Odyssey or Atrox or Akira-R I'd more than happy to defer to those specific figures...
size wise , its just shorter than the sovereign , most people seem to over-estimate how big it actually is
haha, glad i'm not the only one, much of my chosen stats where derived to soem degree from it's size, both turbn rate and hull needed to be lower/higher respectivlly than the nebulae in my mind or it would look odd as hell.
The cannons obviouslly came from where they did, and i chose the style for reasons allready outlined, the rest i figure is obvious as well.
At least i didn;t try putting the Opaka's stats on it . Not that i would, i'm saner than that.
Holy cow you guys are still having this pointless discussion - we have no say on what she gets - speculating is useless - of course if your Taking bets then ok.
Put me down For:
38k hull
1.3 shield mod
12 turn
10 console
3 uni stations 1 cmdr sci 1 lt cmdr sci
4/4 weapons
subsystem and enhance sensor
adv slipstream
1 console + 1 special ability
10 power to shields 15 to Aux
can load any cannon up front - including dual heavy
End of discussion - that's my guess - we shall see next month.
the only problem with that hypothesis is, it doesn't take into account the number of people that own the ship , but aren't currently using it
Of course, but my observations date back to the day the ship released. When it was new. And there still was a dearth of them from everything I saw. People who buy a ship and never fly it are certainly going to be the vast minority, and likely account for a percentage of people small enough not to skew the end result, and thus don't really have to be factored into the hypothesis.
Could it possibly skew things? Sure, but it is spectacularly unlikely. I mean, it's possible that we're all part of the fever dream of a particularly unruly penguin who has indigestion thanks to a poorly digested apple dumpling... but I'm not going to go betting the farm on that.
Either way it's not a problem with the hypothesis. It's a perfectly valid hypothesis which is supported by the evidence (anecdotal though it may be). If the chance for random errors were removed it wouldn't be a hypothesis it would be concrete fact, which has never been the suggestion.
Thus what I believe you mean to say is that you doubt the hypothesis, not that you have a problem with it. And of course, while there is room for error in any hypothesis, you have to weigh those chances.
Really what are the odds that a metric butt-tonne of people bought a Sovereign-R and didn't fly it, even on launch day? What are the odds that the percentage of people who did that are unusually skewed toward the Sovereign-R as opposed to other potential ships (since ultimately we are talking about something that's relative)? I'd say relatively minor on both counts.
theres always room for a little doubt when we dont have the exact sales figures
im not saying it isnt a plausible hypothesis at all , just that a lot of people collect ships / buy for consoles etc
might be a huge number , but its a number nontheless
the main problem people have had with the regent is , its just .. well boring.
theres always room for a little doubt when we dont have the exact sales figures
Obviously. The fact that it's framed as an educated guess alone implies doubt. I'd never suggest there isn't any.
It's all a question of how reasonable the doubt is.
While there are collectors who may rarely take a ship out for a spin, even when it launches, they are not just a minority (which they also are) but also a non-factor. Someone who picks up pretty much every ship doesn't bolster a ship's relative success by buying it since they buy every ship.
You have to consider that this isn't so much a question of "Did the Sovereign-R cover it's costs?" When dealing with a product that has no per unit manufacturing costs that's more or less an easy thing to do (or at least it should be). The question is "Did the time and money invested in developing the Sovereign-R payoff to the same degree as it has for other ships, or would those resources have been better used developing an alternative?"
Thus it's a comparison that matters. The Sovereign-R versus other alternatives. A collector doesn't matter as they will basically buy just about anything, so any alternative they probably would have purchased as well. There's no relative increase for the Sovereign-R in comparison to other products there. Those purchases... don't really matter. They don't suggest that the ship's development was a better course of action than developing some other property.
This is also a strike against people, say, buying a new Sovereign-R yet still flying their old Atrox. If they're buying Atroxes and Armitages then they're also boosting those ships which has an effect on how successful the Sovereign-R is, relatively speaking.
Now, people buying the ship for the console/torpedo is more likely to be a factor. However the console in question is somewhat redundant as it's another "gas TRIBBLE"... and it's generally viewed as one of the least effective, even when compared to lower tiers of EWP. And the torpedo is lackluster too, since [acc] is king here and that torp only sports one, and like all leveling weapons... it levels poorly and thus yields substandard damage.
So the question becomes; How many people would be hyped up to spend $25 on a couple of things that people generally don't want?
Because it have a 1.5 Mod, the Atrox that have a turn rate of 5 only gets a 1.2 Mod and hull? its 40.500.
You know what I do on my Escort? EPTS and ST ... same applies, I dont NEED those Cmdr Eng stations because I have those as a Sci and that have heals (ST, HE).
And you put 1.5 Mod on this DESPITE having a 40k hull ... in fact it have MORE Hull that a Assault Refit.
How the hell is fair to have a Cruiser Hull and a Science Ship Shield Modifier?
And no, it does not get some "nice abilities to compensate" as a broad statement, its Shield Mod is there because they have weaker hulls, if it have a strong hull, like the Atrox, the Shield Modifier gets smaller.
You made a Galaxy-X with higher shields, you made a Cruiser.
And Turn rate 6 is dumb and why? BECAUSE MANY SCIENCE ABILITIES ARE DEFLECTOR DISK BASED!
Tyken's Rift? Deflector.
Gravity Well? Deflector.
Energy Siphon? Deflector.
Hazard Emitters and Science Team arent so I am robbed from the THREE actually useful Science Abilities because I cannot effectively target my enemy, this is why Science Ships have high turn rate (even the Nebula that is the slowest non-carrier science ship have a turn rate 8) and would leave me with Shockwave and Repulsors, VM is not Deflector Disk but its Probe Launcher, its also limited to targets on front of the ship, even if VM is a limited use debuffer.
The issue with cannons is BOTH turn rate and BO layout, turn rate is a factor to Science ship despite the fact they LACK THE ABILITY TO MOUNT CANNONS! even Sci Carriers face that problem but its reduced due to their hangars, the Atrax without its hangars would be nothing but a huge target.
And on the subject, if they cannot fit cannons then why the hell did you given it a Lt. Cmdr station? If you dont want for it to use cannons then why?
I am sorry but what I see is you just make a Galaxy-X, not a Vesta ... and as I certainly objected into turning the Vesta into a Carrier I sure as hell do the same into turning into a cruiser, a TURN RATE SIX cruiser.
Regarding Edit, its slightly smaller that the Soverign Class by meters ... certainly NOT the size of a Odyssey class.
Regarding Edit2:Even the 4/4 Science Oddy does not get subsystem target and people complained to high heavens about SA having it on a 4/4 weapons layout, Science Ships get SA because they are 3/3, giving it to a Cruiser is the proverbial Cherry on the top of the cake.
Edit:
Oh, THAT ability you KDFers complained due to the 5.5 turn rate that is only mitigated by the Subspace Snare and the fact it can Cloak?
I've allready explained why i chose the turn rate and hull i did anyway, but having just seen this i wanted to adress a couple of points since you seem to have no clue about the basics of balance.
1. If your not cycling tac team constantly your sheilds will collapse and you will die rapidly under serious amounts of fire Sci team is only really useful once your sheilds drop and there are far better sci heals you can use at that point. 1EPTS is just as usless. It's a nice get me out of jail free card if things go wrong but it will not deal with sustained damage intake. Lastly and your really should know this. Your escort evadesvastly more incoming damage to the point that it makes a really marked differance to things.
Sure 1EPTS, 2 HE1, 2TSS2 would provide some tanking ability, but compared to bassiclly anything else in game it's luaghable. Any other sci or cruiser can bring some powerful extra healing, (especially EPTS constant cyclying), and Escorts evade so much more that they can hal drasticlly less healing and still outlast.
2. Yes it's sheild mod is there becuase of it's weak hull. BUT it is on a platform with a much better tank, much better evashion and, (since they typiclly have LtCmdr as sci too), much better sci abilities. This has to choose between science tricks and even the most basic of tanks.
3. it's got a Sci Cmdr. it's a science ship, thats what defines ships, where the cmdr goes. It's also got nearly no Engeneeeiring consles, another clue. It was also supposed to have SA and Target Subsystems i simply forgot them in my rush to finish the description.
As far as abilities. There's only 3 abilities with a 90 degree arc i see considered worth using by the players who know what they're doing. Viral, Grav and Tykens, (Syphon is 360 btw, my klink eng uses it on the vo'quv all the time). Tykens is only really useful if you have a near stationery target, like the Cannons you can pre plan it's use. Viral and Grav well are more valid, but i'd bet on most putting APO1 in the Lt Cmdr slot, add that to evasive and lining up shouldn;t be hard given the long CD's, it's not like cannons where you need to be lined up but moving all the time to get any use out of them.
Besides, whilst obviouslly i screwed up my size estimation, thats where the hull and turn rate came from, an odddy sized ship turning faster than an oddy and with same or less hull than a Nebullae, you've got to be kidding. Okay i screwed up the size estimation but that was the thinking.
4. Cannons are so far ahead of Beams and torps in damage that BO's mean nothing. Bo's add a lot, but a pure non-BO buffed cannon build will still destroy a BO buffed beam or torp build on the DPS chart, so long as you can turn enough to use them cannons are allways better. Not to mention the power efficiancy.
Also that layout lets you run say 2 copies of FAW, 2 copies of Tac Team, and an attack pattern, you could if you wanted drop tac teams and bring other stuff like moving FAW down to ensign and putting mines and another attak pattern in as well. Beams may not be hit as hard as cannons, but being able to buff them like that still gives a decent buff. a non-BO cannon escort would still out DPS you but it's going to be a lot tighter, assuming your running enough weapons power.
5. No a turn rate 6 hyprid. Look a cruiser is defined by it's boffs and consles becuase without those you can't actually do what a cruiser does. Namely tank like a maniac.
That said i delibratly built it as a 3 way hybrid. it's got a Science ship abilities, but a hybrid tac/sci consle and boff layout as well as a tac focused unique consle. But all of this is packed onto a hull with cruiser like movment and hull.
And don't delude yourself, even with the size correction you are not going to get a ship that can effectivlly use limited arc abilities like Grav Well. 9 is going to be about the max, it's probably also going to have Nebulae like hull at worst, e.t.c. It's going to be a cruiser light in base stats no matter what you do.
6. 4/4 is meaningless, i'd happilly give up the extra 2 slots on my sov for SA or similar. What makes it so powerful on cruisers is entierly down to the fact that a cruiser can cycle EPTW constantly, (often on top of EPTS as well). This lets it keeps it's weapons damage output at max whilst having high sheild resistance. Sci ships have a much harder time getting high Aux, high weapons, and a decent level in the other 2 area's.
The weapons drain of > 6 beams mean there's no DPS improvem,nent compared to 6 so any extra slots are littrially fluff. Well unless you bring the new high angle torp into play. but thats why cruiser pilots cried for that for so long. It gave them an actual way to use their extra slots.
Why not give it a Phaser Autocannon like the Bortasqu' Disruptor Autocannon?
This would give it a little bit of Burst damage, and help with the Canon arguements.
Not actually a bad idea . Is a nice middile ground.
I'm goign to go off and re-jig my idea to take account of the new scale info anyway .
Production level Quantum Slipstream Drive: Starfleet?s first slipstream drive intended for continuous use over long distances. The drive can also be run to an even higher setting than a normal drive, but cannot sustain this.
Game Term: Doubles all speeds in sector space and uncaps sector space speed regardless of impulse drive choice.
Experimental Heavy Cannon: The Vesta class is fitted with Starfleet?s latest experimental heavy cannon system in a fixed forward mount under the saucer.
Game Terms: A phaser version of the Borteas Autocannon.
May mount the Intrepid Refits Ablative Amour Console.
+10 Weapons Power
+10 Aux Power
Sensor Analysis
Subsystem Targeting
Console: Advanced Multi-Frequency control Firing Computer: Starfleet?s latest and greatest attempt to build an automated targeting system for combating the borg. This advanced system is able to not only randomize frequencies, but self determine when the enemy has adapted and alter it's frequency modulation algorithms accordingly. It is even able to utilize sensor data in an attempted to adapt perfectly, allow the Vesta class to occasionally mimic the borgs own adaptation trickery. The algorithm are useful against any enemy, but more so vs the borg.
Game Terms: Can only be fitted to the Vesta.
+10% weapons bleedthrough
5% chance on any shot of: +100% weapon bleedthrough
100% chance of: +2000 damage for all weapons vs borg.
Discussion:
At it's core this is something of a bit of everything ship.
The choice of boff/console layout is very much a sci/tac hybrid, whilst the base stats bar shields are a cruiser at heart. The Cannons answers the issues of cannon use, (poor turn rate rendering them useless), without going to the extreme of a spinal lance. The drive stuff is mostly pure fluff. The console I literally made up as I honestly didn't have any other idea's, I?m only familiar with the ship from the wiki. That said it?s a nice firepower buff of a unique kind, and gives people a way to get access to STF grade anti-borg abilities without having to un-slot their fleet stuff.
Overall despite one hell of a hull shield combo I think this ship will balance out on he basis of having one of the weaker tanks in the game and a sub par evasion. It might be destructive and be capable of all kinds of cute sci tricks, but you?re going to have to watch your incoming more than usual.
Update Discussion: I brought the hull and turn back into line with the actual scale, and took the idea of making the cannons a Borteas like ability. I also threw you the 4/3 as a bone. TBH at this point the design is kind of weak. The switch to a heavy tac focus at the expense of engineering is much less effective here as your still dealing with a ship with bad evasion and a very limited tank that?s using those tac slots on beams. They are still effective, but it?s not like with, (for example), an escort where you also get the cannons to maximize the benefit. Overall I doubt the tradeoffs are worth it.
Obviously. The fact that it's framed as an educated guess alone implies doubt. I'd never suggest there isn't any.
It's all a question of how reasonable the doubt is.
While there are collectors who may rarely take a ship out for a spin, even when it launches, they are not just a minority (which they also are) but also a non-factor. Someone who picks up pretty much every ship doesn't bolster a ship's relative success by buying it since they buy every ship.
You have to consider that this isn't so much a question of "Did the Sovereign-R cover it's costs?" When dealing with a product that has no per unit manufacturing costs that's more or less an easy thing to do (or at least it should be). The question is "Did the time and money invested in developing the Sovereign-R payoff to the same degree as it has for other ships, or would those resources have been better used developing an alternative?"
Thus it's a comparison that matters. The Sovereign-R versus other alternatives. A collector doesn't matter as they will basically buy just about anything, so any alternative they probably would have purchased as well. There's no relative increase for the Sovereign-R in comparison to other products there. Those purchases... don't really matter. They don't suggest that the ship's development was a better course of action than developing some other property.
This is also a strike against people, say, buying a new Sovereign-R yet still flying their old Atrox. If they're buying Atroxes and Armitages then they're also boosting those ships which has an effect on how successful the Sovereign-R is, relatively speaking.
Now, people buying the ship for the console/torpedo is more likely to be a factor. However the console in question is somewhat redundant as it's another "gas TRIBBLE"... and it's generally viewed as one of the least effective, even when compared to lower tiers of EWP. And the torpedo is lackluster too, since [acc] is king here and that torp only sports one, and like all leveling weapons... it levels poorly and thus yields substandard damage.
So the question becomes; How many people would be hyped up to spend $25 on a couple of things that people generally don't want?
For what it's worth, I have also been watching the numbers of AC-R's.
I have to say that I agree with your results. In general it seems like there are significantly more around now than there were on release day. Contrast this with the Odyssey, the Armitage, and the Atrox, which seemed to flood sector space in a couple of days.
Note that I do not look for anything that is like the Regent - that's an automatic "score" for the regent so that isn't worth bothering with. However, i compulsively end up clicking on various ships and look up the data on them. I like looking at people's bios and I'm also interested in what ship they're using. Being a large fan of the assault cruiser I also like to see what people are using. The vast, vast majority are AC's, not AC-R's, regardless of skin.
I think that if the AC-R did well, then it's probably an accumulation of popularity over time, which makes sense since newer players may well want a follow-on to the AC on their own time.
What are the causes of this? Well, I can think of a few.
1) The Odyssey stomped the AC-R's niche flat. Doubt it, but it's possible; there's definitely encroachment in a big way.
2) The devs waited too long. I've waited since January (when I got here and hit VA). By that time many people will have invested in one of the other ships (most likely the Odyssey, possibly the Excelsior-R in at least a few cases) and may have lost interest in the AC-R, or feel that they spent their money and that's that.
3) Lack of power. $25 is a lot for a ship that's essentially a side-grade. This is especially so when one considers that the Odyssey Tac may well outperform it in most critical ways, and with the Excelsior-R definitely outperforming it in agility. Although the wide-arc qtorp is a great weapon, the TRIBBLE console is lackluster at best for most, and aside from that, the only difference between this and the free AC is a BOff slot swap. Is this worth shelling out cash for, especially when you can shell out the same cash for an Odyssey, or less cash for an Excelsior-R? The answer, for a lot of people, is going to be a sound 'no.'
4) Feeling teased. The Fleet AC, for all people lamented its loss of tanking, was a killing machine. It also had a decent shield mod and better "armor" (hull HP). People may feel a bit ripped off or unsatisfied with the way things turned out with the c-store version. Some may be waiting for what they feel is an inevitable re-release of the Fleet AC, and are going to make a single double-investment of buying their way into a large, T5 fleet (where necessary) and dumping $20 to get the Fleet AC for a single toon.
There is also the possibility that a lot of people just don't use their Regent; they may have picked it up as they've lusted after a theoretical AC-R for ages, but then realized their Odyssey was a superior performer. For a while I was in this group, and honestly I am still undecided between the two ships - which is somewhat unsettling because I loved the AC a great deal back "in the day." I'm currently experimenting with my AC-R to see how well it fits my playstyle. However, I don't know that this is the case for a lot of players, just letting their AC-R's gather dust in spacedock, and I'm pretty sure that this wouldn't necessarily be the case for newer players, who may be eager to just jump on to the AC-R the first chance they get as they're fresh from their free AC and want a taste of C-Store ships.
So, in short, I have to agree with the hypothesis that there are a lot fewer AC-R's out there than the devs were expecting. However, whether or not this is due to being underpowered is an open question, though I suspect it certainly didn't help matters, nor did how long it took, the fact that the Odyssey and Excelsior-R seem to hit their niches better, the "teasing" of the Fleet AC, and the fact that its bonuses may well not be worth $25 to many.
Obviously. The fact that it's framed as an educated guess alone implies doubt. I'd never suggest there isn't any.
It's all a question of how reasonable the doubt is.
While there are collectors who may rarely take a ship out for a spin, even when it launches, they are not just a minority (which they also are) but also a non-factor. Someone who picks up pretty much every ship doesn't bolster a ship's relative success by buying it since they buy every ship.
You have to consider that this isn't so much a question of "Did the Sovereign-R cover it's costs?" When dealing with a product that has no per unit manufacturing costs that's more or less an easy thing to do (or at least it should be). The question is "Did the time and money invested in developing the Sovereign-R payoff to the same degree as it has for other ships, or would those resources have been better used developing an alternative?"
Thus it's a comparison that matters. The Sovereign-R versus other alternatives. A collector doesn't matter as they will basically buy just about anything, so any alternative they probably would have purchased as well. There's no relative increase for the Sovereign-R in comparison to other products there. Those purchases... don't really matter. They don't suggest that the ship's development was a better course of action than developing some other property.
This is also a strike against people, say, buying a new Sovereign-R yet still flying their old Atrox. If they're buying Atroxes and Armitages then they're also boosting those ships which has an effect on how successful the Sovereign-R is, relatively speaking.
Now, people buying the ship for the console/torpedo is more likely to be a factor. However the console in question is somewhat redundant as it's another "gas TRIBBLE"... and it's generally viewed as one of the least effective, even when compared to lower tiers of EWP. And the torpedo is lackluster too, since [acc] is king here and that torp only sports one, and like all leveling weapons... it levels poorly and thus yields substandard damage.
So the question becomes; How many people would be hyped up to spend $25 on a couple of things that people generally don't want?
People who bought it COULD HAVE opted just to use the Sovereign costume skin/parts and ignored the Regent costume. You wouldn't KNOW if you saw it on launch day.
That said, I think that while ships have been a healthy seller, interest is dying down because:
A) C-Store releases are coming out faster than content and content is what gets logins (and sales) up.
There's a limit to how many ships a person needs or wants.
C) C-Store ships aren't as sexy anymore now that lockbox ships are here.
D) I imagine F2P players buy fewer ships on average than subbers did, even of those who spend money.
E) It's probably time to start looking at how to get that collector enthusiasm up for ground items. I think this involves looking at adding diversity to ground, compelling ground content, and ground items people would be looking at paying an average of $25 per account for.
I think the EV suits were a stab at this last one. Charging $7 per character is likely supposed to generate an average of $25 per account. Problem is, that money doesn't cover BOffs and the suits weren't as cool/flashy as C-Store space consoles.
Charge $7 per character for a pack of 5 Tommyguns and Dixon Hill costume unlocks and then we'll be talking. THAT is flashy because it's a costume that can be used with different builds (like a ship) and because it has a functional power.
Honestly, I think they're a bit lost on what's flashy on the ground. They succeeded with the Tholian sword and I'd wager even more with the Ferengi whip but there's nothing sexy about the Relativity phasers aside from PvP griefing. The visual's barely noticeable. The powers aren't helpful or novel in PvE. The mechanics aren't different. Whereas the whip and sword both have REALLY unique mechanics. (The sword being able to deal different energy types. The whip because it deals a unique damage type and because it works pretty well as a melee weapon.) The phasers don't do exotic energy and when you hit a target with them, you just stand there with nothing to do for seven seconds or focus elsewhere, doing so much less damage that no net time is saved.
If they'd made the pistol, say, use rifle mechanics with pistol animations, Dmgx2 and given it the Fleet Disrupt disintegration mod (unique for a phaser) it'd be canon and more interesting.
I like a lot of J-Man's thoughts (I suspect it was him) but I think it might be time to swap the space and ground systems guys. The OPness of space stuff is getting absurd and could probably use Jeremy taking point whereas ground lacks diversity and the stuff implemented for it is too cautious... and could use Geko ramming through with a balance steamroller. I think you'd see those ground STF queues liven up then too.
I think a lot of it is because Jeremy has handled a lot of the ground stuff and worries about PvP and hard numerics whereas Geko plays fast and loose with general principles and "value for the money." And their focuses are especially flipped since the life and hope of this game's PvP is space combat whereas ground is an area where a lot of players are already bored and/or frustrated by the lack of novel toys or the difficulty. (The former being a case where the novel toys people want are canon novelties like we have in space... And the latter being because Gozer was a TRIBBLE when it came to STF design and PuG accessibility. If people could pay a few bucks to steamroll Infected and Cure optional with canon-looking weapons and gimmicks, I think they would)
About the AC-R i just don't think people will pay 25$ for a 9 console ship when most of the people who might be interested in the AC-R is probably already flying a 10 console Oddy Tactical, They look at the AC-R and think "why the hell should i waste money on something that seems like a downgrade from what i already have".
At least that was the response when i asked around in my fleet.
Production level Quantum Slipstream Drive: Starfleet?s first slipstream drive intended for continuous use over long distances. The drive can also be run to an even higher setting than a normal drive, but cannot sustain this.
Game Term: Doubles all speeds in sector space and uncaps sector space speed regardless of impulse drive choice.
Experimental Heavy Cannon: The Vesta class is fitted with Starfleet?s latest experimental heavy cannon system in a fixed forward mount under the saucer.
Game Terms: A phaser version of the Borteas Autocannon.
May mount the Intrepid Refits Ablative Amour Console.
+10 Weapons Power
+10 Aux Power
Sensor Analysis
Subsystem Targeting
Console: Advanced Multi-Frequency control Firing Computer: Starfleet?s latest and greatest attempt to build an automated targeting system for combating the borg. This advanced system is able to not only randomize frequencies, but self determine when the enemy has adapted and alter it's frequency modulation algorithms accordingly. It is even able to utilize sensor data in an attempted to adapt perfectly, allow the Vesta class to occasionally mimic the borgs own adaptation trickery. The algorithm are useful against any enemy, but more so vs the borg.
Game Terms: Can only be fitted to the Vesta.
+10% weapons bleedthrough
5% chance on any shot of: +100% weapon bleedthrough
100% chance of: +2000 damage for all weapons vs borg.
Discussion:
At it's core this is something of a bit of everything ship.
The choice of boff/console layout is very much a sci/tac hybrid, whilst the base stats bar shields are a cruiser at heart. The Cannons answers the issues of cannon use, (poor turn rate rendering them useless), without going to the extreme of a spinal lance. The drive stuff is mostly pure fluff. The console I literally made up as I honestly didn't have any other idea's, I?m only familiar with the ship from the wiki. That said it?s a nice firepower buff of a unique kind, and gives people a way to get access to STF grade anti-borg abilities without having to un-slot their fleet stuff.
Overall despite one hell of a hull shield combo I think this ship will balance out on he basis of having one of the weaker tanks in the game and a sub par evasion. It might be destructive and be capable of all kinds of cute sci tricks, but you?re going to have to watch your incoming more than usual.
Update Discussion: I brought the hull and turn back into line with the actual scale, and took the idea of making the cannons a Borteas like ability. I also threw you the 4/3 as a bone. TBH at this point the design is kind of weak. The switch to a heavy tac focus at the expense of engineering is much less effective here as your still dealing with a ship with bad evasion and a very limited tank that?s using those tac slots on beams. They are still effective, but it?s not like with, (for example), an escort where you also get the cannons to maximize the benefit. Overall I doubt the tradeoffs are worth it.
it'll not be able to use the ablative armour console
t5 ship consoles are unique to the ship they cam with ONLY
as for it being ' kind of weak' this is a science ship , not a cruiser . it shouldnt really be designed to tank stuff :rolleyes:
Able to mount Dual Cannons, but not Dual Heavy Cannons
I stuck her with the Excelsior's turn rate because I felt it was best. Slow enough to make her feel like a Cruiser, fast enough to not totally lose out on those dual cannons. In pretty much every other way she's a standard Science ship.
I left the potential for a fourth Science console so that she could match up with the Oddy and Fleet ships, but I'm not sure about that call.
Changed console layout, reduced shield modifier by 0.1, increased hull from 27k to 30k.
it'll not be able to use the ablative armour console
t5 ship consoles are unique to the ship they cam with ONLY
as for it being ' kind of weak' this is a science ship , not a cruiser . it shouldnt really be designed to tank stuff :rolleyes:
There's weak and then there's underpowered. Of course as a sci ship it shouldn't be able to tank like a cruiser. But now it's even worse than it was before. Littrially it's infiriour to a Sci ship for Sci stuff, has the worst tank in the game, and whilst the Autocannon/Tac slot Combo will be semi hard hitting it's still not going to be a match for anything nastier than an ordinary cruiser.
Thats the inherent issues with making a full on sci/tac hybrid. With the weakest base damage in the game to start with sci ships get the smallest benefit from extra tac slots. They still benefit as i allready stated, but where not talking the way a cruiser does. At the same time such a hybrid has to sacrafice in other area's to get this hybrid nature. At which point you have to ask, is the tradeoff worth it.
As for the consle, since it seems to include so much voyager tech i figured it would be "fluffy" to add the option.
ABout the AC-R:
2 issues.
1. it dosen't compete with fleet ships.
2. People asking for the AC-R wanted a ship with the tanking ability of the AC,. but expanded damage options via consle/boff tweaks.
Most wanted a Lt Cmdr Tac, CMDr Eng, Lt Cmdr Eng, Ensign Sci type layout, so we got our Lt Cmdr tac option without sacraficing our Eng abilities.
the only real tech it has from voyager is the slipstream drive , which , in the novel-vese is what makes the ship special , since no other starfleet ship has it at the time of the vestas construction ( heck NOONE outside that race in the delta quadrant has it)
There's weak and then there's underpowered. Of course as a sci ship it shouldn't be able to tank like a cruiser. But now it's even worse than it was before. Littrially it's infiriour to a Sci ship for Sci stuff, has the worst tank in the game, and whilst the Autocannon/Tac slot Combo will be semi hard hitting it's still not going to be a match for anything nastier than an ordinary cruiser.
Thats the inherent issues with making a full on sci/tac hybrid. With the weakest base damage in the game to start with sci ships get the smallest benefit from extra tac slots. They still benefit as i allready stated, but where not talking the way a cruiser does. At the same time such a hybrid has to sacrafice in other area's to get this hybrid nature. At which point you have to ask, is the tradeoff worth it.
As for the consle, since it seems to include so much voyager tech i figured it would be "fluffy" to add the option.
ABout the AC-R:
2 issues.
1. it dosen't compete with fleet ships.
2. People asking for the AC-R wanted a ship with the tanking ability of the AC,. but expanded damage options via consle/boff tweaks.
Most wanted a Lt Cmdr Tac, CMDr Eng, Lt Cmdr Eng, Ensign Sci type layout, so we got our Lt Cmdr tac option without sacraficing our Eng abilities.
There is an inherent hybrid cost, yes.
Which is why this thing will have overpowered consoles and/or weapons. And also how it will be able to get away with having them.
Changed console layout, reduced shield modifier by 0.1, increased hull from 27k to 30k.
I think that's a reasonable guess. I think it WILL be Dual Heavy Cannons. More universal BOFF slots by at least one.
Multiple consoles, possibly 10 console slots.
I fully expect halfway between a 2500 ZEN ship and a Odyssey 3-pack.
10 console slots but the ship itself will be borderline useless without 2 equipped at all times. So stuff like... Turnrate of 6 but the turnrate doubles or even triples when you equip the consoles in order to force you to equip them. So you need 'em for the cannons.
Al in a Dev interview already confirmed that if they make her able to load dual cannons she will be able to load dual heavy cannons - he said that the system can't be changed so that it could load regular duals vs heavy duals
End of debate on that. He also said that because the designer wanted it to be as close to what he designed, plus what she did in the books that he was pretty sure she would get to load cannons up front.
That pretty much means she is getting the option to load dual heavy cannons - end of story.
And watch for a turn above 10 (i suspect 11 or 12) - she was designed to be a tight turner for the cannons
Intrepid is nice and tight design as well and it's turn is 12
The Vor'cha battle crusier is similar size but not as sleek and it has a 10 turn so why would Vesta not have the same or better - that's my case for 11 or 12 - a bit less than sci interpid but more than the wider Vor'cha.
Al in a Dev interview already confirmed that if they make her able to load dual cannons she will be able to load dual heavy cannons - he said that the system can't be changed so that it could load regular duals vs heavy duals
End of debate on that. He also said that because the designer wanted it to be as close to what he designed, plus what she did in the books that he was pretty sure she would get to load cannons up front.
That pretty much means she is getting the option to load dual heavy cannons - end of story.
And watch for a turn above 10 (i suspect 11 or 12) - she was designed to be a tight turner for the cannons
Intrepid is nice and tight design as well and it's turn is 12
The Vor'cha battle crusier is similar size but not as sleek and it has a 10 turn so why would Vesta not have the same or better - that's my case for 11 or 12 - a bit less than sci interpid but more than the wider Vor'cha.
The Vorcha is smaller than the Gal, the Sov is just as long but a bit sleeker as the gal. The Vesta if it's actually near Sov size is going to be bigger than the Vorcha, and a lot less thin in the vertical arc. 10 for the turn rate is really insanely optomistic IMHO. And even that is the bare usable level for cannons, 12+ is really ideal range.
Also if it dosen't have at least fleet ship base stats it's not gonna sell period.
The Vorcha is smaller than the Gal, the Sov is just as long but a bit sleeker as the gal. The Vesta if it's actually near Sov size is going to be bigger than the Vorcha, and a lot less thin in the vertical arc. 10 for the turn rate is really insanely optomistic IMHO. And even that is the bare usable level for cannons, 12+ is really ideal range.
Also if it dosen't have at least fleet ship base stats it's not gonna sell period.
I know - people say that Cyptic would be shooting itself in the foot if it cam out with an OP ship
But the Case for it this time is very strong:
1) They paided extra for it
2)It launches with what is supposed to be a big Season - so having a anticipate ship as a dud would not look good at all!!
3)We are coming into fiscal end and quarter end and christmas season - all of which companies usually put out their best stuff to get into the `black`for the year
after the lackluster Sov-R and the big slow down from S6 they need a big solid sales leader going into end of year
Anything less would shoot themselves in the foot in my opinion - but like I said before - nothing we say here really effects what we get.
Vor`cha is still a BIG ship Lenght 482M width 342M!! - height 107 meters
Vesta - lenght 672M - 1 third is Nacelle sticking way back width 132M height 88 meters
So they are more then likely expecting it to bring in a whole lot more then what they put out for it.
2)It launches with what is supposed to be a big Season - so having a anticipate ship as a dud would not look good at all!!
So?
3)We are coming into fiscal end and quarter end and christmas season - all of which companies usually put out their best stuff to get into the `black`for the year
We have no idea what their books looke like. How much they are losing or gaining. But its safe to say they wouldnt have put the money down for this if they didnt expect it to sell merely for its namesake.
after the lackluster Sov-R and the big slow down from S6 they need a big solid sales leader going into end of year
Seeing the multitude of non-fed ships running about the game its doubtful that these ships are seen as a leader in anything other then another chance to stuff their pockets. The lockboxes are where the moneys at. But even so, the ship has been heavily demanded since Start so they are more then likely assuming the ship itself regardless of layout or console goodies will sell.
Vesta - lenght 672M - 1 third is Nacelle sticking way back width 132M height 88 meters
I havent seen any specs for the Vesta set to launch into game. But I do know from experience that many of the ships in game are not no where near the size they should be. Take the Defiant for example. Its massive compared to what is seen in game. Its also safe to assume they arent going to produce a Flagship thats the largest ever constructed in StarFleet history only to eclipse it with an equal to or bigger ship.
Comments
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Youre still not bringing anything to the table except an opinion. No evidence, just talk. You dont have the numbers in front of you and you never will. So speculate all you want. It wont change the fact you arent a credible source of information on the topic.
I already presented my evidence... seeing a lack of Assault Cruiser Refits. I am a witness to these events. Witness accounts are evidence.
DOffing nearly every day since the ship has been released for a few hours a day at basically every single time period, spread out, I've seen about three in Sector Space, and exactly a grand total of two ships using the proprietary aesthetic in STFs. This next to dozens upon dozens of cat carriers, Defiant-Rs, MVAMs, Odysseys, Lockbox ships, and Akira-Rs.
You see, that's what makes this an educated guess. The fact that I have collected evidence and have some knowledge on the subject. Is it perfect? No, but then if it were then it wouldn't be an educated guess... it would be a fact. Something I didn't present my opinion as.
I'm 100% credible, as noted by the fact that I bluntly said this was an educated guess. Unless you're suggesting that summation isn't credible, that I'm not providing an educated guess as I suggested, and you're instead insisting that what I'm actually giving out the gospel truth instead...
... but then you're just delusional if that's the case.
I've got one. But I dislike the skin and go with the Sovvy skin instead, so it's hard to spot it. Likely, most people go with the sovvy skin, it's a good ship.
If I had it I'd do that too, but I fly an Odyssey right now.
However, as I've said before, I specifically check the tooltips on the Assault Cruisers I see to check which ones are refits because I'm interested in seeing what other people are flying. It doesn't work in STFs or Fleet Events (the tooltips are screwed there), but in Sector Space it does, and I can tell exactly what ships people are flying.
Like I said, this isn't confirmed fact, it's anecdotal evidence. But it is compelling, especially when it matches up so well with player feedback and common consensus. As I've presented it, as a hypothesis, it is in fact credible. And in lieu of more solid evidence, or even a contradictory account (which standupguy86 is decidedly not providing) it's the best that we have presented here.
But I mean, hey, if someone wants to present a dissenting point (which no one actually has) I'll be more than happy to listen to it. Or if Cryptic wants to post the ship's sales figures here, and how they compare to... say... the Odyssey or Atrox or Akira-R I'd more than happy to defer to those specific figures...
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
haha, glad i'm not the only one, much of my chosen stats where derived to soem degree from it's size, both turbn rate and hull needed to be lower/higher respectivlly than the nebulae in my mind or it would look odd as hell.
The cannons obviouslly came from where they did, and i chose the style for reasons allready outlined, the rest i figure is obvious as well.
At least i didn;t try putting the Opaka's stats on it
Put me down For:
38k hull
1.3 shield mod
12 turn
10 console
3 uni stations 1 cmdr sci 1 lt cmdr sci
4/4 weapons
subsystem and enhance sensor
adv slipstream
1 console + 1 special ability
10 power to shields 15 to Aux
can load any cannon up front - including dual heavy
End of discussion - that's my guess - we shall see next month.
Of course, but my observations date back to the day the ship released. When it was new. And there still was a dearth of them from everything I saw. People who buy a ship and never fly it are certainly going to be the vast minority, and likely account for a percentage of people small enough not to skew the end result, and thus don't really have to be factored into the hypothesis.
Could it possibly skew things? Sure, but it is spectacularly unlikely. I mean, it's possible that we're all part of the fever dream of a particularly unruly penguin who has indigestion thanks to a poorly digested apple dumpling... but I'm not going to go betting the farm on that.
Either way it's not a problem with the hypothesis. It's a perfectly valid hypothesis which is supported by the evidence (anecdotal though it may be). If the chance for random errors were removed it wouldn't be a hypothesis it would be concrete fact, which has never been the suggestion.
Thus what I believe you mean to say is that you doubt the hypothesis, not that you have a problem with it. And of course, while there is room for error in any hypothesis, you have to weigh those chances.
Really what are the odds that a metric butt-tonne of people bought a Sovereign-R and didn't fly it, even on launch day? What are the odds that the percentage of people who did that are unusually skewed toward the Sovereign-R as opposed to other potential ships (since ultimately we are talking about something that's relative)? I'd say relatively minor on both counts.
im not saying it isnt a plausible hypothesis at all , just that a lot of people collect ships / buy for consoles etc
might be a huge number , but its a number nontheless
the main problem people have had with the regent is , its just .. well boring.
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Obviously. The fact that it's framed as an educated guess alone implies doubt. I'd never suggest there isn't any.
It's all a question of how reasonable the doubt is.
While there are collectors who may rarely take a ship out for a spin, even when it launches, they are not just a minority (which they also are) but also a non-factor. Someone who picks up pretty much every ship doesn't bolster a ship's relative success by buying it since they buy every ship.
You have to consider that this isn't so much a question of "Did the Sovereign-R cover it's costs?" When dealing with a product that has no per unit manufacturing costs that's more or less an easy thing to do (or at least it should be). The question is "Did the time and money invested in developing the Sovereign-R payoff to the same degree as it has for other ships, or would those resources have been better used developing an alternative?"
Thus it's a comparison that matters. The Sovereign-R versus other alternatives. A collector doesn't matter as they will basically buy just about anything, so any alternative they probably would have purchased as well. There's no relative increase for the Sovereign-R in comparison to other products there. Those purchases... don't really matter. They don't suggest that the ship's development was a better course of action than developing some other property.
This is also a strike against people, say, buying a new Sovereign-R yet still flying their old Atrox. If they're buying Atroxes and Armitages then they're also boosting those ships which has an effect on how successful the Sovereign-R is, relatively speaking.
Now, people buying the ship for the console/torpedo is more likely to be a factor. However the console in question is somewhat redundant as it's another "gas TRIBBLE"... and it's generally viewed as one of the least effective, even when compared to lower tiers of EWP. And the torpedo is lackluster too, since [acc] is king here and that torp only sports one, and like all leveling weapons... it levels poorly and thus yields substandard damage.
So the question becomes; How many people would be hyped up to spend $25 on a couple of things that people generally don't want?
I've allready explained why i chose the turn rate and hull i did anyway, but having just seen this i wanted to adress a couple of points since you seem to have no clue about the basics of balance.
1. If your not cycling tac team constantly your sheilds will collapse and you will die rapidly under serious amounts of fire Sci team is only really useful once your sheilds drop and there are far better sci heals you can use at that point. 1EPTS is just as usless. It's a nice get me out of jail free card if things go wrong but it will not deal with sustained damage intake. Lastly and your really should know this. Your escort evadesvastly more incoming damage to the point that it makes a really marked differance to things.
Sure 1EPTS, 2 HE1, 2TSS2 would provide some tanking ability, but compared to bassiclly anything else in game it's luaghable. Any other sci or cruiser can bring some powerful extra healing, (especially EPTS constant cyclying), and Escorts evade so much more that they can hal drasticlly less healing and still outlast.
2. Yes it's sheild mod is there becuase of it's weak hull. BUT it is on a platform with a much better tank, much better evashion and, (since they typiclly have LtCmdr as sci too), much better sci abilities. This has to choose between science tricks and even the most basic of tanks.
3. it's got a Sci Cmdr. it's a science ship, thats what defines ships, where the cmdr goes. It's also got nearly no Engeneeeiring consles, another clue. It was also supposed to have SA and Target Subsystems i simply forgot them in my rush to finish the description.
As far as abilities. There's only 3 abilities with a 90 degree arc i see considered worth using by the players who know what they're doing. Viral, Grav and Tykens, (Syphon is 360 btw, my klink eng uses it on the vo'quv all the time). Tykens is only really useful if you have a near stationery target, like the Cannons you can pre plan it's use. Viral and Grav well are more valid, but i'd bet on most putting APO1 in the Lt Cmdr slot, add that to evasive and lining up shouldn;t be hard given the long CD's, it's not like cannons where you need to be lined up but moving all the time to get any use out of them.
Besides, whilst obviouslly i screwed up my size estimation, thats where the hull and turn rate came from, an odddy sized ship turning faster than an oddy and with same or less hull than a Nebullae, you've got to be kidding. Okay i screwed up the size estimation but that was the thinking.
4. Cannons are so far ahead of Beams and torps in damage that BO's mean nothing. Bo's add a lot, but a pure non-BO buffed cannon build will still destroy a BO buffed beam or torp build on the DPS chart, so long as you can turn enough to use them cannons are allways better. Not to mention the power efficiancy.
Also that layout lets you run say 2 copies of FAW, 2 copies of Tac Team, and an attack pattern, you could if you wanted drop tac teams and bring other stuff like moving FAW down to ensign and putting mines and another attak pattern in as well. Beams may not be hit as hard as cannons, but being able to buff them like that still gives a decent buff. a non-BO cannon escort would still out DPS you but it's going to be a lot tighter, assuming your running enough weapons power.
5. No a turn rate 6 hyprid. Look a cruiser is defined by it's boffs and consles becuase without those you can't actually do what a cruiser does. Namely tank like a maniac.
That said i delibratly built it as a 3 way hybrid. it's got a Science ship abilities, but a hybrid tac/sci consle and boff layout as well as a tac focused unique consle. But all of this is packed onto a hull with cruiser like movment and hull.
And don't delude yourself, even with the size correction you are not going to get a ship that can effectivlly use limited arc abilities like Grav Well. 9 is going to be about the max, it's probably also going to have Nebulae like hull at worst, e.t.c. It's going to be a cruiser light in base stats no matter what you do.
6. 4/4 is meaningless, i'd happilly give up the extra 2 slots on my sov for SA or similar. What makes it so powerful on cruisers is entierly down to the fact that a cruiser can cycle EPTW constantly, (often on top of EPTS as well). This lets it keeps it's weapons damage output at max whilst having high sheild resistance. Sci ships have a much harder time getting high Aux, high weapons, and a decent level in the other 2 area's.
The weapons drain of > 6 beams mean there's no DPS improvem,nent compared to 6 so any extra slots are littrially fluff. Well unless you bring the new high angle torp into play. but thats why cruiser pilots cried for that for so long. It gave them an actual way to use their extra slots.
Hmmm, given the descriptions and artwork.
Hull: 36,000
Sheilds:1.43
Weapons 4/3
Impulse Modifier: 0.17
Turn: 9
Consles: 5R/4B/1Y
Layout: CMDR, Lt Sci/Ensign Eng/Lt, LtCMDR Tac
Built in Abilities:
Production level Quantum Slipstream Drive: Starfleet?s first slipstream drive intended for continuous use over long distances. The drive can also be run to an even higher setting than a normal drive, but cannot sustain this.
Game Term: Doubles all speeds in sector space and uncaps sector space speed regardless of impulse drive choice.
Experimental Heavy Cannon: The Vesta class is fitted with Starfleet?s latest experimental heavy cannon system in a fixed forward mount under the saucer.
Game Terms: A phaser version of the Borteas Autocannon.
May mount the Intrepid Refits Ablative Amour Console.
+10 Weapons Power
+10 Aux Power
Sensor Analysis
Subsystem Targeting
Console: Advanced Multi-Frequency control Firing Computer: Starfleet?s latest and greatest attempt to build an automated targeting system for combating the borg. This advanced system is able to not only randomize frequencies, but self determine when the enemy has adapted and alter it's frequency modulation algorithms accordingly. It is even able to utilize sensor data in an attempted to adapt perfectly, allow the Vesta class to occasionally mimic the borgs own adaptation trickery. The algorithm are useful against any enemy, but more so vs the borg.
Game Terms: Can only be fitted to the Vesta.
+10% weapons bleedthrough
5% chance on any shot of: +100% weapon bleedthrough
100% chance of: +2000 damage for all weapons vs borg.
Discussion:
At it's core this is something of a bit of everything ship.
The choice of boff/console layout is very much a sci/tac hybrid, whilst the base stats bar shields are a cruiser at heart. The Cannons answers the issues of cannon use, (poor turn rate rendering them useless), without going to the extreme of a spinal lance. The drive stuff is mostly pure fluff. The console I literally made up as I honestly didn't have any other idea's, I?m only familiar with the ship from the wiki. That said it?s a nice firepower buff of a unique kind, and gives people a way to get access to STF grade anti-borg abilities without having to un-slot their fleet stuff.
Overall despite one hell of a hull shield combo I think this ship will balance out on he basis of having one of the weaker tanks in the game and a sub par evasion. It might be destructive and be capable of all kinds of cute sci tricks, but you?re going to have to watch your incoming more than usual.
Update Discussion: I brought the hull and turn back into line with the actual scale, and took the idea of making the cannons a Borteas like ability. I also threw you the 4/3 as a bone. TBH at this point the design is kind of weak. The switch to a heavy tac focus at the expense of engineering is much less effective here as your still dealing with a ship with bad evasion and a very limited tank that?s using those tac slots on beams. They are still effective, but it?s not like with, (for example), an escort where you also get the cannons to maximize the benefit. Overall I doubt the tradeoffs are worth it.
For what it's worth, I have also been watching the numbers of AC-R's.
I have to say that I agree with your results. In general it seems like there are significantly more around now than there were on release day. Contrast this with the Odyssey, the Armitage, and the Atrox, which seemed to flood sector space in a couple of days.
Note that I do not look for anything that is like the Regent - that's an automatic "score" for the regent so that isn't worth bothering with. However, i compulsively end up clicking on various ships and look up the data on them. I like looking at people's bios and I'm also interested in what ship they're using. Being a large fan of the assault cruiser I also like to see what people are using. The vast, vast majority are AC's, not AC-R's, regardless of skin.
I think that if the AC-R did well, then it's probably an accumulation of popularity over time, which makes sense since newer players may well want a follow-on to the AC on their own time.
What are the causes of this? Well, I can think of a few.
1) The Odyssey stomped the AC-R's niche flat. Doubt it, but it's possible; there's definitely encroachment in a big way.
2) The devs waited too long. I've waited since January (when I got here and hit VA). By that time many people will have invested in one of the other ships (most likely the Odyssey, possibly the Excelsior-R in at least a few cases) and may have lost interest in the AC-R, or feel that they spent their money and that's that.
3) Lack of power. $25 is a lot for a ship that's essentially a side-grade. This is especially so when one considers that the Odyssey Tac may well outperform it in most critical ways, and with the Excelsior-R definitely outperforming it in agility. Although the wide-arc qtorp is a great weapon, the TRIBBLE console is lackluster at best for most, and aside from that, the only difference between this and the free AC is a BOff slot swap. Is this worth shelling out cash for, especially when you can shell out the same cash for an Odyssey, or less cash for an Excelsior-R? The answer, for a lot of people, is going to be a sound 'no.'
4) Feeling teased. The Fleet AC, for all people lamented its loss of tanking, was a killing machine. It also had a decent shield mod and better "armor" (hull HP). People may feel a bit ripped off or unsatisfied with the way things turned out with the c-store version. Some may be waiting for what they feel is an inevitable re-release of the Fleet AC, and are going to make a single double-investment of buying their way into a large, T5 fleet (where necessary) and dumping $20 to get the Fleet AC for a single toon.
There is also the possibility that a lot of people just don't use their Regent; they may have picked it up as they've lusted after a theoretical AC-R for ages, but then realized their Odyssey was a superior performer. For a while I was in this group, and honestly I am still undecided between the two ships - which is somewhat unsettling because I loved the AC a great deal back "in the day." I'm currently experimenting with my AC-R to see how well it fits my playstyle. However, I don't know that this is the case for a lot of players, just letting their AC-R's gather dust in spacedock, and I'm pretty sure that this wouldn't necessarily be the case for newer players, who may be eager to just jump on to the AC-R the first chance they get as they're fresh from their free AC and want a taste of C-Store ships.
So, in short, I have to agree with the hypothesis that there are a lot fewer AC-R's out there than the devs were expecting. However, whether or not this is due to being underpowered is an open question, though I suspect it certainly didn't help matters, nor did how long it took, the fact that the Odyssey and Excelsior-R seem to hit their niches better, the "teasing" of the Fleet AC, and the fact that its bonuses may well not be worth $25 to many.
People who bought it COULD HAVE opted just to use the Sovereign costume skin/parts and ignored the Regent costume. You wouldn't KNOW if you saw it on launch day.
That said, I think that while ships have been a healthy seller, interest is dying down because:
A) C-Store releases are coming out faster than content and content is what gets logins (and sales) up.
C) C-Store ships aren't as sexy anymore now that lockbox ships are here.
D) I imagine F2P players buy fewer ships on average than subbers did, even of those who spend money.
E) It's probably time to start looking at how to get that collector enthusiasm up for ground items. I think this involves looking at adding diversity to ground, compelling ground content, and ground items people would be looking at paying an average of $25 per account for.
I think the EV suits were a stab at this last one. Charging $7 per character is likely supposed to generate an average of $25 per account. Problem is, that money doesn't cover BOffs and the suits weren't as cool/flashy as C-Store space consoles.
Charge $7 per character for a pack of 5 Tommyguns and Dixon Hill costume unlocks and then we'll be talking. THAT is flashy because it's a costume that can be used with different builds (like a ship) and because it has a functional power.
Honestly, I think they're a bit lost on what's flashy on the ground. They succeeded with the Tholian sword and I'd wager even more with the Ferengi whip but there's nothing sexy about the Relativity phasers aside from PvP griefing. The visual's barely noticeable. The powers aren't helpful or novel in PvE. The mechanics aren't different. Whereas the whip and sword both have REALLY unique mechanics. (The sword being able to deal different energy types. The whip because it deals a unique damage type and because it works pretty well as a melee weapon.) The phasers don't do exotic energy and when you hit a target with them, you just stand there with nothing to do for seven seconds or focus elsewhere, doing so much less damage that no net time is saved.
If they'd made the pistol, say, use rifle mechanics with pistol animations, Dmgx2 and given it the Fleet Disrupt disintegration mod (unique for a phaser) it'd be canon and more interesting.
I like a lot of J-Man's thoughts (I suspect it was him) but I think it might be time to swap the space and ground systems guys. The OPness of space stuff is getting absurd and could probably use Jeremy taking point whereas ground lacks diversity and the stuff implemented for it is too cautious... and could use Geko ramming through with a balance steamroller. I think you'd see those ground STF queues liven up then too.
I think a lot of it is because Jeremy has handled a lot of the ground stuff and worries about PvP and hard numerics whereas Geko plays fast and loose with general principles and "value for the money." And their focuses are especially flipped since the life and hope of this game's PvP is space combat whereas ground is an area where a lot of players are already bored and/or frustrated by the lack of novel toys or the difficulty. (The former being a case where the novel toys people want are canon novelties like we have in space... And the latter being because Gozer was a TRIBBLE when it came to STF design and PuG accessibility. If people could pay a few bucks to steamroll Infected and Cure optional with canon-looking weapons and gimmicks, I think they would)
At least that was the response when i asked around in my fleet.
it'll not be able to use the ablative armour console
t5 ship consoles are unique to the ship they cam with ONLY
as for it being ' kind of weak' this is a science ship , not a cruiser . it shouldnt really be designed to tank stuff :rolleyes:
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Changed console layout, reduced shield modifier by 0.1, increased hull from 27k to 30k.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
There's weak and then there's underpowered. Of course as a sci ship it shouldn't be able to tank like a cruiser. But now it's even worse than it was before. Littrially it's infiriour to a Sci ship for Sci stuff, has the worst tank in the game, and whilst the Autocannon/Tac slot Combo will be semi hard hitting it's still not going to be a match for anything nastier than an ordinary cruiser.
Thats the inherent issues with making a full on sci/tac hybrid. With the weakest base damage in the game to start with sci ships get the smallest benefit from extra tac slots. They still benefit as i allready stated, but where not talking the way a cruiser does. At the same time such a hybrid has to sacrafice in other area's to get this hybrid nature. At which point you have to ask, is the tradeoff worth it.
As for the consle, since it seems to include so much voyager tech i figured it would be "fluffy" to add the option.
ABout the AC-R:
2 issues.
1. it dosen't compete with fleet ships.
2. People asking for the AC-R wanted a ship with the tanking ability of the AC,. but expanded damage options via consle/boff tweaks.
Most wanted a Lt Cmdr Tac, CMDr Eng, Lt Cmdr Eng, Ensign Sci type layout, so we got our Lt Cmdr tac option without sacraficing our Eng abilities.
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
There is an inherent hybrid cost, yes.
Which is why this thing will have overpowered consoles and/or weapons. And also how it will be able to get away with having them.
I think that's a reasonable guess. I think it WILL be Dual Heavy Cannons. More universal BOFF slots by at least one.
Multiple consoles, possibly 10 console slots.
I fully expect halfway between a 2500 ZEN ship and a Odyssey 3-pack.
10 console slots but the ship itself will be borderline useless without 2 equipped at all times. So stuff like... Turnrate of 6 but the turnrate doubles or even triples when you equip the consoles in order to force you to equip them. So you need 'em for the cannons.
End of debate on that. He also said that because the designer wanted it to be as close to what he designed, plus what she did in the books that he was pretty sure she would get to load cannons up front.
That pretty much means she is getting the option to load dual heavy cannons - end of story.
And watch for a turn above 10 (i suspect 11 or 12) - she was designed to be a tight turner for the cannons
Intrepid is nice and tight design as well and it's turn is 12
The Vor'cha battle crusier is similar size but not as sleek and it has a 10 turn so why would Vesta not have the same or better - that's my case for 11 or 12 - a bit less than sci interpid but more than the wider Vor'cha.
Nice avatar, BTW.
The Vorcha is smaller than the Gal, the Sov is just as long but a bit sleeker as the gal. The Vesta if it's actually near Sov size is going to be bigger than the Vorcha, and a lot less thin in the vertical arc. 10 for the turn rate is really insanely optomistic IMHO. And even that is the bare usable level for cannons, 12+ is really ideal range.
Also if it dosen't have at least fleet ship base stats it's not gonna sell period.
I know - people say that Cyptic would be shooting itself in the foot if it cam out with an OP ship
But the Case for it this time is very strong:
1) They paided extra for it
2)It launches with what is supposed to be a big Season - so having a anticipate ship as a dud would not look good at all!!
3)We are coming into fiscal end and quarter end and christmas season - all of which companies usually put out their best stuff to get into the `black`for the year
after the lackluster Sov-R and the big slow down from S6 they need a big solid sales leader going into end of year
Anything less would shoot themselves in the foot in my opinion - but like I said before - nothing we say here really effects what we get.
Vor`cha is still a BIG ship Lenght 482M width 342M!! - height 107 meters
Vesta - lenght 672M - 1 third is Nacelle sticking way back width 132M height 88 meters
So they are more then likely expecting it to bring in a whole lot more then what they put out for it.
So?
We have no idea what their books looke like. How much they are losing or gaining. But its safe to say they wouldnt have put the money down for this if they didnt expect it to sell merely for its namesake.
Seeing the multitude of non-fed ships running about the game its doubtful that these ships are seen as a leader in anything other then another chance to stuff their pockets. The lockboxes are where the moneys at. But even so, the ship has been heavily demanded since Start so they are more then likely assuming the ship itself regardless of layout or console goodies will sell.
I havent seen any specs for the Vesta set to launch into game. But I do know from experience that many of the ships in game are not no where near the size they should be. Take the Defiant for example. Its massive compared to what is seen in game. Its also safe to assume they arent going to produce a Flagship thats the largest ever constructed in StarFleet history only to eclipse it with an equal to or bigger ship.