Fleet Aquarius Destroyer: inferior to lower-tier fleet ships, in need of improvement

epsilonia

I argue that the Aquarius Destroyer and Fleet Aquarius Destroyer are in need of improved stats compared to their current forms.

Introduction:

The Fleet Aquarius Destroyer and Aquarius Destroyer are ships available to fleets that have a Tier IV or greater Shipyard. The Fleet Aquarius Destroyer costs 20,000 Fleet Credits and 4 Fleet Ship Modules, and the Aquarius Destroyer costs 200,000 Fleet Credits. The argument exists that this vessel, within the game canon, is intended to be deployed from an Odyssey-class vessel and serve as a support craft; thus, its stats are not as high as compared to a "proper" escort. I argue against that premise for one based upon game mechanics involved with how they are obtained; these vessels are underpowered compared to their relative acquisition costs and require improvements to make them into worthwhile vessels instead of vanity trophies. To support my argument that these two vessels are in need of modification to improve their stats, I will first provide those of three other vessels for comparison: the Fleet Patrol Escort, the Fleet Escort Retrofit, and the Tactical Escort Refit. The Fleet Patrol Escort and the Fleet Escort Retrofit are both ships available for 20,000 Fleet Credits and 4 Fleet Ship Modules, and are available at Tier I and II Shipyards, respectively. The Tactical Escort Refit is a Captain-level Escort (compare to the AD/FAD being Vice Admiral ships) available for 1,500 Zen. The stats of these vessels, as of the time this article was written, are as follows (skip to Argument if you already know these stats):

Data:

Fleet Aquarius Destroyer
Class: Escort (Vice Admiral-rank, Fleet Ship - Tier IV Shipyards)
Hull: 26,400
Shield Modifier: 0.94
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 2 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 17
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Tactical (3 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills), Ensign Universal (1 skill)

Aquarius Destroyer
Class: Escort (Vice Admiral-rank, Fleet Ship - Tier IV Shipyards)
Hull: 24,000
Shield Modifier: 0.85
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 2 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 17
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Tactical (3 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills), Ensign Universal (1 skill)

Fleet Patrol Escort
Class: Escort (Vice Admiral-rank, Fleet Ship - Tier I Shipyards)
Hull: 34,100
Shield Modifier: 0.99
Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 2 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 16
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Tactical (3 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Science (2 skills), Ensign Universal (1 skill)

Fleet Escort Retrofit
Class: Escort (Vice Admiral-rank, Fleet Ship - Tier II Shipyards)
Hull: 30,360
Shield Modifier: 0.99
Weapons: 4 Fore, 3 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 2 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 17
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Tactical (3 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Science (2 skills), Ensign Engineering (1 skill)

Tactical Escort Refit
Class: Escort (Captain-rank)
Hull: 25,000
Shield Modifier: 0.9
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 3 Engineering, 2 Science, 3 Tactical
Turn Rate: 17
Impulse Modifier: 0.20
Inertia rating: 70
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Tactical (2 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Science (2 skills), Ensign Engineering (1 skill)

Argument:

Comparing the stats of the Tactical Escort Refit to the normal and Fleet Aquarius Destroyer, we can see that the Captain-level vessel is equal in most stats, other than having one less Tactical console than both (and one less Engineering than the Fleet Aquarius Destroyer), a Lieutenant Tactical on the TER instead of the AD/FAD's Lieutenant Commander, Engineering and Science bridge officers instead of the Universal AD/FAD bridge officers, and hull stats. In fact, the Tactical Escort Refit has a greater hull and shield modifier (Hull: 25,000, Shield Modifier: 0.9) than the Aquarius Destroyer (Hull: 24,000, Shield Modifier: 0.85). The cost of the Captain-level escort is only 1500 Zen, rather than the 2000 Zen of the Fleet Aquarius Destroyer (for four Fleet Ship Modules). These minor weaknesses compared to a far, far greater investments required for investment in this Tier IV Shipyard vessel offer the argument of simply using the Tactical Escort Refit instead of an Aquarius Destroyer.

The normal and Fleet Aquarius Destroyers received a greater shield modifier on February 14, 2013. They were previously worse than they are now, showing that Cryptic is willing to rebalance ships in favor of making them more worthwhile to use. I ask for more consideration to be given to the Aquarius Destroyer.

As it currently exists, the Aquarius is very similar to a Bird-of-Prey. What it lacks is a full complement of Universal bridge officers and battle cloak. The Bird-of-Prey has access to higher-level bridge officer skills than the Aquarius can fit, as well as a higher Turn Rate (21). What the Aquarius gains compared to a Bird-of-Prey is... a net one more Ensign bridge officer. I ask not that all of these suggestions be applied; the following are simply a list of suggestions as to how the Aquarius Destroyer (more specifically, its fleet counterpart) could be improved:

Include a Battle Cloak: This might rub many people the wrong way, but if nothing else were to be improved, a Battle Cloak would be justifiable on this craft. Its hull is terribly low compared to other escorts, in the range that Birds-of-Prey are on the KDF vessels. While the Federation typically does not use cloaked vessels, the Khitomer Accords are a thing of the past in game canon. A Battle Cloak is not unthinkable as an addition to this vessel, given the stats currently attributed to it.

"Bird-of-Prey"-Universal Bridge Officer Layout and/or Turn Rate: If the ships are to remain Birds-of-Prey in hull and shield strength, I can't imagine why they can't have a similar bridge officer layout and maneuverability.

Third Aft Weapon Slot: If the Battle Cloak is not added to this vessel, there is no reason for it not to have a third aft weapon slot. Every other Fleet Escort has no fewer than three aft weapon slots.

Increased Hull/Shield Modifier: These values, as previously listed, are horrifyingly low compared to other Fleet Escorts. An increase to those on-par with the Fleet Escort Retrofit would be recommended, perhaps even slightly lower, but something more would need to be added to make the Fleet Aquarius Destroyer less inferior to the Fleet Escort Retrofit in all ways.

Decreased Fleet Credit/Ship Module Costs: If a ship inferior to the other escorts is to be sold, it should be priced comparatively lower. No one wants to pay for a sports car and receive a jalopy.

Function As Small Craft: The Aquarius is capable of being deployed as a support craft from the Odyssey. I believe that the Aquarius could thus be flagged as a shuttle, and therefore be a ?super-shuttle? for doing missions such as Operation Gamma and The Vault

Conclusion:

As I conclude, I wish to thank Jamjamz and the rest of the ship modeling and texturing team for designing a beautiful destroyer craft. Part of the reason why I advanced my shipyards first, before other fleet assets, was to fly an Aquarius, and my only visual disappointment is how the Type 6, my favorite non-shield hull texture, cannot be applied it to this ship. Now, what I hope for is that each Aquarius can be made into a ship that is worth flying for more than just its looks, in a way that justifies the costs necessary to unlock and purchase them.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

epsilonia

skollulfr wrote: »

nope aquarius is fine, bop is fine, the rest are overpowered to lulzy levels.

b'rel = what a small ship should be, hit & run glass cannon with high focussed dps and agility to offset lack of health

Fleet Patrol Escort = size of a damn cruiser, moves like a fighter, health of a cruiser hits like a juggernaught

Fleet Escort Retrofit = size of a bop, moves like a fighter health of a cruiser , also hits hile a juggernaught.


what is making these ships seem poor is that their niche as small craft is obsoleted by cruiser size mvam's & raptors having the same agility as such small ships
and other small fedscorts having the durability of cruisers when they shouldnt do.

what your suggestion will do is further obsolete cruisers & large ships while simultaniously making the escort ships in game more of a big bland mess than they are now.

You seem to have left off the Battle Cloak from the Fleet B'rel in your description. How would you feel about the Fleet B'rel if it had no Battle Cloak and more locked bridge officer slots? Also, your stats, as listed, are incorrect. They are as follows:

Class: Raider (Fleet Ship, Tier V Shipyards) [effectively Escort]
Hull: 24,750
Shield Modifier: 0.88
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 30
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 3 Science, 3 Tactical
Turn Rate: 23
Impulse Modifier: 0.20
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Universal (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Universal (3 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills)
Abilities: Battle Cloak

And as long as we are posting Bird-of-Prey stats, let's include what the KDF gets in place of the Aquarius, the Fleet Hoh'Sus.

Class: Raider (Fleet Ship, Tier IV Shipyards) [effectively Escort]
Hull: 24,750
Shield Modifier: 0.88
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 70
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 3 Engineering, 3 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 21
Impulse Modifier: 0.20
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Universal (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Universal (3 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills)
Abilities: Battle Cloak

dova25

I agree with @skollulfr in this one .

For OP i have met Aquarius Destroyer in combat actually in C&H and it is a nasty little ship that strange enough can hit very hard if it is built properly and it takes little damage due to high turn rate.I am sorry i didn't logged that combat but at the next encounter I will and post some data too.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

contrarydecision

To be honest I'd be entertained with keeping the Aquarius as it is but making it count as a small craft. Make it a super-shuttle and suddenly its actually justifiable wasting the equivalent of $20 on something that is barely on par with a tier 4 ship.

scurry5

skollulfr wrote: »

whoopsy for not attentively copying all the stats?
and, not a great deal of difference between either of those two ships.
gg on proving my point.

any issue i have with the cloak is how they are implemented, and they arent that great in the least. bout all they grant you is a bit of advantage for timing your alpha and a tractor beam or shockwave disables it. so its far from a win button.

The battle cloak on a KDF bop gives you a very big advantage, given that the classic Bop relies almost totally on timing your alpha, as you put it. Also, getting disabled hardly matters once the disable wears off and you can recloak. The Aquarius does not have that option.

In essence, the things you failed to copy are the biggest differences between a BoP and the Aquarius: turnrate, universal boff slots, and battle cloak. Without these, a BoP would be nothing but an inferior, paper-hulled escort, which the Aquarius is.

The Aquarius also lacks the flexibility of the Bop. While a Bop and easily be configured to be an alpha striker, a sci or a healer, you cannot do that with the Aquarius.

With these differences, I believe that the Aquarius would be better off nerfed somewhat then made a small craft, or just given the universal boff slots to make for a more interesting playstyle.

And yes, the Aquarius can hit fairly hard. However, the problem is that it cannot hit as hard as a similarly outfitted fleet escort of a different type, which is why we are looking for a buff, considering it costs the same. Oh, and its turnrate is exactly the same as the Defiant Retrofit, which hits a lot harder for the same price, and can fit a standard cloak.

spork87

then dont fly it, it belongs docked on the back of a starship used as cannon fodder when your work bees and saucer are on CD

Unknown

This content has been removed.

ussultimatum

skollulfr wrote: »

nope aquarius is fine, bop is fine, the rest are overpowered to lulzy levels.

fleet b'rel http://www.stowiki.org/B%27rel_Fleet_Bird-of-Prey_Retrofit
Class: Escort (Fleet Ship, Tier V Shipyards)
Hull: 24,750
Shield Modifier: 0.88
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 3 Science, 3 Tactical
TURN RATE: 23
Impulse Modifier: 0.20
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander universal (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander universal (3 skills), Lieutenant universal (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills)
BATTLE CLOAK
THE SINGLE BEST BOFF LAYOUT IN THE ENTIRE GAME

versus as you pointed out


Fleet Aquarius Destroyer
Class: Escort (Vice Admiral-rank, Fleet Ship ? Tier IV Shipyards)
Hull: 26,400
Shield Modifier: 0.94
Weapons: 4 Fore, 2 Aft
Crew: 50
Device Slots: 2
Consoles: 4 Engineering, 2 Science, 4 Tactical
Turn Rate: 17
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Inertia rating: 80
Bonus Power: +15 weapons power
Bridge Officers: Commander Tactical (4 skills), Lieutenant Commander Tactical (3 skills), Lieutenant Engineering (2 skills), Lieutenant Universal (2 skills), Ensign Universal (1 skill)


b'rel = what a small ship should be, hit & run glass cannon with high focussed dps and agility to offset lack of health

Aquarius = small ship, with no hit & run ability.

No cloak.

No Battle cloak.

No 23 base turn rate.

Same Weapon load as Fleet B'rel.

Primarily Locked BOFF layout.

No ridiculously good CMD, Ltc x2, Lt boff layout.

Absolutely nothing to offset lower health.



There is no way any rational player capable of cognizant thought can look at the above specs of these two ships and even pretend they are remotely balanced vs. each other.


Anyone who says so, is just being a shill for their faction of choice and not even attempting to be objective.


It's one thing to love your faction, and quite another to say things that are very clearly absurd.

kimmym

I want one just to make people rage when I out DPS them in it.

That's worth 20mil in fleet modules alone.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

sunfrancks

Seems to me that the Aquarius has all of the negatives, but none of the positives of the b'rel......

this1isavailable

This ship is so tiny when I fought one in pvp I couldn't tell where it was facing.

In my opinion they should simply buff its turnrate to 20 and impulse mod to .22 (which are on par with the super op ship known as jhas) instead of making it another copy of an existing escort.

dontdrunkimshoot

the fleet aquarius needs 1 thing

a turn rate of 20

it doesnt make much sense that it only turns as well as the bigger defient, and the MUCH larger saber. the lower hitpoints would actually be fairly balanced then. it would be like what the bug should be, but isnt. it loses a weapon slot, hitpoints, but gains mad turn and some universals, it would be a nice change of pace, a ship with advantages and disadvantages, instead of only advantages.

4 forward weapon slots, 4 tac consoles, and a COM and LTC tac with a 14 turn rate and up is all any ship needs to laydown major pain, regardless of the other stats. you just take a survivability hit by useing this vs anything else.

epsilonia

sunfrancks wrote: »

Seems to me that the Aquarius has all of the negatives, but none of the positives of the b'rel......

Precisely what my primary points boil down to.

alphawolf001

Just fix the boff layout, the boff layouts on a few fed ships are very lacking, just fix them cryptic...not hard to understand doesnt matter if klinks cry (i have klink toons aswell) (half of them glitch over to the blue just to have a good fight, with other klinks) that means some fed ships need fixed! Fix my fed ships and I will stay a fed player even when your romulans release... Why cant the Aquarius just be the modern defiant replacement a cloak would be a bonus.....

cryptic if you do anything at least fix the boff layouts

ussultimatum

reyan01 wrote: »

I
Irrespective, so far as I am concerned, it's inability to tank notwithstanding, it's a damned fun ship to fly and it's satisfying to watch my little, underestimated, aquarius tear into enemy ships just as quickly, if not sometimes faster, than some of the other escorts in whatever instance I am in.

It's also fun to watch when players let perception bias completely cloud their reason.

epsilonia

reyan01 wrote: »

Yes, that MUST be it. I must have been seeing things, and that rainbow-beam Prometheus was a figment of my imagination. Silly of me to think that I could possibly out DPS any other escort, even a rainbow-boat, in an Aquarius. I mean, EVERY other escort in the game is set up SO perfectly. :rolleyes:

Saying that, it's also fun to watch when players let their anal-superior attitude completely cloud their reason.

In the defense of that ship, I do fly a rainbow-beam Prometheus from time to time, with Romulan plasma consoles, kitted out to the Nth degree, just so I can see all the pretty plasma cloud colors on enemies, but I save that for PvE. The U.S.S. Aurora most certainly did benefit from the Chroniton Dual Beam Bank for more rainbows. But at least I know it's inferior to other, better builds.

taergon

Argh, just bought this as I thought it was a beautiful little ship. I usually don't mind not having the best ship/layout if its for looks but this seems bad.

ussultimatum

reyan01 wrote: »

Yes, that MUST be it. I must have been seeing things, and that rainbow-beam Prometheus was a figment of my imagination. Silly of me to think that I could possibly out DPS any other escort, even a rainbow-boat, in an Aquarius. I mean, EVERY other escort in the game is set up SO perfectly. :rolleyes:.

Well I'm glad your happy that your completely inferior ship performs well vs. players who have no concept of game mechanics, using rainbow beams on an Escort.

That's certainly worthy of coming into a thread and boasting how you "out DPS other escorts".

I'm sure it must help justify the purchase of the Aquarius.

doffingcomrade

They should make it so owning the Oddy gives a discount on this thing. The Failquarius is not worth 4 modules.

epsilonia

doffingcomrade wrote: »

They should make it so owning the Oddy gives a discount on this thing. The Failquarius is not worth 4 modules.

While it would be nice, I can't imagine they would.

pweistheworst

I really want the Fleet Aquarius but EVERY time I go to buy it I end up looking at the horrible stats and I buy something else.

If the mods are serious about wanting players to spend good money on the Aquarius then the LEAST they need to do is increase the turn rate (20 or higher for greater maneuvering) and make all the BOFFs universal stations.

I can accept the fact that it doesn't come with a cool weapon like a heavy quad cannon or room for more weapons or more hull points ... it's a tiny ship.

Unfortunately, as it is now the Aquarius doesn't have enough of the benefits of a tiny ship ... which is why so many of us keep complaining about it.

The ship looks cool and we'd love to run it in our fleets, but not the way it is currently setup.

cr4ckf0x

Hi guys, I would like to buy access to your shipyards, can't seem to see any of you on game. Can we sort something out?

Cheers.

umaeko

I am entirely in approval of the premise of this thread. I own a Fleet Aquarius, I used it for half-a-year, and while I've been quite able to make it work... I end up doing so at a disadvantage to players in other endgame escorts whom are in a better position to outperform me.

There is also the matter of the ridicule that accompanies the whimsical choice of commanding a ship you like the looks of. Despite my ability to make it work, I do admit the 'running joke' has grown highly tedious. It seems all too often the conclusion is "you decided to drive an underpowered ship - you're so dumb".

When the objective is to feel like I can make a worthwhile contribution to any endgame effort... this is one of the things that does sour what enjoyment I might find in this.

Another irksome point is the Hoh'Sus. I happen to like the Hoh'Sus too... but it's clear the Hoh'Sus has been much more fortunate than its Federation counterpart - it's commonly seen by KDF players as one of the strongest endgame Raider picks.

It would definitely be nice to find the Aquarius balanced so to be worth its price, be accordingly more satisfying to own, and compare more evently with its KDF counterpart. I hardly want the Aquarius to be turned into a Raider- if I wanted a cloaking bird of prey I'd be playing a KDF character instead. But there must me someway that is possible to make the Aquarius be competitive.

So, I too submit my appeal to consideration being invested in that direction.

kostamojenx

My proposal for improving the Aquarius is quite simple...

Make it a unique ship using Bridge Officers and keep the stats the same:

Give the Aquarius TWO commander BO slots. One Tactical and one Universal.

That way it may not have a stats advantage over other escorts but it will have a BO advantage and make it worthwhile for fleets and against the upcoming Raiders.

terongray

My simple solution for the Aquarius would be to boost the turn rate closer to BoP levels, and give it a built-in Enhanced Mask Energy Signature, akin to Tier 3 with 9 ranks but better stealth levels. Not true cloak, but it allows the thing a chance to sneak up on things to get an opener before being seen first like the other Raiders.

orangeitis

As suggested in another thread, give destroyers a new mechanic.

timezarg

I've never been a fan of giving new goodies to the Federation, and even I agree that the Aquarius needs work. It was a useless ship from the start. I think what ultimately kills it is that impulse mod, it's as fast as a cruiser.

That being said: Add some hull onto this thing, add 2-3 turn points, increase impulse mod to .20 or .21, and keep inertia the same or increase to 85. That would make the Aquarius competitive again, especially if it was reclassified as a raider to get that upcoming flanking bonus. . .'cause that's what it really is. It's not even close to being a destroyer in its current state, not when you compare it to KDF destroyers (Guramba and Scourge). Destroyers are basically 'heavy escorts'.

kencyr11

A thought I have been toying with for the Aquarius is let it mount the quad cannon(s) without the extra power penalty...as well as buff the turn rate.
That'd give it something unique from the other escorts. I'm not the best person to comment on Boff load outs to I'll not comment to that.

I'd love to get this hull, but until it is given a makeover stat wise I have to pass....

My .02 ec anyhow.....