test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The ups and downs of Avenger ownership...
momaw
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
Right, so I got an Avenger battle cruiser. Neat ship. Perhaps I should have done more research though, because I later learned that the very useful "command array" is coming to ALL cruisers. Which removes about half of what makes this ship actually unique. The VATA console is garbage. So you're left with a ship that spends a chunk of hull strength to move a weapon slot from the rear to the front and mount dual cannons. Advantages to be sure, but...boring ones. Now I kind of feel like a thankless guinea pig testing the command array so that other people can get it later the kinks worked out
It would be nice if VATA were made to actually be worth mounting, and/or make the Avenger's version of command array more potent than other ships since it's the prototype for the feature.
Discuss.
It would be nice if VATA were made to actually be worth mounting, and/or make the Avenger's version of command array more potent than other ships since it's the prototype for the feature.
Discuss.
Post edited by momaw on
0
Comments
Anyways, I don't see why people keep constantly putting down the VATAS. It's not a bad weapon, and the multi-functionality of it is a neat way to let one inflict different kinds of attacks on targets. Plus, they are good for helping to thin out fighter crowds on their way to their designated target.
Secondly, the Avenger is a superb ship. It is superior than an Assault Cruiser, and has better Tactical and Offense potential, period. Though it has slightly less hull, it is far more maneuverable and has more durable shields. The ability to actually mount dual cannons should not be underestimated, either.
Thirdly, I don't understand the logic behind "prototype=more advanced", because technically speaking, prototypes are usually nowhere near more advanced than a production model of anything. They are test beds, usually with inferior developmental-level equipment, to be eventually fine tuned into what you'd see in a mass-produced model of any given item.
I'm fine with the Avenger the precise way it is, VATAS console and all, and the Comm Arrays are also fine.
(it'll be even better when the general public of Avenger early adopters finally understands how Comm Channels actually work, too)
Mine Trap Supporter
Feel bad for ya not enjoying the avenger
My PvE/PvP hybrid skill tree
Higher maneuverability (currently at over 30, could likely push 40 if I went nuts) and ease (relatively speaking) of access compared to the other combat cruiser (FACR) combined with durable but offensive console seating makes the Avenger a damn good ship. Five fore weapons plus DHC capability means it's a very versatile platform in terms of weapon load outs.
Not to mention it doesn't look half bad once you ditch the turkey wings.
All in all it's not an absurdly, overwhelmingly superior cruiser, but for anyone looking to build a blue-sided combat cruiser there are at present no better options.
Very happy with mine here as well.
She gives me a battle cruiser that can go toe to toe with the fleet Vor'cha.
U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
Just because some say it doesn't make it true
Actually, it is.
Compare VATAS with Bio-neural Warhead. Your numbers might vary, but I'm doing a side by side on the same ship with the same skills, so it's a valid relative comparison.
Reload time: 2 minutes / 1 minute
Obvious which wins.
Range: 2-10km / 2.5-15km
Obvious which wins. Worth pointing out that both of these weapons have a minimum range similar your energy weapon's maximum range, if you want to do peak damage, and that both of them benefit greatly from being launched far away from the target. However, BNW's slow and sluggish movement is actually a benefit here because it gives the drone weapon significantly more time to shoot and can make the BNW miss the target entirely on its first pass. Which, again, is more time on target.
Warhead direct damage: 17.4K (quantum mode) / 19.4K
Not sure what the precise blast radius is on BNW but it's comparable. Neither of these weapons are remotely practical really, since both values are insufficient to kill a serious opponent ship in one shot and the damage over time is pathetic.
Drone weapon damage: 980 kinetic DPS or 1616 tachyon DPS / 1587 antimatter DPS
BNW wins. The VATAS can deliver slightly more damage to shields, but ONLY to shields and spread across all facings. Anything with shields strong enough to matter isn't going to be scratched by this. The BNW's antimatter turret chainsaws through everything equally.
Basically the VATAS is a BNW that's slightly nerfed as a torpedo, badly nerfed as a fighting drone, and with a few marginally effective gimmicks like decreasing enemy shield hardness or slowing them down. All in exchange for twice the reload time. BNW is already pretty darn marginal as a weapon system, which makes VATAS just plain terrible.
edit;
If you like numbers, try these. I mounted both weapons and used them as frequently as I sensibly could.
Bio-neural warhead:
9 launches, 7 direct hits
185K total damage from warhead hits
84K total damage from antiproton turret
VATAS:
(Quantum)
5 launches, 10 direct hits
104K total damage from warhead hits
13K total damage from micro-quantum hits
(Tachyon)
1 launch, 1 hit
Being that the raw damage on this warhead is so much lower, we must assume its merit is in its effect on shields. Which is bad. Because there was negligible effect on the target's shields.
Except there are a few differences you aren't considering...the BNW takes up a weapon slot where as the VATA takes up a console...while both are precious I would say the console isn't as precious.
I haven't used a VATA but is its kinetic explosion at the end affected by shields? The BNW is...and I wouldn't exactly call the BNW's turret a chain saw.
I'm not even sure how to read your post. Are those numbers supposed to represent the damage the weapons do on impact, and then the damage the weapons do like, on the way to the target?
Did you test out how different consoles and skills interact with the weapons? You probably should have.
Anyway, since one is an actual slotted weapon, and the other is a multi-purpose console, I'm going to go watch cats push watermelons.
Compare it to Theta or something similar. Or subspace jump. Or I know, how about one of the other recent console weapon systems?
I only did a few dozen parses, but the numbers I have aren't even similar to yours. I'm not even sure what you mean when you say DPS. Are you fudging that based on the damage of the device vs reload time? Or did you parse it? Did you measure the slow on the targets or are you guessing? Same with the tachyon bit.
Anyways yah, the ship is dull if you're used to KDF, but it is nice to have a decent battlecruiser Fed Side.
The console is ok. It can do some very good work for a console in PVE. And it doesn't cost a weapon slot.
Honestly they are both pretty bad weapons. The Bio-neural warhead soundly trounced the VATA in damage output for a total of 507 DPS over the course of my test mission. My least damaging front mounted weapon (dual heavy cannons) scored 697 DPS. And the cannons would have done a lot better if I weren't forced to maintain standoff range from targets in order to effectively test the torpedoes.
Basically: BNW gave me substantially more damage than VATA and was itself outperformed by an energy weapon being used badly. Cost of BNW is a weapon that will do substantially more damage in its place If you want to look at the cost of the VATA, then it's a layer of armor or a damage console, both of which apply persistent and sustained benefits.
1500 DPS in a drone weapon isn't anything to sneer at. More to the point: A big reason why the BNW performed so much better was that its turret kept shields suppressed in that instant before the torpedo hit. Because its drone weapon is energy based, it can do that. The VATA's micro quantum torps are not only half the DPS, they're kinetic damage, which means they're reduced to futility against shields and do absolutely nothing to help the warhead hit hull.
I can get a similar bang out of an isometric charge if I can chain it.
Also, if you REALLY want to compare the range on VATAs and the bio-neural?
15k range on Bio-neural? Really slow travel time(which gives it time to put that PDS to use)
10k on the VATA? It'll cross that distance in a couple seconds.
In the end, I don't think it's worth comparing a weapon to a console. It's more a question of are EITHER of these good supplimental gear for whatever build you're working on?
As for the ship itself? Cloak is kinda neat I guess. Not the most aesthetically pleasing beast, and not sure if I should have bothered switching over from the Regent. It's a bit flimsier, but the turn rate is nice.
Can you explain further? Because this is the kind of thing I'm seeing.
http://momaw.kikaimegami.com/sto-vata-bnw.png
http://momaw.kikaimegami.com/sto-vata-qtorp.png
Even looking from the other end at the target's damage taken, there's no mysterious unexplained effects. From all appearances: What you see is what you get.
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x57/UrsusMorologus/Star%20Trek%20Online/bio-neuralstagger.png
I don't regret buying the Avenger ship and it's fleet variant. Having essentially an 11th weapon slot with the VATA console, it's a nice little combo.
Comparing the console to a weapon is a bit off in it's practicality. Normally all consoles IMO are bits of fanboy TRIBBLE material, offering little in practical game enhancements.
The ship however is a lot of fun. I put a fleet variant under the command of an engineering captain who was running an all-romulan plasma odyssey. My game play went from graceful combat to something more escort in style. The biggest difference was a sizable jump in dps with the addition of the 5th weapon forward.
I started with a DEM/Marion beam build using arrays. I tried a DHC build. Ultimately I went to a 'focused DEM build' using 3 DB, an omega torp, and the exp romulan array at the front, 2 arrays and the cutting beam at the rear.
Hello 12K dps.
I played with turrents instead of arrays - but found my rear under protected and my dps dropped.
I'm looking forward to creating a tactical version later this month, although NOT having a commander tac slot does limit my creativity.
Consider how easy it is to get a VATA console. Buy the C-Store Avenger.
How easy is it to get that Bio-Neural Warhead?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Join the Empire and buy the SuQob Raptor (Qorgh Refit). 1k Zen.
Or buy the reward pack for however much it's going for these days.
Its one of the lockbox torpedoes for the Feds. Since only Feds can buy the Avenger, thats all that matters
To me, it's one of the most ugly ship designs currently ingame. It looks like a 5 year old tried to build the Voyager with Lego Duplos.
Performance-wise, it wasn't as much fun to fly as my Fleet Vor'Cha (aka Tor'Kaht) or any of my other battlecruisers (monbosh, k'kora, haakona, chell gret). Sure, the 5 fwd weapon slots are nice, but feels much bulkier and less sturdy than it's KDF counterpart and with a 2-weapon type setup (e.g. Torp & Cannons), it suffers from having the useless Tac ensign slot.
Tactical Team I , Cannon Rapid Fire/Scatter Volley I , Cannon Rapid Fire/Scatter Volley II
Tactical Team I
You don't need a Auxiliary to Battery to have constant tactical team and cannon abilities going.
With Auxiliary to Battery
Torpedo Spread I , Attack Pattern Beta I , Cannon Rapid Fire/Scatter Volley II
Tactical Team I
I use that Auxiliary to Battery with the Avenger. Torpedo Spread I does good with Romulan Hyper Plasma Torpedos.
wait, what? the avenger has 10 weapon slots?
Extrange, less than 500,000 EC
Lol...
/10 char
Essentially what you have is a cruiser with the same level of fire power as a Scimitar minus the thalaron spread, the 5 fore 3 aft arrangement is excellent.
I took mine on a patrol and it melted a d'deridex in one volley. It is the only dedicated fed cruiser which can mount DHCs which kind of turns it into a over sized escort but with the survivability of a cruiser with a fantastic boff set up, that universal Lt slot gives it versatility, in that regard i've put in a sci boff with polarize hull and tyken's rift.
You can have an engineer in that slot or if you want overkill, put a tac in, the VATA is a fun toy indeed and depending on which cruiser command you have activated changes the behavior of the weapon, again a very nice touch.
The down side however is the way the console layout is set up, you get the standard 4 slots with cruisers and a 4 tac console slots which is very nice but you only get one sci slot which really is one the avenger's few failings.
The other issue i have with the avenger is that the turn rate while very good for a cruiser is not so good with DHCs and more agile opponents can and will run rings around you and keeping your guns on target is easier said than done at time though the fleet rcs consoles can remedy it but not entirely cure it.
For anyone who has experience of KDF battle cruisers, the avenger should be right up your street.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
second i run the ship with plasma DHCs and she do's tons of dmg yes its not like 23k dps but for what i have on her 6k dps is allot one of her quantoms do's 18k dmg x2 that means 36k if it crits (and it crits allot) thats 64k dmg (my highest crit this far was 84k per projectile ) every 2 mins this means that you can use it 3 times for total of 108k dmg only by the projectiles in ise
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I think we finally found a point where people's incessant reminders that VATA is not a weapon actually matters: Projectile weapon officers do not affect it.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]