test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Re: 4-year annviersary ships - The Dyson Science Destroyers

1101112131416»

Comments

  • Options
    teknesiateknesia Member Posts: 860 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    This is my opinion and my opinion alone, but god what an ugly set of ships. They look straight out of a cartoon.
    edbf9204-c725-4dab-a35a-46626a4cb978.jpg
  • Options
    beerxhyperbeerxhyper Member Posts: 676 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    lucho80 wrote: »
    1) Sensor scan and sensor analysis are two completely different things

    2) It's a sci ship so it normally would be a 6 weapons ship, the 7th is stuck in there for the special tac mode.

    3) It is an excellent sci ship, probably great for drain focused builds and the set bonuses are pretty generous.

    What I'm not 100% sure is what happens to commander level powers when you switch. Can I use ES3, switch to tac mode, and blow my still under the effects of ES3 opponent up with the proton cannons?

    gorngonzolla said yes all sci buffs and such well stay when u switch to tact mode. u just lose the use of second deflector and such but the buffs and such stay that u used before u switched to tact mode.


  • Options
    novapolaris#2925 novapolaris Member Posts: 784 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    beerxhyper wrote: »
    gorngonzolla said yes all sci buffs and such well stay when u switch to tact mode. u just lose the use of second deflector and such but the buffs and such stay that u used before u switched to tact mode.

    I take it that works both ways, both for Science and for Tactical abilities. For example, you could use Attack Pattern Omega III and then switch out of Tactical Mode, but still have the buff.
  • Options
    sinusiridumsinusiridum Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    They seem fairly nice as sci ships.
    For a Fed maybe not so much as they have available plenty of options already in that category.
    But for Romulans and KDF it's for sure a great adition as they lack variety concerning those kind of ships.


    My biggest concern is, are these worthy to get (cof cof... grind) for a tactical or engineer class?
    ###################
  • Options
    novapolaris#2925 novapolaris Member Posts: 784 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    They seem fairly nice as sci ships.
    For a Fed maybe not so much as they have available plenty of options already in that category.
    But for Romulans and KDF it's for sure a great adition as they lack variety concerning those kind of ships.


    My biggest concern is, are these worthy to get (cof cof... grind) for a tactical or engineer class?

    Considering the Tactical Mode, they'd definitely be something a tactical officer could use. Depending on the mode, it either has a Commander Tac or Commander Sci. Engineering could use it too, using the functions of either mode to complement their own abilities, such as miracle worker and rotate shield frequency.
  • Options
    szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    rinkster wrote: »
    My only issue with the ships per se is, are they OP?

    Power creep, while probably inevitable, shouldn't be over-fed.

    With the current meta focused on Engineer-heavy ships and these ships being pretty light on Engineering slots, I'm not overly concerned about it.

    They're going to be mean and viscous little ships, but they look like they're going to be pretty fragile, relatively speaking. Sure, they have potential for a nice shield buffer, but they don't have have the engineering capacity to maintain survivability over prolonged engagements. The Romulan Aves is likely going to be the most dangerous one in that regard - Aux does benefit cloaking.
  • Options
    anodynesanodynes Member Posts: 1,999 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Just taking on this part:
    mcherub wrote: »
    Why is it that in the game, all other destroyers have more hull. Heck most science ships have more hull, and better shields to boot. The only science ship in the game at t4 or t5 with less hull is the Vesta. T4 science ships have 30k hull base. T5 science ships have 33k hull usually, while destroyers have either 33,000 (t4 temporal destroyer), 34,500 (vet destroyers), 31,500 (Guramba), and 39,000 (adapted destroyer). So with all the dyson tech, why is this new science destroyer hybrid worse than well, any normal science ship or destroyer.

    By most science vessels, you mean most Fleet science vessels. That's not a fair comparison to these ships, since Fleet ships are Tier 5 plus 10% on those stats. Even with that, only 3 of those have 33,000 or higher hull. You're also making the mistake of calling level 40 ships Tier 4. They aren't, they're entry-level Tier 5. Tier 4 ships are level 30 ships.
    This is an MMO, not a Star Trek episode simulator. That would make for a terrible game.
  • Options
    willamsheridanwillamsheridan Member Posts: 1,189 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Do the C-store ships also have the Warp core or just the anniversary event ships?
    I thought only the secondary deflector was missing on them.

    And does any Part of the Set give you the Warp trail the obelisk has?
  • Options
    pwebranflakespwebranflakes Member Posts: 7,741
    edited January 2014
    Do the C-store ships also have the Warp core or just the anniversary event ships?
    I thought only the secondary deflector was missing on them.

    And does any Part of the Set give you the Warp trail the obelisk has?

    Just the anniversary ships.

    Not sure about the warp trail, though. Details for them are still being finalized.

    Cheers,

    Brandon =/\=
Sign In or Register to comment.