This shows only that the devs also don't know what the Aquarius is. And their unwillingness to improve the Aquarius is a shame really...
Regarding the Aquarius' nomenclature, as you stated, you can find it in the escort section of the shipyard, but everywhere else in the game it is classed as a destroyer. The Hirogen-escort-180°-console does not work on the Aquarius.
The problem is that someone, somewhere confused roles with designs.
Escort is a role --- in the historic navy, for example, a "destroyer-escort" was the ship(s) that circled capital or unarmed ships, mostly to protect against or detect enemy subs. These were the ships chunking out depth charges in WWII after a sub started shooting at the aircraft carrier or tanker or whatnot. Literally, it escorted the vulnerable ships.
Destroyer is a class. It is a smaller, faster, but well armed for its size vessel.
The same was true for air combat.... the planes were fighters in class, and their role (sometimes) was to escort bombers.
There should not be an escort class at all -- someone bungled.
The problem is that someone, somewhere confused roles with designs.
Escort is a role --- in the historic navy, for example, a "destroyer-escort" was the ship(s) that circled capital or unarmed ships, mostly to protect against or detect enemy subs. These were the ships chunking out depth charges in WWII after a sub started shooting at the aircraft carrier or tanker or whatnot. Literally, it escorted the vulnerable ships.
Destroyer is a class. It is a smaller, faster, but well armed for its size vessel.
The same was true for air combat.... the planes were fighters in class, and their role (sometimes) was to escort bombers.
There should not be an escort class at all -- someone bungled.
I think the "bungle" originated from canon. The Defiant-class was the Fed's first tactically-oriented warship. The Federation, still wanting to be viewed as a peace-loving organization, didn't want other civilizations to see a warlike label for their ships, so they instead officially labeled their Defiant-class an "Escort".
Fast-forward to STO, where all of their tactical ships, sans a couple(like the Chimera), are considered "Escorts".
@ bobsisko47: The Hirogen console doesn't work with the playable Aquarius...? Hmmm... could it be that the player Aquarius is the Destroyer, and the NPC version is the Escort? Going by labels, it would make sense.
My opinion...
In STO there is only one difference between Destroyers and Escorts. And funny enough its the same difference between Carriers and Dreadnoughts or Cruisers and Dreadnoughts:
If the Devs feel the ship needs a "more awesome description" tho compensate for the lack of quality they give it a more awesome sounding name.
Funny side note: The Defiante in canon was only called "Escort" because she couldn't be called "Warship" for "political reasons".
So what ever she really is, its not an escort.
My opinion...
In STO there is only one difference between Destroyers and Escorts. And funny enough its the same difference between Carriers and Dreadnoughts or Cruisers and Dreadnoughts:
This.
If the other tactical ships would get unique mechanics like Raiders are getting, we wouldn't have this confusion.
But I fear it's a bit difficult to create a euphemistic "starfleetish" word from "gunboat".
Maybe it would indeed be better to rename her to "frigate", a term only used by NPC ships right now.
That could actually fit very well. BoP are representative of klingon frigates by NPCs afterall and since the Aquarius is a match for Raiders (less the battle cloak and uni boff slots of course) calling it a frigate would line up as a more appropriate and federation sounding classification.
Mind you I play kdf quite heavily, and even I think cryptic should cut the TRIBBLE and just give the Aquarius uni slots, hell even give it the 10% hull boost and flanking that raiders are getting. the flanking could even be the same value as the breen raider since the Aquarius has no cloak. Its a single ship available to the federation and you need to work to get it so I don't see it as impacting the 'unique kdf flavour' or whatever argument others sometimes use. it would go a long way to making the Aquarius viable as an option.
just another in a long line of reasons why "escort", "science" and "cruiser" are utterly useless, even if you add "destroyer" and "carrier" to the mix, its still does nothing but communicate the games failure to communicate its mechanics in a that has any verisimilitude or even consistency. imo due to the ad-hoc nature of how ships are dealt with in the first place.
The mechanics have almost nothing to do with ship type. You claiming that there's a failure anywhere must be demonstrated, not asserted.
what makes a ship a raider? cryptic throwing the label at it? where is the consistent background model that says "at this point, and with these characteristics the ship is considered a raider"?
because to be it looks completly bass ackwards.
If by "throwing the label at it" means they decided what it is, then yes, that's exactly what makes any ship in their game what they are. The Cryptic STO team are the gods of the STO world. They decide what's what in STO, even if it contradicts canon or IRL conventions. Does it have to make sense? No.
You may refer to the ships as anything you like to colloquially, as long as who you're addressing knows what you're talking about. But in a discussion addressing the ship types, if what Cryptic is established for them isn't being used, that claim is demonstrably wrong and should be treated as a fallacious argument.
what makes a ship a raider? cryptic throwing the label at it? where is the consistent background model that says "at this point, and with these characteristics the ship is considered a raider"?
Prior to the Breen Raider being introduced the only raiders were KDF Birds of Prey, characterized by low hull, high maneuverability and battle cloaks, 4/2 weapon loadouts and universal boff stations.
the Breen Raider broke that silightly but added flanking as a raider characteristic which the BoPs are soon to get. So really escorts (and be extention raptors and destroyers) are the only ship types that specifically doesn't have some extra mechanic to characterize them
So really escorts (and be extention raptors and destroyers) are the only ship types that specifically doesn't have some extra mechanic to characterize them
What extension? Playable Raptors and Destroyers aren't Escorts.
What extension? Playable Raptors and Destroyers aren't Escorts.
Except apparently for the Aquarius. :<
If you want to get highly technical no they're not escorts
but the fundumental difference between escorts and raptors is that raptors have a cloak, a little bit higher hull and a little lower shields typically, they are for all intents and purposes kdf escorts.
and destroyers... they're escorts/raptors in the grand scheme of things, they have only minor differences afterall. All share the same basics in effect so I group them all together as escorts even if thats technically not what they are.
and thats all you're screaming over at the moment, a technicality.
but the fundumental difference between escorts and raptors is that raptors have a cloak, a little bit higher hull and a little lower shields typically, they are for all intents and purposes kdf escorts.
No, the fundamental difference is that Escorts are called Escorts, and Raptors are called Raptors.
Mechanically, a raptor is an escort, as is the Aquarius.
Raiders: Flanking damage.
Cruisers: Cruiser command auras.
-- Battlecruisers: Three commands rather than four, and can use dual cannons.
Science vessels: Innate sensor scan and subsystem targeting (and in a little while, secondary deflectors).
Carriers: Innate subsystem targeting and hangar bays.
Destroyers: Modes.
Warbirds: Singularity powers.
Escorts and raptors: EDIT: 10% defense bonus.
That's the basic way the class breakdown works in this game from a mechanical standpoint. Raptors are just the name the KDF uses for escorts (with the addition of having a cloaking device), because reasons.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Mechanically, a raptor is an escort, as is the Aquarius, because it has no added mechanics.
Okay look. Mechanically, a Raptor is a tactical ship. It doesn't magically become a totally different type of tactical ship just because it lacks any distinct features. The Escort ship type is not the "default" tactical ship type. A playable Raptor is an Escort as much as an Escort is a Corvette or a Destroyer.
An Escort is an Escort. A Raptor is a Raptor. A Destroyer is a Destroyer. Escorts do not somehow 'own' the typical tactical ship setup. They do not 'own' the 4/3 weapon slot setup. They do not 'own' the ability to equip dual heavy cannons. The only thing they have in common with other tactical ships is that they're all tactical ships, and have the typical setup that most tactical ships share.
The only time a Raptor can be called an Escort is the NPC ship called "Raptor Escort". And we're not talking about NPC ships.
Seriously mate if you want to go that deep into technicalities, none of the vesta varients are science ships either. No the Vesta has its own class, which you can see when you hover over a dual cannon, the vesta is a 'Multi-Mission Science Vessel'
You could call it a subset of the Science Vessel type but its not a science vessel by your logic. raptors and escorts have the same relationship as the vesta and other science vessels, destroyer just seems to be a label cryptic slaps on ships that are escort/raptor related but don't fit the exact mold.
Seriously mate if you want to go that deep into technicalities, none of the vesta varients are science ships either. No the Vesta has its own class, which you can see when you hover over a dual cannon, the vesta is a 'Multi-Mission Science Vessel'
You could call it a subset of the Science Vessel type but its not a science vessel by your logic. raptors and escorts have the same relationship as the vesta and other science vessels, destroyer just seems to be a label cryptic slaps on ships that are escort/raptor related but don't fit the exact mold.
That's like saying "Deep Space Science Vessel" isn't "Science Vessel" either. By that standard, no ship is a science vessel. :rolleyes:
That's like saying "Deep Space Science Vessel" isn't "Science Vessel" either. By that standard, no ship is a science vessel. :rolleyes:
What part of "Destroyer" is spelt "Escort?"
You're missing the point, this entire thread is about what the Aquarius destroyer is classified as ingame. the Vesta is just a prime example of a ship that breaks the usual mold. Every ship in the game has a different classification in the games internal code, then the items have lists of which ships they can be placed on. The Aquarius destroyer is just that The Aqarius destroyer.
Comments
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Aquarius_Destroyer
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Aquarius_Destroyer
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
The Aquarius Dreadnaught Destroyer. It's an escort though.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Okay, so it's both. Case closed I guess! =3
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Regarding the Aquarius' nomenclature, as you stated, you can find it in the escort section of the shipyard, but everywhere else in the game it is classed as a destroyer. The Hirogen-escort-180°-console does not work on the Aquarius.
Escort is a role --- in the historic navy, for example, a "destroyer-escort" was the ship(s) that circled capital or unarmed ships, mostly to protect against or detect enemy subs. These were the ships chunking out depth charges in WWII after a sub started shooting at the aircraft carrier or tanker or whatnot. Literally, it escorted the vulnerable ships.
Destroyer is a class. It is a smaller, faster, but well armed for its size vessel.
The same was true for air combat.... the planes were fighters in class, and their role (sometimes) was to escort bombers.
There should not be an escort class at all -- someone bungled.
Fast-forward to STO, where all of their tactical ships, sans a couple(like the Chimera), are considered "Escorts".
@ bobsisko47: The Hirogen console doesn't work with the playable Aquarius...? Hmmm... could it be that the player Aquarius is the Destroyer, and the NPC version is the Escort? Going by labels, it would make sense.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
In STO there is only one difference between Destroyers and Escorts. And funny enough its the same difference between Carriers and Dreadnoughts or Cruisers and Dreadnoughts:
If the Devs feel the ship needs a "more awesome description" tho compensate for the lack of quality they give it a more awesome sounding name.
Funny side note: The Defiante in canon was only called "Escort" because she couldn't be called "Warship" for "political reasons".
So what ever she really is, its not an escort.
If the other tactical ships would get unique mechanics like Raiders are getting, we wouldn't have this confusion.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
That could actually fit very well. BoP are representative of klingon frigates by NPCs afterall and since the Aquarius is a match for Raiders (less the battle cloak and uni boff slots of course) calling it a frigate would line up as a more appropriate and federation sounding classification.
Mind you I play kdf quite heavily, and even I think cryptic should cut the TRIBBLE and just give the Aquarius uni slots, hell even give it the 10% hull boost and flanking that raiders are getting. the flanking could even be the same value as the breen raider since the Aquarius has no cloak. Its a single ship available to the federation and you need to work to get it so I don't see it as impacting the 'unique kdf flavour' or whatever argument others sometimes use. it would go a long way to making the Aquarius viable as an option.
The mechanics have almost nothing to do with ship type. You claiming that there's a failure anywhere must be demonstrated, not asserted.
If by "throwing the label at it" means they decided what it is, then yes, that's exactly what makes any ship in their game what they are. The Cryptic STO team are the gods of the STO world. They decide what's what in STO, even if it contradicts canon or IRL conventions. Does it have to make sense? No.
You may refer to the ships as anything you like to colloquially, as long as who you're addressing knows what you're talking about. But in a discussion addressing the ship types, if what Cryptic is established for them isn't being used, that claim is demonstrably wrong and should be treated as a fallacious argument.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Prior to the Breen Raider being introduced the only raiders were KDF Birds of Prey, characterized by low hull, high maneuverability and battle cloaks, 4/2 weapon loadouts and universal boff stations.
the Breen Raider broke that silightly but added flanking as a raider characteristic which the BoPs are soon to get. So really escorts (and be extention raptors and destroyers) are the only ship types that specifically doesn't have some extra mechanic to characterize them
Except apparently for the Aquarius. :<
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
If you want to get highly technical no they're not escorts
but the fundumental difference between escorts and raptors is that raptors have a cloak, a little bit higher hull and a little lower shields typically, they are for all intents and purposes kdf escorts.
and destroyers... they're escorts/raptors in the grand scheme of things, they have only minor differences afterall. All share the same basics in effect so I group them all together as escorts even if thats technically not what they are.
and thats all you're screaming over at the moment, a technicality.
No, the fundamental difference is that Escorts are called Escorts, and Raptors are called Raptors.
The KDF has no playable action-exclusive Escorts.
No they're not. At all. "Escort" isn't synonymous with "tactical ship".
I posted about this subject here.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
you're still on about a technicality.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Raiders: Flanking damage.
Cruisers: Cruiser command auras.
-- Battlecruisers: Three commands rather than four, and can use dual cannons.
Science vessels: Innate sensor scan and subsystem targeting (and in a little while, secondary deflectors).
Carriers: Innate subsystem targeting and hangar bays.
Destroyers: Modes.
Warbirds: Singularity powers.
Escorts and raptors: EDIT: 10% defense bonus.
That's the basic way the class breakdown works in this game from a mechanical standpoint. Raptors are just the name the KDF uses for escorts (with the addition of having a cloaking device), because reasons.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
An Escort is an Escort. A Raptor is a Raptor. A Destroyer is a Destroyer. Escorts do not somehow 'own' the typical tactical ship setup. They do not 'own' the 4/3 weapon slot setup. They do not 'own' the ability to equip dual heavy cannons. The only thing they have in common with other tactical ships is that they're all tactical ships, and have the typical setup that most tactical ships share.
The only time a Raptor can be called an Escort is the NPC ship called "Raptor Escort". And we're not talking about NPC ships.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
You could call it a subset of the Science Vessel type but its not a science vessel by your logic. raptors and escorts have the same relationship as the vesta and other science vessels, destroyer just seems to be a label cryptic slaps on ships that are escort/raptor related but don't fit the exact mold.
That's like saying "Deep Space Science Vessel" isn't "Science Vessel" either. By that standard, no ship is a science vessel. :rolleyes:
What part of "Destroyer" is spelt "Escort?"
they get an innate 10% defense bonus.
You're missing the point, this entire thread is about what the Aquarius destroyer is classified as ingame. the Vesta is just a prime example of a ship that breaks the usual mold. Every ship in the game has a different classification in the games internal code, then the items have lists of which ships they can be placed on. The Aquarius destroyer is just that The Aqarius destroyer.