test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Season 9 Dev Blog #20: New Patrol Escort

1356721

Comments

  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    zulisvel wrote: »
    Well the picture in the blog is apparently the USS Nellore, NCC-93475 so presumably the first Tempest class will have a lower registry nuber than that.
    That's not how registry numbers work. Read my post again.
    nikkojt wrote: »
    Unless the Nellore existed prior to the Tempest class, and they're just missing the -A suffix.
    The TOS U.S.S. Enterprise didn't get an -A at first when it was refitted.
  • ursusmorologusursusmorologus Member Posts: 5,328 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    The BOFF seating is pretty wild. ... 3/3 Engi on an escort ... alright

    TT1, CRF1, CRF2, APO3
    EPtE1, AtD1, EPtW3
    ET1, AtD1, RSP2
    ST1, HE2

    or run it as sci

    TT1, CRF1, CRF2, APO3
    EPtE1, AtS1, EPtW3
    TB1, TSS2, TBR2
    ST1, HE2

    so many ways to go seriously wrong
  • nikkojtnikkojt Member Posts: 372 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    That's not how registry numbers work. Read my post again.

    The TOS U.S.S. Enterprise didn't get an -A at first when it was first refitted.

    True. However, the Enterprise refit didn't get a new class designation, whereas this does seem to be a new class, which implies a more significant distinction.
    You could be right, of course, but in my opinion that there should be the Nellore-A.
    I am NikkoJT, Foundry author and terrible player. Follow me!
    There used to be a picture here, but they changed signatures and I can't be bothered to replace it.
  • miirikmiirik Member Posts: 483 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I spit on this. make some fleet retrofits for KDF as well.

    Draguas, phalanx, marauder, dacoit, and others need a bump up.
  • suavekssuaveks Member Posts: 1,736 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    miirik wrote: »
    I spit on this. make some fleet retrofits for KDF as well.

    Draguas, phalanx, marauder, dacoit, and others need a bump up.

    Fleet Dacoit Flight-Deck Cruiser
    Fleet Draguas Support Vessel
    Fleet Phalanx Science Vessel
    Fleet Vandal Destroyer
    Fleet K'Tanco Battle Cruiser
    Fleet Pach/Puyjaq Raptor
    Fleet Qorgh/SuQob Raptor
    Fleet Ki'tang/Ch'Tang Bird-of-Prey
    Fleet Hegh'ta Heavy Bird-of-Prey
    Fleet Marauder Flight-Deck Cruiser
    Fleet Guramba Siege Destroyer


    But I guess AT BEST we'll get a Fleet Guramba... someday... Because it's the only KDF ship Geko knows about...
    PyKDqad.jpg
  • gooddaytodie39gooddaytodie39 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Sweet looking ship. I think I'll take one. Also, hoping later this week or maybe next week we'll see the Fleet Garumba or something for KDF and Roms for the C-store? Would be nice.
  • canis36canis36 Member Posts: 737 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I damn near squee'd when I realized what this was.

    That said, I'm a bit iffy about the decision to retire the vanilla Fleet Patrol Escort. Why not just add the Fleet Patrol Escort Refit as a separate ship and let people choose which one they'd rather purchase? While I'm already dreaming of ways to leverage the two Lt. Cmdr BOFF slots for maximum fun there are going to be people who prefer the straightforward uncomplicated BOFF seating of the vanilla Patrol Escort and would love to have the extra Tac Console of the current Fleet Patrol Escort.

    Personally I'd suggest leaving the vanilla Fleet Patrol Escort at T1 and adding the Fleet Patrol Escort Refit (maybe rename it as Fleet Tempest-class to lower confusion) as something requiring a more developed Fleet Shipyard...say T3 or thereabouts.
  • flash525flash525 Member Posts: 5,441 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Whilst we're on the argument of registry numbers, I wouldn't look too much into it. There are many examples (within Trek lore) where the registry numbers don't match up to what they should be.

    At the end of the day though, it's just a number. I wasn't aware that all ships needed a letter following said number either. Weirdly, I thought that was specific to the flagship, otherwise other vessels such as the Defiant, Prometheus, Endeavor, Intrepid and Melbourne (etc) would have additional suffixes.

    In addition, aren't ships sometimes renamed? Maybe this ship (for the purpose of this argument) was named (under developmental) as the USS Tempest, but renamed (upon launch) to the USS Nellore?
    attachment.php?attachmentid=42556&d=1518094222
  • zulisvelzulisvel Member Posts: 518 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    That's not how registry numbers work. Read my post again.

    The TOS U.S.S. Enterprise didn't get an -A at first when it was first refitted.

    I did read your post. If the USS Tempest, the first of it's class also has the USS Nellore as a member of it's class then the USS Tempest would have been commissioned first. Thus if the USS Nellore has a registry number NCC-93475, the Tempest which would have been commissioned before it would have a registry number that come before 93475 (i.e. lower than 93475).
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I must admit I had a very positive reaction to the design from the first look at it.

    Looking at it longer... I don't really feel how rounded the saucer deflector is. It's consistent with previous Patrol Escorts (this 2410 refit is essentially a +1 Dervish), though I wish it had been closer to the Vesta-classes secondary deflectors. But that's just a nitpick out of a whimsical preference for more aerodynamism in space. Yeah, don't mind me. :D

    What bothers me more visually are the nacelle pylons and the warp nacelles themselves. They seem extremely organic, to the point that it makes them look more featureless, and akin to a rush job. I'd have expected them spruced up with a bit more visual complexity to match the standard set by the saucer (which is excellent!) and previous 2409 refits.

    This is probably a buy for me. I'd need more views of the ship to get a better opinion of her (underside? rear?) - so that's probably going to be decided when I spin it around in the shipyard store. I'm really happy that the attention to detail (bridge compatible with Origin bridge, those phaser strips) from the Avenger has carried on.

    I'm happy to see another 2409/10 refit. Not the ship style I think people were looking the most forward to, but considering the popularity of the Patrol Escort, I can't say I'm all that surprised. I do wish I had not just bought the Avenger for one of my Tac alts, though! xD

    If there is an actual rear gun turret, that deploys on Red Alert, I am going to be blown away.
  • hellstedthellstedt Member Posts: 31 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Are you kidding me, Cryptic? This new Patrol Escort is TRIBBLE! I will throw mine away when this goes life like that, because it misses an important Lt. Cmdr. Tactical BO Slot.. hell, it's missing a complete Ensign slot! The current has 5! BOs, and when you change it to the current, the ONLY federation warship I really like how it looks and flies goes to hell...



    And what about the current Fleet Patrols ingame? I bet they aren't even changed, and if, they are bugged as hell and we lose equip
  • robeasomrobeasom Member Posts: 1,911 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    These ships are of no use to my Sci captain release a new science ship and then I may release my wallet. The Dyson was the waste of a science ship
    NO TO ARC
    Vice Admiral Volmack ISS Thundermole
    Brigadier General Jokag IKS Gorkan
    Centurion Kares RRW Tomalak
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • commodoreobviouscommodoreobvious Member Posts: 114 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    hellstedt wrote: »
    Are you kidding me, Cryptic? This new Patrol Escort is TRIBBLE! I will throw mine away when this goes life like that, because it misses an important Lt. Cmdr. Tactical BO Slot.. hell, it's missing a complete Ensign slot! The current has 5! BOs, and when you change it to the current, the ONLY federation warship I really like how it looks and flies goes to hell...



    And what about the current Fleet Patrols ingame? I bet they aren't even changed, and if, they are bugged as hell and we lose equip
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Regarding registries, the last modern Starfleet class to be released was the Avenger-class, which had a Registry of NCC-97500.

    I woudn't be surprised to see the Tempest trump that by a few hundreds, or hop up to NCC-98000
  • greendragon527greendragon527 Member Posts: 386 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Great design work! I don't really like the tying of costumes to a Fleet ship now though. Giving fleets a special skin was enough imo. Looking forward to a similar ship KDF and ROM side, hope their nicest skins aren't tied to the fleet system however.
  • suavekssuaveks Member Posts: 1,736 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Don't you think the ship could use a hangar?

    :>
    PyKDqad.jpg
  • flash525flash525 Member Posts: 5,441 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    umaeko wrote: »
    Regarding registries, the last modern Starfleet class to be released was the Avenger-class, which had a Registry of NCC-97500.

    I woudn't be surprised to see the Tempest trump that by a few hundreds, or hop up to NCC-98000
    Why couldn't the Tempest be a predecessor to the Avenger? Just because it's been released to us more recently, doesn't necessarily mean to say that it's a newer Starfleet design. :)
    attachment.php?attachmentid=42556&d=1518094222
  • derrico1derrico1 Member Posts: 282 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    im sure when this goes live we will see it in esd ? if so can u place one out in the spacedocks for us to get up close look at her before we buy her ? thanks great ship hope to see more soon ... my wallet is ready
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Interesting, new (revised) ship.

    Really wish Cryptic would finish putting in the remaining canonical ships like they promised. I could've easily seen this BOFF layout used on the New Orleans or the Yeager (with a slower turn rate) than it being used on another Federation Escort.

    And like others have noted, what of the Romulans and the KDF?
  • locutusofcactuslocutusofcactus Member Posts: 651 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I just named my ship the "Maelstrom" about a week ago. Now it's just going to look like I copied the new ship class name.
  • ragnar0xragnar0x Member Posts: 296 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    rock3tman wrote: »
    The Vesta is already fleet cause its a 5 console ship. What i would like Vesta wise is for them to actually do a proper job on the model itself, there are so many things missing and incorrect.

    SO, make my Vesta shine like she's suppose to and while u devs are at it, fix that darn misaligned Phaser Lance on the Galaxy! I dont even own one and it bothers me!

    its 10 console ship but no fleet level because it have 1.3 shield mod and 27k hull, ALL fleet sci ships are 10 console and 1.43 shield mod and 29.7k hp :)
  • cidstormcidstorm Member Posts: 1,220 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    The design is pretty good and a huge improvement over the originals. Those stats though, pretty powerful. This bodes well for other ships needing some retrofit love.
  • exa12exa12 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    hellstedt wrote: »
    Are you kidding me, Cryptic? This new Patrol Escort is TRIBBLE! I will throw mine away when this goes life like that, because it misses an important Lt. Cmdr. Tactical BO Slot.. hell, it's missing a complete Ensign slot! The current has 5! BOs, and when you change it to the current, the ONLY federation warship I really like how it looks and flies goes to hell...



    And what about the current Fleet Patrols ingame? I bet they aren't even changed, and if, they are bugged as hell and we lose equip


    for spoiler text use #1b1c1f
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,673 Community Moderator
    edited May 2014
    exa12 wrote: »
    this isnt a new free PE, its a 5.5 version, like the regent is to the Assault Cruiser

    it loses an ens slot to boost one of the lt slots to lc com

    the fleet version is a new ship, there will probably be no automatic conversion

    The Fleet version already exists, like the Galaxy-X did before teh revamp. Same class name, same ship model, different BOff layout.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • bluegeekbluegeek Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    Hm... that BOFF setup is something else. Two Lt. Cmdr slots? One of them Universal?

    Heck, this could be a ship that actually pries my Science captains out of their Vestas and into a non-Sci vessel for a ride now and then.

    Or becomes an Escort-Tank-from-Hell. I'm going to be seriously tempted on this one and go all the way to get a Maelstrom class.

    Older C-Store ships are starting to look really obsolete (not just somewhat obsolete).

    And with that tail gun? Anybody trying an alpha decloak on that sucker is in for a surprise.

    I hate to say it, but adding that much firepower to the rear arc means those ships can easily reach out and touch any ship in any direction.

    The Nadion Saturation Bomb? That's a wicked, wicked weapon.

    I don't imagine this is going to be welcomed into the PvP ranks with open arms.
    My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here
    Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
  • nikkojtnikkojt Member Posts: 372 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I just named my ship the "Maelstrom" about a week ago. Now it's just going to look like I copied the new ship class name.

    The Fleet Patrol Escort has always been the Maelstrom-class :P
    flash525 wrote: »

    At the end of the day though, it's just a number. I wasn't aware that all ships needed a letter following said number either. Weirdly, I thought that was specific to the flagship, otherwise other vessels such as the Defiant, Prometheus, Endeavor, Intrepid and Melbourne (etc) would have additional suffixes.
    It's not all ships, just ones that have been destroyed or decommissioned, then recommissioned as a new class. The new Defiant could be said to require an -A after its registry, but since it's a renamed Sao Paulo I guess it gets an exception.
    I am NikkoJT, Foundry author and terrible player. Follow me!
    There used to be a picture here, but they changed signatures and I can't be bothered to replace it.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    flash525 wrote: »
    Whilst we're on the argument of registry numbers, I wouldn't look too much into it. There are many examples (within Trek lore) where the registry numbers don't match up to what they should be.

    At the end of the day though, it's just a number. I wasn't aware that all ships needed a letter following said number either. Weirdly, I thought that was specific to the flagship, otherwise other vessels such as the Defiant, Prometheus, Endeavor, Intrepid and Melbourne (etc) would have additional suffixes.

    In addition, aren't ships sometimes renamed? Maybe this ship (for the purpose of this argument) was named (under developmental) as the USS Tempest, but renamed (upon launch) to the USS Nellore?
    I agree with you. My OCD does not. :(
  • exa12exa12 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    rattler2 wrote: »
    The Fleet version already exists, like the Galaxy-X did before teh revamp. Same class name, same ship model, different BOff layout.

    i meant it was a new ship inside the database, not overriding the old one


    for spoiler text use #1b1c1f
  • gl2814egl2814e Member Posts: 328 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    This ship is a beast. I want it.


    Also, don't worry KDF & RR, the Cold War is over again. We'll protect you from the Borg, Undine, and Iconians.

    U.F.P.! U.F.P.! U.F.P.!
  • iconiansiconians Member Posts: 6,987 Arc User
    edited May 2014
    I echo sentiments that the owners of the retired FPE's should be getting something. Please don't introduce a precedent for upgrading fleet-quality ships that you'll have to re-buy.

    You have the option to change this now before it launches, so please don't make my mind wander when I'm looking at other fleet-quality ships and wondering if I should even bother if there's going to be a theoretical upgrade in the near future that will make me regret my purchase.
    ExtxpTp.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.