test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
So some upcoming T6 ship pack release...
warmaker001b
Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
So some upcoming T6 ship pack release according to the ever reliable source:
Galaxy-X, Ha'apax, and...
.... The Goomba.
Has hell frozen over???
The Galaxy-X isn't my favorite but I still see the T5 version all over the place. Same thing with the Ha'apax. You don't really see this ship high in warbird names being called on as favorites. But you see this thing fairly often. The Guramba? Well, seems she's skipping T5 Fleet and going straight to T6.
A B'Rel and now the old Goomba are getting the T6 treatment.
It seems the "Dreadnought" pack (lol) is getting a "Lance Makeover." Trait making use of BO as well as the Lance. The Ha'apax at T5 did not have a Lance. But it's getting one for T6.
Galaxy-X, Ha'apax, and...
.... The Goomba.
Has hell frozen over???
The Galaxy-X isn't my favorite but I still see the T5 version all over the place. Same thing with the Ha'apax. You don't really see this ship high in warbird names being called on as favorites. But you see this thing fairly often. The Guramba? Well, seems she's skipping T5 Fleet and going straight to T6.
A B'Rel and now the old Goomba are getting the T6 treatment.
It seems the "Dreadnought" pack (lol) is getting a "Lance Makeover." Trait making use of BO as well as the Lance. The Ha'apax at T5 did not have a Lance. But it's getting one for T6.
0
Comments
I'm not saying I believe it but it seems like there are more rumors about prospective tr6 ships then there are ones already in the game, it's just kind of starting to get ridiculous with all the threads about this rumored ship and that rumored ship....
The guys that have found this info have been rock solid reliable. Whatever they've "discovered" was an almost sure thing going in, at least in terms of ships. They've even found old content that was being worked on but shelved.
Cryptic has already set a precedent for mixing ship types in a ship pack. The most recent one, the "Battlecruiser Pack" broke their steady trend of similar releases. The "Battlecruiser Pack" was the Copy & Paste Avenger/Mogh TAC Cruisers with the Mogai, an Escort.
We have just had a battle cruiser pack with a warbird escourt layout completely different from the other two. It's not a jump to assume that this packs tie is a lance type weapons, so hapaxy and gals-x will be simular in states, boffs while the grumbly will be the oddball in the pack, just like the last 3 ship pack.
Join The Space Invaders,..... Federation and KDF fleets.
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Even as it is, it's still one of my favourite ships. My first KDF character ever was a Nausicaan pirate.
Completely agree on this.
Okay, you are right about this still the Mogai, as a Heavy Warbird is more like a Battlecruiser than th the Guramba is a Dread. Mogai and Avenger share some similaritiesin Strength, playstlye... (btw, the D'D and Negh'Var are also called Battlecruisers, the D'D iwthout the comands of course, while their Fed equivalent, Galaxy is just an Exploration Cruiser. They are very different but also very much alike at the same time).
Guramba and Ha'apax are very Ifferent though.
Yes, the Guramba has the Javelin but nothing else.
Dreadnought: 4/4 weapons, massive hull , Lance, Hangar, Seperation
Ha'apax : " , " , " , ? , "
Guramba: : 4/3 or 5/3. 5/2, low hull HP , Javelin, no Hangar, No Seperation
Honestly i hope that they will add something like a Tactical Vo'Quv or some kind of Tac Orion flight deck cruiser.
Just because the Guramba is listed between Ha'apax and Dreadnought does not mean they get released in that order.
Ha'apax and Dread are listed as "Part of Dreadnought bundle" , Guramba is not. I thing the source would know if it will be a part of a bundle or not. Maybe there is just no Info about the KDF ship yet and the Guramba is somethnig like the KDF equivalent of the T6 Prometheus, mabye it will later become part of a bundle or maybe it will be a single release like the T6 Excelsior (also no KDF equivalent to her, thoughT6 K'tinga would be nice)
For me its most likely that the KDF ship will be different, Prometheus and Guramba end up in abundle maybe with a T6 Ha'feh, now that we get the Ha'apax. If they have to redesign the Ha'fehs section of the Ha'apax (the seperating part) they could also release that as a playable ship too.
The other counter-argument is that the trait text - which probably is based on the game ability text - specifically mentions both the spinal lance and the javelin in its text. It's not likely the Goomba grants a trait for ships that you can't even have on your character, unless the trait is available on multiple ships. And if it's available on multiple ships, it's unlikely these ships don't form some kind of pack.
Cryptic has already set a precedent for mixing ship types in a ship pack. The most recent one, the "Battlecruiser Pack" broke their steady trend of similar releases. The "Battlecruiser Pack" was the Copy & Paste Avenger/Mogh TAC Cruisers with the Mogai, an Escort.
I'm not sure where you get the Mogai is closer to a "Battlecruiser," which have Cmdr ENG and LtCmdr TAC stations. The most basic definition of an "Escort" is a Cmdr TAC station, with the subgrouping of "Destroyer" being Cmdr TAC and LtCdr ENG. The T6 Mogai fits that bill exactly despite having the IPB console as part of its set which is very SCI oriented. The Guramba I believe may eventually fall into the "Destroyer" category with its T6 improvements. Well, it is called a Siege Destroyer but we know how reliable Cryptic's naming conventions are
But all 3, Galaxy-X, Guramba, and the converted Ha'apax will have one thing in common: A Lance weapon.
For the sake of guessing about the supposed T6 Guramba improvement, I'm expecting it to have:
+ Improvement to Lt ENG station to LtCdr because of its labeling as a "Destroyer."
+ Cryptic likes to give the converted ships a Universal station and a Hybrid. The Guramba is a very old school BOFF layout. Straight, pure TAC ship, no Universals. Looking at what gets the improvements was kind of iffy for me. I'm figuring the LtCdr ENG would get the Hybrid Seat and the LtCdr TAC gets the Universal treatment.
+ New gimmick console. No problem since the Javelin is built in, and unlike the other Post Guramba/Gal-X ships with a lance, it's built in. Of course, since the T5 Guramba never had a console, there will be no set synergy. No set will be made out of the lower tier Nausicaan Destroyers' consoles either (No T6 Guramba + Plasmonic Leech + Vent Theta Radiation Console Set & Bonus).
As for the Ha'apax, the treatment it's getting is very big. Not the typical BOFF station and Console / Console Set improvements, but that the new one is getting a Lance weapon. Big departure from the original T5 version. *IF* that LtCdr TAC station gets the +1 treatment to become a LtCmdr station, it already has a great TAC Cruiser style console layout at Fleet T5U that will carry over. Combine that with the already existing LtCmdr TAC station and you're looking at a fabulous, flexible BOFF layout that's friendly to the TAC Cruiser role. The Ha'apax at T5, before DR, was a thing or two shy of being considered a great ship. Maybe this will change all that with T6. We'll see.
But Destroyers are a bit more difficult to classify. The Dyson Science Destroyer for example has a Commander Science and a Lt.Cmdr Tactical. The Temporal Destroyer has a Universal Lt.Cmdr.
I think there simply isn't a consistent definition. I think the closest to a definition might be "tactical-oriented with dual cannon ability that is not a Cruiser".
But the Vesta could then just as well be a Science Destroyer.
Maybe it's then
"Tactical Oriented ship with dual cannon ability, that is not a Cruiser and has no hangars." (Does that actually hold up?)
I'm going by the old conventions of ship stats that have gone on these boards for years. Because the stats never lie while ship names Cryptic applies do. Because Cryptic's naming conventions are all TRIBBLE UP.
The community has tossed around years ago "Destroyer" as the Escorts that have the LtCdr ENG station. "Destroyers" do not have Cmdr ENG, that would be the Cruisers. But Cryptic calls the DSD a "Destroyer." They also call the Galaxy-X a "Dreadnought" implying Battleship or near Battleship firepower and stayingpower
I think I boil it only down to Cruiser (includes Battlecruiser), Escort (includes Raptors), Science Vessel, Carrier and Bird of Prey. And with BOP I mean the Klingon one. Give a ship flanking but no all-universal slots and battle cloak, it's probably just some fancy escort in my book.
Romulan Cloak and Singularities is also just a faction thing. The different "Warbirds" can still be mostly mapped to the "old" classes.
I just ignore Cryptic's ship naming. The stats never lie
There's a bunch of the old "informal" naming around still but it's kind of dissipated. But the subcategory naming only really existed for Escorts and Cruisers. It's really old stuff and the community had to come up with its own designations when the first ship appeared that wasn't a full on, dedicated TAC/ENG/SCI ship. That ship was the C-Store's Akira. That was a big game changer, especially for the Feds, in both PVP and PVE. It was a sharp difference in the ease of killing a Defiant, Prometheus, than it was killing the Akira when that ship came out.
Raiders have enough defining characteristics to separate them from Escorts imo, characteristics pioneered by the BoP line. 4/2 weapons (at t5-6 obviously) frail hull and shields even compared to Escorts, highest turn rates on any class in the game and since the introduction of the Breen raider and their formal classification as raiders, Flanking bonus.
Arguably the BoP line is the only set of raiders that really work as you pretty much need the battle cloak to make full use of the flanking and it helps survivability for those that know how to use it.
To paraphrase an old TV comercial; Birds of Prey, the originals and best.
In PVP that's a different story. Hull and shields as flimsy as all Raiders are but no cloaks? You're going to die a horrible death. Repeatedly. Badly. That is the only reason BOPs have hung around as long as they did despite every other ship type easily surpassing the BOP line. The frailty of BOPs/Raiders is at least protected some by BOP Battle / Enhanced Battle Cloaks.
Personally I find it one of the more fun playstyles, unfortunately in the DPS race STO has become its potential takes a back seat to the ever present BFAW cruisers.