I had read the blog and assumed it had cloak when I bought the bundle. False advertising comes to mind when I think about this but I'll give Cryptic the benefit of the doubt and give them some time to fix this error.
Yes. Just like when peeps got all worked up, thinking Cryptic would forego on Black Friday sales, you can safely assume they're not going to let your Klink ship remain without a cloak. It's all good. Report it, and maybe they put the fix on for the next patch, even.
see, Mei-mei, I don't think you're right this time. I think it IS a deliberate and intentional design decision on one level, and a miscommunication with the marketing guy who really writes the blogs on a different level. remove teh "Klingon" label and it's every inch a Federation hull, from the 3/3 weapons layout, to the "no cannons" build restriction to the "No Cloak".
Why, if that turns out to be true, it would not be nice of Cryptic -- to say the least. Feds got a cloak taken away from them, recently (from a Temporal cruiser, iirc); but that was entirely justified (as it really wasn't supposed to have one). But Klingon people are all acting 'in good faith' when they read the ad which says their Klink ship is getting a cloak, as cloaking was one of Cryptic's main selling points to get peeps to even want to play (and invest in) the 'Dark Side.'
So, Cryptic simply owes you a cloak, as advertised. Period.
I had read the blog and assumed it had cloak when I bought the bundle. False advertising comes to mind when I think about this but I'll give Cryptic the benefit of the doubt and give them some time to fix this error.
Yes. Just like when peeps got all worked up, thinking Cryptic would forego on Black Friday sales, you can safely assume they're not going to let your Klink ship remain without a cloak. It's all good. Report it, and maybe they put the fix on for the next patch, even.
see, Mei-mei, I don't think you're right this time. I think it IS a deliberate and intentional design decision on one level, and a miscommunication with the marketing guy who really writes the blogs on a different level. remove teh "Klingon" label and it's every inch a Federation hull, from the 3/3 weapons layout, to the "no cannons" build restriction to the "No Cloak".
I had read the blog and assumed it had cloak when I bought the bundle. False advertising comes to mind when I think about this but I'll give Cryptic the benefit of the doubt and give them some time to fix this error.
The error, my friend, was made at the "Advertising" end-the Blog-writer didn't get the memo, or didn't remember it. Think about how long it takes them to bash up a ship (based on production rate, about 3 months), if it was supposed to cloak, it would.
The missing cloak has to be a mistake, as does the (for me more important) missing Tier 6 ship material. But will the fix it? Before or after the Bird of Prey gets its missing costume options? The Nebula has now 4 full hull variants with an extra option for center pylon and mission module, and the Klingons got one hull material less than they should have?
Anyway, this isn't a Tier 6 Varanus.
It has Lt.Cmdr Universal slot. It also has a Lt.Cmdr Engineering|Temporal. This allows you to genuinely build the ship in different directions.
Quite frankly, patrickngo, if you don't play Fed and refuse to spend money on them, chances are you have flown extremely few Tier 6 Science Vessels. I fly Science Vessels all the time, and I own them all.
Yes, the Tier 6 Multi-Mission Science Vessel will probably be better, but many full-spec ship 3-packs are better than their non-full-spec cousins. I am not going to stick on the MMSV for long, since it just doesn't like anything to me.
Annoying, nothing new, and something the Intrepid and Pathfinder also share.
But a Lt.Cmdr Temporal is still a great boon, it enables you to use one or two of the several damage increasing science-style powers. That doesn't make it better than the available (Fed) T6 Science Vessels, but it makes it an equal.
Mustrum, think about it. 3/3 layout, beams but no cannons-what Klingon ship follows that pattern?
answer: nothing. Gorn ships do it though.
turn rate 10.5-the Varanus has a similar turn rate, with similar inertia.
The uptick to Aux fits with fixing one of the major defects the Varanus had (has) and fits also with other Tier-sixing of existing designs (mostly Fed), in filling gaps.
where am I going to find a nice, common-quality officer with temporal powers? well..? right, gotta max the temporal spec and train them myself if I'm KDF (most likely, I'll eat the crow if I'm wrong here-with hot-sauce.)
You don't have to max out Temporal Spec. You only need a Temporal Qualification for one of your engineer BOFFs and the other skills you can slot are mostly purchasable at the Bridge Officer Trainer.
number of T6 science vessels I've flown: 0. I bought the new one for KDF, but given that the nifty powers are kinda out of my reach, all I have to judge it against, is the Varanus (which I also own=both C-store and fleet versions) and the DSD (which I own two copies of and considered buying the remainder).
There are many possible builds I guess, but something rather easy to accomplish:
Science Cmdr: Gravity Well III, Destabilized Resonance Beam II, Transfer Shield Strength, Hazard Emitters II
Science Ensign: Science Team
Tactical Lt: Tactical Team I, Torpedo Spread II
Engineering|Temporal Lt.Cmdr Option 1: Emergency Power to Shields I, Emergency Power to Auxilliary II, Recursive Shearing I
Engineering|Temporal Lt.Cmdr Option 2: or Channeled Deconstrution I, Rapid Decay II, Recursive Shearing I
Universal Option 1: Transfer Shield Strength I, Energy Siphon I, Tachyon Beam III
Universal Option 2: Emergency Power to Shield, Emergency Power to Auxiliary, Auxiliary to Structural Integrity Field
It's just a starting point where I tried to focus on stuff that doesn't require all that much investment to get (though rep stuff is costly, I just figure it's also inevitable that anyone will eventually complete them all.)
Some possible Starship Mastery Traits: All Hands on Deck (Command Cruiser), Checkmate (Flagship) , Enhanced Power Condensers (Rezereth), Improved Tachyon Beam (Command Cruiser), Reciprocity (lockbox), Improved Critical System (Temporal Recruitment), Weapon System Synergy (Veteran Ship), Tachyon Dispersal (the ship itself)
If you don't usually build torpedo boats and don't craft, getting the Projectiles crafting school to get the trait that gives your torpedoes 10 % shield penetration would be a good idea, but that will take some time.
but...I've seen the stat-block on the Korath (T5 lockbox and upgradable, iirc).
Seeing the stat block and understanding what it really means are not always the same. Spec seats are one of the reasons why Tier 6 ships are so desirable. Just one extra bridge officer slot can be potent, but usually, you just end up with a lot of shared cooldown overlaps. The Spec seats change that, however, since they give you the ability to slot powers that definitely don'T have shared cooldowns with any of your others, and depending on the spec, these powers are also potent. Temporal is arugably one of the strongest, especially if you want to do exotic damage and don't rely on weapons.
and here's my thing: three pack of science ships, one gets Battlecloak AND can mount cannons-and it's ROMULAN-because a different guy did the stats on it, it gets both. The other two were done by teh same guy-who doesn't touch Klingon stuff because he's busy doing what they tell him sells.
I think the real reaso the Romulans get all this stuff because Cryptic decided that the Romulan ships must always be a bit better than the rest. They "pay" with their low singularity power output, but they always get battle cloak and dual cannons.
But dual cannons is not really something for Science Vessels. It doesn't matter if you are a Klingon or not. I still would have expected the Klingon ship to have the option, but it'S not an option I'd use. I found cannons already a trap on the Dyson Destroyer and the Vesta (and the Vesta has Aux Phasers, so it doesn't even have to sacrifice power for weapons to make the cannons work.)
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Man, sometimes I actively look forward to the people here who can't read the fine print making a mistake more pressing than $30 or so.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
It's there Every. Single. Time.
There's arguments for changes to be made but "It's what they advertised!" ain't one of them.
Fortunately, life isn't that black & white. Especially since this isn't really a legal matter. Legally, Cryptic can change whatever they want. The question here, however, is whether it's reasonable for a Klingon player to have believed Cryptic when they said his ship would get a cloak. I say yes, entirely reasonable. If they had said the ship would come with, say, 111 consoles slots (instead of just 11), then trying to hold Cryptic to that would be wholly unreasonable. And there are arguments to be made for other unreasonable demands. But a Klink expecting he'd get his promised cloak ain't one of them.
you forgetting one of the unwritten rules of life, it doesn't matter how wrong you are if there are enough of you.
Yay, the mob rule argument. You might be surprised how often said mobs don't reach critical mass and end up chum for history's sharks .
if people can sue companies over imaginary promise and win, which they have. that disclaimer isn't worth the time it took to copy and paste.
See, the problem is some people are looking at that statement I keep copy/pasting as an insignificant footnote to be causally disregarded in favor of their cries of "but I wanna!" But then again that's usually the same people that think the EULA their eyes glazed over on before they clicked "yeah, sure" means nothing until someone rolls it up and whacks them on the nose with it.
What I see is the crucial boilerplate that allows them to talk to us at all.
you forgetting one of the unwritten rules of life, it doesn't matter how wrong you are if there are enough of you.
Yay, the mob rule argument. You might be surprised how often said mobs don't reach critical mass and end up chum for history's sharks .
if people can sue companies over imaginary promise and win, which they have. that disclaimer isn't worth the time it took to copy and paste.
See, the problem is some people are looking at that statement I keep copy/pasting as an insignificant footnote to be causally disregarded in favor of their cries of "but I wanna!" But then again that's usually the same people that think the EULA their eyes glazed over on before they clicked "yeah, sure" means nothing until someone rolls it up and whacks them on the nose with it.
What I see is the crucial boilerplate that allows them to talk to us at all.
It is significant in that it ensures nothing they do with ships could be something they could be successfully sued over.
Winning friends and influencing the playerbase require, well, something more than "we did nothing illegal! You can't sue us!"
And, previously Cryptic was usually fairly generous: They gave a battle cloak option to the Valiant, they altered the Hestia's boff layout, and when they nerfed ships, it was over clear and definite bugs, like a cloak on a ship that wasn't ever advertised having it.
Now, no one so far presented any concrete reason why a cloaking Naj'sov would be so OP it can't have a cloak (or cannons for that matter, or turn rate) There are sci ships that have all this in some combination already in the game, including one released as the part of that very same pack.
you forgetting one of the unwritten rules of life, it doesn't matter how wrong you are if there are enough of you.
Yay, the mob rule argument. You might be surprised how often said mobs don't reach critical mass and end up chum for history's sharks .
if people can sue companies over imaginary promise and win, which they have. that disclaimer isn't worth the time it took to copy and paste.
See, the problem is some people are looking at that statement I keep copy/pasting as an insignificant footnote to be causally disregarded in favor of their cries of "but I wanna!" But then again that's usually the same people that think the EULA their eyes glazed over on before they clicked "yeah, sure" means nothing until someone rolls it up and whacks them on the nose with it.
What I see is the crucial boilerplate that allows them to talk to us at all.
It's not the copypaste disclaimer that carries the legal weight in the matter. It's just a handy reminder for the players who skipped reading the Terms of Service before clicking accept.
The ToS on the other hand has several pages of thick, long-winded legalese that explicitly and unambiguously state that they can do anything they want with their games and are not responsible for any errors.
Man, sometimes I actively look forward to the people here who can't read the fine print making a mistake more pressing than $30 or so.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
It's there Every. Single. Time.
There's arguments for changes to be made but "It's what they advertised!" ain't one of them.
Fortunately, life isn't that black & white. Especially since this isn't really a legal matter. Legally, Cryptic can change whatever they want. The question here, however, is whether it's reasonable for a Klingon player to have believed Cryptic when they said his ship would get a cloak. I say yes, entirely reasonable. If they had said the ship would come with, say, 111 consoles slots (instead of just 11), then trying to hold Cryptic to that would be wholly unreasonable. And there are arguments to be made for other unreasonable demands. But a Klink expecting he'd get his promised cloak ain't one of them.
This!
This is all that had to be said. The devs seem really busy right now. They've made similar mistakes in the past. Generally, they like to keep to a formula when designing a ship, and this time the Naj'Sov doesn't seem to follow the formula. I don't think it's unreasonable to call this a bug.
"that style of ship"? Methinks you drank a few too many cups of haterade.
what?? some of us don't actually LIKE the FEderation style of flying or play, Mark, you know, 'don't want to lead with my chin all the time' and all that.
I tried the Varanus, really honestly tried to like it. Tried it in Fleet fitting too-even bought an upgrade token for the fleet version...
and I didn't like it. My sci went back to flying a BoP as soon as I'd saved enough to buy the B'rel, and then upgraded to the Kor.
My other Sci is going back to his Dyson-that's not "Haterade" that's just "It doesn't fit my playing style or preferences, Sorry!!"
the Naj'sov flies like a Varanus, it's statted very much like the Varanus, seating is very like a Varanus. It's pretty clear teh stat-block was meant for the Nebula or a T6 Varanus, but someone figured out that teh lizard ship didn't look that good, so they gave it a nifty, Klingon-looking skin.
and I'm sure lots of Varanus users will be right at home with it...just not me. I'm a little peeved about the skin condition (can't use a certain skin material on the hull), but to me that is a remote and minor concern when you take into account the perennial issues like the B'rotlh/B'rel/Kor costume problem, the seminvisible Kar'Fi problem, or that for those poor fools that bought the Bort AND the Tier 6 Bort there's major issues of compatibility with parts on ships that are supposed to be compatible.
The "No Cloak" problem isn't game-breaking, and Nikeix makes a great case for it being intentional, but all that really means on my end, is I bought a ship when I should not have, that will go straight to drydock so I can use the card.
because it isn't appropriate to my tastes. Other players have OTHER tastes-someone, after all, is buying Borts.
To me, it's just-another-federation-ship. That's how it flies, and I'm not interested. If I want to fly a FEderation science vessel (no cannons, no cloak) I'd buy a federation science vessel for a Federation toon and fly it as what it is.
At the end of the day the only time I actually use the Varanus is when I'm flying with my Gorn Characters. It's not bad, in fact I'd say that most T5-T5U are just great. Like you say though "...just not me". It is a worthwjile Admiralty card for all toons though.
Yeah turns out it doesn't take much investment to make qual manuals. 10 point IIRC.
Romulan ships are ALL officially "warbirds", not cruisers, not escorts, not science ships, warbirds. All Warbirds have singularity powers, and can mount DHC, but don't get the full assortment of science ship perks(for example it has a special warbird version of the science mastery package). The Klingon ship is a TRUE science ship.
It's a fascinating "bug" indeed that not only disables it on the ship, but neatly goes through and trims the text out of the product description...
Sadly most of the in-game product descriptions of the KDF version of bundle ships have similar issues, missing mention of cloaks, cannons or stat block changes from the FED version.
Command Cruiser: 30 bucks
Flagship: No **** way I'll put myself through the experience of flying a Bortasque again just for a trait. NOT HAPPENING. Wasted a week on Tribble with the thing and I will never do that again, much less pay money for the privilege.
Rezereth: Don't own it. have to look this one up.
Command Cruiser: another 30 bucks.
Lockbox: too rich for my blood either way (in keys or EC).
Weapon system Synergy: Got it, (the Vet ship is actually pretty neat at tier six.)
I figured that since you were always arguing for more Klingon support you were the type of guy that tried to get as many KDF ships as you could get to support the Klingon cause...
If you don't usually build torpedo boats and don't craft, getting the Projectiles crafting school to get the trait that gives your torpedoes 10 % shield penetration would be a good idea, but that will take some time.
I've got two B'rel Torp boats. command/pilot spec. They both work pretty well. Tachyon Dispersal might make them work better, but putting myself through the time to level a ship that I don't like flying that many times just for the trait seems kinda pointless. I have limited leisure time, and limits on funds. I prefer to invest the time in things I enjoy, I already made a mistake on the money.
[/quote]
If you got the pilot spec - ever tried going back to the Tier 5 Bortasque and see howit flies now? It still has less turn rate then the Tier 6 one, but today I flew the Captain Tier Temporal ship, Gemini or what it's called, and was surprised how slow it turned - none of my ships turn even remotely that slow at Level 60 with Pilot as secondary or primary spec.
believe it or not, I did listen to Borticus' interview on Temporal spec, I'm aware of both how it's supposed to be (a big boost to sci and exotic), and how nifty it is (very). Is it nifty enough to fly a "Klingon" ship that doesn't act like a Klingon ship? IMHO not so much-in other people's? well, duh. But I suspect most of those are already flying Fed.
Well, if you want to fly a Science Vessel, but want to fly it like something that's not a Science Vessel, why do you want a Science Vessel? It's almost as if a Fed player had been saying (backk in the ancient days). "Oh, why do the Feds don't have a Carrier! I want a Carrier" and then Cryptic releases a Carrier you say "yeah, but this isn't really a Fed like Carrier, it's not the Fed way to use pets to kill stuff!"
I always figured the demand for Science Vessels by KDF players was because they preferred playing Klingon for story/RP reasons, but they still wanted the Science Vessel gameplay. The Nebula will deliver that. But if you wanted something else, I dunno.. You got something else with BoPs and Cloak and what not.
It's not a matter of "Something for Science" as much as "Something identifiably KLINGON". come on, you can mount them on the worst platform for DHC or DC in the game (Bortasque, Vo'Quv)-because those are allegedly Klingon designs. (The Vo'quv, well, Klingons had carriers first, but the Bortasque was clearly a Fed industrial espionage success story.) Likewise for Cloak-there are only two other ships that can't in the KLINGON (not gorn or Orion) arsenal: one of those is a Carrier, and the other one comes from a timeline cut off when Janeway traveled time by "Temporal Affairs" (Korath, Look it up in Mem Alpha.)
The gripe isn't that it isn't statistically a good Science ship, it's that it's not a KLINGON ship (skin and name notwithstanding.)
Not every Klingon ship needs cloak. Klingons (in canon) didn't always have cloak, and in STO, the Vo'Quv didn't cloak either.
But anyway, I think the lack of ability to use DCs and the lack of Cloak just seems an error to me. It just doesn't make sense if one looks at the usual Cross-Faction packs. I see no real reason why the Science Vessel shouldn't have them. It's just another B'Rolth type screwup and we can only hope that they'll find the spare or off-time to change it.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
@patrickngo
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
you forgetting one of the unwritten rules of life, it doesn't matter how wrong you are if there are enough of you.
Yay, the mob rule argument. You might be surprised how often said mobs don't reach critical mass and end up chum for history's sharks .
if people can sue companies over imaginary promise and win, which they have. that disclaimer isn't worth the time it took to copy and paste.
See, the problem is some people are looking at that statement I keep copy/pasting as an insignificant footnote to be causally disregarded in favor of their cries of "but I wanna!" But then again that's usually the same people that think the EULA their eyes glazed over on before they clicked "yeah, sure" means nothing until someone rolls it up and whacks them on the nose with it.
What I see is the crucial boilerplate that allows them to talk to us at all.
A wealth of counter-arguments and evidence has been presented against your main point, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is: you claim you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was a design choice (and not a bug/accidental omission) in the sense of "we removed cloak on this ship because we've change our minds and we're legally entitled to do so" on the basis of your other claim that it is not cryptic blogs but in-game performance (after buying it, one cannot test c-store ships on tribble) and in-game c-store stats.
So I suggest to go back and more carefully read the evidence and points made, and offer something worthwhile counter to it, but repeating the 'they have the right, people here don't get it, therefore it's a design choice' is just repetition of something old backed up by nothing but your very own conviction.
Not much help with the cloaking issue (which reminds me of a similar furore I remember from a watch forum about ten years ago*) but, have you tried loading every weapon slot on the ship with a Mk XII Polaron Turret, and loading two BOFFs with tactical team I and cannon rapid fire? (If it has two available tac seats, of course, I'm not failiar with the specs) because all polaron turrets, comined with cannon rapid fire, is f*cking sweet! Remember how much I hated on the Archon? I still do, but the Kool-Aid build means it doesn't need a science BOFF, and makes it enjoyable (for me) enough to actually keep as a listed ship, as opposed to dry-docking or dismissing... If you can only seat one tac Lt, you don't get the full effect, but two, refreshing the firing cycle every fifteen seconds... Well, I'll let you see for yourself
*A watch was being released which was listed as having an ETA movement, but when someone got the back off, all that was installed, was an Asian clone movement, not an actual ETA... Sure, they both tell the time, can both be regulated to the same tolerances and accept the same parts, but at the end of the day, people were pi**ed that they weren't receiving what had been advertized...
Not much help with the cloaking issue (which reminds me of a similar furore I remember from a watch forum about ten years ago*) but, have you tried loading every weapon slot on the ship with a Mk XII Polaron Turret, and loading two BOFFs with tactical team I and cannon rapid fire? (If it has two available tac seats, of course, I'm not failiar with the specs) because all polaron turrets, comined with cannon rapid fire, is f*cking sweet! Remember how much I hated on the Archon? I still do, but the Kool-Aid build means it doesn't need a science BOFF, and makes it enjoyable (for me) enough to actually keep as a listed ship, as opposed to dry-docking or dismissing... If you can only seat one tac Lt, you don't get the full effect, but two, refreshing the firing cycle every fifteen seconds... Well, I'll let you see for yourself
I run a Polaron build on a fleet Norgh, and have since...oh...2013? It's not a true 'vaper' build, but gets good numbers and the power levels stay nice and high for engines, weapons, sheilds, and aux when combined with a Leech and the old, pre-reputation, assimilated set (all four pieces).
but then, I DO run a sci boff on it-for Hazards and Sci-Team (cleanses), Engineering team (cleanses and hull heal) and, of course, Tactical team (because shield redistribution is GOOD.)
Sweet Is that beams, cannons or turrets? I just figured the Kool-Aid build might help turn a less than satisfactory ship, into a tolerable one for you
look at it this way... at absolute worst, even if you have to flip sh it over the lack of cloak and/or cannons, you bought a ship that's a slap in the face of Gecko's comments about science and/or klingon not selling
@patrickngo
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
Shhh... let him rant.
He did this in the Klingon forums. Don't mention the turn rate increases to 9.5 when it slots two Flagship consoles or that pilot specialization further increases the turn to around 13. Additionally, each Flagship can slot Gravity Well (the Gorkon can slot 2 copies). Each Flagship can not only maintain fire on it's primary target; it can smash several targets into the tiny arc of Dual Heavies to make CSV more effective.
If they screwed up a Fed ship like this, there would be a 10 to 20 page rant, and a dev would have responded. It being a klingon ship means it must be a few people just ranting for no reason. If you can not understand what I just said go home and go to bed.
As for the Bortasqu. Pilot specialization again.... You do realize at some point they are going to nerf that right? So what every player must now pay 30+30+30= 90 for +3 turn rate? Hmm maybe shave some money off of that a bundle pack or discount. So another words the Bortasqu does not work in klingon fashion, because most people are not going to pay that much money for 3+ turn rate. With a possible 15 second increase to turn rate.
Another words get the hell off the KDF players back. The fact of the matter is if they wanted to design the Bortasqu like a Klingon ship they would have put the turn rate at 9 to start with and dump the console flight speed buffs. Then again no extra money. So it was in there best interest to design it like a fed ship. In essence your point is mute. I am talking a wall feds will always act like this, unless it is something of theirs. Nothing new.
@patrickngo
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
neither does the T5 version anymore - at least in regards to the inertia; just before releasing the flagship pack, they changed the inertia value on the T5 bortasqu's from 18 to 30 - same as the odyssey has
don't know if they did anything to the cloak and turn rate as well
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
@patrickngo
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
While the T6 Bortasqu' handles better than the T5 version, the improvements are marginal. They are still horrible choices for narrow arc builds with that turn rate, propensity to slide, etc. KDF Battle Cruisers lay claim to excellent handling and are extremely good platforms for narrow arc builds. That's how we made our money with them in PVP, using Vor'Cha, Negh'Var, etc with DHCs with fast moving ships around still. Bortasqu'? No friggin' way, they handle like bricks. The cloak? It's still the same: Standard.
The Bortasqu's are really Fed Cruisers with Klingon skins. OTOH, if these had been Fed Cruisers, Feds would be in love with them. They are ideal beamboats and the console slots are, IMO, better than the Fed equivalents.
@patrickngo
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
While the T6 Bortasqu' handles better than the T5 version, the improvements are marginal. They are still horrible choices for narrow arc builds with that turn rate, propensity to slide, etc. KDF Battle Cruisers lay claim to excellent handling and are extremely good platforms for narrow arc builds. That's how we made our money with them in PVP, using Vor'Cha, Negh'Var, etc with DHCs with fast moving ships around still. Bortasqu'? No friggin' way, they handle like bricks. The cloak? It's still the same: Standard.
The Bortasqu's are really Fed Cruisers with Klingon skins. OTOH, if these had been Fed Cruisers, Feds would be in love with them. They are ideal beamboats and the console slots are, IMO, better than the Fed equivalents.
Well... I DO use mine to FaW spam until everything on the map is dead. So yes, it is correct that they are good at FaW spam.
Comments
Why, if that turns out to be true, it would not be nice of Cryptic -- to say the least. Feds got a cloak taken away from them, recently (from a Temporal cruiser, iirc); but that was entirely justified (as it really wasn't supposed to have one). But Klingon people are all acting 'in good faith' when they read the ad which says their Klink ship is getting a cloak, as cloaking was one of Cryptic's main selling points to get peeps to even want to play (and invest in) the 'Dark Side.'
So, Cryptic simply owes you a cloak, as advertised. Period.
DISCLAIMER: All information in this blog post is subject to change.
It's there Every. Single. Time.
There's arguments for changes to be made but "It's what they advertised!" ain't one of them.
you forgetting one of the unwritten rules of life, it doesn't matter how wrong you are if there are enough of you.
if people can sue companies over imaginary promise and win, which they have. that disclaimer isn't worth the time it took to copy and paste.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
There are many possible builds I guess, but something rather easy to accomplish:
Science Cmdr: Gravity Well III, Destabilized Resonance Beam II, Transfer Shield Strength, Hazard Emitters II
Science Ensign: Science Team
Tactical Lt: Tactical Team I, Torpedo Spread II
Engineering|Temporal Lt.Cmdr Option 1: Emergency Power to Shields I, Emergency Power to Auxilliary II, Recursive Shearing I
Engineering|Temporal Lt.Cmdr Option 2: or Channeled Deconstrution I, Rapid Decay II, Recursive Shearing I
Universal Option 1: Transfer Shield Strength I, Energy Siphon I, Tachyon Beam III
Universal Option 2: Emergency Power to Shield, Emergency Power to Auxiliary, Auxiliary to Structural Integrity Field
Weapons: Quantum Phase Torpedo, Quantum Phaser, Terran Force Withering Torpedo, Neutronic Torpedo (Delta), Terran Force Withering Disruptor, Thoron Infused Polaron Beam (Delta)
Other options: Plasma-Emission Torpedo (Crafting/Exchange), Gravimetric Torpedo (Dyson Rep)
It's just a starting point where I tried to focus on stuff that doesn't require all that much investment to get (though rep stuff is costly, I just figure it's also inevitable that anyone will eventually complete them all.)
Some possible Starship Mastery Traits: All Hands on Deck (Command Cruiser), Checkmate (Flagship) , Enhanced Power Condensers (Rezereth), Improved Tachyon Beam (Command Cruiser), Reciprocity (lockbox), Improved Critical System (Temporal Recruitment), Weapon System Synergy (Veteran Ship), Tachyon Dispersal (the ship itself)
If you don't usually build torpedo boats and don't craft, getting the Projectiles crafting school to get the trait that gives your torpedoes 10 % shield penetration would be a good idea, but that will take some time.
Seeing the stat block and understanding what it really means are not always the same. Spec seats are one of the reasons why Tier 6 ships are so desirable. Just one extra bridge officer slot can be potent, but usually, you just end up with a lot of shared cooldown overlaps. The Spec seats change that, however, since they give you the ability to slot powers that definitely don'T have shared cooldowns with any of your others, and depending on the spec, these powers are also potent. Temporal is arugably one of the strongest, especially if you want to do exotic damage and don't rely on weapons.
I think the real reaso the Romulans get all this stuff because Cryptic decided that the Romulan ships must always be a bit better than the rest. They "pay" with their low singularity power output, but they always get battle cloak and dual cannons.
But dual cannons is not really something for Science Vessels. It doesn't matter if you are a Klingon or not. I still would have expected the Klingon ship to have the option, but it'S not an option I'd use. I found cannons already a trap on the Dyson Destroyer and the Vesta (and the Vesta has Aux Phasers, so it doesn't even have to sacrifice power for weapons to make the cannons work.)
Fortunately, life isn't that black & white.
Yay, the mob rule argument. You might be surprised how often said mobs don't reach critical mass and end up chum for history's sharks
See, the problem is some people are looking at that statement I keep copy/pasting as an insignificant footnote to be causally disregarded in favor of their cries of "but I wanna!" But then again that's usually the same people that think the EULA their eyes glazed over on before they clicked "yeah, sure" means nothing until someone rolls it up and whacks them on the nose with it.
What I see is the crucial boilerplate that allows them to talk to us at all.
Winning friends and influencing the playerbase require, well, something more than "we did nothing illegal! You can't sue us!"
And, previously Cryptic was usually fairly generous: They gave a battle cloak option to the Valiant, they altered the Hestia's boff layout, and when they nerfed ships, it was over clear and definite bugs, like a cloak on a ship that wasn't ever advertised having it.
Now, no one so far presented any concrete reason why a cloaking Naj'sov would be so OP it can't have a cloak (or cannons for that matter, or turn rate) There are sci ships that have all this in some combination already in the game, including one released as the part of that very same pack.
It's not the copypaste disclaimer that carries the legal weight in the matter. It's just a handy reminder for the players who skipped reading the Terms of Service before clicking accept.
The ToS on the other hand has several pages of thick, long-winded legalese that explicitly and unambiguously state that they can do anything they want with their games and are not responsible for any errors.
This!
This is all that had to be said. The devs seem really busy right now. They've made similar mistakes in the past. Generally, they like to keep to a formula when designing a ship, and this time the Naj'Sov doesn't seem to follow the formula. I don't think it's unreasonable to call this a bug.
At the end of the day the only time I actually use the Varanus is when I'm flying with my Gorn Characters. It's not bad, in fact I'd say that most T5-T5U are just great. Like you say though "...just not me". It is a worthwjile Admiralty card for all toons though.
Qapla'!
Romulan ships are ALL officially "warbirds", not cruisers, not escorts, not science ships, warbirds. All Warbirds have singularity powers, and can mount DHC, but don't get the full assortment of science ship perks(for example it has a special warbird version of the science mastery package). The Klingon ship is a TRUE science ship.
My character Tsin'xing
Sadly most of the in-game product descriptions of the KDF version of bundle ships have similar issues, missing mention of cloaks, cannons or stat block changes from the FED version.
I've got two B'rel Torp boats. command/pilot spec. They both work pretty well. Tachyon Dispersal might make them work better, but putting myself through the time to level a ship that I don't like flying that many times just for the trait seems kinda pointless. I have limited leisure time, and limits on funds. I prefer to invest the time in things I enjoy, I already made a mistake on the money.
[/quote]
If you got the pilot spec - ever tried going back to the Tier 5 Bortasque and see howit flies now? It still has less turn rate then the Tier 6 one, but today I flew the Captain Tier Temporal ship, Gemini or what it's called, and was surprised how slow it turned - none of my ships turn even remotely that slow at Level 60 with Pilot as secondary or primary spec.
Well, if you want to fly a Science Vessel, but want to fly it like something that's not a Science Vessel, why do you want a Science Vessel? It's almost as if a Fed player had been saying (backk in the ancient days). "Oh, why do the Feds don't have a Carrier! I want a Carrier" and then Cryptic releases a Carrier you say "yeah, but this isn't really a Fed like Carrier, it's not the Fed way to use pets to kill stuff!"
I always figured the demand for Science Vessels by KDF players was because they preferred playing Klingon for story/RP reasons, but they still wanted the Science Vessel gameplay. The Nebula will deliver that. But if you wanted something else, I dunno.. You got something else with BoPs and Cloak and what not.
Not every Klingon ship needs cloak. Klingons (in canon) didn't always have cloak, and in STO, the Vo'Quv didn't cloak either.
But anyway, I think the lack of ability to use DCs and the lack of Cloak just seems an error to me. It just doesn't make sense if one looks at the usual Cross-Faction packs. I see no real reason why the Science Vessel shouldn't have them. It's just another B'Rolth type screwup and we can only hope that they'll find the spare or off-time to change it.
The T6 Bortasque doesn't have all the weird penalties like terrible inertia, crappy cloak, and bad turn rate, that the T5 Bortasque has. Check out the stats. They're actually really good ships.
A wealth of counter-arguments and evidence has been presented against your main point, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is: you claim you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was a design choice (and not a bug/accidental omission) in the sense of "we removed cloak on this ship because we've change our minds and we're legally entitled to do so" on the basis of your other claim that it is not cryptic blogs but in-game performance (after buying it, one cannot test c-store ships on tribble) and in-game c-store stats.
So I suggest to go back and more carefully read the evidence and points made, and offer something worthwhile counter to it, but repeating the 'they have the right, people here don't get it, therefore it's a design choice' is just repetition of something old backed up by nothing but your very own conviction.
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/5f3ny7/najsov_research_vessel_sans_cloak_no_dhc_use/
*A watch was being released which was listed as having an ETA movement, but when someone got the back off, all that was installed, was an Asian clone movement, not an actual ETA... Sure, they both tell the time, can both be regulated to the same tolerances and accept the same parts, but at the end of the day, people were pi**ed that they weren't receiving what had been advertized...
He did this in the Klingon forums. Don't mention the turn rate increases to 9.5 when it slots two Flagship consoles or that pilot specialization further increases the turn to around 13. Additionally, each Flagship can slot Gravity Well (the Gorkon can slot 2 copies). Each Flagship can not only maintain fire on it's primary target; it can smash several targets into the tiny arc of Dual Heavies to make CSV more effective.
Just let it be.
As for the Bortasqu. Pilot specialization again.... You do realize at some point they are going to nerf that right? So what every player must now pay 30+30+30= 90 for +3 turn rate? Hmm maybe shave some money off of that a bundle pack or discount. So another words the Bortasqu does not work in klingon fashion, because most people are not going to pay that much money for 3+ turn rate. With a possible 15 second increase to turn rate.
Another words get the hell off the KDF players back. The fact of the matter is if they wanted to design the Bortasqu like a Klingon ship they would have put the turn rate at 9 to start with and dump the console flight speed buffs. Then again no extra money. So it was in there best interest to design it like a fed ship. In essence your point is mute. I am talking a wall feds will always act like this, unless it is something of theirs. Nothing new.
neither does the T5 version anymore - at least in regards to the inertia; just before releasing the flagship pack, they changed the inertia value on the T5 bortasqu's from 18 to 30 - same as the odyssey has
don't know if they did anything to the cloak and turn rate as well
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
While the T6 Bortasqu' handles better than the T5 version, the improvements are marginal. They are still horrible choices for narrow arc builds with that turn rate, propensity to slide, etc. KDF Battle Cruisers lay claim to excellent handling and are extremely good platforms for narrow arc builds. That's how we made our money with them in PVP, using Vor'Cha, Negh'Var, etc with DHCs with fast moving ships around still. Bortasqu'? No friggin' way, they handle like bricks. The cloak? It's still the same: Standard.
The Bortasqu's are really Fed Cruisers with Klingon skins. OTOH, if these had been Fed Cruisers, Feds would be in love with them. They are ideal beamboats and the console slots are, IMO, better than the Fed equivalents.
My character Tsin'xing