test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Anniversary Bundle ( Legendary ) Mirror?

12346

Comments

  • Options
    novapolaris#2925 novapolaris Member Posts: 785 Arc User
    Raider Flanking replaces a weapon. Every raider in the game has a max of 7 weapons, including an experimental. 5 fore, 1 aft and an experimental is the same as the Temer, for example. Your confusion is that the legendary defiant isn't a raider. It's a warship. No flanking or experimental weapon, thus it's 5/3.


    AH, okay. That explains it. I'm ashamed I missed that detail of raiders, though. ,_,
  • Options
    nightkennightken Member Posts: 2,824 Arc User
    theoryfive wrote: »
    Another thing I'm wondering about is why strip the Mirror Adamant down to 5/*1* on weapons? The standard seemed to be 4/3 or 5/2 on other versions, even the legendary 10th anniversary one. I'm curious what the rationale is for this.

    If the reason were if the ship has intrinsic cloak, then that's massively outdated since now it'd make the ship worthless in favor of non-nerved cloaking ships, after they let everyone have access to every ship. Why fly that when you can fly a Klingon or Romulan ship, or a lockbox ship or other legendary ship?

    The combo of raider flanking, dual spec with full intel features, possible intrinsic cloak... that all doesn't seem like it significantly outdoes other legendary ships enough to warrant dropping the weapon slots down that low. And we have the legendary Intrepid which does everything, and now this same bundle is adding another legendary Intrepid which drops the hangar in favor of an intrinsic lance weapon and swaps full miracle worker for full command while still being dual spec. I don't get it.

    because raiders only get 6 weapons originally being not science ships and being all birds of preys at first. which since they mostly get use and treated as tact ships they are bad at both.


    theoryfive wrote: »
    Another thing I'm wondering about is why strip the Mirror Adamant down to 5/*1* on weapons? The standard seemed to be 4/3 or 5/2 on other versions, even the legendary 10th anniversary one. I'm curious what the rationale is for this.

    If the reason were if the ship has intrinsic cloak and raider flanking, then that's massively outdated since now it'd make the ship less valuable in favor of non-nerved cloaking ships, after they let everyone have access to every ship. Why fly that when you can fly a Klingon or Romulan ship, or a lockbox ship or other legendary ship with similar functionality that isn't hit that hard?

    The combo of raider flanking, dual spec with full intel features, possible intrinsic cloak... that all doesn't seem like it significantly outdoes other legendary ships enough to warrant dropping the weapon slots down that low. And we have the legendary Intrepid which does everything, and now this same bundle is adding another legendary Intrepid which drops the hangar in favor of an intrinsic lance weapon and swaps full miracle worker for full command while still being dual spec. I don't get it.

    Raider Flanking replaces a weapon. Every raider in the game has a max of 7 weapons, including an experimental. 5 fore, 1 aft and an experimental is the same as the Temer, for example. Your confusion is that the legendary defiant isn't a raider. It's a warship. No flanking or experimental weapon, thus it's 5/3.

    actually it's the reverse, raider flanking was made because they get fewer weapons, and cryptic didn't want to give them more, though they did it anyway for experimental when they made them to buff escorts, the weapon count came first.

    if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
  • Options
    jkwrangler2010jkwrangler2010 Member Posts: 263 Arc User
    I wish the Galaxy didn't have a turning radius the size of a moon.
  • Options
    cryptkeeper0cryptkeeper0 Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    The one thing I just noticed why do all science ship types except scouts have the same trait package ? You would think science destroyers would have some escort traits or a multi mission would slightly different traits. Now a science warship, or spearhead science ships no new traits? It's not as though these ships are going to be used for a support build.
  • Options
    karr2k3karr2k3 Member Posts: 44 Arc User
    Don't get me wrong I appreciate the new ships for what they are, it just doesn't make sense to me to call something a "Battlecruiser" and not really support the ship with make it a little more tactical based other than seating and changing the weapons loadout to it. It's like the Negh'Var battlecruiser with only 3 tactical consoles. Another plus side is making this bundle where the individual ships maybe purchasable individually for people that don't want the entire bundle.
  • Options
    jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,807 Arc User
    avoozuul wrote: »
    I'm sad there's no Terran Promethius.

    That is a ship I would really like to see! Especially with MVAM and using the Vanguard Wingmen mechanics of the Jem'Hadar ships to console the other sections when it's separated.
  • Options
    nommo#5819 nommo Member Posts: 1,105 Arc User
    nommo#5819 wrote: »
    Here's my nitpicks on the bundle which I think is still a pretty good value if one's inclined to have all 6 ships.


    Cryptic should've:

    Had the uniform variants accessible by all factions.

    Had the Adamant with Improved Raider Flanking.

    Had the Agony Quad Cannons useable along with Phaser Cannons since they're probably not.

    Had a different gimmick on the Trailblazer other than another Agony Phaser Lance.

    Also, just in case, make sure the 6x Ship Slots are useable across the account & not for only 1 character.

    Replace the 12x, losing, Keys with another Agony Phaser space weapon crate which is actually useful.


    Otherwise, I really dig the Cygnus & Adamant designs but all the ships look good.

    The consoles & traits sound interesting but no way to tell if any good till reviews are read/watched.

    The stats & seatings seem on par with some better than others but nothing too terrible.

    While I'm not completely sold on this bundle it's nicely tempting.
    I agree its shame the costumes aren't. Adamant probably has battle cloak, so the lack of improved raider flanking makes sense.

    I could see them both quads being usable, but who knows.
    Trailer blazer is a 4/3 science ship so its a spearhead, those are one of the best there are, it also has command so I suspect it make a good torp platform as well.

    It likely 1 character unlocks on the ship slots I hope they can open separately so you can transfer them.
    Meh the keys are worth EC or free lobi though strieght up free lobi would be way better replacement.
    Traits are not bad but not best in slot, the seating is mostly outstanding though lt temp ops on the adamant is just not useful *shrug*
    MW lt, I think intel would have been better on the on the trail blazer.


    Good call on the Adamant's lack of Improved Raider Flanking to counter balance what it has: Combat Cloaking Device.

    Good call too on the Trailblazer being a 4/3 weapon layout (which is good) but I still think it having yet another Agony Phaser Lance is a bit of lackluster creativity. I would've preferred it to have it's own distinctive gimmick.

    I'm doubtful too about the Phaser Quads & these new Agony Phaser Quads being used at the same time, but it'd be nice.

    It is a shame Cryptic didn't make the uniform variants wearable by all factions.

    I would've found another Agony Phaser Space Weapon crate more useful than my 12x losing gamble Keys, that's just me though with my STO luck.
  • Options
    nommo#5819 nommo Member Posts: 1,105 Arc User
    strathkin wrote: »
    I'm rather disapointed, the Andromedia didn't offer more Tactical Consoles. Still there are ways around it with Universal's that boost Phaser%, or All Damage %.

    So seems it will just require a bit more creativity, that's my only guess... ...yet I would have like to see console variations more for sure!

    It is what it is.

    avoozuul wrote: »
    strathkin wrote: »
    I'm rather disapointed, the Andromedia didn't offer more Tactical Consoles. Still there are ways around it with Universal's that boost Phaser%, or All Damage %.

    So seems it will just require a bit more creativity, that's my only guess... ...yet I would have like to see console variations more for sure!

    It is what it is.
    Yeah, considering we already have two other versions of the galaxy with only three tac slots there was no harm in adding a fourth tac slot for this one.

    I completely agree with you both, this Galaxy is a Terran version after all, to me it makes sense for it to be more offense orientated not just another cookie-cutter Galaxy console layout.
  • Options
    nommo#5819 nommo Member Posts: 1,105 Arc User
    karr2k3 wrote: »
    Why if the Terran ships are usually more tactical base is the Oddy and Galaxy Terran variants still holding the same console layout as the prime universe ships. It makes no sense that a Terran Galaxy holds the same 5 engineering console slots and only 3 tactical console slots adding tactical officer seating giving it a 5-3 wpns loadout doesn't qualify as a tactical ship it still lacks the ability to be able to put that new setup to good use. The Legendary Mirror Dreadnought at least got a 5-3 wpns loadout that it should have had from the beginning minus the lack of a 5th tactical console instead of the 5th engineering console. The T5 ships are set up different than the prime universe T5's seating and console layouts so why is there the lack of changes to the T6 mirror ships?

    Completely agree
  • Options
    novapolaris#2925 novapolaris Member Posts: 785 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    westmetals wrote: »
    jcsww wrote: »
    avoozuul wrote: »
    I'm sad there's no Terran Promethius.

    That is a ship I would really like to see! Especially with MVAM and using the Vanguard Wingmen mechanics of the Jem'Hadar ships to console the other sections when it's separated.

    You know.... that would be an interesting "improvement", if they went back and replaced the existing MVAM mechanics with the Wingman-style mechanics....

    I WISH there was a legendary Prometheus. Getting my hopes up about the Hestia getting the Adamant/Nova model treatment. ,_, Or a decent improvement to separation mode craft.
  • Options
    faelon#8433 faelon Member Posts: 358 Arc User
    nommo#5819 wrote: »
    Good call on the Adamant's lack of Improved Raider Flanking to counter balance what it has: Combat Cloaking Device.

    Good call too on the Trailblazer being a 4/3 weapon layout (which is good) but I still think it having yet another Agony Phaser Lance is a bit of lackluster creativity. I would've preferred it to have it's own distinctive gimmick.

    I'm doubtful too about the Phaser Quads & these new Agony Phaser Quads being used at the same time, but it'd be nice.

    It is a shame Cryptic didn't make the uniform variants wearable by all factions.

    I would've found another Agony Phaser Space Weapon crate more useful than my 12x losing gamble Keys, that's just me though with my STO luck.
    At least the Inquisitors Uniform should be available to all factions, as everybody's evil twin wears it. I can understand the hesitancy regarding the Odyssey variants, to a point. But i really wish they unwound a few of the odder uniform restrictions. I wish they appreciated how much Space Barbie is the end game for many of us. And the more subtle options they give us, the happier we are. Things like all the belts and trimmings. The Mirror Overall sets have some of the most accessories. Let us use them anywhere.
  • Options
    novapolaris#2925 novapolaris Member Posts: 785 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    One thing I'm still curious/confused about is why they modeled the Cygnus with an awesome looking secondary deflector... but it can't equip one? I'd like to understand what's up there.
  • Options
    cryptkeeper0cryptkeeper0 Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    theoryfive wrote: »
    One thing I'm still curious/confused about is why they modeled the Cygnus with an awesome looking secondary deflector... but it can't equip one? I'd like to understand what's up there.

    Maybe the idea evolved from a science destroyer (like the Titan) where it could flip between science with a secdef and tac with an experimental weapon? That would have made the ship more interesting, particularly given its temporal station.

    I really do think we need to revamp regular destroyers to change between Escort/battlecruiser mode. A battlecruiser/science hybrid would be awesome to.
  • Options
    avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,204 Arc User
    I'd love it if a T6 Stargazer had a transform mechanic of engi to tac.
    I stream on Twitch, look for Avoozl_
  • Options
    jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,807 Arc User
    westmetals wrote: »
    jcsww wrote: »
    avoozuul wrote: »
    I'm sad there's no Terran Promethius.

    That is a ship I would really like to see! Especially with MVAM and using the Vanguard Wingmen mechanics of the Jem'Hadar ships to console the other sections when it's separated.

    You know.... that would be an interesting "improvement", if they went back and replaced the existing MVAM mechanics with the Wingman-style mechanics....

    That is my only complaint with the MVAM mechanic. The pets are pretty much no better than Fleet Support. Adding Wingmen to the pets when separated, would also allow coordinated attack patterns, which was demonstrated in Message In A Bottle. Give me both EMH's as accoiunt wide special Bridge Officer unlocks and i would be sold in a heartbeat on a Legendary Prometheus.
  • Options
    crypticarmsmancrypticarmsman Member Posts: 4,115 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    Yeah. Nothing in this bundle screams "Must Have" to me. That said, I have enough refined Dil to 'buy' it outright, and have put my offers up on the DilEx. If it converts to Zen by 3/3/22; I'll pick up the Bundle. If not, I won't.
    Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012
    TOS_Connie_Sig_final9550Pop.jpg
    PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
  • Options
    jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,807 Arc User
    Yeah. Nothing in this bundle screams "Must Have" to me. That said, I have enough refined Dil to 'buy' it outright, and have put my offers up on the DilEx. If it converts to Zen by 3/3/22; I'll pick up the Bundle. If not, I won't.

    My last bulk conversion of almost 8,000 ZEN from Dilithium, took about 10 days and went through a few days ago. I think you've got plenty of time.
  • Options
    nommo#5819 nommo Member Posts: 1,105 Arc User
    Yeah. Nothing in this bundle screams "Must Have" to me. That said, I have enough refined Dil to 'buy' it outright, and have put my offers up on the DilEx. If it converts to Zen by 3/3/22; I'll pick up the Bundle. If not, I won't.

    Maybe it's my apathy but I resemble this approach the most.
  • Options
    jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,807 Arc User
    westmetals wrote: »
    jcsww wrote: »
    Yeah. Nothing in this bundle screams "Must Have" to me. That said, I have enough refined Dil to 'buy' it outright, and have put my offers up on the DilEx. If it converts to Zen by 3/3/22; I'll pick up the Bundle. If not, I won't.

    My last bulk conversion of almost 8,000 ZEN from Dilithium, took about 10 days and went through a few days ago. I think you've got plenty of time.

    I don't think the speed of the conversion has anything to do with the amount.

    The amount was just how much I was waiting on. There are a lot more Dilithium offers wanting ZEN then there is ZEN to fulfill them currently. Each offer before mine came first when the ZEN was available to convert for the person who was waiting for their offer to complete.
  • Options
    nommo#5819 nommo Member Posts: 1,105 Arc User
    I think after watching today's 10F livestream I've talk myself out of buying the 12th Anniversary Terran Bundle, at least for now. It was rushed & they explained that but it wasn't the best presentation neither.

    I was going to be some zen short anyways so unless Cryptic was going to coincide a zen buying bonus I wasn't looking forward to possibly buying more.

    I still think all the ship designs look good with the Cygnus & Adamant looking the best imo but that's just cosmetics.

    One thing that bothers me since I usually try to theme build is the ships come with the normal non-upgradable Agony Phasers, but unless someone still has that Agony Space Weapon Crate it'll be real difficult (real expensive) to outfit all these Terran ships with Agony Phaser space weapons since there hasn't been an injection supply in a long time.

    The normal Phaser Quads & these new Agony Phaser Quads cannot be used together. Bummer. But they did state that these new Agony Phaser Quads are now part of the set.

    Cryptic ignored the numerous times it was questioned/mentioned in chat about the Terran "battlecruiser" Cygnus only having 3 Tac consoles.

    It seems all of these new skins will be kitbashable with their previous variants except with the Engle where for the complete skin option one will have to own the C-Store Engle as well.

    Maybe after it releases & the reviews are given I'll change my mind.
  • Options
    cryptkeeper0cryptkeeper0 Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    nommo#5819 wrote: »
    I think after watching today's 10F livestream I've talk myself out of buying the 12th Anniversary Terran Bundle, at least for now. It was rushed & they explained that but it wasn't the best presentation neither.

    I was going to be some zen short anyways so unless Cryptic was going to coincide a zen buying bonus I wasn't looking forward to possibly buying more.

    I still think all the ship designs look good with the Cygnus & Adamant looking the best imo but that's just cosmetics.

    One thing that bothers me since I usually try to theme build is the ships come with the normal non-upgradable Agony Phasers, but unless someone still has that Agony Space Weapon Crate it'll be real difficult (real expensive) to outfit all these Terran ships with Agony Phaser space weapons since there hasn't been an injection supply in a long time.

    The normal Phaser Quads & these new Agony Phaser Quads cannot be used together. Bummer. But they did state that these new Agony Phaser Quads are now part of the set.

    Cryptic ignored the numerous times it was questioned/mentioned in chat about the Terran "battlecruiser" Cygnus only having 3 Tac consoles.

    It seems all of these new skins will be kitbashable with their previous variants except with the Engle where for the complete skin option one will have to own the C-Store Engle as well.

    Maybe after it releases & the reviews are given I'll change my mind.

    I really think they need to add old weapon boxs to the dilithium store. I fairly sure even if they had answer for the Cygnus people wouldn't like it. I am honestly fine with its console slots even though I think they should have taken off one engi for a tactical.
  • Options
    jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,807 Arc User
    I didn't watch the Ten Forward Weekly and I never watch them. However, some well known fleetmates have brought up some concerns with the incoming rushed mess. I will wait a week to see if they address some of the gripes and known issues before buying. I really like Terran stuff though and agree, there needs to be a way to reduce the cost of acquiring Agony Phasers. Personally, I would be happy if buying the bundle unlocked an Advanced Agony Phaser option in the Dilithium Store, just like with the Spiral Wave Disruptors.
This discussion has been closed.