test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

absolutely the worst T6 ship?

annemarie30annemarie30 Member Posts: 2,692 Arc User
it's always asked what ship is "the best" but I am looking for the worst one. I want to be able to say Challenge accepted andf see if i can make a decent build. Yes, I'm really that bored
We Want Vic Fontaine
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
«134

Comments

  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,654 Arc User
    I hate the Kobali Samsar because it turns....so....slowly and is meh in every other way. Plus it's crewed by unholy freaks ;)

    The console is nice though.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,540 Community Moderator
    I hate the Kobali Samsar because it turns....so....slowly and is meh in every other way. Plus it's crewed by unholy freaks ;)

    The turn rate is subjective based on player stats. Mine can probably turn pretty decently with a combination of Pilot Spec, couple RCS Neutroniums, and native Endeaver perk points.
    Second point is kinda... not a point seeing as how its being crewed by whichever faction your character is a part of.

    As for my opinion on the worst... even with the turn rate buffs the standard T6 D'Deridex is a brick and you FEEL it. The legendary at least has one point higher in turn rate, which puts it on par with the T6 Galaxy, which in turn is actually doable with turn rate buffs. But the standard T6 D'Deridex to me is just a slow brick no matter what you do.
    I really can't think of any others that, at least to me, felt painful to fly off the top of my head. And I admit I've been spoiled by Pilot ships when it comes to cannon equipped escorts. The Terran Adamant felt clunky to me after flying the Legendary Defiant.
    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!)
  • jedipiccolo#1700 jedipiccolo Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    Lol, I knew my T6 D'Deridex would already be listed by the time I got here to post. It really does fly like a brick and it constantly pulls nose down, while looking like it's flying backwards. It's truly an odd ship. I am not sure at all what that says about me using it and refusing to give it up. I just fly in slow circles, usually below everyone else!
  • annemarie30annemarie30 Member Posts: 2,692 Arc User
    Yeah I was thinking the D'Derpidex, just wasn't sure if there wasn't a bigger suck ship
    We Want Vic Fontaine
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,817 Arc User
    The D'Deridex is bad and (at least on a maneuver level) so is the Fe'Rang though the latter's fighters make up for some of it. I think the extra-straightjacketed feel of those two is from the inertia being cranked way over into the anti-skid end of the spectrum so they cannot pull the kind of power-glide maneuvers that some other big ships can use to make keeping the enemy in firing arc less of a dragging chore.
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,478 Arc User
    Two ships which have very little going in their favor are
    https://sto.fandom.com/wiki/Jupiter_Carrier

    and

    https://sto.fandom.com/wiki/Vorgon_Ytijara_Dreadnought_Cruiser

    Both can be made to work, but it takes a fair bit more time and effort.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 5,051 Arc User
    Well, I don't buy ships that I hate so I'm not sure. All my ships have some positive side(s).

    But one thing I always found annoying:

    Having to unlock any slow-turning cruiser's trait when you're specced for flying a fast escort or a sci ship.

    Especially the Presidio - before the release of the Boimler trait, I considered All hands on deck a must-have trait for most toons. But most of those toons are SCIs and TACs, so they either didn't need a high turn rate, or they were flying ships that automatically had much more of that.


    The ship itself isn't too bad though, I decided it to make it my main ship on one of my ENG toons. But dedicating a toon to a specific ship and thus taking the time to make it work, is of course much different from having to make it work for a few missions and while switching from a much easier-to-fly ship.
  • inferiorityinferiority Member Posts: 4,379 Arc User
    ...the standard T6 D'Deridex is a brick and you FEEL it.
    Yep, but it's one of my 'go to' ships for my Romulan and Reman engineers. It turns a bit better when cloaked but overall, it's great for broadsiding! Love it!

    My opinion on the worst ship is likely to change from one day to the next, but I find having Intel commander seating on an Escort such a waste of time. By the time you activate the Gather Intel ability, you've probably already blown up your current target. So, to me, this makes the likes of the Phantom, Adamant, etc. the worst!

    However, just ignore the Intel ability and they work quite well. :D
    - - - - I n f e r i o r i t y - C o m p l e x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Everyone has a better name and Youtube Channel than me...  :/
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,282 Arc User
    I see your D'Derpidex and raise you one corpse barge - the Sarcophagus has a turn rate of FOUR...the only ship to have it, I might add, and for good reason.​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #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!"
    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.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,540 Community Moderator
    I see your D'Derpidex and raise you one corpse barge - the Sarcophagus has a turn rate of FOUR...the only ship to have it, I might add, and for good reason.​​

    I counter with beam arrays and support for FAW/Suppression Barrage combo on top of its two hangers. Yea it turns slow but its not meant to.
    *shrug*
    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!)
  • spiritbornspiritborn Member Posts: 4,363 Arc User
    While I don't have a specific ship to name I'd say ships with a full spec specialization (even if it's considered a bad one) are still inherently better then those that have either no specialization seating or just the seating and not other stuff that come with a specialization, granted there's not many T6 ships like that.
  • szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    edited August 2023
    As someone who loves to tinker and mess around non-meta mechanics, this is a pretty tough ask.

    If you were to ask for worst build types, I could probably give you multiple 'fun' examples, but it's really hard to pin down a ship/platform because there are so many ways to use them. For example, a Herald Quas isn't a great weapon platform, but it is a fantastic support platform to enhance and protect other people with. Even something like a Ytijara has some really interesting buildcraft with a minelayer or collector/tow-ship setup.

    The Andromeda and Jupiter are probably some of the most cumbersome and restrictive ships to try to work with. Parliament might be a close third because of its awkward console layout(the bridge layout is quite serviceable though).

  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,478 Arc User
    I am trying to remember which was the first released tier 6 ship. That should answer which is the worst T6 ship.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    edited August 2023
    ...the standard T6 D'Deridex is a brick and you FEEL it.
    Yep, but it's one of my 'go to' ships for my Romulan and Reman engineers. It turns a bit better when cloaked but overall, it's great for broadsiding! Love it!

    My opinion on the worst ship is likely to change from one day to the next, but I find having Intel commander seating on an Escort such a waste of time. By the time you activate the Gather Intel ability, you've probably already blown up your current target. So, to me, this makes the likes of the Phantom, Adamant, etc. the worst!

    However, just ignore the Intel ability and they work quite well. :D

    That is an interesting take. The Adament is probably the best DEW raider in the game. :)
    Forget the mechanic. You can run Surgical 3 on it. Has the raider bonus 10% ambush and raider turn/inertial, battle cloak. With full escort hull stats. For sure no where close to a worst list... its top 3 escort/raider I would say there isn't a better escort in the game, best you can get in the zen store for sure.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    I am trying to remember which was the first released tier 6 ship. That should answer which is the worst T6 ship.

    That about sums it up... basically all the early T6s that have one Lt. specialty seat. Things like the Guardian, the Mat'Ha and others. They aren't all bad ships they are just not what we think of as T6 anymore.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    In all seriousness though if you want to make something crappy do something. Forget T6 get one of the old unique T5 ships like the Malon, APU cruiser, Arehbes, Nihydron, or the Kazon Raider. They can be made to do well.... for style points put all the eject stuff consoles you can find on a Malon or something. lol
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,478 Arc User
    husanakx wrote: »
    In all seriousness though if you want to make something crappy do something. Forget T6 get one of the old unique T5 ships like the Malon, APU cruiser, Arehbes, Nihydron, or the Kazon Raider. They can be made to do well.... for style points put all the eject stuff consoles you can find on a Malon or something. lol

    Well an APU Cruiser with a full turret build is fun, but that observation is also beside the point because we're trying to qualify the T6 Ships.

    Every Tier 1-6 ship can be made to work in end game content, but some take considerable more effort than others.
    Right now we're trying to determine which Tier 6 takes the most effort.

    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    edited August 2023
    questerius wrote: »
    husanakx wrote: »
    In all seriousness though if you want to make something crappy do something. Forget T6 get one of the old unique T5 ships like the Malon, APU cruiser, Arehbes, Nihydron, or the Kazon Raider. They can be made to do well.... for style points put all the eject stuff consoles you can find on a Malon or something. lol

    Well an APU Cruiser with a full turret build is fun, but that observation is also beside the point because we're trying to qualify the T6 Ships.

    Every Tier 1-6 ship can be made to work in end game content, but some take considerable more effort than others.
    Right now we're trying to determine which Tier 6 takes the most effort.

    Well as per Cryptic T5X=T6. :) lol

    But as others have said if you want the worst of the worst. You probably can look at the early Romulan non warbirds (cruisers and sci). The -40 power makes them pretty terrible... you can justify that on the warbirds with Enhanced cloaks and extra hard points (such as the Malem which is 4/3 rather then 4/2 on a bop) DDx is the obvious choice... but right up there is the Laeosa Research Warbird. Its a sci ship with only one Lt CMD temp spec seat, 11 turn rate with 45 inertia and a sing core. Its Slow can't turn is almost impossible to do anything but kinetic on (which for sci isn't the end of the world) you just can't power weapons and aux and run your engines at enough to make that thing move at all. Easily the worst Sci ship in the game anyway. (also the only rom sci ship) You can make it work... but the build options on it are non existent, and essentially any other sci ship is better.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,654 Arc User
    .
    husanakx wrote: »
    questerius wrote: »
    I am trying to remember which was the first released tier 6 ship. That should answer which is the worst T6 ship.

    That about sums it up... basically all the early T6s that have one Lt. specialty seat. Things like the Guardian, the Mat'Ha and others. They aren't all bad ships they are just not what we think of as T6 anymore.

    And they're still perfectly fine ships, just not top of the heap. I have fond memories of my "hammer of the gods" Mat'Ha cannon build with the Heavy Disruptor Spinal Cannon going WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! and smashing ships to pieces :)

  • inferiorityinferiority Member Posts: 4,379 Arc User
    husanakx wrote: »
    That is an interesting take. The Adament is probably the best DEW raider in the game. :)
    Yep, as I said:
    However, just ignore the Intel ability and they work quite well. :D
    The Boff seating works very well and the ship itself is fantastic - it's just the Intel ability itself is pointless.
    - - - - I n f e r i o r i t y - C o m p l e x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Everyone has a better name and Youtube Channel than me...  :/
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    husanakx wrote: »
    That is an interesting take. The Adament is probably the best DEW raider in the game. :)
    Yep, as I said:
    However, just ignore the Intel ability and they work quite well. :D
    The Boff seating works very well and the ship itself is fantastic - it's just the Intel ability itself is pointless.

    Fair. That sums up all the ship mechanic stuffs though. They are all basically garbage.
    Its too bad Cryptic didn't add more vulnerability imparting clicks. The Fheats plasma lance imparts 10s of intel vulnerability. If we had more things like that Intels mechanic would be a bit more usable.
  • szerontzurszerontzur Member Posts: 2,724 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    I am trying to remember which was the first released tier 6 ship. That should answer which is the worst T6 ship.
    The first set, to my memory, were:
    FED: Phantom, Eclipse, Scryer, Guardian, and.. Dauntless?
    KDF: Qib, Mat'ha
    ROM: Faeht, Aelahl

    Aside from the 4/3 weapon layout of the Intel Escorts, a lot of these ships are still quite respectable. Many of them have very nice consoles that would see a lot of use even today if they weren't restricted to their respective ships. (Removing their restrictions have been on my wishlist since early 2021.) The Lances/Spinal Cannons are obvious, but even things like the Qib and Aelahl console are surprisingly useful.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,654 Arc User
    edited August 2023
    Ah, right - the Delta Pack - I bought that back in 2014 as my first ships purchase - https://stowiki.net/wiki/Delta_Rising:_Operations_Pack

    And yes, the Qib console does look useful - https://stowiki.net/wiki/Console_-_Universal_-_Weapon_Systems_Siphon
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,608 Arc User
    Seeing as the QIB is being mentioned. It is one of the oldest T6s... but its actually a very very good ship that recently got a couple massive buffs.

    Its got not bad turn and inertia for a battle cruiser... a battle cloak.
    It got buffed with Intel... as it has a commander Engi/Intel meaning you can use surgical 3 on it.
    It got buffed with advance consoles as it can slot 5 engi consoles.

    One nice thing about the advance consoles... a bunch of very old ships got a bit of extra life. That 3 tac console 4/4 QIB was always sort of meh.... but with 6 advance consoles it can be top tier.
  • theraven2378theraven2378 Member Posts: 6,014 Arc User
    Pathfinder, on the Intel seating, not great with Lt. level at best.
    Limited on tactical options and quite honestly, the Terran Trailblazer has been a permanent replacement which does a better job and has more options to mess around with.
    NMXb2ph.png
      "The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
      -Lord Commander Solar Macharius
    • dragon#2626 dragon Member Posts: 275 Arc User
      Ytijara-class dreadnought, without question. I cannot fathom how anyone could possibly have thought the 3/5 weapon arrangement was a good idea.
      I swim through a sea of stars. . . .
    • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,540 Community Moderator
      Ytijara-class dreadnought, without question. I cannot fathom how anyone could possibly have thought the 3/5 weapon arrangement was a good idea.

      I believe the idea was that she was more of a minelayer.
      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!)
    • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,478 Arc User
      rattler2 wrote: »
      Ytijara-class dreadnought, without question. I cannot fathom how anyone could possibly have thought the 3/5 weapon arrangement was a good idea.

      I believe the idea was that she was more of a mine layer.

      And it performs pretty good as a mine layer especially since it is an event ship.
      That said, a mine layer is not the easiest build to master.
      This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
    • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 4,249 Arc User
      Ytijara-class dreadnought, without question. I cannot fathom how anyone could possibly have thought the 3/5 weapon arrangement was a good idea.
      3/5 is great idea that we need more options for, we need more 3/5 ships. The Ytijara has a number of unique builds and stand out features making it one of the top ships in game. It shouldn't be anywhere near the worst ship list give that its a best ship for at least 2 build types.
    • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 4,249 Arc User
      edited August 2023
      The D'Deridex is bad and (at least on a maneuver level) so is the Fe'Rang though the latter's fighters make up for some of it. I think the extra-straightjacketed feel of those two is from the inertia being cranked way over into the anti-skid end of the spectrum so they cannot pull the kind of power-glide maneuvers that some other big ships can use to make keeping the enemy in firing arc less of a dragging chore.
      The Fe'Rang is anything but bad. Its one of the top carriers in game, pretty sure its near the top for Pet builds both with and without access to SAD. Its the no1 strongest none Frigate Carrier without SAD trait and with the SAD trait its still right up there near the top. Its also the strongest Tricobalt platform in game. I know Tricobalt are rare builds but its note worthy on top of being such a strong carrier.
      Post edited by pottsey5g on
    This discussion has been closed.