first off the special ability ???? ohh transwarp ok has nada to do with combat.
120 years old the hull design( not ship) yes with upgraded parts .
yes a differant boff set up not better just differant.
turn rate yes lets call that the ability
Inertia - newtons first law Proportiona to mass. It is measure of the resistance to changes in velocity.
I know what real inertia is, just not how it applies to the game.
Secondly, I was just point out its differences, and why in my opinion it should have lower specs.
FYI the AC has more crew unless i looked at the wrong tooltip.
The Gal-R and Gal-X both have a special combat ability, the Ex has an out of combat ability.
Turn rate is 7vs8 ... the Ex is a smaller ship.
The BO setup traded the Eng LTC for a Tac LTC... a fair trade.
And don't forget how technology advancement slows down so there wouldn't be a huge issue with having 120 yr old refit ship, it would be pretty smart actually. It's like restoring an old car, like a 1970 Chevelle (yeah, baby!) and putting in a new LS1 fuel injected engine and new suspension... it all fits and the car performs much better and is essentially better than new.
So I guess I'm just missing the crux of the matter... other than it being a C-Store exclusive which does suck.
I read there is 50 more crew on the Excelsior than the AC.
It may be smaller, but it is also much older.
The thing with many of these analogies is that, though people may like to use the car analogy, it is flawed. cars are cars and ships are ships, the development of naval ships and the development of cars are different. Unless you can say that all the engines, weapons, defensive systems, and crew of one of our most advanced modern aircraft carriers could fit into one from 90 years ago, there is little real world evidence for what Cryptic is doing. In STO, many of the newer ships are two to three times the size and yet I can put the same complement of weapons on both and have even better specs.
I read there is 50 more crew on the Excelsior than the AC.
It may be smaller, but it is also much older.
The thing with many of these analogies is that, though people may like to use the car analogy, it is flawed. cars are cars and ships are ships, the development of naval ships and the development of cars are different. Unless you can say that all the engines, weapons, defensive systems, and crew of one of our most advanced modern aircraft carriers could fit into one from 90 years ago, there is little real world evidence for what Cryptic is doing. In STO, many of the newer ships are two to three times the size and yet I can put the same complement of weapons on both and have even better specs.
I double checked and it says 800 for the AC and 750 for the Ex.
Sorry you didn't care for the analogy... just trying to help you wrap your mind around the Ex being viable despite it's design age, but whatever. Anyway your aircraft analogy is a worse example IMO, but I digress. Anyway you seem like you've made up your mind, regardless. Feel free to continue hate'n on the Ex, the C-Store, and Cryptic. I'm gonna have some fun and play some STO.
I also find the people against it are against the c store
Let me be perfectly clear ... I LIKE the C-Store. I've bought three ship skins from it, one playable race, about four or five bridges, and one uniform set.
I like the C-Store.
If the Nebula they release is the cruiser version, I'll buy that.
If the TOS Enterprise Refit they release is T5 ... I'll definitely buy that.
I like the C-Store.
I just think that this direction that it is going with the excelsior is ... the slippery slope. And I think a lot of the people, most notably Squidhead Jax who has been making this point for a long, long time ... are right. And have a valid criticism of this direction.
The C-Store gave me playable Pakleds. I'll always like the C-Store for that.
But Squidhead's point about how the C-Store has shifted and now does offer game changing items for RL money ... is a valid point. The Excelsior is the most recent and in my opinion most blatant example of this point. But Squidhead had a point before. When it was the tribble or the Borg BO or the Galaxy X. They were just not quite a blatant a point as the Excelsior.
Well I wasn't sure... I've been bored at work and posting more than usual. I apologize for thinking you were addressing me and hope nothing I wrote offended you.
Well I wasn't sure... I've been bored at work and posting more than usual. I apologize for thinking you were addressing me and hope nothing I wrote offended you.
Ah, no worries. I'm not offended at all. There are so many times in a thread where simple miscommunication can happen. Sometimes I think I choose my words to come off way more aggressively than I ever intend them to be. And that's most likely a fault of my writing style. So I can totally understand.
And I know what you mean being bored at work. Heh.
You all are baseing this on hearsay not on fact I have bought it and flown it and can tell yea it not over powerd.
just because you have flown it doesn't mean its not overpowered. i'm sure there are others that know how to get more out of it than you do. thats the point. overpowered or not it still takes someone with some skill to exploit that overpoweredness
it works both ways. I have flown against kdf and fed and lose as much as win as i did in my souv,
case in point: you more or less break even with your fighting. learn to pvp better.
I think with the way the Excelsior is now, we are facing a similar situation as with the Galaxy X back then. For a time there was an inconsistency with the c-store policy. I would hope already existing t5 ships, in and out of store, get a revmp as soon as possible.
One problem is the fairly limited possibilities with the way ships are set up. We have 3 classes of BOs, each one has a maximum of 4 space skills, which consist of a limited number of skills in various degrees of "power".
The general weapon setup is a given for each type of t5 ship. Consoles are pretty limited, with engineering consoles the most desired, tactical consoles are a no-brainer and science quite circumstantial. Add to that special powers, that some classes have and others don´t, being balanced by loosing all-time benefits for the sake of cooldown powers with again circumstantial value.
I really hope that there is a way to break from established and limited ship setups without imbalancing the whole game.
just because you have flown it doesn't mean its not overpowered. i'm sure there are others that know how to get more out of it than you do. thats the point. overpowered or not it still takes someone with some skill to exploit that overpoweredness
case in point: you more or less break even with your fighting. learn to pvp better.
1) you can say that about any ship so your point is what they all are over powered ????
2) I pvp fine i am not the best but i don't claim to be but i have been doing it for a long time so i do know what i am doing.
3) my main point is if you havent flown it you cant sit here and tell people that its overpowerd .
Having flown the AC, SC, Gal-X, Gal-R, and Ex in PvP matches with my friends . . . the Ex isn't overpowered at all. Team cohesion and skill are still the deciding factors in PvP.
If you're losing to it, then you have no other recourse but to practice and get better.
Having flown the AC, SC, Gal-X, Gal-R, and Ex in PvP matches with my friends . . . the Ex isn't overpowered at all. Team cohesion and skill are still the deciding factors in PvP.
If you're losing to it, then you have no other recourse but to practice and get better.
Boo-yah
/Point and nod
I have played my Klink against this so-called 'overpowered ship' and we ground him to a pulp just like the rest of em...
I have played my Tac Fed officer allied with TWO of these 'amazing' ships... and one of them proved to be a pretty good ally... the other sucked donkey balls and kept blowing up repeatedly. Perhaps due to the fact he kept goading the Klingons with colorful jibes like "KLINKS SUXXORS, YOU CAN'T KILL MY L337 SHIP"... such things should not have been said.
Suffice it to say... he died the most, and we ended up losing. So just like any OTHER ship... it all depends on how smart/stupid you are as a captain... what skills you choose... and if you can keep yer damned yap shut when you aint got the chops to back up your ***** talkin. LOL
Having flown the AC, SC, Gal-X, Gal-R, and Ex in PvP matches with my friends . . . the Ex isn't overpowered at all. Team cohesion and skill are still the deciding factors in PvP.
If you're losing to it, then you have no other recourse but to practice and get better.
Simple question ... which cruiser would you fly in PVP right now ...
I know what real inertia is, just not how it applies to the game.
Secondly, I was just point out its differences, and why in my opinion it should have lower specs.
I read there is 50 more crew on the Excelsior than the AC.
It may be smaller, but it is also much older.
The thing with many of these analogies is that, though people may like to use the car analogy, it is flawed. cars are cars and ships are ships, the development of naval ships and the development of cars are different. Unless you can say that all the engines, weapons, defensive systems, and crew of one of our most advanced modern aircraft carriers could fit into one from 90 years ago, there is little real world evidence for what Cryptic is doing. In STO, many of the newer ships are two to three times the size and yet I can put the same complement of weapons on both and have even better specs.
i think the car analogy is more apropos than one to a salt water navy ship. The marine environ is very caustic, with little life forms that aid in the process of decay. Not to say space does not offer challenges to the longevity of a ship, I do not believe that space is a hostile to a hull as the oceans of earth.
Still if you insist on using a salt water analogy I'll bite. Consider a naval ship that was not built to modern modular specifications. Served with continual upgrades, (Offensive range extended from 25 nautical miles to over 1000 nautical miles), for a total of fifty two years and continues to function as a museum for a grand total of seventy one years of hull in the water. Iowa class battleships are a bad analogy for for space ships but it gives an idea about how a ship can be mothballed, turned into a museum, upgraded, used in another war, mothballed and turned back into a museum.
Cryp is always lie to us... "We dont put any stuff in the c-store to manipulate the game balance".
STO - Monthly Payment
C-Store - item Shop with various useful items like the gal-x, excelsior, tribble, console etc.
Bye cryp, i'am done with this game ... such a great piece of ****, season 2 completely rushed with bugs and season 3 will to.
Take a look on Warhammer ... well nice this game, play this now there is all perfect. No Instances, only Loading Screen on REAL WORLD changes, details are nice, content is nice and longtime motivation.
I have played my Klink against this so-called 'overpowered ship' and we ground him to a pulp just like the rest of em...
I have played my Tac Fed officer allied with TWO of these 'amazing' ships... and one of them proved to be a pretty good ally... the other sucked donkey balls and kept blowing up repeatedly. Perhaps due to the fact he kept goading the Klingons with colorful jibes like "KLINKS SUXXORS, YOU CAN'T KILL MY L337 SHIP"... such things should not have been said.
Suffice it to say... he died the most, and we ended up losing. So just like any OTHER ship... it all depends on how smart/stupid you are as a captain... what skills you choose... and if you can keep yer damned yap shut when you aint got the chops to back up your ***** talkin. LOL
Simple question ... which cruiser would you fly in PVP right now ...
Assault Cruiser or Excelsior?
Refit Galaxy. For the versatility.
However, and I can't stress this enough, the Excelsior is really fun to fly. The quickness and agility and firepower are a fun combo with my sci captain debuffing abilities. Sadly, I don't have enough money for BO 3 . . . .
This is what ****es me off about the c-store. Want to sell a service? Extra character slots and the like. Fine.
Want to sell other things like pre-order perks? Fine, with me... really upsets some others though. Want to sell fluff like uniforms and races. This bugs me, I'll buy races and uniforms but I'd much rather they just be content in the game. Hard to obtain, unlock, find... fine. I'll even buy a ship skin if I like it. But these last 2 ships (the Gal-X and the Tier 5 Excelsior)... not for me, thanks.
Simple question ... which cruiser would you fly in PVP right now ...
Assault Cruiser or Excelsior?
I am tempted to try have Irion try the Excelsior to see what all the hububaloo is about. Possibly because I am a more offensive player and prefer a dual beam bank build the excelsior's turn advantage might play out better for Irion. Still I really like the survivability and support of the exploration cruiser and feel that with a bit more practice I could be as good a defensive player as I am at offense.
I do not deny your sense that the Excelsior has a touch of the OP to it. Turn rate is a major factor in getting your strong weapons on target and thus improves DPS potential considerably. I have not gotten this ship so I do not know how it's BO configuration is gonna benefit my play style but I sense that is another area where the Excelsior "excels."
DStahl did acknowledge our concerns about the Excelsior being OPed and said that all the tier five ships will get a look at especially when it comes to BO configurations. I worry that it will take a bit if time though before the issue is addressed.
Still on the fence about the Excelsior though. As I said in another thread, like you, I plan to hold out for the TOS Enterprise refit. You see I am still a bit torqued about how the C-Store has been handled since the Gal-X debacle, and want to starve them as much as I can before I drop money on the C-Store. I hope that if I, and others, starve the C-Store long enough they will come down to reality when it comes to the real life money cost of virtual pixels I cannot own in actuality.
I double checked and it says 800 for the AC and 750 for the Ex.
Sorry you didn't care for the analogy... just trying to help you wrap your mind around the Ex being viable despite it's design age, but whatever. Anyway your aircraft analogy is a worse example IMO, but I digress. Anyway you seem like you've made up your mind, regardless. Feel free to continue hate'n on the Ex, the C-Store, and Cryptic. I'm gonna have some fun and play some STO.
Yes my analogy of how modern naval ships have evolved and future space ships (that use naval terminology, act like naval ships, and have naval type uniforms) is so much worse than your car analogy. Cars are different evolutionary than ships are.
Cars have gotten larger, yes, but not like ships do. A Ford model A in 1927 was about 4.2 m in length and 1.7 m wide, while a modern Ford Focus is about 4.5 m in length and 1.75 meters in length.
The first US Carrier built to be an Aircraft Carrier was the USS Ranger, at about 230 m in length and about 35 meters wide, while a modern carrier, the Nimitz Class is about 335 meters in length and 76 meters wide.
The difference in size is different between ships and cars, that is why I find your analogy flawed. I would love for you to point out how my analogy of naval ships is flawed.
Yes my analogy of how modern naval ships have evolved and future space ships (that use naval terminology, act like naval ships, and have naval type uniforms) is so much worse than your car analogy. Cars are different evolutionary than ships are.
Cars have gotten larger, yes, but not like ships do. A Ford model A in 1927 was about 4.2 m in length and 1.7 m wide, while a modern Ford Focus is about 4.5 m in length and 1.75 meters in length.
The first US Carrier built to be an Aircraft Carrier was the USS Ranger, at about 230 m in length and about 35 meters wide, while a modern carrier, the Nimitz Class is about 335 meters in length and 76 meters wide.
The difference in size is different between ships and cars, that is why I find your analogy flawed. I would love for you to point out how my analogy of naval ships is flawed.
Funny the trend for ships other than carriers seems to be getting smaller. Then again the success of the British jump carrier, even carriers are shrinking. More automated systems reduce the required number of crew to accomplish the same task you know. A traditional carrier, on the other hand, has to support planes and until pilotless drones become more prevalent the Nimitz class will need it's size to field the number of planes it does. With the introduction F-35 Lightning II it is possible that a jump carrier is in the US's future.
Like I said earlier the life aquatic is far more caustic then the life vacuous. Solar radiation and mirco-impacts aside there are nowhere near as many variables to age the hull of a ship. When you add the compression, expansion, torque and twist a naval ship experiences as it travels through a waves swell and trough, it becomes understandable why navy ships would have shorter life spans than space ships. For example the Nimitz is currently slated for a fifty year operational life. It has received continual upgrades since it was launched in 1972. Source, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cvn-68-mods.htm. Naval ships are poor examples of the life expectancy of star ship hulls that never or only rarely enter the Earth's atmosphere.
Funny the trend for ships other than carriers seems to be getting smaller. Then again the success of the British jump carrier, even carriers are shrinking. More automated systems reduce the required number of crew to accomplish the same task you know. A traditional carrier, on the other hand, has to support planes and until pilotless drones become more prevalent the Nimitz class will need it's size to field the number of planes it does. With the introduction F-35 Lightning II it is possible that a jump carrier is in the US's future.
Like I said earlier the life aquatic is far more caustic then the life vacuous. Solar radiation and mirco-impacts aside there are nowhere near as many variables to age the hull of a ship. When you add the compression, expansion, torque and twist a naval ship experiences as it travels through a waves swell and trough, it becomes understandable why navy ships would have shorter life spans than space ships. For example the Nimitz is currently slated for a fifty year operational life. It has received continual upgrades since it was launched in 1972. Source, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cvn-68-mods.htm. Naval ships are poor examples of the life expectancy of star ship hulls that never or only rarely enter the Earth's atmosphere.
The problem is that Star Trek follows naval traditions and ideas and that has been the basis for much of Star Trek's ship operations. For them to suddenly ignore that makes little sense. As for things aging the hulls of the starship, we only have the information we have collected, that doesn't mean there aren't a billion things that could age a hull that we haven't discovered yet. Lastly, if it is just so simple for newer parts to be put on older ships, why wasn't the Excelsior much more powerful during the Dominion War? And why did I see no Constellation class ships fighting the Dominion, I mean they could be just as powerful as any of the other ships and used just as widely, yet they never ever show up.
I been flying the Excelsior T5 since it's release. I can say it is fun. I do a lot of PvP and I don't feel that it is giving me a advantage. It can't match DSP of escorts and it doesn't have the Shield heals that I can provide to others with the Star Cruiser.
I been flying a Star Cruiser forever and my fleet-mates (escorts) hate it that I am now using the Excelsior T5. No Transfer Shield Strength can't lose my Science Team or Hazard Emitter and I removed Extend Shields for Warp Plasma. Little Escorts hate that.
Now for PvE it is a great advantage. Been playing Elite with it and my battles don't take as long. I have different BOs for different setups so I can run High Yield 3 or Beam Overload 3. With my weapons power set at 119 and then hit Beam Overload 3, than I use EPS to bring my weapons up to 125, now this is nice.
I do agree the that it does make the Sovereign look not so attractive. The Sovereign should had been this ship! If the Sovereign had a Tactical Lt Commander slot I would had gotten it and not the Star Cruiser. A ensign tactical is the most useless slot in the game. I would love to see the Sovereign with a Tactical Lt Commander slot and replace the Tactical Ensign with Science Ensign. Now that would be a ship.:D
You didn't answer my question ... but then again, you kind of do here:
However, and I can't stress this enough, the Excelsior is really fun to fly. The quickness and agility and firepower are a fun combo with my sci captain debuffing abilities. Sadly, I don't have enough money for BO 3 . . . .
So, like I say ... the excelsior is making the assault cruiser pointless.
You pay money, you get a better ship! Awesome sauce!
So, like I say ... the excelsior is making the assault cruiser pointless.
Except it's not. It's trading defense for offense. If you don't understand the importance of tanking, then you don't know how to play the game, period.
But then, I've never really liked the Assault Cruiser to begin with, so . . . .
Besides the Excelsior, is there any other Federation ship in game that offers a Lt Cmdr Boff slot that is not that of the PC? No? Really? This illustrates why so many people are upset about this.
Cryptic has released something that is only available through a micro-transaction. This is not about cosmetic items like uniforms or player races. The Excelsior is the first (most likely, of many)item that will require an extra investment by the playerbase. The game is design in such a way that it is possible for cryptic to sell functionality through the c-store. It is questionable if they could or would alter it to make the look of the ships cosmetic.
Cryptic should have designed the ships with three components:
1. Skin (some restrictions based on player level & profession & ship tier)
2. Console layout (multiple choices with restrictions based on player level & profession)
3. Bridge layout (multiple choices with restrictions based on player level & profession)
This way a player could choose to put together the ship of his choice restricted by level and profession. Retrofits would be much easier to implement and new skins could be added to the c-store to increase options.
You know, the more time goes by, the more I am happy I did not purchase a LTS. At least this way I can make the choice not to give Cryptic any more money. There are so many positives in this game that I hope Cryptic Management rethinks their business practices. It seems they are more interested in milking the IP than really doing something special with it.
To be fair, maybe it is not Cryptic, but Atari calling these shots. If that is the case then Atari needs to let Cryptic design a flexible, innovative game with the Star Trek AI.
To be fair, maybe it is not Cryptic, but Atari calling these shots. If that is the case then Atari needs to let Cryptic design a flexible, innovative game with the Star Trek AI.
They are. It's called Neverwinter Online, and it's an OMG, not an MMO.
Marketing speak just got hitched to Corner Cutting!
I'm not sure the Excelsior is OP, but it definitely provides an attractive option to the free cruisers. I wish they had either A] given it the same slots as an existing cruiser, or B] added an alternate free cruiser with the same slots.
It's not overpowered, but it definitely has high DPS thats only inferior to Escorts.
Today, I was doing the Klingon Scout Force Daily in my Sovereign and started from the beginning, halfway through, someone in an Excelsior came in with his fleet. I ended up in Second (first was a fleet escort, go figure. :rolleyes:) but the Excelsior got third.
If the Excelsior has that kind of DPS then Cryptic has some explaining to do. It all the more confirms that the Excelsior is a game-changing ship that they promised never would be put in the C-store.
Comments
Then why play at all?
Just give the medal to the one with the biggest bank account.
I know what real inertia is, just not how it applies to the game.
Secondly, I was just point out its differences, and why in my opinion it should have lower specs.
I read there is 50 more crew on the Excelsior than the AC.
It may be smaller, but it is also much older.
The thing with many of these analogies is that, though people may like to use the car analogy, it is flawed. cars are cars and ships are ships, the development of naval ships and the development of cars are different. Unless you can say that all the engines, weapons, defensive systems, and crew of one of our most advanced modern aircraft carriers could fit into one from 90 years ago, there is little real world evidence for what Cryptic is doing. In STO, many of the newer ships are two to three times the size and yet I can put the same complement of weapons on both and have even better specs.
I double checked and it says 800 for the AC and 750 for the Ex.
Sorry you didn't care for the analogy... just trying to help you wrap your mind around the Ex being viable despite it's design age, but whatever. Anyway your aircraft analogy is a worse example IMO, but I digress. Anyway you seem like you've made up your mind, regardless. Feel free to continue hate'n on the Ex, the C-Store, and Cryptic. I'm gonna have some fun and play some STO.
I wasn't referencing you.
Let me be perfectly clear ... I LIKE the C-Store. I've bought three ship skins from it, one playable race, about four or five bridges, and one uniform set.
I like the C-Store.
If the Nebula they release is the cruiser version, I'll buy that.
If the TOS Enterprise Refit they release is T5 ... I'll definitely buy that.
I like the C-Store.
I just think that this direction that it is going with the excelsior is ... the slippery slope. And I think a lot of the people, most notably Squidhead Jax who has been making this point for a long, long time ... are right. And have a valid criticism of this direction.
The C-Store gave me playable Pakleds. I'll always like the C-Store for that.
But Squidhead's point about how the C-Store has shifted and now does offer game changing items for RL money ... is a valid point. The Excelsior is the most recent and in my opinion most blatant example of this point. But Squidhead had a point before. When it was the tribble or the Borg BO or the Galaxy X. They were just not quite a blatant a point as the Excelsior.
Well I wasn't sure... I've been bored at work and posting more than usual. I apologize for thinking you were addressing me and hope nothing I wrote offended you.
Ah, no worries. I'm not offended at all. There are so many times in a thread where simple miscommunication can happen. Sometimes I think I choose my words to come off way more aggressively than I ever intend them to be. And that's most likely a fault of my writing style. So I can totally understand.
And I know what you mean being bored at work. Heh.
just because you have flown it doesn't mean its not overpowered. i'm sure there are others that know how to get more out of it than you do. thats the point. overpowered or not it still takes someone with some skill to exploit that overpoweredness
case in point: you more or less break even with your fighting. learn to pvp better.
One problem is the fairly limited possibilities with the way ships are set up. We have 3 classes of BOs, each one has a maximum of 4 space skills, which consist of a limited number of skills in various degrees of "power".
The general weapon setup is a given for each type of t5 ship. Consoles are pretty limited, with engineering consoles the most desired, tactical consoles are a no-brainer and science quite circumstantial. Add to that special powers, that some classes have and others don´t, being balanced by loosing all-time benefits for the sake of cooldown powers with again circumstantial value.
I really hope that there is a way to break from established and limited ship setups without imbalancing the whole game.
1) you can say that about any ship so your point is what they all are over powered ????
2) I pvp fine i am not the best but i don't claim to be but i have been doing it for a long time so i do know what i am doing.
3) my main point is if you havent flown it you cant sit here and tell people that its overpowerd .
If you're losing to it, then you have no other recourse but to practice and get better.
Boo-yah
/Point and nod
I have played my Klink against this so-called 'overpowered ship' and we ground him to a pulp just like the rest of em...
I have played my Tac Fed officer allied with TWO of these 'amazing' ships... and one of them proved to be a pretty good ally... the other sucked donkey balls and kept blowing up repeatedly. Perhaps due to the fact he kept goading the Klingons with colorful jibes like "KLINKS SUXXORS, YOU CAN'T KILL MY L337 SHIP"... such things should not have been said.
Suffice it to say... he died the most, and we ended up losing. So just like any OTHER ship... it all depends on how smart/stupid you are as a captain... what skills you choose... and if you can keep yer damned yap shut when you aint got the chops to back up your ***** talkin. LOL
Simple question ... which cruiser would you fly in PVP right now ...
Assault Cruiser or Excelsior?
i think the car analogy is more apropos than one to a salt water navy ship. The marine environ is very caustic, with little life forms that aid in the process of decay. Not to say space does not offer challenges to the longevity of a ship, I do not believe that space is a hostile to a hull as the oceans of earth.
Still if you insist on using a salt water analogy I'll bite. Consider a naval ship that was not built to modern modular specifications. Served with continual upgrades, (Offensive range extended from 25 nautical miles to over 1000 nautical miles), for a total of fifty two years and continues to function as a museum for a grand total of seventy one years of hull in the water. Iowa class battleships are a bad analogy for for space ships but it gives an idea about how a ship can be mothballed, turned into a museum, upgraded, used in another war, mothballed and turned back into a museum.
Cryp is always lie to us... "We dont put any stuff in the c-store to manipulate the game balance".
STO - Monthly Payment
C-Store - item Shop with various useful items like the gal-x, excelsior, tribble, console etc.
Bye cryp, i'am done with this game ... such a great piece of ****, season 2 completely rushed with bugs and season 3 will to.
Take a look on Warhammer ... well nice this game, play this now there is all perfect. No Instances, only Loading Screen on REAL WORLD changes, details are nice, content is nice and longtime motivation.
QFT and made me laugh, thank you.
Refit Galaxy. For the versatility.
However, and I can't stress this enough, the Excelsior is really fun to fly. The quickness and agility and firepower are a fun combo with my sci captain debuffing abilities. Sadly, I don't have enough money for BO 3 . . . .
Want to sell other things like pre-order perks? Fine, with me... really upsets some others though. Want to sell fluff like uniforms and races. This bugs me, I'll buy races and uniforms but I'd much rather they just be content in the game. Hard to obtain, unlock, find... fine. I'll even buy a ship skin if I like it. But these last 2 ships (the Gal-X and the Tier 5 Excelsior)... not for me, thanks.
I am tempted to try have Irion try the Excelsior to see what all the hububaloo is about. Possibly because I am a more offensive player and prefer a dual beam bank build the excelsior's turn advantage might play out better for Irion. Still I really like the survivability and support of the exploration cruiser and feel that with a bit more practice I could be as good a defensive player as I am at offense.
I do not deny your sense that the Excelsior has a touch of the OP to it. Turn rate is a major factor in getting your strong weapons on target and thus improves DPS potential considerably. I have not gotten this ship so I do not know how it's BO configuration is gonna benefit my play style but I sense that is another area where the Excelsior "excels."
DStahl did acknowledge our concerns about the Excelsior being OPed and said that all the tier five ships will get a look at especially when it comes to BO configurations. I worry that it will take a bit if time though before the issue is addressed.
Still on the fence about the Excelsior though. As I said in another thread, like you, I plan to hold out for the TOS Enterprise refit. You see I am still a bit torqued about how the C-Store has been handled since the Gal-X debacle, and want to starve them as much as I can before I drop money on the C-Store. I hope that if I, and others, starve the C-Store long enough they will come down to reality when it comes to the real life money cost of virtual pixels I cannot own in actuality.
Yes my analogy of how modern naval ships have evolved and future space ships (that use naval terminology, act like naval ships, and have naval type uniforms) is so much worse than your car analogy. Cars are different evolutionary than ships are.
Cars have gotten larger, yes, but not like ships do. A Ford model A in 1927 was about 4.2 m in length and 1.7 m wide, while a modern Ford Focus is about 4.5 m in length and 1.75 meters in length.
The first US Carrier built to be an Aircraft Carrier was the USS Ranger, at about 230 m in length and about 35 meters wide, while a modern carrier, the Nimitz Class is about 335 meters in length and 76 meters wide.
The difference in size is different between ships and cars, that is why I find your analogy flawed. I would love for you to point out how my analogy of naval ships is flawed.
Funny the trend for ships other than carriers seems to be getting smaller. Then again the success of the British jump carrier, even carriers are shrinking. More automated systems reduce the required number of crew to accomplish the same task you know. A traditional carrier, on the other hand, has to support planes and until pilotless drones become more prevalent the Nimitz class will need it's size to field the number of planes it does. With the introduction F-35 Lightning II it is possible that a jump carrier is in the US's future.
Like I said earlier the life aquatic is far more caustic then the life vacuous. Solar radiation and mirco-impacts aside there are nowhere near as many variables to age the hull of a ship. When you add the compression, expansion, torque and twist a naval ship experiences as it travels through a waves swell and trough, it becomes understandable why navy ships would have shorter life spans than space ships. For example the Nimitz is currently slated for a fifty year operational life. It has received continual upgrades since it was launched in 1972. Source, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/cvn-68-mods.htm. Naval ships are poor examples of the life expectancy of star ship hulls that never or only rarely enter the Earth's atmosphere.
The problem is that Star Trek follows naval traditions and ideas and that has been the basis for much of Star Trek's ship operations. For them to suddenly ignore that makes little sense. As for things aging the hulls of the starship, we only have the information we have collected, that doesn't mean there aren't a billion things that could age a hull that we haven't discovered yet. Lastly, if it is just so simple for newer parts to be put on older ships, why wasn't the Excelsior much more powerful during the Dominion War? And why did I see no Constellation class ships fighting the Dominion, I mean they could be just as powerful as any of the other ships and used just as widely, yet they never ever show up.
I been flying a Star Cruiser forever and my fleet-mates (escorts) hate it that I am now using the Excelsior T5. No Transfer Shield Strength can't lose my Science Team or Hazard Emitter and I removed Extend Shields for Warp Plasma. Little Escorts hate that.
Now for PvE it is a great advantage. Been playing Elite with it and my battles don't take as long. I have different BOs for different setups so I can run High Yield 3 or Beam Overload 3. With my weapons power set at 119 and then hit Beam Overload 3, than I use EPS to bring my weapons up to 125, now this is nice.
I do agree the that it does make the Sovereign look not so attractive. The Sovereign should had been this ship! If the Sovereign had a Tactical Lt Commander slot I would had gotten it and not the Star Cruiser. A ensign tactical is the most useless slot in the game. I would love to see the Sovereign with a Tactical Lt Commander slot and replace the Tactical Ensign with Science Ensign. Now that would be a ship.:D
You didn't answer my question ... but then again, you kind of do here:
So, like I say ... the excelsior is making the assault cruiser pointless.
You pay money, you get a better ship! Awesome sauce!
Yes I did. It fits neatly into the current ships.
Except it's not. It's trading defense for offense. If you don't understand the importance of tanking, then you don't know how to play the game, period.
But then, I've never really liked the Assault Cruiser to begin with, so . . . .
Cryptic has released something that is only available through a micro-transaction. This is not about cosmetic items like uniforms or player races. The Excelsior is the first (most likely, of many)item that will require an extra investment by the playerbase. The game is design in such a way that it is possible for cryptic to sell functionality through the c-store. It is questionable if they could or would alter it to make the look of the ships cosmetic.
Cryptic should have designed the ships with three components:
1. Skin (some restrictions based on player level & profession & ship tier)
2. Console layout (multiple choices with restrictions based on player level & profession)
3. Bridge layout (multiple choices with restrictions based on player level & profession)
This way a player could choose to put together the ship of his choice restricted by level and profession. Retrofits would be much easier to implement and new skins could be added to the c-store to increase options.
You know, the more time goes by, the more I am happy I did not purchase a LTS. At least this way I can make the choice not to give Cryptic any more money. There are so many positives in this game that I hope Cryptic Management rethinks their business practices. It seems they are more interested in milking the IP than really doing something special with it.
To be fair, maybe it is not Cryptic, but Atari calling these shots. If that is the case then Atari needs to let Cryptic design a flexible, innovative game with the Star Trek AI.
They are. It's called Neverwinter Online, and it's an OMG, not an MMO.
Marketing speak just got hitched to Corner Cutting!
Much as I enjoy flying it, it is a bad precedent.
Today, I was doing the Klingon Scout Force Daily in my Sovereign and started from the beginning, halfway through, someone in an Excelsior came in with his fleet. I ended up in Second (first was a fleet escort, go figure. :rolleyes:) but the Excelsior got third.
If the Excelsior has that kind of DPS then Cryptic has some explaining to do. It all the more confirms that the Excelsior is a game-changing ship that they promised never would be put in the C-store.