test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Avenger Class - Worth it?

13»

Comments

  • theraven2378theraven2378 Member Posts: 6,014 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    the Bo layout is TRIBBLE. for the uni slot will be science anyway, and the console is TRIBBLE. the torp could be good. but the ship is not worth 2500Zen, the Zvenger also is not worth 2500 Zen

    The Assault Cruiser refit is fantastic, I happen to own one and it does not disappoint, the Bridge layout, I don't really have an issue with.

    The Avenger, until I get the ship, I can't exactly make up my mind about, i've got to fly it first
    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
    • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      Visually? The Avenger is atrocious. It's literally a brick with a spoon taped on the end.

      Statistically?

      - The torp console is idiotic. Yes, with TAC buffs, it shows great, big numbers. Yes, it looks cool when it fires. Yes, it shoots more stuff on the way in. But here's where it gets stupid. It has a minimum firing range just like the Bio-Neural Warhead. Dumb idea to stuff this tactic and console on a cannons oriented ship, where by definition, it fights at short ranges. Also, to get the most of this attack, you need to fire at a long range so that more shots are fired by the attack on the way in. Again, on a ship that by design, fights at "knife fight" ranges. When the pretty effects of the console wore off on me, I removed this useless thing to stuff something in that actually will make a difference.

      - The ship... the ship is a Battlecruiser in handling and BOFF layout. For the Feddies that do not get it yet, KDF Battlecruisers have ALWAYS had Cmdr ENG, not Cmdr TAC. The Avenger follows suit. Not all KDF Battlecruisers have LtCdr TAC either like the Fleet Torkhat / Vor'Cha. The K'T'Inga for instance is LtCdr / Cmdr ENG, just like traditional Cruisers. Anyways, the Avenger, ironically is better at being a Battlecruiser than most KDF Battlecruisers. The BOFF layout is quite superb in that role. The Fleet Torkhat/Vor'Cha has superior turn (10 vs Avenger 9). The turn rate is equal to Fleet Negh'Var. It still handles quite well. But the Console layout is decent. But again, the BOFF layout MAKES the Avenger. Not the cloak capability. Not the dumb, idiotically designed torpedo console. But the BOFF layout and handling of the Avenger makes it the best Battlecruiser in the game. You have enough ENG space to make a difference. You can go Dual Aux2Batt. The Fleet Torkhat can't really do that without sacrificing Science completely, which is dangerous for STFs and many Hazards and Tractors in this game. If you skip Aux2Batt, that ENG layout can make for a good setup.
      XzRTofz.gif
    • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      I don't know about this after seeing this vid I can do about the same with my Oddy Tac.It doesn't perform like my Klingon criusers do.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IMIt7S5-Qc

      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
      USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
      Star Trek Gamers
    • castlebravo023castlebravo023 Member Posts: 7 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      I would just like to say that I love the way the Avenger looks and plays. I'm beginning to believe that all the people who hate on the Avenger have never actually played it. The episode Yesterday's Enterprise shows us exactly how Starfleet can man up when it has to. The development of this ship is simply a logical outgrowth of that exact sort of effect. Both fluff wise and stats wise, I say it's long overdo.

      Cryptic's awesome design department deserves kudos for all the new and excellent designs they have come out with. I also love my Regent and my tac Odyssey with saucer separation.

      I also absolutely despise the way the Galaxy looks, ESPECIALLY the Dreadnaught. That ship in STO handles exactly the way it did on the TV/movie screen. Badly. If you're wanting a Galaxy to do what a Sovereign does then you are doing it wrong. I can understand if it's your favorite ship, but it's an orange and you're looking for an apple. Now having said that: I personally believe the Akira class should be a battle cruiser. I don't know what the hell they were thinking. :-)

      Also, Kirk is better than Picard, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded. :-)
    • marshalericdavidmarshalericdavid Member Posts: 0 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      I also absolutely despise the way the Galaxy looks, ESPECIALLY the Dreadnaught. That ship in STO handles exactly the way it did on the TV/movie screen. Badly.

      The Galaxy in game is poorly represented. It has Science capability equal to a Defiant Class and that is just wrong. Makes no sense. The Galaxy should have a Lt.Commander Science station. Galaxy in game is just horrid.

      The Galaxy X in game nothing like All Good things... Its Lance in game is much slower firing and misses hitting it's target to much.
    • ussfuryussfury Member Posts: 142 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      Well, my main ship is a Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit (Defiant) named "U.S.S. Avenger". And it's the ship I'll fly til the day I die.

      But I might give the Avenger a spin, someday. The stats and layout are nice.
    • sevmragesevmrage Member Posts: 0 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      I also absolutely despise the way the Galaxy looks, ESPECIALLY the Dreadnaught. That ship in STO handles exactly the way it did on the TV/movie screen. Badly. If you're wanting a Galaxy to do what a Sovereign does then you are doing it wrong. I can understand if it's your favorite ship, but it's an orange and you're looking for an apple. Now having said that: I personally believe the Akira class should be a battle cruiser. I don't know what the hell they were thinking. :-)

      Also, Kirk is better than Picard, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded. :-)

      I might have respected your opinion, but then you went and gave the idea that your opinions are a matter of fact, and that anyone else who disagrees is an idiot.

      Please stick to your T1 C-Store Connie in game and don't post here again.

      @ussfury
      I've actually been thinking about a defiant class, I just have no way of getting one right now. I would like one, though.
      Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
      My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
      khayuung wrote: »
      Firstly, be proud! You're part of the few, the stubborn, the Federation Dreadnought Captains.
    • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
      edited October 2013

      I also absolutely despise the way the Galaxy looks, ESPECIALLY the Dreadnaught. That ship in STO handles exactly the way it did on the TV/movie screen. Badly. If you're wanting a Galaxy to do what a Sovereign does then you are doing it wrong. I can understand if it's your favorite ship, but it's an orange and you're looking for an apple. Now having said that: I personally believe the Akira class should be a battle cruiser. I don't know what the hell they were thinking. :-)

      Also, Kirk is better than Picard, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded. :-)
      I belive the Akira in the moive was just a Heavy CA.when you have played other Star trek games you know you can't take a criuser at fulll impluse and expect it to turn on a dime sure Klinks ship can because they are desinged simply for combat and nothing esle.Fed cruisers on the other hand are desinged for exploration and long range patral of Fed space.

      You won't get an aguement for me who is better capt. as Kirk is King.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
      USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
      Star Trek Gamers
    • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      i think the representation of the akira in this game is spot on, except for its turnrate. That should really be around 12, not higher, maybe even slightly lower.

      and perhaps restricted to beams too...but that is just the "canon nerd" talking in me.
      Go pro or go home
    • castlebravo023castlebravo023 Member Posts: 7 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      sevmrage wrote: »
      I might have respected your opinion, but then you went and gave the idea that your opinions are a matter of fact, and that anyone else who disagrees is an idiot.

      Damn.

      SOMEBODY needs to recalibrate their sarcasm sensor array. (hint, look for the smiley-face).

      Also, if I could give a C-Store Connie they stats and BO/Weapons/Console of a T5 ship, I would do EXACTLY that.

      The Constitution class is one fine lady.
    • grendelthewise#0990 grendelthewise Member Posts: 640 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      All the ships have there ups and downs. It all depends on your fighting style and build.
      Fleet Admiral of the U.S.S. ATTILA KHAN-CDA (NX-921911).
    • sevmragesevmrage Member Posts: 0 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      Damn.

      SOMEBODY needs to recalibrate their sarcasm sensor array. (hint, look for the smiley-face).

      Ah, sorry about that.
      Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
      My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
      khayuung wrote: »
      Firstly, be proud! You're part of the few, the stubborn, the Federation Dreadnought Captains.
    • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      ussfury wrote: »
      Well, my main ship is a Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit (Defiant) named "U.S.S. Avenger". And it's the ship I'll fly til the day I die.

      But I might give the Avenger a spin, someday. The stats and layout are nice.

      Will you call your Avenger-class ship the U.S.S. Defiant? :P
    • diotwdiotw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
      edited October 2013
      coffeemike wrote: »
      Yeah I am not happy with the look personally... the BOFF slots are epic along with the rest of the ship stats. The look... can't we put the Galaxy X skin on it instead?

      Pretty much my thoughts, only I'd chose the Exeter skin myself. Such a gorgeous looking ship, but you never get to use it, because it's low level only. I think the Avenger would look much nicer dressed as an Exeter, right now the only reason I don't have one is that I find it one of the ugliest ships in Starfleet right now.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
      This character is why I don't play my Romulan any more. Tovan Khev is NOT my BFF! Get him off my bridge!
    Sign In or Register to comment.