test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Hestia Class Advanced Escort Stats

12467

Comments

  • rockmonstartrekrockmonstartrek Member Posts: 11 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    carlosbfly wrote: »
    Indeed. It'll make this ship into a dud on release apart from diehard fans. Such a good design wasted on stupidity. If they mess up the T6 Defiant like this, they'll be blood in the streets.

    Lol the T6 Defiant will be one of the ugliest ships in the game. not too hard to find pics of it. Stats can be another matter but I can't see it being on par with the Phantom.
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    danpmk wrote: »
    Prediction based on this ship getting Command, which matches its T5 tertiary Engineering:
    Patrol Escort: Intel
    Star Cruiser: Pilot
    Assault Cruiser: Intel
    Deep Space Science Vessel: Pilot
    Recon Science Vessel: Command
    That would make all the "original" T5 ships fill interesting niche playstyles, instead of having more Pilot Escorts, Command Cruisers and Intel Science Vessel. Ignore the haters Cryptic, do it!
    That's assuming we don't get another spec before all of those come out, which we probably will before long. We're due.
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    Well, seems like I might have some good news:
    @Zoberraz wrote:
    @Cryptic_TtC Is the ShipDev team aware that the Prometheus' (all variants) Beta section is missing its 'nose' in-game?
    @Zoberraz I'm aware of the issue with the Prometheus variant.
    @Zoberraz wrote:
    @Cryptic_TtC Oh. Well. Okay. I guess it'll get fixed when possible :)
    @Zoberraz it has already been fixed internally. ;)
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    To be fair, I don't think the Piloting spec is really all that amazing. I found it about as useful as command once the novelty wore off. Intel is still a leg up from the two, thanks to ionic turbulence and override subsystem safeties.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    azniadeet wrote: »
    This build has the gears turning in my head. I think those poo-pooing it need to use their imagination a bit more. There's a lot of potential here.

    Three tact ensign seats makes a perfect fit for torp hy, tact team and kemocite... then turning the eng seat into a command hybrid allows for the addition of something like concentrate firepower or phalanx formation...

    There is no shortage of options for a creative build on what was already a viable 40-50k ship as a T5U.
    Sadly, too many players refuse to think beyond BFAW builds.
    This really seems like the perfect ship to make into a tric-bomber. :D
    Nah, the faeth still rules supreme for that one.​​
    Yes, but.... that's a Romulan ship. :p

    Ok, perfect Fed ship. :p
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,489 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    azniadeet wrote: »
    This build has the gears turning in my head. I think those poo-pooing it need to use their imagination a bit more. There's a lot of potential here.

    Three tact ensign seats makes a perfect fit for torp hy, tact team and kemocite... then turning the eng seat into a command hybrid allows for the addition of something like concentrate firepower or phalanx formation...

    There is no shortage of options for a creative build on what was already a viable 40-50k ship as a T5U.
    Sadly, too many players refuse to think beyond BFAW builds.
    This really seems like the perfect ship to make into a tric-bomber. :D
    Nah, the faeth still rules supreme for that one.
    Yes, but.... that's a Romulan ship. :p

    Ok, perfect Fed ship. :p
    questerius wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    azniadeet wrote: »
    This build has the gears turning in my head. I think those poo-pooing it need to use their imagination a bit more. There's a lot of potential here.

    Three tact ensign seats makes a perfect fit for torp hy, tact team and kemocite... then turning the eng seat into a command hybrid allows for the addition of something like concentrate firepower or phalanx formation...

    There is no shortage of options for a creative build on what was already a viable 40-50k ship as a T5U.
    Sadly, too many players refuse to think beyond BFAW builds.
    This really seems like the perfect ship to make into a tric-bomber. :D
    Nah, the faeth still rules supreme for that one.
    Yes, but.... that's a Romulan ship. :p

    Ok, perfect Fed ship. :p

    In that case the Intrepid and pathfinder can still give it a run for its money.Only drawback is the lack of tac boff slots​​
    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.
  • captaincelestialcaptaincelestial Member Posts: 1,925 Arc User
    hawku001x wrote: »
    Cool.

    I guess that explains why the flat part of mid section on the current prommie was bitten off.

    CPIyxXcU8AAgb9a.jpg:large

    See it at 0:32s
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07eyG5l7dVE&t=0m32s

    At 0:49s, they mention 'command', so that's where the Command station comes in ;)
  • captaincelestialcaptaincelestial Member Posts: 1,925 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    I'm thinking a update to the actual look of the separated Prometheus will be released at the same time, like the update to the Akria. Esp. since the mid section has a bit of the saucer section attached to it.

    Thank you, hawku001x for the clip :)
  • jrq2jrq2 Member Posts: 263 Arc User
    What a shame it's a nice looking ship but with the command located on the Engineering Bridge officer side, makes this ship very limited.
    I would have preferred the command seat be used on the tactical commander seat since the ship already has 3 extra Boff abilities.
    This would have made it more flexible without sacrificing too much.

    They would generate more sales if they would give the ship better bridge officer seats.

    I guess I will just have to stay with my T6 Fleet Chimera escort at least it is more flexible then the new ship.
    The Chimera at least has to universal bridge officer seats and it also uses command abilities but in this case with the universal seating you can balance the ship with all 4 ability
    Like :
    LtC Eng <--- universal seat

    LtC <----Command Officer Hybrid seat /Eng

    Com Tac

    Lt Sci

    En Sci <---- universal seat

    With is setup you get:
    4 Tac abilities
    3 Eng abilities
    3 Command Officer abilities
    3 Sci abilities
    A nice balance without too much sacrifice
  • edited September 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • laetexbunslaetexbuns Member Posts: 41 Arc User
    Dev laziness is what I've seen alot of throughout this game and this is simply another example thereof... Toss us TRIBBLE and see what we make of it...pfft My first c-store ship was the multi vector, wtf is with the command seat bs? Spend 30$ again to find we hate a engineer seat on a tac ship, please!
    syW94ht.jpg
  • jon1764jon1764 Member Posts: 81 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    What is the point of having a third slot of tactical/engineering/science when it is can only hold an ensign ability? I personally find such a slot to be useless, it should at least be a universal.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    questerius wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    azniadeet wrote: »
    This build has the gears turning in my head. I think those poo-pooing it need to use their imagination a bit more. There's a lot of potential here.

    Three tact ensign seats makes a perfect fit for torp hy, tact team and kemocite... then turning the eng seat into a command hybrid allows for the addition of something like concentrate firepower or phalanx formation...

    There is no shortage of options for a creative build on what was already a viable 40-50k ship as a T5U.
    Sadly, too many players refuse to think beyond BFAW builds.
    This really seems like the perfect ship to make into a tric-bomber. :D
    Nah, the faeht still rules supreme for that one.
    Yes, but.... that's a Romulan ship. :p

    Ok, perfect Fed ship. :p
    In that case the Intrepid and pathfinder can still give it a run for its money.Only drawback is the lack of tac boff slots​
    The Irony is strong with this one. :D
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    jaturnley wrote: »
    danpmk wrote: »
    Prediction based on this ship getting Command, which matches its T5 tertiary Engineering:
    Patrol Escort: Intel
    Star Cruiser: Pilot
    Assault Cruiser: Intel
    Deep Space Science Vessel: Pilot
    Recon Science Vessel: Command
    That would make all the "original" T5 ships fill interesting niche playstyles, instead of having more Pilot Escorts, Command Cruisers and Intel Science Vessel. Ignore the haters Cryptic, do it!
    That's assuming we don't get another spec before all of those come out, which we probably will before long. We're due.

    I'd be rather annoyed if they did. I maxed out my spec trees and can't gain more spec points other than the one's from special reward boxes. Would suck if I weren't able to save some up. >_>
  • zeatrexzeatrex Member Posts: 212 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    Command seat over a Pilot/Intel seat = Fail.
    T6 escort with 4 tactical consoles = Fail.
    No universal seats = Fail.

    One thing I seriously hated about the MVAC is how easily its pets were destroyed in battle, I mean, none of them can withstand an AoE hit from an exploding ship. To tell you the truth, this being a T6... I do not think the pets it releases will withstand much damage and die just as fast. Man you people could of made this ship so amazing, but instead you just **** it up like everything else you add new to the game.

    Congratulations.
  • badgerpants999badgerpants999 Member Posts: 241 Arc User
    So we get a T-5U ship for Zen and the T6 is Fleet only? Did you people even look at the other T6 ships?
  • awesometificawesometific Member Posts: 42 Arc User
    I dont know if I missed it but did they release the stats for this once you split into Alpha, Beta and Gamma sections depending on which section you command? It has been a while since I took the T5 one out for a spin but wasn't each section geared toward either tac, eng or sci?
    Fleet Admiral Marcus Red-Six
  • dabelgravedabelgrave Member Posts: 979 Arc User
    I dont know if I missed it but did they release the stats for this once you split into Alpha, Beta and Gamma sections depending on which section you command? It has been a while since I took the T5 one out for a spin but wasn't each section geared toward either tac, eng or sci?
    Here you go:
    file.php?id=1555&mode=view​​
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    Not really, separating gives you certain stat changes, but relatively small stuff like turn rate changes, power level modifiers, and shield cap changes.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • antibakantibak Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    Another worthless escort ship with a crappy bridge officer layout. Shame on you cryptic!!!!!! Another ship, (2 in a row now) that I will pass on!!!! You should never, NEVER put 3 of the same bridge officer class type on any ship!!!! What happened to universal slots????? Are you insane!!!!! ;))))) And a "Command specialization." OMG!!!! Seriously though, when will you figure it out that you will sell twice as many ships with flexible universal bridge officer slots; plus it would be nice someday to have an universal specialization pick? This will fill your bank coffers much easier than these silly "Niche ships" that only the "naive in game mechanics" or pure obsessive Star Trek fan will buy! I love this game but you keep giving me more and more reasons to hold on to my money! Thanks:(
  • iranoveryourdogiranoveryourdog Member Posts: 54 Arc User
    needs to have a tactical/pilot seat, instead of engineering/command... and all of the ships that are capable of separation, (Galaxy, Prometheus, etc) shouldn't require a console slot to use that ability...it's built into the design of the ship:/
  • dracounguisdracounguis Member Posts: 5,358 Arc User
    1 Ensign Tactical, 1 Lieutenant Tactical, 1 Commander Tactical, Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Command, 1 Lieutenant Commander Science​​

    IMO, a ensign station on any T6 ship is stupid if it's not a universal. I'd almost say that even then it's stupid to any ensign station on a T6 ship. Can we please get away from the near pointless ensign station on top tier ships?

    A single power ensign TAC is especially silly when you have the LT. and Com. stations. Are there even 3 ensign level powers people would want to use at the same time?
    Sometimes I think I play STO just to have something to complain about on the forums.
  • dracounguisdracounguis Member Posts: 5,358 Arc User
    hawku001x wrote: »

    I guess that explains why the flat part of mid section on the current prommie was bitten off.

    CPIyxXcU8AAgb9a.jpg:large

    Wow, they really screwed up the look of the Beta ship if they cut off the nose of it. It's horrific now. Why change it where it makes it worse?
    Sometimes I think I play STO just to have something to complain about on the forums.
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    After some bad experiences in the Forums i decided to stay quiet here but with this Ship...i have to add my 5 Cents.....

    The Prometheus was always one of my Favourite Ship Designs in Star Trek, unfortunately what we had in the Game (T5) had a Garbage Layout, so i never bothered with it (3 Tac Stations= FAIL, NO Universals= FAIL.....only 4 Tac Consoles= FAIL...Garbage Seperation Pets= FAIL......) now you have the chance to Fix all this with the T6 and what are you doing?.....Continue the Garbage -_- BUT even make it WORSE!........Who the HELL is responsable for the Ship Layouts? a 6 Years old Kid who throws some Dices to randomly decide the Layouts???? do you even Compare new Ships to existing ones? do you even think a second about what TYPE of Ship this is, what its role is and how it compares to the existing ones with certain Layouts???? You even know what Upgrading something means???? (the T5 to T6) with the Andromeda Class you made a nice Updated Version of the Galaxy Class that was WRONG in so many ways, same goes for several other ships like Negh'Var, the Heavy Escorts and so on, so da HELL went wrong with this???? only the hardest of the DIE HARD Fans of this Ship would even consider buying this MESS, and even many of them will Pass in Frustration about this Stupidness - sorry but has to be said -

    So Cryptic you see all those People here (and iam sure will be way more and most people will not even care saying something here and instead that ignore the ship) do yourself AND the Prometheus Fans a Favour, do a FULL Break, call that Ship back and send it to the Federation Shipyards, there tell your Engineers to do a Emergency FIX for it, the following is what most People would like and THAT would sell!

    Change the Ensign Tac to a Universal or BETTER remove the Ensign and Upgrade the Lt Tac to a Lt Commander Tac, this Lt Commander Tac make it a INTEL or PILOT Hybrid, leave the Lt Comm Eng ALONE (no hybrid), its the ships only Eng Station, so experimenting there is NOT GOOD. Last but not least..4 Tactical Consoles on a ESCORT??? in this case a T6 ESCORT?! so we are Forced to get the Fleet Version if we want the Fifth Console that should be in Place by Default???
    Make the C-Store version 5 Tac, 3 Sci, 2 Eng and Slap a Third Eng Console Slot on the Fleet one, THIS would make sense, and THIS would be acceptable, what you did there is NOT!

    as people allready said, you really managed to come up with something that even makes the Resolute Class look good, and this means something! (for everyone who does not know what i mean....the Resolute is GARBAGE!)

    Cryptic....you SERIOUSLY should Consider such Changes, or else you should be Prepared for the Possibly WORST Sale for a new Ship in STO History, and that would be BAD for you and a SHAME for People that would otherwise Buy this GOOD looking Ships, YES the Designer did a nice Job here, KUDOS to him!

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    After some bad experiences in the Forums i decided to stay quiet here but with this Ship...i have to add my 5 Cents.....

    The Prometheus was always one of my Favourite Ship Designs in Star Trek, unfortunately what we had in the Game (T5) had a Garbage Layout, so i never bothered with it (3 Tac Stations= FAIL, NO Universals= FAIL.....only 4 Tac Consoles= FAIL...Garbage Seperation Pets= FAIL......) now you have the chance to Fix all this with the T6 and what are you doing?.....Continue the Garbage -_- BUT even make it WORSE!........Who the HELL is responsable for the Ship Layouts? a 6 Years old Kid who throws some Dices to randomly decide the Layouts???? do you even Compare new Ships to existing ones? do you even think a second about what TYPE of Ship this is, what its role is and how it compares to the existing ones with certain Layouts???? You even know what Upgrading something means???? (the T5 to T6) with the Andromeda Class you made a nice Updated Version of the Galaxy Class that was WRONG in so many ways, same goes for several other ships like Negh'Var, the Heavy Escorts and so on, so da HELL went wrong with this???? only the hardest of the DIE HARD Fans of this Ship would even consider buying this MESS, and even many of them will Pass in Frustration about this Stupidness - sorry but has to be said -

    So Cryptic you see all those People here (and iam sure will be way more and most people will not even care saying something here and instead that ignore the ship) do yourself AND the Prometheus Fans a Favour, do a FULL Break, call that Ship back and send it to the Federation Shipyards, there tell your Engineers to do a Emergency FIX for it, the following is what most People would like and THAT would sell!

    Change the Ensign Tac to a Universal or BETTER remove the Ensign and Upgrade the Lt Tac to a Lt Commander Tac, this Lt Commander Tac make it a INTEL or PILOT Hybrid, leave the Lt Comm Eng ALONE (no hybrid), its the ships only Eng Station, so experimenting there is NOT GOOD. Last but not least..4 Tactical Consoles on a ESCORT??? in this case a T6 ESCORT?! so we are Forced to get the Fleet Version if we want the Fifth Console that should be in Place by Default???
    Make the C-Store version 5 Tac, 3 Sci, 2 Eng and Slap a Third Eng Console Slot on the Fleet one, THIS would make sense, and THIS would be acceptable, what you did there is NOT!

    as people allready said, you really managed to come up with something that even makes the Resolute Class look good, and this means something! (for everyone who does not know what i mean....the Resolute is GARBAGE!)

    Cryptic....you SERIOUSLY should Consider such Changes, or else you should be Prepared for the Possibly WORST Sale for a new Ship in STO History, and that would be BAD for you and a SHAME for People that would otherwise Buy this GOOD looking Ships, YES the Designer did a nice Job here, KUDOS to him!

    Well, that's just it, really. We have a dev team with little to no vision (lookin at you, Rivera) and hardly seem to care what the players really want. The odd time they do act like they care, it's slim pickins. This game really needs a fresh team with new goals and new ideals as opposed to the current crash grab/grind fest that's been the status quo since the inception of Delta Rising.

    I don't expect the Hestia to be a big seller and having seen screenshots of the T6 defiant already, I've no interest in that ugly P.O.S. either. It's just another in a long, long line of TRIBBLE T6 ships that serve no other purpose than being the obvious attempt at a cash grab.

    Frankly, I don't even want to see T6 versions of T5 ships. I would much rather see something new and interesting, rather than a T6 rehash of old ships.

    But, MOST importantly, it'd be nice if universal stations were actually, y'know UNIVERSAL. ie. Tac/Sci/Eng/Command/Intel/Pilot, as opposed to having specialized seating.

    Seriously, Cryptic. Like so many others, I've given you the benefit of the doubt and time and time again, you let me down more often than the Maple Leafs at a hockey game.

    Time to take a hard look at your design choices and see your cookie cutter, carbon copy method just ISN'T working.

    Might be being a little harsh, but frankly, you need the wake-up call.
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    Underwhelming at best. Not the command, but the 3 tactical ensigns. Not everyone has Kemo to abuse it. A simple change would be to make the tactical lt. universal, or making the cmd.tac command.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    danpmk wrote: »
    Prediction based on this ship getting Command, which matches its T5 tertiary Engineering:
    Patrol Escort: Intel
    Star Cruiser: Pilot
    Assault Cruiser: Intel
    Deep Space Science Vessel: Pilot
    Recon Science Vessel: Command
    That would make all the "original" T5 ships fill interesting niche playstyles, instead of having more Pilot Escorts, Command Cruisers and Intel Science Vessel. Ignore the haters Cryptic, do it!
    Assault Cruiser should be Pilot, since it has the Manual Steering Column. ;)
    captennik1 wrote: »
    I rarely post comments but this I have to post a comment for this ship I honestly don`t see any reason why someone would prefer to buy this ship instead of any other escort now a good idea on making it interesting is to put the Lieutenant Tactical as a Lieutenant Universal slot this way people will actually thing that is worth buying.I am not against the Command idea although Intel or Pilot would fit better to an escort ship otherwise the ship is ok for an escort and the trait could give some interesting builds
    Is there any reason to play any other Escort than a Pilot Escort?
    5/2 weapon layout, and pilot maneuvers. The only way it could be more powerful might be if you could slot Override Subsytem Safeties to it. And no Escort will be more fun without the pilot maneuvers. :p
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • xinaerkxinaerk Member Posts: 64 Arc User
    COMMAND abilities... FOUR forward weapons...ENSIGN tactical station. :/

    My God, that really is a bad ship. Just as bad as the patrol escort. The "NEW" patrol and advanced escorts are a serious step backwards.

    No thanks. Looks nice though...

    I'll stick around my pilot escort pack... FIVE forward weapons, afterburners, pilot abilites... Enough said.
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited September 2015
    Maybe the Hestia wouldn't look so bad stat-wise, if the pilot escorts weren't that good in first place. That happens when you sell too much powercreep in advance. One would think that Cryptic learned this lesson long ago.

    I would understand if the Hestia did cost less than Icarus for users that previously bought MVAE, so it would be just an upgrade for T5U Promethus fans...but for the same price...well, that's one hell expensive costume.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,489 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    questerius wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    azniadeet wrote: »
    This build has the gears turning in my head. I think those poo-pooing it need to use their imagination a bit more. There's a lot of potential here.

    Three tact ensign seats makes a perfect fit for torp hy, tact team and kemocite... then turning the eng seat into a command hybrid allows for the addition of something like concentrate firepower or phalanx formation...

    There is no shortage of options for a creative build on what was already a viable 40-50k ship as a T5U.
    Sadly, too many players refuse to think beyond BFAW builds.
    This really seems like the perfect ship to make into a tric-bomber. :D
    Nah, the faeht still rules supreme for that one.
    Yes, but.... that's a Romulan ship. :p

    Ok, perfect Fed ship. :p
    In that case the Intrepid and pathfinder can still give it a run for its money.Only drawback is the lack of tac boff slots​
    The Irony is strong with this one. :D

    Looks that way huh, but because of their secondary deflector and ability to throw out high level GW they compensate for the lack of tac. If you have an intrepid then equip the ablative console and throw a generic trico build on before visiting CEA. It's funny to see those kind of damage numbers.​​
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.