test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

T6 Flagships Stats

24567

Comments

  • msb777msb777 Member Posts: 36 Arc User
    Ya its mest up that the romulans get hanger pets, battle cloak and the other romulan ship abilites, yes they have less hull and a .05 less shield mod then SF but thats nothing. I understand diffrent factions means diffrent traits and it would be boring if all factions had the same thing. but at lest give them all hanger pets. So in short I think i will stick with my command battle cruiser the stats are similer plus it has a hanger bay.
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    At least the console from the Anniversary ship is obtainable by everyone! Truthfully, I probably wont even use any of these console set these ships come with. Too many useful consoles that are incorporated into my builds to give up slots for gimmicks. I do like the BOFF seating options though. They did good there!
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • chrisevans34chrisevans34 Member Posts: 260 Arc User
    Also question regarding Costume layout, if we own the T5 version can we use them on the T6 version? so to mix n match what it looks like, on other t6 ships??
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    Ships all look fine to me. Only thing is, the original Bortasqu is an amazing looking ship. Hard to top that. Still, some of those KDF Flagship images are pretty hot.

    There's a whole lot of Flagshippy goodness here. I'll probably grab the whole blasted megabundle at some point. I just have so many new ships right now, I need a moment to breath. :)

    I'm hoping that we can use the T5 skin on these T6's...especially the Klingon lol
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • gorngonzollagorngonzolla Member Posts: 172 Cryptic Developer
    Question does not Mention Anything about Cloaks?? the scimitar or the Bortasqu???

    Bortasqu' variants have Cloak while the Scimitar variants have Romulan Battlecloak.

    Phil “Gorngonzolla” Zeleski
    Cryptic Studios
    Lead Systems Designer
  • seriousdaveseriousdave Member Posts: 2,777 Arc User
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.
  • samt1996samt1996 Member Posts: 2,856 Arc User
    Well I guess that makes sense although the lack of a hangar bay is also somewhat annoying...
  • captaincelestialcaptaincelestial Member Posts: 1,925 Arc User
    I really like the diversity in designs within the same factions for the Flagships.

    Good job, guys!
  • captaincelestialcaptaincelestial Member Posts: 1,925 Arc User
    samt1996 wrote: »
    Look I love you guys but I'm slightly pissed off because the Romulon AND KDF versions get to break your own rules about five consoles... what gives?

    As someone who knew a bit about time machines, "It's a 'Timey-Whimey' thing."
  • saphira123456789saphira123456789 Member Posts: 67 Arc User
    Umm...

    For those of us who cannot get the anniversary ship due to crashes (like me), I honestly hope they have said anniversary ship in the Lobi Store, for far cheaper than 800 Lobi.

    After all, MMOs aren't charity, but they aren't Ferengi either.

    And some of your Lobi Store prices are QUITE outrageous, this being one of them.

    Also, I would love the new T6 Oddy to have backwards compatibility with the T5 Oddy's console set, as it would make the new oddy that much more survivable, especially the worker bee console from the old Oddy's Engineering variant. The Chevron Seperation console and Aquarius console will help us to be tactically versatile. If we can do that, well then, more power to us all.

    For that matter, the console off the Samsar, combined with the repair platform console, would really increase survivability.

    Then again, that's already allowed, so...
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.

    For DPS purposes..the Tactical Ody and Bort have a very nice BOFF layout. LT COM tactical and a LT COM universal makes for an interesting build!

    Personally, I run Kemocite Laced III, and with that BOFF layout I can also use my FAW III or Spread III depending on what I am doing. There is flexibility in all the variants, but I have always been leaning towards the tactical variants.
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • tobiashirttobiashirt Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    trejgon wrote: »
    Am I the only one here who noticed flagship technologies set using krenim science ship console as a set part?

    REALLY?!
    AGAIN?

    Cryptic haven't yet resolved issue of people that missed 5th anniversary ship not being able to have a full set of command battlecruiser consoles and now you are doing exacly same thing with next anniversary ship and following zenpacks?

    this is one of the most Illogical things I've noticed in game development - wasn't community whining about samsar console laud enought or what?

    Same mistake made twice by the people putting out the ships, or those obtaining them? Seeing this setup coming a year in advance, when the samsar console's use on the CBC's was announced, and yet not planning ahead to make sure and get the krenim ship on even 1 character?
  • seriousdaveseriousdave Member Posts: 2,777 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.

    For DPS purposes..the Tactical Ody and Bort have a very nice BOFF layout. LT COM tactical and a LT COM universal makes for an interesting build!

    Personally, I run Kemocite Laced III, and with that BOFF layout I can also use my FAW III or Spread III depending on what I am doing. There is flexibility in all the variants, but I have always been leaning towards the tactical variants.

    So your answer as to why the already worse versions get shafted is because they wanted to make the already better versions look better? Yeah sure makes sense....
  • burstdragon323burstdragon323 Member Posts: 853 Arc User
    I have to admit, I'm a bit let down.

    Theyre great ships, but when I saw how different they all looked, I had hoped that the ship's stats would reflect that. For example, I had hoped that the Science variants would have had +1 turn with a hit to their max hull, since the have the least "bulk" of each ship.
  • schloopdooschloopdoo Member Posts: 373 Arc User
    2 Science consoles and 4 Engineering on the Martok, as opposed to 3 and 3, has a big impact on who I might put in that Universal Boff seat.

    I'm sure that the Martok will be fun to fly, in any event. I had a lot of fun trying to turn the Tactical Bortasqu into a viable cannon ship, and the game didn't have Mk XIV Fleet RCS consoles then.
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    Hey @gorngonzolla - any chance the T5 Fed set got fixed so it can use Chevron Separation and The Aquarius consoles at the same time?
  • kirjahkirjah Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    Is there any special dev-magic reason why the T6 versions of the Odyssey and Bortasqu classes get some significant base stat upgrades according to the stat pages, including the Bortasqu going from 5.5 turn and 18 inertia to 6.5 turn and 30 inertia, but the T6 version of the Scimitar is identical to T5U except for +1 boff ability slot?

    It seems to make the T6 Scimitar variants the least valuable pack out of the three factions by a significant margin. I saved up the zen already, and that's giving me some pause.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.

    For DPS purposes..the Tactical Ody and Bort have a very nice BOFF layout. LT COM tactical and a LT COM universal makes for an interesting build!

    Personally, I run Kemocite Laced III, and with that BOFF layout I can also use my FAW III or Spread III depending on what I am doing. There is flexibility in all the variants, but I have always been leaning towards the tactical variants.

    So your answer as to why the already worse versions get shafted is because they wanted to make the already better versions look better? Yeah sure makes sense....
    The benefit is that you have more universal slots than the other builds, which gives you more options to combine powers that work well together, than just pick powers because you're stuck with a specific seat.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • gralerongraleron Member Posts: 221 Arc User
    The T5 and T5-U Odyssey Science and Tactical variants had their own custom power distributions. I take it there was a deliberate decision not to mirror these at T6?
    Vice Admiral Elaron, USS Hard Light
  • royalsovereignroyalsovereign Member Posts: 1,344 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    nikolunus wrote: »
    Only one complaint and is just something from an engineering view, why just why are there weapon emitters on the engines? Who in Star Fleet would think its a great idea to put a phaser emitter on a warp nacelle. A high energy weapon firing from a place where you never want high energy weapons to hit or cause an inbalance in the energy flow. It just takes me out of the game when ever I see a ship firing off a beam from one of the nacelles.
    You know this was originally done in TNG on the Ent-D, right? I mean, it isn't like they mounted an emitter array directly to the warp core. ;)

    As for the new ships, I don't spend on Fed or Klink ships, and I always hated the Scimitar, so I don't see myself touching these.
    "You Iconians just hung a vacancy sign on your asses and my foot's looking for a room!"
    --Red Annorax
  • stobg2015stobg2015 Member Posts: 800 Arc User
    trejgon wrote: »
    Am I the only one here who noticed flagship technologies set using krenim science ship console as a set part?

    REALLY?!
    AGAIN?

    Cryptic haven't yet resolved issue of people that missed 5th anniversary ship not being able to have a full set of command battlecruiser consoles and now you are doing exacly same thing with next anniversary ship and following zenpacks?

    this is one of the most Illogical things I've noticed in game development - wasn't community whining about samsar console laud enought or what?

    This is one of my concerns, too. Since the console will be unavailable a short time from now, people who buy a bundle after that will have no chance to complete their set if they didn't participate in the event. So we're saying event participation is now mandatory for all players (who don't want to get behind)?

    And why should a Krenim console have anything to do with an Alliance battleship?

    Between that and not wanting to see further perpetuation of the 9-ship eng/tac/sci bundles, I'm going to have to close my wallet in protest. Other people are welcome to throw their money out the airlock, but I'm not doing it.
    (The Guy Formerly And Still Known As Bluegeek)
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.

    For DPS purposes..the Tactical Ody and Bort have a very nice BOFF layout. LT COM tactical and a LT COM universal makes for an interesting build!

    Personally, I run Kemocite Laced III, and with that BOFF layout I can also use my FAW III or Spread III depending on what I am doing. There is flexibility in all the variants, but I have always been leaning towards the tactical variants.

    So your answer as to why the already worse versions get shafted is because they wanted to make the already better versions look better? Yeah sure makes sense....

    If tactical is a better variant, why not use the tactical variant? problem solved from a logical point of view. just sayin

    If you do not like any of the variants, do not buy them

    Bottom line, they are cruisers. If you want a science ship, buy a science ship. If you want a pure DPS ship, go with an escort. The variants they offer, allow captains other than engineers to get a little something to play with.
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    So, what's up with those engineering ody & bort and the tac simi boff layouts? Any particular reason why the only have 1 lt.cmdr but 3 lt seats? Kinda gives them a disadvantage compared to the others.

    For DPS purposes..the Tactical Ody and Bort have a very nice BOFF layout. LT COM tactical and a LT COM universal makes for an interesting build!

    Personally, I run Kemocite Laced III, and with that BOFF layout I can also use my FAW III or Spread III depending on what I am doing. There is flexibility in all the variants, but I have always been leaning towards the tactical variants.

    So your answer as to why the already worse versions get shafted is because they wanted to make the already better versions look better? Yeah sure makes sense....
    The benefit is that you have more universal slots than the other builds, which gives you more options to combine powers that work well together, than just pick powers because you're stuck with a specific seat.

    Thank you!
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    kirjah wrote: »
    Is there any special dev-magic reason why the T6 versions of the Odyssey and Bortasqu classes get some significant base stat upgrades according to the stat pages, including the Bortasqu going from 5.5 turn and 18 inertia to 6.5 turn and 30 inertia, but the T6 version of the Scimitar is identical to T5U except for +1 boff ability slot?

    It seems to make the T6 Scimitar variants the least valuable pack out of the three factions by a significant margin. I saved up the zen already, and that's giving me some pause.
    The T5-U Scim was already significantly better than the other two ships, and in many ways is still better than most T6 ships in combat. It didn't really need any further improvement - the T6 even with these small improvements will sell like crazy.

    The Bort, however, was a hot mess, and hopefully they did more to fix it than just increasing the turn and inertia - most notably moving the turning fulcrum/center mass to a point further forward. It looks like they shortened the snout already, so with the maneuver improvements and if they moved the turn point, it could actually be useful as something other than a BWAW boat.

  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    stobg2015 wrote: »
    trejgon wrote: »
    Am I the only one here who noticed flagship technologies set using krenim science ship console as a set part?

    REALLY?!
    AGAIN?

    Cryptic haven't yet resolved issue of people that missed 5th anniversary ship not being able to have a full set of command battlecruiser consoles and now you are doing exacly same thing with next anniversary ship and following zenpacks?

    this is one of the most Illogical things I've noticed in game development - wasn't community whining about samsar console laud enought or what?

    This is one of my concerns, too. Since the console will be unavailable a short time from now, people who buy a bundle after that will have no chance to complete their set if they didn't participate in the event. So we're saying event participation is now mandatory for all players (who don't want to get behind)?

    And why should a Krenim console have anything to do with an Alliance battleship?

    Between that and not wanting to see further perpetuation of the 9-ship eng/tac/sci bundles, I'm going to have to close my wallet in protest. Other people are welcome to throw their money out the airlock, but I'm not doing it.

    Not much to cry over, really. The bonus it offers is nothing special. If they never brought up that 4th set bonus, would you have sat there complaining you did not get a 4th set bonus that offers a slightly modified version of the console abilities? LOL

    Just don't use it, and pretend it never existed. You will be fine!
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    jaturnley wrote: »
    kirjah wrote: »
    Is there any special dev-magic reason why the T6 versions of the Odyssey and Bortasqu classes get some significant base stat upgrades according to the stat pages, including the Bortasqu going from 5.5 turn and 18 inertia to 6.5 turn and 30 inertia, but the T6 version of the Scimitar is identical to T5U except for +1 boff ability slot?

    It seems to make the T6 Scimitar variants the least valuable pack out of the three factions by a significant margin. I saved up the zen already, and that's giving me some pause.
    The T5-U Scim was already significantly better than the other two ships, and in many ways is still better than most T6 ships in combat. It didn't really need any further improvement - the T6 even with these small improvements will sell like crazy.

    The Bort, however, was a hot mess, and hopefully they did more to fix it than just increasing the turn and inertia - most notably moving the turning fulcrum/center mass to a point further forward. It looks like they shortened the snout already, so with the maneuver improvements and if they moved the turn point, it could actually be useful as something other than a BWAW boat.

    Yeah the T5 bort was a mess. Hopefully this new turn rate and inertia solve that problem somewhat!
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    trejgon wrote: »
    Am I the only one here who noticed flagship technologies set using krenim science ship console as a set part?

    REALLY?!
    AGAIN?

    Cryptic haven't yet resolved issue of people that missed 5th anniversary ship not being able to have a full set of command battlecruiser consoles and now you are doing exacly same thing with next anniversary ship and following zenpacks?

    this is one of the most Illogical things I've noticed in game development - wasn't community whining about samsar console laud enought or what?

    Its ok, everything will be fine.
    Not much to cry over, really. The bonus it offers is nothing special. If they never brought up that 4th set bonus, would you have sat there complaining you did not get a 4th set bonus that offers a slightly modified version of the console abilities? LOL

    Just don't use it, and pretend it never existed. You will be fine!
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • happyhappyj0yj0yhappyhappyj0yj0y Member Posts: 699 Arc User
    Wait so...

    One version from each only has one Lt. Commander slot coupled with three lowly Lieutenants.

    While the others all have two Lt. Commander, one Lieutenant and an Ensign?

    That doesn't seem right.
  • nateham101#2745 nateham101 Member Posts: 420 Arc User
    Wait so...

    One version from each only has one Lt. Commander slot coupled with three lowly Lieutenants.

    While the others all have two Lt. Commander, one Lieutenant and an Ensign?

    That doesn't seem right.

    What does not seem legit? Seems legit to me. We can not have everything. There is flexibility all over the place here. These ships are a marked improvement over their T5 counterparts.
    1Wlp6QH.gif
  • saber1973asaber1973a Member Posts: 1,225 Arc User
    edited February 2016
    jaturnley wrote: »
    Hey @gorngonzolla - any chance the T5 Fed set got fixed so it can use Chevron Separation and The Aquarius consoles at the same time?

    Yes please fix it - as it is it was why i did not buy T5 Odyssey bundle and got Galaxy Pack for my Feds.

    Edit:
    I got the T5 Scimitar and Bortasqu Bundles for my Romulans and KDF, but Odyssey was "either chevron separate or Aquarius" - so no - thank you.
Sign In or Register to comment.