test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
winter ship stats and info
natureyouscary
Member Posts: 64 Arc User
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/dymhby/winter_event_tab_is_presumably_accidentally_up/
Thanks to reddit. It looks amazing, might even replace my vanguard carrier.
4/3 weaps, 2 hangers, 5 tact console slots, cmd tact, lt cmd engi and let cmd MW sci...the 5 turn rate will be rough but comp engines fix that.
Thanks to reddit. It looks amazing, might even replace my vanguard carrier.
4/3 weaps, 2 hangers, 5 tact console slots, cmd tact, lt cmd engi and let cmd MW sci...the 5 turn rate will be rough but comp engines fix that.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That said, after leveling the mastery i will most likely return to my regular ships.
The Fekh'lir style of ships either agrees or does not agree with you. I tend to lean towards the latter.
It looks like once again I won't be able to use the phlogiston projector with fire damage on a fek'irhi ship since none of them so far have an experimental weapon slot, I guess I'll have to wait and see until they do the escort next.
Then I saw the base turn rate of 5.
Depending on the inertia stat it may turn out to be another Vo'Quv that wallows no matter how much turn gear you stuff in it. Of course if that is the case it could be turned into a turret/omni ship I suppose similar to the "galactica" builds for the Vo'Quv.
Well, the screen shot shows inertia of 30 which is better than the Vo'Quv's 20, and the 25 that the Kar'Fi, Galaxy variants and the like have. The Excelsior and Sovereigns have 40 inertia.
A base turn rate of 5 is just awful though. Consider if you get +50% to turn rate, you're only at 7.5 which is still less than the base turn of a Kar-Fi. Inertia may keep you from sliding for half a sector, but you are still not turning the ship until the battle is done.
A .14 impulse modifier is also abysmal. A Vo'Quv gets .15. The only things with worse, I believe, are the Universe and its counterparts at .13.
I will say that because it has very little science ability, it can probably be a fine broadsider, and doesn't need to turn a whole lot. Still, that limits it to turrets or beam arrays, maybe a 180 torpedo, and that's about it.
The trait isn't that good for this ship either. If it is a PBAOE, then this ship needs to be in the thick of things to use it, which can be bad for a slow turner, as it makes it real easy for targets to leave your frontal beam arc. And as hangar launch timing is based on aux, and this ship won't need much, that also hurts the value of the trait. Presumably its also exotic damage, which again, this ship needs very little. On a proper science carrier though, the trait might have a lot more value.
True. There was a thread about that balance problem not too long ago.
One if the better sounding suggestions for solving the problem was a third fighter bay that could only handle fighters and not a heavier unit like frigates or the "fighter wings" (the other two would be the usual "handles anything" bays). It would close the gap a little but still not make it overpowered.
Maybe giving them an experimental weapon slot would help? I mean they are dreadnoughts, it would make sense for them to be able to field such a weapon.
> (Quote)
>
> True. There was a thread about that balance problem not too long ago.
>
> One if the better sounding suggestions for solving the problem was a third fighter bay that could only handle fighters and not a heavier unit like frigates or the "fighter wings" (the other two would be the usual "handles anything" bays). It would close the gap a little but still not make it overpowered.
Dont think that would work. The playerbase generally speaking doesnt like restricted slots on ships. If you had a third hanger bay to carriers but restrict what you could slot there I can guarantee there would be rage threads very quickly.
You see how some react to frigate pet restrictions.
Only if we get one that shoots fire
I am looking forward to my xmas present of a flaming skull-ship of DOOM!
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
I believe there is actually an experimental weapon that shoots fire, but I don't remember what it comes from. Someone was complaining in game that neither of the fekirhi ships can use it
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Fire damage is pretty rare, though the Hestia has a console to do fire damage too. Its odd because fire really fits better as plasma damage, but they want fire damage for some reason.
A proper Fek'ihri experimental fire weapon though, I think I'd like to see a short range flame thrower, maybe 3km max range but pretty high damage or maybe a CD so low it is nearly continuously firing at that range.
My character Tsin'xing
My original point on this was that fire is basically plasma, unless you think that ship hulls are flammable. Why does the game use fire damage when it should logically be plasma? The crazy Fek'ihri make their weird designs with a certain insanity that fits them, but from a game perspective, they should still be bound by physical laws of the universe.
i'm personally not interested by this ship or an other. any ship can be used to do the same content over and over. if one day they change the current tfos (especially the old ones) and if they add really difficult content, and add something really new. I might be interested in a specific ship. Currently, there is no reason to grind for this ship unless you are a collector or a newcomer., or if you like to keep ships in your shipward, covered by dust.
plasma, fire, polaron, phaser etc nothing make a real difference. it is always the same old game mechanism.