test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Legendary Vor'cha, massive disappointment

245

Comments

  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    I look at the bright side even though it’s hard to find:

    For the price they ask me to pay here every bad ship stat they offer in this pack makes it all the easier to not even think about getting it.

    So far so good I’d say.

    Agreed, saves me the time, effort, and/or money that would normally use to acquire it. It's just a quick and easy 'No.' :lol:
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    I look at the bright side even though it’s hard to find:

    For the price they ask me to pay here every bad ship stat they offer in this pack makes it all the easier to not even think about getting it.

    So far so good I’d say.

    Agreed, saves me the time, effort, and/or money that would normally use to acquire it. It's just a quick and easy 'No.' :lol:

    I'm still hurt I won't get a decent Excelsior. I can live without the Ambassador because the current T6 is a capable enough ship, and whatever they do to it (hell, the Legendary could be a mirror of the Vor'cha with bad turning and command, for all we know!), it can't be that big an improvement. The Vor'cha is a mess, the B'rel is a snooze... but, man... MW Excelsior. Uggghhhh. I want that. Not enough, but I want it.
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,569 Arc User
    You'd think everyone's Fleet is top heavy with Engineers.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    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.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,698 Community Moderator
    Simply because they didn't give a ship the exact stats you want, it doesn't cater to your particular build style, or it's not designed to reach 40983749873497 zillion DPS, doesn't make it a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in this game, simply ships that don't work as well for particular play styles. What works well for me as a tank may not work as well for a sci captain, or someone looking for pure energy DPS. I hate the mentality that if something isn't catered 100% to the latest flavor of the month DPS or build, that somehow it's a bad ship. There's more to this game than the damage charts. Simply because they didn't include a ship you like, or they included a ship you don't like, does NOT mean they're ignoring what people want or the requests they're getting. Year of Klingon has not now, nor has it ever been about the ships.

    With that in mind if folks want to debate features for the money vs another ship, that's at least a legitimate debate. So far I'm not impressed with the B'rel myself either, but I do like the Vorcha and Excelsior as they're improvements in my book compared to what we had before. Some folks may disagree and that's cool. So far I like what I see and will be getting the pack as there are fun things I can do with those ships for my tanks.

    If folks don't like the ships, then vote with your wallet and don't buy them. Otherwise some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to ships. There are going to be tradeoffs with each ship that's flown. Otherwise if there were no downsides to certain ships, then that ship would be extremely OP and that's the only ship you would ever see people using. And yeah I get some folks are going to think "well you're a mod you're supposed to defend the company" type sentiment. However I do legitimately like what I see with the Vorcha and Excelsior, and I'm no stranger to telling them they need to up their game if I think it's needed.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • garaffegaraffe Member Posts: 1,353 Arc User
    When it comes down to it, we can debate this "legendary" bundle all we want, but it is each individual player that will decide whether to buy it or not. Cryptic will then compile the numbers and decide if the bundle was a "success". We all have our part to play in this economic tango we call the "free" market.
  • ankesorgcallitriankesorgcallitri Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    As i said earlier i cannot decide if this is gross incompetence or ignorance , both are capital offences in my book so ...
    Most ppl dont like TRIBBLE (the show i mean) and they dont like the moronic KDF designs , Cryptic has to know this as well , they had a golden opportunity here to give us beloved ships which are actually good , i dont know anything when it comes to escorts so i cannot comment on the BoP other then the ship is a much loved design and if u mess it up ppl will hate u for it
    The Vorcha i personally love a lot its a natural evolution of the D7 but hey we all needed another command ship ...
    We are looking at 50 level of endeavor farming in our KDF recruit , most ppl would have loved to put them into these ships , well if the giveaway BoP is better there goes then part , year of klingon joke continues with a lego bundle with 2 KDF ships and 2 FED, 2 mediocre KDF ship and 1 good FED and the other unknown great year of klingon so far
    I seem to remember Janeway had a year of hell once .... at least that title was honest.
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    Simply because they didn't give a ship the exact stats you want, it doesn't cater to your particular build style, or it's not designed to reach 40983749873497 zillion DPS, doesn't make it a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in this game, simply ships that don't work as well for particular play styles. What works well for me as a tank may not work as well for a sci captain, or someone looking for pure energy DPS. I hate the mentality that if something isn't catered 100% to the latest flavor of the month DPS or build, that somehow it's a bad ship. There's more to this game than the damage charts. Simply because they didn't include a ship you like, or they included a ship you don't like, does NOT mean they're ignoring what people want or the requests they're getting. Year of Klingon has not now, nor has it ever been about the ships.

    With that in mind if folks want to debate features for the money vs another ship, that's at least a legitimate debate. So far I'm not impressed with the B'rel myself either, but I do like the Vorcha and Excelsior as they're improvements in my book compared to what we had before. Some folks may disagree and that's cool. So far I like what I see and will be getting the pack as there are fun things I can do with those ships for my tanks.

    If folks don't like the ships, then vote with your wallet and don't buy them. Otherwise some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to ships. There are going to be tradeoffs with each ship that's flown. Otherwise if there were no downsides to certain ships, then that ship would be extremely OP and that's the only ship you would ever see people using. And yeah I get some folks are going to think "well you're a mod you're supposed to defend the company" type sentiment. However I do legitimately like what I see with the Vorcha and Excelsior, and I'm no stranger to telling them they need to up their game if I think it's needed.

    The Fleet Nimitz has better hull, better shields, and better turn rate. The Fleet D'Khellra has better hull, and with its console set, the better turn rate, along with a battle cloak itself. The Fleet Negh'Tev has nearly identical hull, and much better turn rate.
    Every other battle cruiser has less hull but turn rates to actually make a 5/3 layout useable, and the Qugh while having weak turning itself is obviously full MW.

    This Vor'cha is set up to be the worst turning battlecruiser in the game, despite being one of the best engineering ships for DHCs originally thanks to its turn rate. This is what originally set the KDF battlecruisers apart from Fed cruisers, their turn rate and ability to use DHCs, and why some of us actually played KDF to get that unique playstyle.

    Edit: And to add, with Temporal, in offensive configuration, you get another 20% bonus turn rate, thus this turn rate nerf can be close to 50% if you ran in offensive configuration.

    It isn't even that it is a bad ship, its that it is well outside the norms for both its lineage and for similar ships and there is no balancing reason for it.

    And command is just bad right now. It may as well not exist due to how it all works, especially with how awful or niche the BOFF powers are. They do know this and have said they want to rework it as I recall, so maybe some day everyone will like command again. That is why I'm less bothered by command, on the expectation they are going to fix it someday, but it is still a very weak specialization.
    Post edited by foxrockssocks on
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,354 Arc User
    ...some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to ships.
    Some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to anything to do with Klingons. Half the first page was filled with people using their personal dislike for the Legendary Vor'cha as an excuse to rail again about how they don't believe this has been "the Year of Klingon".

    Cheese and crust, people, have you even played a Klingon recruit? Do you have the least idea how thoroughly the entire first three arcs have been rewritten, recoded, and cleaned up? I mean, yes, we still need to do something about the special target aboard Kahless' ship spawning above or below the deck in the Fek'Ihri Return arc, but taking command of your first ship makes much more sense now, you don't have to "prove yourself" with a silly bat'leth competition when you get back to Qo'noS (as if commanding a starship had anything to do with swinging a sword under tightly controlled conditions of no danger), Klingons aren't total jerks when it comes to capturing the DeWitt, her captain doesn't crack and spill Starfleet's security codes at the threat of torture, when you have to rescue the captured warriors after the attack on Utopia Planitia you take your entire task force there instead of stealing a Fed runabout and sneaking in like a bunch of Romulans, the monks of Boreth aren't mysteriously missing when you arrive there, and I don't even know where to start about the improvements to Gre'thor, both in approach to the place and in the execution of its interior spaces.

    This all represents a massive investment of both time and money into the Klingon spaces of the game specifically. I used to code for a living, but not graphics, so I have only an inkling of what was involved here, but I can assure you this isn't the work of just one person chained to a desk somewhere, nor is it the result of someone's "free time". There's tons of work that's been put into it. Personally, I'm not sure I care for the design of the T6 M'Chla refit, but it does kind of grow on you after a while (not unlike a fungus, one supposes), and besides, for me it's only a placeholder until I unlock the Temer. Other than that, fix the two enemies I found spawned into walls (the special target aboard the Batlh and one Hordling that spawned inside a wall in Treachery's chamber, causing me to have to quit and reload the mission), and this will be, in my not so damn humble opinion, just about the perfect "Year of Klingon". The fact that scraps were thrown to the other factions doesn't change that in the least.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • ussvaliant2#1952 ussvaliant2 Member Posts: 402 Arc User
    I can't really see many people buying this bundle for the KDF ships they are very underwhelming. If it sells it will be on the popularity of the Excelsior and Ambassador Classes respectively.
    https://i.imgur.com/r6F7yxj.jpeg
  • foppotee#4552 foppotee Member Posts: 1,704 Arc User
    Simply because they didn't give a ship the exact stats you want, it doesn't cater to your particular build style, or it's not designed to reach 40983749873497 zillion DPS, doesn't make it a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in this game, simply ships that don't work as well for particular play styles. What works well for me as a tank may not work as well for a sci captain, or someone looking for pure energy DPS. I hate the mentality that if something isn't catered 100% to the latest flavor of the month DPS or build, that somehow it's a bad ship. There's more to this game than the damage charts. Simply because they didn't include a ship you like, or they included a ship you don't like, does NOT mean they're ignoring what people want or the requests they're getting. Year of Klingon has not now, nor has it ever been about the ships.

    With that in mind if folks want to debate features for the money vs another ship, that's at least a legitimate debate. So far I'm not impressed with the B'rel myself either, but I do like the Vorcha and Excelsior as they're improvements in my book compared to what we had before. Some folks may disagree and that's cool. So far I like what I see and will be getting the pack as there are fun things I can do with those ships for my tanks.

    If folks don't like the ships, then vote with your wallet and don't buy them. Otherwise some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to ships. There are going to be tradeoffs with each ship that's flown. Otherwise if there were no downsides to certain ships, then that ship would be extremely OP and that's the only ship you would ever see people using. And yeah I get some folks are going to think "well you're a mod you're supposed to defend the company" type sentiment. However I do legitimately like what I see with the Vorcha and Excelsior, and I'm no stranger to telling them they need to up their game if I think it's needed.

    Well you'd have more insight, more or less, than most of us so do tell your reasoning for the subjectively lousy turn-rate & the possible Cryptic reasoning?

    I'm still looking for anything significantly dampened that much on the Excelsior like Vor'cha in an effort to boost something else, hinder it outright or something to counter-balance.

  • kidinthehall#2744 kidinthehall Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    I'm still grabbing this bundle as technically I'm not paying for it, my fiance is for a birthday gift, I really wish Cryptic would reconsider the weapons layout of the B'Rel, I might be able to live with the Vorcha turn rate but the B'Rel layout makes it hard for me to want to use it over my Kelvin D7 or the MatHa Raptor and that sucks cause I love the ENT BoP skin.
  • joshmauljoshmaul Member Posts: 519 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    The fact that scraps were thrown to the other factions doesn't change that in the least.

    I disagree with that assessment, because I think by comparison, all the Klingons have received are scraps. Yes, the remaking of their specific content is a welcome change, and I liked the Klingon elements from Discovery that weren't actually too bad (like the new Boreth, for instance), but it does not change just how neglected the faction is when compared to the three separate-yet-equal Federation factions. Yes, we get it, the Federation is the focus of Star Trek, but... the Romulans got their own EXPANSION, for pity's sake - and up to a point, so did our "hero class", the Jem'Hadar. And while the past two years (and counting) of content have involved Discovery-era Klingons, the key word there is actually "Discovery" rather than "Klingons".
    TW1sr57.jpg
    "There's No Way Like Poway!"

    Real Join Date: October 2010
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    Simply because they didn't give a ship the exact stats you want, it doesn't cater to your particular build style, or it's not designed to reach 40983749873497 zillion DPS, doesn't make it a bad ship.

    There it is.. I was wondering how long until you came around with this same tired script from every previous thread.

    Cryptic releases a ship, people state their opinions, often based on reasonable expectations (like the well established turn rate) and here you come dismissing it all as people just wanting 'uber stuff.' Anytime anyone has an issue with a ship, it's the same thing.. people who aren't happy are wrong, they're just being unreasonable.. people just care about the absolute best power.. blah blah.

    I'll give you credit, at least you're consistent.

    Dismissive and insulting.. but consistent.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 57,971 Community Moderator
    Alright guys... cool off. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on the ship, but stop getting aggressive over it or hyjacking it as a weapon to attack others over in game content.

    As Kirk once said, a ship is a ship.
    Cryptic releases a ship, people state their opinions, often based on reasonable expectations (like the well established turn rate) and here you come dismissing it all as people just wanting 'uber stuff.' Anytime anyone has an issue with a ship, it's the same thing.. people who aren't happy are wrong, they're just being unreasonable.. people just care about the absolute best power.. blah blah.

    I'll give you credit, at least you're consistent.

    Dismissive and insulting.. but consistent.

    There's a difference between simply expressing one's opinion, and weaponizing said opinion. The constant comparisons to other ships highlighting the Legendary Vor'cha's "failures", constant calls of failure, and so on that has been going on in this thread go beyond just expressing an opinion. And all this before anyone actually can get their hands on the ship to give an objective review of its capabilities. Its all based on speculation over stat numbers, which we always know are subject to change before release, and personal bias. And people are taking it too far with using it to launch attacks against Cryptic for "betraying the KDF" once again, as has been common over the Year of Klingon. Darkblade was justified in calling it out in my opinion.

    A Legendary ship doesn't mean it is vastly superior to anything we have already. I personally feel my Vizir Command Assault Cruiser is superior to the Legendary Sovereign because the BOff layout fits MY personal playstyle better. However someone else may like the Legend's BOff layout better than I do. That doesn't make either of our opinions wrong. How said opinion is expressed is just as important as what is being expressed.

    Perhaps if people who had an issue with a ship were more open to discussing how to work with it or improve it in a more constructive manner, we wouldn't be having this particular debate.

    So instead of dissing the ship... could we move on to how we as players can work with it build wise? I personally would find that more interesting than once again pulling out the pitchforks.

    And to start it... I can see a beam build with at least two Fleet Neutroniums with [Turn] and maybe the Tachyokinetic Converter if the turn rate stands as is.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • gaevsmangaevsman Member Posts: 3,190 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    ...some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to ships.
    Some folks have some extremely unreasonable expectations when it comes to anything to do with Klingons. Half the first page was filled with people using their personal dislike for the Legendary Vor'cha as an excuse to rail again about how they don't believe this has been "the Year of Klingon".

    Cheese and crust, people, have you even played a Klingon recruit? Do you have the least idea how thoroughly the entire first three arcs have been rewritten, recoded, and cleaned up? I mean, yes, we still need to do something about the special target aboard Kahless' ship spawning above or below the deck in the Fek'Ihri Return arc, but taking command of your first ship makes much more sense now, you don't have to "prove yourself" with a silly bat'leth competition when you get back to Qo'noS (as if commanding a starship had anything to do with swinging a sword under tightly controlled conditions of no danger), Klingons aren't total jerks when it comes to capturing the DeWitt, her captain doesn't crack and spill Starfleet's security codes at the threat of torture, when you have to rescue the captured warriors after the attack on Utopia Planitia you take your entire task force there instead of stealing a Fed runabout and sneaking in like a bunch of Romulans, the monks of Boreth aren't mysteriously missing when you arrive there, and I don't even know where to start about the improvements to Gre'thor, both in approach to the place and in the execution of its interior spaces.

    This all represents a massive investment of both time and money into the Klingon spaces of the game specifically. I used to code for a living, but not graphics, so I have only an inkling of what was involved here, but I can assure you this isn't the work of just one person chained to a desk somewhere, nor is it the result of someone's "free time". There's tons of work that's been put into it. Personally, I'm not sure I care for the design of the T6 M'Chla refit, but it does kind of grow on you after a while (not unlike a fungus, one supposes), and besides, for me it's only a placeholder until I unlock the Temer. Other than that, fix the two enemies I found spawned into walls (the special target aboard the Batlh and one Hordling that spawned inside a wall in Treachery's chamber, causing me to have to quit and reload the mission), and this will be, in my not so damn humble opinion, just about the perfect "Year of Klingon". The fact that scraps were thrown to the other factions doesn't change that in the least.

    I agree, it's a great work, and i'm having fun playing KDF again.. i did that once, and all my other KDF chars skipped the tutorial, and level them by other means. Now, i'm actually playing the missions again. It's not perfect, but nothing is perfect. This bundle is not perfect, at a lower price i would jump to it.. but as it is.. no, i'll pass.. I dont care about the stats too much, i don care about DPS and other things.. just the ships i like.. i like the ones in the bundle, but i don't like the price.. :wink:
    The forces of darkness are upon us!
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Alright guys... cool off. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on the ship, but stop getting aggressive over it or hyjacking it as a weapon to attack others over in game content.

    As Kirk once said, a ship is a ship.
    Cryptic releases a ship, people state their opinions, often based on reasonable expectations (like the well established turn rate) and here you come dismissing it all as people just wanting 'uber stuff.' Anytime anyone has an issue with a ship, it's the same thing.. people who aren't happy are wrong, they're just being unreasonable.. people just care about the absolute best power.. blah blah.

    I'll give you credit, at least you're consistent.

    Dismissive and insulting.. but consistent.

    There's a difference between simply expressing one's opinion, and weaponizing said opinion. The constant comparisons to other ships highlighting the Legendary Vor'cha's "failures", constant calls of failure, and so on that has been going on in this thread go beyond just expressing an opinion. And all this before anyone actually can get their hands on the ship to give an objective review of its capabilities. Its all based on speculation over stat numbers, which we always know are subject to change before release, and personal bias. And people are taking it too far with using it to launch attacks against Cryptic for "betraying the KDF" once again, as has been common over the Year of Klingon. Darkblade was justified in calling it out in my opinion.

    A Legendary ship doesn't mean it is vastly superior to anything we have already. I personally feel my Vizir Command Assault Cruiser is superior to the Legendary Sovereign because the BOff layout fits MY personal playstyle better. However someone else may like the Legend's BOff layout better than I do. That doesn't make either of our opinions wrong. How said opinion is expressed is just as important as what is being expressed.

    Perhaps if people who had an issue with a ship were more open to discussing how to work with it or improve it in a more constructive manner, we wouldn't be having this particular debate.

    So instead of dissing the ship... could we move on to how we as players can work with it build wise? I personally would find that more interesting than once again pulling out the pitchforks.

    And to start it... I can see a beam build with at least two Fleet Neutroniums with [Turn] and maybe the Tachyokinetic Converter if the turn rate stands as is.

    Don't be ridiculous. We have the info Cryptic has given us. If it is wrong, then please fix it. 6.5 turn is absurdly low. This is the Vor'cha we are talking about, a ship that has always had 10 turn rate in every incarnation. There is nothing wrong with questioning it and criticizing it. There is no clear rationale for the decision based on the rest of the stats for the ship.

    But we know what 6.5 turn rate is like. There is nothing wrong comparing it to ships like the Nimitz/Europa or the D'Khellra. They are extremely similar and 5/3 is not seriously workable in a ship that slow. Telling people to just slot more turn consoles is absolutely not an answer.

    If you slot a 30% turn rate console with 10 base turn rate, you get 13, 3 extra turn rate. If you do that with 6.5, you get to 8.45. Use two and you're at 10.4. So you'd need 2 consoles just to match the BASE turn rate of the original ship which can use those same two consoles and get up to 16 turn rate (and another +2 in offensive configuration) or use other consoles for damage instead. And it is an even worse call to expect every build to run competitive engines.

    There aren't any hidden stats here. We see the huge loss to turn, we see there are no compensating stats that make up for it, and making the ship 5/3 with a 6.5 turn rate is just insulting. Here, enjoy a great weapons layout! Good luck using it better than a 4/4 though.

    But, you want constructive? Go fly a Europa or a Negh'Tev or Kurak or a Qugh, a Ty'Gokor, or better yet, the Vor'ral, and save $150. This L. Vor'cha does not have any serious benefit over those ships, nothing worth the price point.

    Should it? Yes it absolutely should. The original legendaries were all easily improvements over their predecessors (not including the box ships because that is a different animal) looking at the whole ship. The Ross was full command, just a straight upgrade over the Galaxy. The Sovereign was noticeably different, but MW made it a very powerful ship. The Defiant, again straight upgrade.

    The L. Excelsior is clearly better than the Resolute, even with the slightly lowered mobility stats. They aren't slashed nearly in half like the turn rate from the Vor'ral to the L. Vor'cha. If 6.5 were a typo and supposed to be 9.5, there would be nothing to complain about except command.

    Is it a typo? Well is it? By all means get Cryptic to clarify that, because it sticks out like a sore thumb and makes absolutely no sense because none of the other stats on that ship makes up for it at all.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    It is in no way unreasonable for any player to expect more from these ships. These ships are given the label “Legendary,” they are billed as something special and only sold in expensive “mega packs.” Frankly, the thought that anyone doesn’t have the right to demand better from something with this this price point is laughable. Obtaining this ship requires purchase of an entire pack that will range in price from $187 - $250 depending on sale. It’s in no way unreasonable to expect the ships in this bundle to be superior to their $30 ‘common’ counter parts. When Cryptic puts this kind of price on something, they’re saying it’s special so there is nothing wrong with expecting them to deliver and on the Vor’Cha they didn’t.

    Are the ships good? Yes. Can they be built to perform? Yes.. but at this price point is “good” enough?

    No.

    The bottom line is, this is a place for discussion and that’s what people are doing. If they’re happy fine, but those that aren’t are stating their opinion and don’t deserve to be labeled as some kind of elitist for simply wanting value for their money. The only people being ‘aggressive’ are those that are blindly labeling anyone that disagrees with them.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,165 Arc User
    edited February 2021


    Great. Now the people who were upset at the 6.5 can feel better, and the people who were trying their darndest to defend a bad number(because everything has be defended, right?) can stop pretending it wasn't a bad number.
    Post edited by thegrandnagus1 on

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    edited February 2021

    Ok, that makes even less sense. Why 9.5? The baseline for this ship is 10.. I don’t get it.

    It’s better then 6.5.. surely, but still.. I am confused.

    Ultimately, I won’t be buying it, so I guess my confusion is irrelevant, but I really would love to know the rational behind lowering half a point.. it doesn’t even make a difference at that point so why not just give people the 10?

    Still, 9.5 is a big improvement over 6.5 that’s for sure.

    Very odd.. but thanks for pointing it out, and at least Cryptic is listening which they should be credited for. I find the final resolution puzzling, but thank you Kael for relaying it.

    Insert witty signature line here.
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User


    Great. Now the people who were upset at the 6.5 can feel better, and the people who were trying their darndest to defend a bad number can relax.

    Agree. If 9.5 is the true value then this is fine. I'm not excited about command, but the ship is otherwise fit for service.
  • wraithknight#4461 wraithknight Member Posts: 78 Arc User
    I'm glad my Orion flies the Fek'hiri warship and Tarantula or I'd probably rage like you folks are over the "10 turn speed" and "boo hoo wheres my D7?"

    Young people....
  • terranempire#7881 terranempire Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    tumblr_mpioprBeG21qie4ovo3_500.jpg
    I am with Korax on this one. If they fix the turn speed on the Not Legendary'Vorcha and give the Sux-B'rel fore weapons: 5
    & aft weapons: 3 with 3 device slots and remove the experimental with un-nerfed HP hull. Otherwise this is the Year of Klingon Hell.

    The voluntary mods can give example of builds on how to run a pathetic mak'dar themselves.

    Edit: well at least it's 9.5. Why it isn't back at 10... is beyond me. Still a pathetic bundle for Klingons especially the B'rel.
    tumblr_p30rz12vWH1qdb2vqo6_r1_540.gif
    "Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer"
    "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
    #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
  • foppotee#4552 foppotee Member Posts: 1,704 Arc User
    I certainly see the 9.5 turn-rate more in-line & consistent with all the other Vor'cha reiterations paired with these stats.

    I'm still not planning to buy the bundle, I just don't think it has enough value, but for this finer detail I'm glad the error was corrected or it was finally altered.

    With this Vor'cha's "intended" turn-rate, or new turn-rate, & if it had been a MW too like that Excelsior then it would've been far more compelling.

    There's still that clunker B'rel though that stinks.

    What will be the final "legendary" silhouette be? An Aquarius MW Command Carrier Light Escort? A MW Temporal Ambassador? A MW Pilot Odyssey? My fingers are crossed for a MWx2 Steamrunner.

    Tune in next time to find out, & now a word from our sponsors.
  • discojerdiscojer Member Posts: 533 Arc User

    Ok, that makes even less sense. Why 9.5? The baseline for this ship is 10.. I don’t get it.

    It’s better then 6.5.. surely, but still.. I am confused.

    Because they try to "balance" things that way. Like the Inquiry vs the Arbiter. It's bette4r in every conceivable way so they gimped the turn rate slightly. Same with the Legendary Galaxy vs the Yamato
  • ankesorgcallitriankesorgcallitri Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    Star Trek Discovery has been one of the most streamed shows in the world since it came out, and, according to Cryptic, the Discovery content brought in more new players then even Victory is Life did. So no, most people don't hate it. Only a vocal minority does.

    Well look up ratings when they aired the first season on normal tv the first episode had lower ratings then reruns ...
    And as someone else stated it above , it is not unreasonable to expect these ships to be superior to most ships , if u charge insane prices for these bundles, however rich those bundles are with additional content , ppl are forced to pay 250 USD for them, u cant buy them one ship at a time so it is not unreasonable to say these should be in the top 5% of ship as performance goes.
    Making the Vorcha command while the other is an MW isnt fair as well , no one can argue that the 2 are equal , MW is clearly superior yet in the year of klingon we get a lackluster BoP and a command Vorcha , the feds get another MW , and who knows what the Ambassador will be if its the Ambassador , i still hope its another KDF ship like a MW D7 cruiser not flight deck carrier.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    > @darkbladejk said:
    > Simply because they didn't give a ship the exact stats you want, it doesn't cater to your particular build style, or it's not designed to reach 40983749873497 zillion DPS, doesn't make it a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in this game, simply ships that don't work as well for particular play styles. What works well for me as a tank may not work as well for a sci captain, or someone looking for pure energy DPS. I hate the mentality that if something isn't catered 100% to the latest flavor of the month DPS or build, that somehow it's a bad ship. There's more to this game than the damage charts. Simply because they didn't include a ship you like, or they included a ship you don't like, does NOT mean they're ignoring what people want or the requests they're getting. Year of Klingon has not now, nor has it ever been about the ships.



    Did you reply to anybody particular in this thread? I don’t think so because the ship is bad at everything you mention your post.

    Have fun getting and playing it. I will have fun not getting and playing it. What I also will have fun at is to continue to point out every bad ship release that can best be described as a bad joke noob trap in these forums in the future. It’s not remotely worth the price cryptic is asking.
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
This discussion has been closed.