test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Legendary Vor'cha, massive disappointment

124

Comments

  • nikephorusnikephorus Member Posts: 2,737 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    protoneous wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    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?
    Frankly, I don't give a V. rex's tailfeathers about the turn rate of the Vor'cha. I've only got one Klink who flies cruisers, and he's happily settled into his Khitomer-class.

    It's just maddening to watch people whining about this not being "a real Year of Klingon" when so very, very much has been done with them. For Molor's sake, we even got a new free uniform, upgrades on ship skins, a new T6 raider that only costs the investment of a very little amount of time, and for those jealous of the Fed and Rom ships the ability to command any ship you like! Whaddaya want, bloodwine ice cream?

    Oh wow, ONE new free uniform. Such generosity!
    And what about the "new" raider which is very much NOT a T6? I *fainted* when I saw that!
    And sure, there's sooooo many Klingon players that are incredibly jealous of Fed and Rom ships that the faction-unlock is CERTAINLY for them.

    ... the point is flying so high up over your head, it's practically headed for Mars right now.

    That would make two heads. I'd have to agree with @jonsills . Not only about his choice of ship for a KDF toon but also about the wall of complaints this is turning into.

    Turn rate has been fixed. Not all releases of ships will please everybody. Feedback is good.

    As to the rest, Year of Klingon as a whole represents a lot of work by Cryptic and overall it's been a great experience for me from getting a free ship with withering barrage unlock to remastered missions and an epic series of newer missions. The recruitment rewards that unlock for my entire account and getting to know melee combat is icing on the cake.

    If you don't like this bundle just save up your zen for another bundle. I'm going to 'steal some time' when it comes around again instead.

    I would have like to have seen something different for my recruit as well, but the sky isn't falling.

    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    You wanna hide your head under the sand and pretend that this "Year of Klingon" was anything more than a few revamped assets, butchered episodes, butchered ships (the grand total of 3 we're getting!) and loads of money *wasted* on voice-overs for episodes that are shattering an entire faction for the sake of shattering it, then good for you.

    People have every right to complain and neither you nor anyone else have any right to try and say that they don't.
    If you don't like that people have complaints, then move along and don't interact. It's that simple.
    You like this farce? Good for you. Make your own thread saying how much you like it. Again: it's that simple.

    I have to agree. I was pretty excited for this event and it's been underwhelming. The special assassination missions end around the second story arc and are just forgotten (was hoping for a little more story around this, but it was like they couldn't even bother to do much with it). The legendary pack for me at least is pretty disappointing. When I first saw it I thought "why are there fed ships in this pack?" Then I thought; "It's fine we're gonna get a great B'rel and Vorcha at least." Nope they are both pretty terrible. If this event is suppose to help bring people to the KDF side I don't think it will succeed in that. Once players finish with the rewards or get frustrated trying to ambush kill stuff because dialogue boxes keep breaking cloak they will go back to the fed side since there is really zero to keep them playing a kdf character.
    Tza0PEl.png
  • mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 179 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    The only reality I see is a bunch of whiny clowns who didn't get enough ships this year and are throwing a fit because of it.

    Oh man. Stuff just got real.

    MltysVY.gif

  • jexsamxjexsamx Member Posts: 2,797 Arc User
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    Oh man. Stuff just got real.

    But am I wrong?
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    The only reality I see is a bunch of whiny clowns who didn't get enough ships this year and are throwing a fit because of it. There has been more Klingon content and updates in the last year than there has been in the last five (at least) in every category except ships, but because they can't fly most of it, they just ignore it. So MuCh FoR tHe YeAr Of ThE kLiNgOn

    For what it's worth, I think this bundle is tone deaf garbage too and the Vor'cha is particularly disappointing even with the updated turn rate. I just find this whole idea that the Year of the Klingon has been anything other than that to be tiresome and willfully ignorant.

    The KDF got exactly 1 ship so far in the YotK, 3 counting the legendary bundle. In the last year the Feds got what 13? 15? Now you and others can point to the KDF updates in content and so forth, and that's great, however, I don't know about you, but I don't run KDF missions every day over and over again.

    I do fly KDF ships every day, though, so the lack of new KDF ships during the year of the Klingon is particularly noticeable. I dare say for most people, because the ship is what you are in all day every day, the ship is the major piece of content that outweighs any mission updates or other refinements. I take my Vor'ral into the Badlands, into the Dyson Sphere, into any mission, into the Delta quadrant, into the Gamma quadrant, against the Borg, against the Voth, against the Tzenkethi, etc.

    My ship is the biggest single piece of content I'm interacting with every day, whatever ship it happens to be. It isn't hard to understand why people place far higher value on ships than the other content in game, and thus why people expected some significant KDF ship releases during the YotK.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,114 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    Oh man. Stuff just got real.

    But am I wrong?

    It's true that video game forums are full of people whining.

    Some people whine about (some issue) they have with the game.

    Other people whine about the other people whining.

    Is whining about (some issue) with a video game silly? Maybe.

    But whining about the other people whining about a video game is just as silly.

    And yep, I'm silly too. But at least I realize the neither group of whiners has any kind of 'moral superiority' over the other.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • jennycolvinjennycolvin Member Posts: 1,099 Arc User
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    jexsamx wrote: »
    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    The only reality I see is a bunch of whiny clowns who didn't get enough ships this year and are throwing a fit because of it.

    Oh man. Stuff just got real.

    MltysVY.gif

    Nah mate. It's not worth my time or my effort to try and reason with someone that resorts to insulting others just because *shocked gasp* they dare to think differently - even if they have all the proof in the world at their disposal.

    But what do I know, I'm just a "whiny clown" for stating my opinion.
    kv1Ohsx.png
    Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.

    Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
    - quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;

    Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
    Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
  • fallenkezef#4581 fallenkezef Member Posts: 644 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    The only reality I see is a bunch of whiny clowns who didn't get enough ships this year and are throwing a fit because of it. There has been more Klingon content and updates in the last year than there has been in the last five (at least) in every category except ships, but because they can't fly most of it, they just ignore it. So MuCh FoR tHe YeAr Of ThE kLiNgOn

    For what it's worth, I think this bundle is tone deaf garbage too and the Vor'cha is particularly disappointing even with the updated turn rate. I just find this whole idea that the Year of the Klingon has been anything other than that to be tiresome and willfully ignorant.

    The KDF got exactly 1 ship so far in the YotK, 3 counting the legendary bundle. In the last year the Feds got what 13? 15? Now you and others can point to the KDF updates in content and so forth, and that's great, however, I don't know about you, but I don't run KDF missions every day over and over again.

    I do fly KDF ships every day, though, so the lack of new KDF ships during the year of the Klingon is particularly noticeable. I dare say for most people, because the ship is what you are in all day every day, the ship is the major piece of content that outweighs any mission updates or other refinements. I take my Vor'ral into the Badlands, into the Dyson Sphere, into any mission, into the Delta quadrant, into the Gamma quadrant, against the Borg, against the Voth, against the Tzenkethi, etc.

    My ship is the biggest single piece of content I'm interacting with every day, whatever ship it happens to be. It isn't hard to understand why people place far higher value on ships than the other content in game, and thus why people expected some significant KDF ship releases during the YotK.

    There was a mission I replayed often, the assault on Mars. The "year of the klingon" butchery destroyed that mission.
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    The reality of the situation is there for everyone to see.

    The only reality I see is a bunch of whiny clowns who didn't get enough ships this year and are throwing a fit because of it. There has been more Klingon content and updates in the last year than there has been in the last five (at least) in every category except ships, but because they can't fly most of it, they just ignore it. So MuCh FoR tHe YeAr Of ThE kLiNgOn

    For what it's worth, I think this bundle is tone deaf garbage too and the Vor'cha is particularly disappointing even with the updated turn rate. I just find this whole idea that the Year of the Klingon has been anything other than that to be tiresome and willfully ignorant.

    The KDF got exactly 1 ship so far in the YotK, 3 counting the legendary bundle. In the last year the Feds got what 13? 15? Now you and others can point to the KDF updates in content and so forth, and that's great, however, I don't know about you, but I don't run KDF missions every day over and over again.

    I do fly KDF ships every day, though, so the lack of new KDF ships during the year of the Klingon is particularly noticeable. I dare say for most people, because the ship is what you are in all day every day, the ship is the major piece of content that outweighs any mission updates or other refinements. I take my Vor'ral into the Badlands, into the Dyson Sphere, into any mission, into the Delta quadrant, into the Gamma quadrant, against the Borg, against the Voth, against the Tzenkethi, etc.

    My ship is the biggest single piece of content I'm interacting with every day, whatever ship it happens to be. It isn't hard to understand why people place far higher value on ships than the other content in game, and thus why people expected some significant KDF ship releases during the YotK.

    There was a mission I replayed often, the assault on Mars. The "year of the klingon" butchery destroyed that mission.

    I agree.
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,485 Arc User
    You can tell people don't read or make their own assumptions of things that are.

    It's 'Year of Klingon: NOT ' Year of THE Hlingon'.
    '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
  • doctorstegidoctorstegi Member Posts: 960 Arc User
    B)

    C-Store Inc. is still looking for active members on the fed side. If you don't have a fleet feel free to contact me in game @stegi.
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,351 Community Moderator
    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.

    Now that folks know the Vorcha turn rate was a typo and is actually 9.5 instead of 6.5, I dare say this pretty much nullifies this argument on turn rate. Had it legitimately been 6.5 instead of the 9.5, this argument still would have failed to hold any weight. Having a slower turn rate doesn't preclude a 5/3 layout from working great on a ship. The fact that folks can run cannons successfully on the Vaadwaur Juggernaut nullifies all arguments stating the 5/3 layout wouldn't have worked on the Vorcha. Folks stating they didn't like the turn rate would have been a valid criticism since it would have been a large departure from previous. Folks saying they don't think it would have been a good idea to mount cannons also would have been a fair criticism. But to say the ship as a whole would have been rendered useless would have been a baseless argument by the logic folks were using. Since this argument has been rendered moot by it being revealed to be a typo, I see no further reason to comment on this particular argument further.
    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.
    Define "reasonable expectations" because I already know your standard and my standard are two different things. I stand by my statement that just because a ship differs from someone's expectations, or doesn't cater to someone's build style in the exact way they wanted it, does not make any ship a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in game, simply those that don't cater to a particular person's playstyle.

    As for folks "just wanting uber stuff" as you put it, I stand by my assertions. I can't tell you the number of times I have seen people complain about a ship for one reason or another and try to assert it's objectively bad, and pass on the ship purchase. That or they buy the ship anyways despite them having said the ship is objectively bad, and make some kind of excuse of "I'm a completionist" or "I wanted ship X from the pack and couldn't buy it solo." At least the second example is a legitimate argument but still a contradiction as they're rewarding what they consider bad development or similar. Fast forward a few weeks or months and someone discovers come kind of new OP combo or build that calls for that ship. The same folks that were bashing the ship previously are now singing the ship's praises. The one's that bought the ship previously talk a big game like they knew it was going to be this big sleeper hit the entire time or they knew about the potential for a flavor of the month combo to be discovered. The one's who don't have it then go to purchase the ship, and woe be unto Cryptic if they dare not have the pack in the Cstore at the time. Because then it becomes "they never have the legendary pack's around enough" or similar excuses. I've seen it many times here on this forum, in various social media groups dedicated to the game, and even in my own fleet from time to time.

    There is also a huge difference in someone giving an opinion, and trying to assert that same opinion as objective fact on why the ship is supposedly bad. If someone were to say, "I don't like the Vorcha because it's boff setup isn't ideal for what I want to do, and I would have preferred it be Miracle Worker primary instead of Command," they are giving valid opinion based criticisms to why they don't like the ship. If on the other hand they say "the Vorcha is a terrible ship because it should have been a Miracle Worker primary instead of Command because Command sucks, and we can't get Narrow Sensor Bands III. So it's a bad ship and anyone who buys it is supporting bad design," that's them trying to assert their own subjective opinion as objective fact. There is a HUGE difference between giving an opinion on why one doesn't like a ship, and trying to assert that opinion as objective fact that applies to everyone else.
    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.
    Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point. Just because you don't like a particular ship doesn't make it an objectively bad ship. That's the ship existing and you being offended by it. It means nothing. As I said above, if one says "I don't the ship because I can't get my full preferred build onto the ship," that's a fair argument. Saying "it's not worth the price" is a fair opinion based argument. However to assert it as objectively bad because you personally don't like the ship's stats is a baseless argument. If you don't like the ship, you're entitled to that opinion, but you have that opinion doesn't make you correct or the ship bad. It's the ship existing and you having an opinion. Not everyone is going to like every ship, and not every ship is meant for every person. Your way of building ships is not the only way of building, nor is it the "correct" way just because you're the one building it.
    "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
  • doctorstegidoctorstegi Member Posts: 960 Arc User
    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.

    Now that folks know the Vorcha turn rate was a typo and is actually 9.5 instead of 6.5, I dare say this pretty much nullifies this argument on turn rate. Had it legitimately been 6.5 instead of the 9.5, this argument still would have failed to hold any weight. Having a slower turn rate doesn't preclude a 5/3 layout from working great on a ship. The fact that folks can run cannons successfully on the Vaadwaur Juggernaut nullifies all arguments stating the 5/3 layout wouldn't have worked on the Vorcha. Folks stating they didn't like the turn rate would have been a valid criticism since it would have been a large departure from previous. Folks saying they don't think it would have been a good idea to mount cannons also would have been a fair criticism. But to say the ship as a whole would have been rendered useless would have been a baseless argument by the logic folks were using. Since this argument has been rendered moot by it being revealed to be a typo, I see no further reason to comment on this particular argument further.
    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.
    Define "reasonable expectations" because I already know your standard and my standard are two different things. I stand by my statement that just because a ship differs from someone's expectations, or doesn't cater to someone's build style in the exact way they wanted it, does not make any ship a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in game, simply those that don't cater to a particular person's playstyle.

    As for folks "just wanting uber stuff" as you put it, I stand by my assertions. I can't tell you the number of times I have seen people complain about a ship for one reason or another and try to assert it's objectively bad, and pass on the ship purchase. That or they buy the ship anyways despite them having said the ship is objectively bad, and make some kind of excuse of "I'm a completionist" or "I wanted ship X from the pack and couldn't buy it solo." At least the second example is a legitimate argument but still a contradiction as they're rewarding what they consider bad development or similar. Fast forward a few weeks or months and someone discovers come kind of new OP combo or build that calls for that ship. The same folks that were bashing the ship previously are now singing the ship's praises. The one's that bought the ship previously talk a big game like they knew it was going to be this big sleeper hit the entire time or they knew about the potential for a flavor of the month combo to be discovered. The one's who don't have it then go to purchase the ship, and woe be unto Cryptic if they dare not have the pack in the Cstore at the time. Because then it becomes "they never have the legendary pack's around enough" or similar excuses. I've seen it many times here on this forum, in various social media groups dedicated to the game, and even in my own fleet from time to time.

    There is also a huge difference in someone giving an opinion, and trying to assert that same opinion as objective fact on why the ship is supposedly bad. If someone were to say, "I don't like the Vorcha because it's boff setup isn't ideal for what I want to do, and I would have preferred it be Miracle Worker primary instead of Command," they are giving valid opinion based criticisms to why they don't like the ship. If on the other hand they say "the Vorcha is a terrible ship because it should have been a Miracle Worker primary instead of Command because Command sucks, and we can't get Narrow Sensor Bands III. So it's a bad ship and anyone who buys it is supporting bad design," that's them trying to assert their own subjective opinion as objective fact. There is a HUGE difference between giving an opinion on why one doesn't like a ship, and trying to assert that opinion as objective fact that applies to everyone else.
    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.
    Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point. Just because you don't like a particular ship doesn't make it an objectively bad ship. That's the ship existing and you being offended by it. It means nothing. As I said above, if one says "I don't the ship because I can't get my full preferred build onto the ship," that's a fair argument. Saying "it's not worth the price" is a fair opinion based argument. However to assert it as objectively bad because you personally don't like the ship's stats is a baseless argument. If you don't like the ship, you're entitled to that opinion, but you have that opinion doesn't make you correct or the ship bad. It's the ship existing and you having an opinion. Not everyone is going to like every ship, and not every ship is meant for every person. Your way of building ships is not the only way of building, nor is it the "correct" way just because you're the one building it.

    I agree though the Vor'cha looks doable now since they "fixed" that turn rate to 9.5. That makes it for me actually better then the other T6 Version. While I'm not a fan of Command and would have preferred something else its still useable. Though the overall value of this pack is still garbage for me. I don't care about the gamble junk in it for me its 22x no win, so worthless. Upgrade token to T6x I don't need I got plenty in the bank and T6 Coupons? Well if you have all the Ships you want from the Zen Store they don't do me any good. There is probably not so many normal T6 ships coming out. If I can trade them then fine they do actually have some value other then that no. Considering they gave 10 ships last year for 750zen more and now give 4 ships + 2 inferior ship coupons the value of this pack is still TRIBBLE. I'm not even going into the Year of Klingon and KDF Ships because I know for years they don't give a darn about KDF and never did. If it wasn't for Discovery we wouldn't even get a Year of the Klingon so they could address and maybe impress potential new Players. They bring out broken stuff for the Anniversary and put a insane price tag on a 4 ship legendary bundle during a pandemic. The servers are laggy as tribble since a while now again and makes playing the game very little enjoyable. There is a good reason for people to complain and as some people pointed out the ship stats for Legendary Ships are medioca and we all know by now that Legendary Ships are their T7 Ships because they know if they would have called them that they would have lost a massive amount of players again as they did with the Delta Rising T5 to T6 upgrade.
    C-Store Inc. is still looking for active members on the fed side. If you don't have a fleet feel free to contact me in game @stegi.
  • mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 179 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    > @darkbladejk said:
    > Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point.

    Am I the only person who thinks that mods shouldn't be so obviously trying to dunk on someone? Maybe?
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,913 Arc User
    Define "reasonable expectations" because I already know your standard and my standard are two different things. I stand by my statement that just because a ship differs from someone's expectations, or doesn't cater to someone's build style in the exact way they wanted it, does not make any ship a bad ship. There are no objectively bad ships in game, simply those that don't cater to a particular person's playstyle.

    Here is the problem.. you're attacking a point no one is making.

    No one is saying that these ships aren't viable, no one is saying they can't be used well. The issue with these ships.. again.. is the price point value they offer and in this case, that value is low. Yes, they might appeal to a certain play style but these ships offer nothing new or special which means that other ships also appeal to that play style at a much lower price point. These ships come with a premium price tag, and nothing else.

    What I am tired of hearing is the thought that anyone who expresses an opinion other then 'greatest thing ever' is just being negative. People should be allowed view points other then 'this is great' and anytime anyone has a view contrary to that, they are attacked and labeled. Your entire post is a long winded way of saying that if you don't think these ships are great you're wrong.
    There is also a huge difference in someone giving an opinion, and trying to assert that same opinion as objective fact on why the ship is supposedly bad. If someone were to say, "I don't like the Vorcha because it's boff setup isn't ideal for what I want to do, and I would have preferred it be Miracle Worker primary instead of Command," they are giving valid opinion based criticisms to why they don't like the ship. If on the other hand they say "the Vorcha is a terrible ship because it should have been a Miracle Worker primary instead of Command because Command sucks, and we can't get Narrow Sensor Bands III. So it's a bad ship and anyone who buys it is supporting bad design," that's them trying to assert their own subjective opinion as objective fact. There is a HUGE difference between giving an opinion on why one doesn't like a ship, and trying to assert that opinion as objective fact that applies to everyone else.

    Had someone said that ""I don't like the Vorcha because it's boff setup isn't ideal for what I want to do, and I would have preferred it be Miracle Worker primary instead of Command" you would just insert your opinion that they wanted Miracle Worker because it's 'the best' and they're being petty. There are several comments on here that fit your very definition of of 'objective' that you attack anyway because you turn that objectivity into the ranting you choose to hear.

    And for the record 'good or bad' is only opinion to a point. The game has an established baseline for abilities, there are some that perform well and some that perform poorly. These facts can be mathematically documented and have been on many occasions. If a ship release is only capable of using the abilities that have already been considered by the majority to be 'bad' then yes.. that ship is 'bad.' The idea that there can never be such thing as a 'bad' ship or a 'bad' console, trait, etc is simply not true. This however, is not the case here because no one thinks these ships are incapable of completing game content, that's never been an issue. The issue is that they meet that standard but do nothing to surpass it despite their premium price tag.

    Again, there is no wrong doing in expecting to get more when you pay more. People are not wrong for wanting value for their money. As individual 3k Zen ships, these releases are just fine.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • kurtronkurtron Member Posts: 161 Arc User
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    > @darkbladejk said:
    > Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point.

    Am I the only person who thinks that mods shouldn't be so obviously trying to dunk on someone? Maybe?

    Nope
  • sthe91sthe91 Member Posts: 4,244 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    > @darkbladejk said:
    > Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point.

    Am I the only person who thinks that mods shouldn't be so obviously trying to dunk on someone? Maybe?

    When he comments on what he thinks about STO as a player, he is not being a mod. He becomes a mod, when he needs to as his job entails. Remember he is a STO player as well and not just a mod.
    Where there is a Will, there is a Way.
  • kidinthehall#2744 kidinthehall Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    > @mattingly1 said:
    > > @darkbladejk said:
    > > Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point.
    >
    > Am I the only person who thinks that mods shouldn't be so obviously trying to dunk on someone? Maybe?
    >

    You'll be fine.
  • payback99payback99 Member Posts: 40 Arc User
    sthe91 wrote: »
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    > @darkbladejk said:
    > Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point.

    Am I the only person who thinks that mods shouldn't be so obviously trying to dunk on someone? Maybe?

    When he comments on what he thinks about STO as a player, he is not being a mod. He becomes a mod, when he needs to as his job entails. Remember he is a STO player as well and not just a mod.

    Yeah and one that has clearly invested too much time and money in the game to accept any criticism against it while maintaining a professional manner. Just look at the difference between their posts and the other mod in the thread who while also defending the ship still acts professional and like an actual mod.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,913 Arc User
    As far as Moderator Status goes, I don't believe anyone is doing anything out of line. As said before, Mods are still just STO players like the rest of us, they have the same right to post their opinions as anyone else, even if I don't agree with that opinion. Dark hasn't done anything 'out of bounds,' his comments are in line with the same things the rest of us post every day. He's not deleting comments or locking the thread to get the last word, there is no abuse of power in disagreeing with people.

    As far as hostility, lets just remember that text does not denote tone. Tone of voice is a big part of human interaction and it's one we lack on a web forum. You can read a post in a calm tone and it sounds completely different then if you read it in an aggressive tone. This happens to me all the time, I post something I think is perfectly benign and someone blows up at me for insulting them. I was genuinely perplexed by the earlier warning because I was choosing to read things in a calm voice, others apparently were not.

    I disagree with him, but his moderator status isn't really a factor here, it's fine. I am one of the main people he's disagreed with and I don't feel the least bit insulted.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • cbrjwrrcbrjwrr Member Posts: 2,782 Arc User
    I'm sure I'm not the only one, but once the Fed Legendary bundle came out, and all this year of Klingon thing started, I decided that the KDF Legendary bundle would be something I would get as soon as it was available; I've had 25k Zen sat in my account ever since November specifically for this. (the first Zen sale I knew about since the Fed bundle)

    That Fed bundle?

    3 of those ships were otherwise promo ships to get; Connie, Donnie and Crossfield. The Konnie was a lockbox ship, and the NX is Lobi. That's five ships that otherwise cost best part of the 20k asking price each, and as only single character unlocks.

    Further, having the console and trait from the Vizer - which until it was put in the C-Store at 14k Zen, was otherwise approaching the cheaper end of the five mentioned earlier in cost - for the Sovvy, the best version of the Oddy, a much better version of the Galaxy, Miracle Worker Intrepid and Defiant overhaul meant that even the C-Store Plus releases had value for being serious upgrades to the older ships.

    As a result, the just the ships bundle represented the best value of anything in the C-Store.

    This bundle however?

    Near enough the same asking price as the Fed "just the ships" bundle, with just four ships, two T6 ship tokens, some ship upgrade tokens, one uniform, and a whole bunch of stuff I have to liquidate (keys, promo R&D packs etc.) to recoup some of the cost, with an estimate of best part of 40+ days turning in contraband even with 40+ characters. I don't even have to rationalise spending real money to justify the pack, as I already bought that Zen - I can't rationalise away spending the Zen I bought specifically for this pack, on this pack.

    Ultimately I only have myself to blame; I don't dispute that, caveat emptor etc. and all. But having a player who was enthusiastic enough to buy in advance, left so disappointed, is not good.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,273 Arc User
    cbrjwrr wrote: »
    I'm sure I'm not the only one, but once the Fed Legendary bundle came out, and all this year of Klingon thing started, I decided that the KDF Legendary bundle would be something I would get as soon as it was available; I've had 25k Zen sat in my account ever since November specifically for this. (the first Zen sale I knew about since the Fed bundle)

    That Fed bundle?

    3 of those ships were otherwise promo ships to get; Connie, Donnie and Crossfield. The Konnie was a lockbox ship, and the NX is Lobi. That's five ships that otherwise cost best part of the 20k asking price each, and as only single character unlocks.

    Further, having the console and trait from the Vizer - which until it was put in the C-Store at 14k Zen, was otherwise approaching the cheaper end of the five mentioned earlier in cost - for the Sovvy, the best version of the Oddy, a much better version of the Galaxy, Miracle Worker Intrepid and Defiant overhaul meant that even the C-Store Plus releases had value for being serious upgrades to the older ships.

    As a result, the just the ships bundle represented the best value of anything in the C-Store.

    This bundle however?

    Near enough the same asking price as the Fed "just the ships" bundle, with just four ships, two T6 ship tokens, some ship upgrade tokens, one uniform, and a whole bunch of stuff I have to liquidate (keys, promo R&D packs etc.) to recoup some of the cost, with an estimate of best part of 40+ days turning in contraband even with 40+ characters. I don't even have to rationalise spending real money to justify the pack, as I already bought that Zen - I can't rationalise away spending the Zen I bought specifically for this pack, on this pack.

    Ultimately I only have myself to blame; I don't dispute that, caveat emptor etc. and all. But having a player who was enthusiastic enough to buy in advance, left so disappointed, is not good.

    This is a great point... this leg pack includes no golden unicorns. No Lobi, no promo... all zen store ships with a small stat bump and or shift.

    The other legendary packs had unicorns. Even the Romulan pack included the T'liss promo ship (one of the best ships in the game that was beyond most players means being promo) The disco ship was lockbox.

    This pack could have included any number of decent yet long in the tooth KDF lockbox or even promo ship. The D4x... the D7 both would have been good options. Really this pack should include both the D4x and the D7 to be a worthy equal to last years fed pack. Without them the value is extremely lackluster.... I mean a slightly upgraded vorcha, and a brel which although its pretty is going to be outdone by the free giveaway 11th bday ship. All for basically the same price as last years fed ulti pack, filled with promo and lockbox ship for account unlock.

    The more I look at it the more this pack annoys me.
  • ankesorgcallitriankesorgcallitri Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    Well sadly the fact that you are disappointed is irrelevant to them , they got your money the rest is ....
    This bundle is what they think the year of klingon deserves in a world of federation.... i still remember when the game was still monthly sub based only and it was nicknamed World of Federation.
    The fed ship now those are legendary ships , these are "good enough" , well if good enough is what KDF players deserve they need to vote with there money.
    Fact is i am not even predominantly a KDF player , i just wanted a nice looking (yes that is important for me) KDF design , i understand some can stommack de MW battlecruiser KDF design , i cannot.
    I leveled up my Gagarin for the trait and made the mistake to fit it with MW skills for that short time and ofc it felt good, then i was kinda sad putting it away. Then i see the leggo bundle announced and i was like Yess! And waited patiently to see the ships announced , BoP well i didnt even look at stats i am not interested but who knows it must be good its a legendary ship and the design is epic , ok ok next, an MW fed ship which fits nicely in my playstyle so what can it be the KDF counter to that a MW D7 , a proper cruiser not carrier , or an MW Vorcha , well it turns out KDF can have a Command Vorcha instead because that is clearly on par with the fed ship.
    So all i dared to hope is equal treatment , i didnt even raise an eyebrow why the year of klingon KDF bundle even has fed ships in it but hey , all i personally wanted a good looking KDF designed MW ship to grind out those 50 endeavor levels....
    I dont think i am so alone in my point
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    Seems I struck a nerve there. Though you proved my point. Just because you don't like a particular ship doesn't make it an objectively bad ship. That's the ship existing and you being offended by it. It means nothing. As I said above, if one says "I don't the ship because I can't get my full preferred build onto the ship," that's a fair argument. Saying "it's not worth the price" is a fair opinion based argument. However to assert it as objectively bad because you personally don't like the ship's stats is a baseless argument. If you don't like the ship, you're entitled to that opinion, but you have that opinion doesn't make you correct or the ship bad. It's the ship existing and you having an opinion. Not everyone is going to like every ship, and not every ship is meant for every person. Your way of building ships is not the only way of building, nor is it the "correct" way just because you're the one building it.

    By laying words into other players mouths you don’t strike any nerves here you just appear to me as someone who seems to have been traumatised by some evil DPSer in the past . If that’s the case I feel sorry for you but hey, it wasn’t me. ;)

    Of course my opinion is SUBJECTIVE when it comes to new ship releases. It is the very aspect of the forums to bring my subjective opinion out of 9 full years’ worth of STO experience here and to help everybody who reads it to make a purchase decision out of it. My considerations include, but are not limited to:

    1) How many different activities can one pursue how well on the ship? -> not many to none
    2) Does the release offer anything new compared to what we already got? -> nope, its 3 steps backwards
    3) What price do they ask for it? -> they have clearly lost their senses
    4) Is something mislabeled or advertised wrong to give us a false impression? -> Yep, to make it an unrespectful noob trap

    As far as the >LEGENDARY< Vor’cha is concerned, yes, it is perfectly unsuited to bring any DPS nightmares of yours to life! Unfortunately, it also remains BAD at everything else I could possibly want to do with it so my subjective lable stands and will continue to do so for every BAD release they throw at us in the future.

    Good lord, the turnrate is a bit better now and it its the first Vor'cha with a working cloak. As if it would change anything. I could not even think of a more suited word than BAD when it comes to this release.
    Post edited by peterconnorfirst on
    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
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited February 2021
    In another thread its mentioned that they will throw in 500 lobi in the 11th ani pack as an additional sale argument.

    While the offer is still not good enough for me to get the pack I feel completely justified to continue to point out BAD offers like the one we got here in the future as cryptic seems to need our help to understand what’s worth getting for players and what not.

    I strongly hope that everybody around here will never stop to state that poo poo stinks and does not taste like delicious chocolate pudding! Do so because it helps!
    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
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,913 Arc User
    I strongly hope that everybody around here will never stop to state that poo poo stinks and does not taste like delicious chocolate pudding! Do so because it helps!

    The only thing that will ultimately effect change is if dissatisfied players don't buy the pack. Despite my differences in philosophy with another person on this forum, that's one thing we do agree on. Players should vote with their wallets, everything else is just noise.

    I don't ultimately wish financial failure upon those that run Star Trek Online as I enjoy playing this game. Players however, should consider that future sales are influenced heavily by what's sold previously. If you agree that this pack doesn't represent a good value, don't buy it. If you do, then simply put.. you have no right to complain.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • fallenkezef#4581 fallenkezef Member Posts: 644 Arc User
    They are getting desperate now, adding 500 lobi to the bundle.

    Seems they realise how universaly hated this bundle is but don't wan't to actualy fix it.
  • husanakxhusanakx Member Posts: 1,273 Arc User
    I strongly hope that everybody around here will never stop to state that poo poo stinks and does not taste like delicious chocolate pudding! Do so because it helps!

    The only thing that will ultimately effect change is if dissatisfied players don't buy the pack. Despite my differences in philosophy with another person on this forum, that's one thing we do agree on. Players should vote with their wallets, everything else is just noise.

    I don't ultimately wish financial failure upon those that run Star Trek Online as I enjoy playing this game. Players however, should consider that future sales are influenced heavily by what's sold previously. If you agree that this pack doesn't represent a good value, don't buy it. If you do, then simply put.. you have no right to complain.

    The frustrating thing is.... when it doesn't sell it will be because "Klingon stuff doesn't sell".

    We have seen this happen time and time over a decade now. Give the Klingon some inferior bit of kit.... it doesn't sell... blame that on low Klingon uptake.

    Everytime they have flirted with something decent on the KDF side they have backtracked or added some obtuse handicap. Goes all the way back to the first updates of ships like the brel years back. Always had to ensure the Klingon stuff was just a little bit broken. From putting broken cloaks on everything that wasn't a raider... and then handicapping the raiders to all grethor even as escort class ships got buffs and even proper cloaks. Then they slapped the KDF right in the face with Romulans. I mean yes you can fly a KDF aligned Romulan but WHY ? I mean this recruit bride officer is another great example... finally a true Klingon toon can have a Infiltrator boff and more or less = the cloaking ability of a romulan toon. But they don't add it as an account unlock. I have multiple old KDF toons that I would have been excited to spend time and money on bringing them up to 2021 standards.... had I been able to claim a Sup inf for them. As it stands they will continue to be part of my Farm. Cryptic had an opportunity to turn probably a bunch of old KDF players farms into resource gobblers. BUT that would be giving something decent to longtime KDF players. I mean what is the fear... PvP is still dead last I checked, there is no incoming wave of kerrat tears because the 11 year old toon now has a proper ambush bonus. NO more then normal anyway cause anyone that really wants to play such a role already has Romulan KDF toons.
Sign In or Register to comment.