Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12
# 1 Overpowered Vesta?
11-02-2012, 10:04 AM
Sci: Built as a Suppot Vessel with POWERFUL shtelds.
Engi: Built as a Exploration Vessel with lots of hull\huge Warp Reactor
Tac: Built as a Support Vessel with Firepower

We should all know this because of our wonderfull Star Trek Shows\Movies.

Getting to the point; What makes the Vesta Class a OP ship? Because of its so called god mode? Its a SCI ship! Its meant to have powerfull shields thanks to the great scientists in the ship. Just because its immune to Damage for probably 30 seconds like the Ablative armor doesn't mean its God like.
Most of the people who point the finger at certain ships and cry overpowered are most likely Tac Captains because their damage won't be able to take someone out in the 60 secons they have before they are fired back upon and destroyed. Its agreable that Tacs are meant to pack a punch. But they are not suppoed to take as much damage as they are giving. But alas not every Tac is capable of such a feat. Same goes for some Sci and even some Eng! Every ship\class has their purpose in the Star Trek Universe\ Game. Being a Sci Captain I for one am proud to finally have a ship than will b able to take some damage as well as give it but because of our extremely reduced hull strength I think its bout time Sci has their one hip that can do some Damage! Eni should be next given their massive tanking abilities maby a better turn rate is in order as well.

The Vest class wll be a big upgrade for All Captains!

Like a wise man once said; " Its not how powerfull your ship is, but how you handle your ship!"
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 891
# 2
11-02-2012, 10:56 AM
It combines the shields and control powers of a science ship with the mobility and firepower of an escort(cannons +sensor analysis +pets) .

Add in pets (Danube or fighters) and its unique blend of console powers, and you have a extremely high DPS ship that can practically hold a target in place indefinitely while also being as close to impervious to attack. And off the off chance you do break down those shields, it can go invulnerable.

That's not even touching on the cannons that are proposed to potentially bypass weapon power and run off aux.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 715
# 3
11-02-2012, 10:59 AM
The only thing I do not like is it?s a sci ship with more tactic slots and more DPS then an assault cruiser! Why would an assault ship made for combat be weaker than a sci ship for exploration? Then again that could just be the assault cruisers are underpowered.

The aux weapons I like and see little wrong with them.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,069
# 4
11-02-2012, 11:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pottsey5g View Post
The only thing I do not like is it?s a sci ship with more tactic slots and more DPS then an assault cruiser! Why would an assault ship made for combat be weaker than a sci ship for exploration? Then again that could just be the assault cruisers are underpowered.

The aux weapons I like and see little wrong with them.
It's not actually a dedicated science ship - they created a new catergory for it. As per the blog:
Quote:
The novels classify the ship as a Multi-Mission Explorer, so we decided to call the entire line Multi-Mission Science Vessels

STAR TREK BATTLES - HIGH DPS PLAYERS NEED NOT APPY
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 715
# 5
11-02-2012, 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by reyan01 View Post
It's not actually a dedicated science ship - they created a new catergory for it. As per the blog:
To me a multi mission ship and one based around being an Explorer is a more generic do a bit at everything not better than a dedicated combat cruiser. Why would it fit heavier weapons and more tactical slots over a dedicated combat ship? Although this is more a moan as how weak dedicated combat cruisers are over how good the Vesta is.

The Vesta has pretty much made combat/Assault cruisers obsolete.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 62
# 6
11-02-2012, 11:00 AM
Vesta (science)
3 tac 2 eng 5 science (+15 aux)
AoE Multi-Heal + boost to particle generators

Vesta (tactical)
4 tac 2 eng 4 science (+10 aux +5 wep)
Death Ray (probably significant power, but not a spinal lance)

Vesta (engineering)
3 tac 3 eng 4 shield (+10 aux +5 shield)
Anti-Control + Reflect Kinetic (torps, mines, repulsors, cutting beam probably all included)

Console Set:

-2 consoles: Faster Slip Stream (only useful for travel unless using all 3 consoles)

-3 consoles: Paladin Style Immunity Bubble (immune to damage since Aux will likely be at 125, can't attack except ramming speed, more than likely)

Cons:
-3 console slots taken up by the set (same issue with Oddy)
-mutual cooldowns for all effects (probably 2 or 3 minutes otherwise its kind of moot to use more than one console).

Pros:
-3x DHC that run off Aux power
-the 3 console shield works off of aux power
-Many Boff/Player abilities are maximized by aux power
-Hangar Bay
-Standard Science ship abilities such as sensor scan and system targeting
-Crazy tanking/healing potential, especially where shields are concerned

Face Value Review:

In one word: Potential. This ship has tons of potential to work exceedingly well in many ways, and I could see myself piloting a very tanky science version with nice fire power and crazy shield strength (paratrinic or reman shields, with shield strength consoles, just for the fun of it). On the other hand, the tactical version could be a shiny new Galaxy-X replacement, moreso than the Chimaera. The main downside are the gimicks and just how useful they might be compared to normal consoles, and all the drain to the aux system could be major unless you spec or equip some EPS boosts. There will also be quite a few things to manage at once, with the hangar bay and science ship abilities, as well as the standard skills. In the right hands this will be an insane ship, otherwise with all the things that could weigh it down, most of them you'll face will be fairly challenging to standard, pretty much like a lockbox ship or similar counterpart.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 32
# 7
11-04-2012, 10:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ortsim View Post
Vesta (science)
3 tac 2 eng 5 science (+15 aux)
AoE Multi-Heal + boost to particle generators

Vesta (tactical)
4 tac 2 eng 4 science (+10 aux +5 wep)
Death Ray (probably significant power, but not a spinal lance)

Vesta (engineering)
3 tac 3 eng 4 shield (+10 aux +5 shield)
Anti-Control + Reflect Kinetic (torps, mines, repulsors, cutting beam probably all included)

Console Set:

-2 consoles: Faster Slip Stream (only useful for travel unless using all 3 consoles)

-3 consoles: Paladin Style Immunity Bubble (immune to damage since Aux will likely be at 125, can't attack except ramming speed, more than likely)

Cons:
-3 console slots taken up by the set (same issue with Oddy)
-mutual cooldowns for all effects (probably 2 or 3 minutes otherwise its kind of moot to use more than one console).

Pros:
-3x DHC that run off Aux power
-the 3 console shield works off of aux power
-Many Boff/Player abilities are maximized by aux power
-Hangar Bay
-Standard Science ship abilities such as sensor scan and system targeting
-Crazy tanking/healing potential, especially where shields are concerned

Face Value Review:

In one word: Potential. This ship has tons of potential to work exceedingly well in many ways, and I could see myself piloting a very tanky science version with nice fire power and crazy shield strength (paratrinic or reman shields, with shield strength consoles, just for the fun of it). On the other hand, the tactical version could be a shiny new Galaxy-X replacement, moreso than the Chimaera. The main downside are the gimicks and just how useful they might be compared to normal consoles, and all the drain to the aux system could be major unless you spec or equip some EPS boosts. There will also be quite a few things to manage at once, with the hangar bay and science ship abilities, as well as the standard skills. In the right hands this will be an insane ship, otherwise with all the things that could weigh it down, most of them you'll face will be fairly challenging to standard, pretty much like a lockbox ship or similar counterpart.
This is a great review of the 3 ships, easy to understand and tons of information, well done. Makes me more want to spend the 5k on all 3 at once. The only thing I see and someothers have pointed out in game was the Hull strength. 27,800 base. The Intrepid has 27k base, the Nebula has 31k base, the Vesta is the same size as the Sovy which has 39k base, maybe bump up the Vesta Hull to say 30k, to me that seems fair ?
U.S.S. HONDA ODYSSEY NCC-170001-F-Odyssey Class
Commanding Officer: Vice Admiral Maximus@blueamdgamer
Dedication Plaque: "By Any Means Necessary" -Malcolm X
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,017
# 8
11-04-2012, 10:39 AM
It could do with bumping up a little , maybe 29k or so , have to keep it low since its a science vessel , but at the same time have to counter all the fancy toys it has , it seems the dev team decided best way to do this was to make it weak hulled .
i suppose its also because hull wise the vesta isnt that much longer than the intrepid stem to stern ( if you discount the pylons and nacelles )

http://www.suricatafx.com/wp-content...etships161.png
12th Fleet
Fleet Captain , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 337
# 9
11-04-2012, 10:45 AM
So what does the introduction of the Vesta mean for the Atrox?

The least they could do is give the Atrox an extra Engineering Console slot or something.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,017
# 10
11-04-2012, 10:48 AM
dont think they'll do anything with it to be honest , unless they add a fleet version
12th Fleet
Fleet Captain , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:16 PM.