Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 267
Here are 3 different starships. IF ship size (width, length, & mass) are UBER IMPORTANT...then perhaps someone can point out WHY the turn of the Ambassador a (Science oriented) Cruiser is not higher than it currently is (7).

If length, width, height, or mass were the determining factor, than the Devs royally screwed up the Nebula's and the Vesta's turn rates, OR just neglected to up the Ambassador's.

-----------------------

Vesta Class
Dimensions:
height: 128 meters
width: 195 meters
length: 672 meters
decks: 24
3.25 MT
TURN: 12


Nebula Class
Dimensions:
height: 130.43 meters
width: 560 meters
length: 442.44 meters
decks: 34 (42 including pod)
4.047 MT
TURN: 9

Ambassador Class
Dimensions:
height: 125 meters
width: 330 meters
length: 526 meters
decks: 38
3.1 MT
TURN: 7


What do you players think?? Agree?? Disagree?? I sincerely want to hear your answer. Just a yes and a WHY, or a no and a WHY. Do not want to get into a debate thread. Thanks.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/dofftrader/yoreantiques/DOFFtrader.gif

Last edited by paragon92518; 02-19-2013 at 03:17 PM.
Survivor of Remus
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 359
# 2
02-19-2013, 03:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
Here are 3 different starships. IF ship size (width, length, & mass) are UBER IMPORTANT...then perhaps someone can point out WHY the turn of the Ambassador a (Science oriented) Cruiser is not higher than it currently is (7).

If length, width, height, or mass were the determining factor, than the Devs royally screwed up the Nebula's and the Vesta's turn rates, OR just neglected to up the Ambassador's.

-----------------------

Vesta Class
Dimensions:
height: 128 meters
width: 195 meters
length: 672 meters
decks: 24
3.25 MT
TURN: 12


Nebula Class
Dimensions:
height: 130.43 meters
width: 560 meters
length: 442.44 meters
decks: 34 (42 including pod)
4.047 MT
TURN: 9

Ambassador Class
Dimensions:
height: 125 meters
width: 330 meters
length: 526 meters
decks: 38
3.1 MT
TURN: 7


What do you players think?? Agree?? Disagree?? I sincerely want to hear your answer. Just a yes and a WHY, or a no and a WHY. Do not want to get into a debate thread. Thanks.
STO is not a simulation. Turn rates are not derived from real-world physics, nor need they maintain a consistent relationship with length and width (which are not even in-game values). One of the things you've really just kind of ignored here is the ship type, which is tied, more or less, to its turn rate. The Nebula, despite being far more massive than a constitution class ship, has a higher turn rate. Why? It is a Science Vessel and therefore benefits from a science vessel turn rate. The Vesta? Also a science vessel. The Ambassador is not a science vessel. It is a cruiser, so it gets a cruiser-grade turn rate.

Last edited by squatsauce; 02-19-2013 at 03:43 PM.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,581
# 3
02-19-2013, 03:30 PM
+ Ambassador is a older ship then the other 2 so it should not perform as well
Welcome to bugs online were we only fix the bugs you like, and will ignore the ones you hate.
These are the voyages of the USS Farmville. Her 5 year mission is to boldly farm where no one has farmed before.
Say No to ARK
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 553
# 4
02-19-2013, 03:48 PM
The Ambassador class. You got a free ship. Didn't pay a dime for it. Vestas and refit Nebulas/Magellans cost money. Why complain? It looks cool. Can't have everything on a free ship.
Chingachgook told me, Don't try to understand them; and don't try to make them understand you. For they are a breed apart and make no sense.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 298
# 5
02-19-2013, 03:54 PM
Typically the way Cryptic does it, is Escorts turn the best, followed by Science Ships, and lastly cruisers. The Vesta and the Nebula are both Sci ships. The Ambassador is a cruiser. Compare the Galaxy to the Ambassador, or even the Oddy and that would make more sense i'm sure. The Galaxy is a point less at 6, and the Oddy is also 6.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,047
# 6
02-19-2013, 06:15 PM
I'm fine with them increasing the Ambassador's turn rate if it loses 2 of it's 8 weapon mounts. Come on man, comparing the Fatbassador cruiser's turn rate with that of a science ship?
I get that some people are in love with the Ambassador, why I don't know, but I am mystified as to why people think they should get a give away ship made better than the store bought ones.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 267
# 7
02-19-2013, 10:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tancrediiv View Post
The Ambassador class. You got a free ship. Didn't pay a dime for it. Vestas and refit Nebulas/Magellans cost money. Why complain? It looks cool. Can't have everything on a free ship.
I have the fleet ship, and got the modules, so it was not the free version.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/dofftrader/yoreantiques/DOFFtrader.gif
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 8
02-19-2013, 11:24 PM
So to get it straight ? you first compare a cruiser to two science ships...then complain that one of the science ships (that is pretty much obsolete by other ships) does have better turn rate ? seriously ?

Let me show you something else....


Excelsior > Galaxy
Ambassador > Galaxy
Any other ship > Galaxy

On a side note, my Fleet heavy cruiser has the inertia of a Galaxy class, despite beeing 8x smaller.
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 659
# 9
02-20-2013, 12:38 PM
The devs hate cruisers. That is all.
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 02:04 AM.