Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Shipyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
06-12-2012, 06:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koppenflak
Lends itself well to crowd control, if you ask me. BFAW1, TT1, TT1 <- All ensigns covered, tanking retained, Lieutenant-through-Commander skills open for serious DPS options.
Using BFAW means using beams. This is still an escort, and going beams mean giving up the best burst available.

Its got more survivability than normal, but its not as far out ahead of the pack as it seems.

The final resistance difference between say EPTS 1 / 2 (and 2 is only up part of the time) will work out to about 3 to 4% resistance on an endgame build.

That leaves you with maybe grabbing Aux to SIF 2, which is not a major improvement over Aux to SIF 1 (which the Fleet Escort can grab).

I suppose you could do EPTS 2 & EPTS 3 for a better overall improvment, but that doesn't leave you with much of value at T1 and means no Aux to SIF or RSP.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Koppenflak
Plenty to like...
Oh don't get me wrong, it's a fine looking ship (stat wise), I'm just adding comments to curb some people who seem to be wildly overreacting thinking that this is the second coming of escorts.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
06-12-2012, 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by USS_Ultimatum
You forgot the part where it has a worse than average tac layout with the dreaded 3 Ensign Tac stations.
Man, what?
The MVAM is capable of great DPS, I don't see how changing its layout to add more tanky-ness is a bad thing... And then you add a hangar without any negatives to escort bonuses.


Obviously with the ship not even in the game I'm not going to sit here and say it's overpowered or anything. But it certainly looks like it rises above other ships pretty easily. I can easily see it being strong for any career.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
06-12-2012, 06:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot-Cancer View Post
The dev blog initialially said 36k hull, it was an error.
Ah. Corrected first post. That reduces my interest in it, as I was wanting something a bit more tanky than my Fleet Escort that could still DPS. 36K hull with the high turnrate would have been a bit OP I suppose, but not that far from a D'Kora in Battle Mode for me to have doubted it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
06-12-2012, 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by USS_Ultimatum
Using BFAW means using beams. This is still an escort, and going beams mean giving up the best burst available.

Its got more survivability than normal, but its not as far out ahead of the pack as it seems.

The final resistance difference between say EPTS 1 / 2 (and 2 is only up part of the time) will work out to about 3 to 4% resistance on an endgame build.

That leaves you with maybe grabbing Aux to SIF 2, which is not a major improvement over Aux to SIF 1 (which the Fleet Escort can grab).

I suppose you could do EPTS 2 & EPTS 3 for a better overall improvment, but that doesn't leave you with much of value at T1 and means no Aux to SIF or RSP.

Oh don't get me wrong, it's a fine looking ship (stat wise), I'm just adding comments to curb some people who seem to be wildly overreacting thinking that this is the second coming of escorts.
Oddly enough, I'm not disagreeing on any particular point... Except maybe SIF2. I've always found it a significant step up from 1, and it's doing everything the fleet escort can in just one bridge officer, rather than two.

I think she's very finely balanced, considering what it brings to the table. As a tanking option goes, this one - I feel - is definately a better option than the fleet escort. Less DPS as a consequence (and you'd expect that) but nonetheless a good option for those who might be used to the inherent tanky-ness of cruisers who are looking to get in to escorts.

On the topic of beams though... I've been contemplating a beamscort for a while. This might be the thing to get me started.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
06-12-2012, 07:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithaqua
Oh, I'm so going to have fun with this one.
Here kitty, kitty, kitty, kitty...
Effective though they can be against escorts, the fun tends to dry up when cruisers are involved. I'm sure they'll still be a common sight though. It'll be interesting to see how Advanced Danubes chroniton procs and tractor beams work with an escort. I imagine the havoc they'll wreak with people's defence value combinedwith relatively high DPS could lead to all sorts of big crits.

I'm also curious to see what the torpedo ability's like, wether or not it's designed to smash small craft/spam, or if it's essentially a high grade torpedo spread.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
06-12-2012, 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koppenflak
I think she's very finely balanced, considering what it brings to the table. As a tanking option goes, this one - I feel - is definately a better option than the fleet escort. Less DPS as a consequence (and you'd expect that) but nonetheless a good option for those who might be used to the inherent tanky-ness of cruisers who are looking to get in to escorts.
The lack of an extra CRF2 or CSV2 by the split up Tac BOffs is probably made up with the DPS the fighters put out, at least over time.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
06-12-2012, 07:34 PM
I'm kinda torn.
My defiant retrofit is getting a little long in the tooth. I've been wanting a new escort, and I like the Akira.
Even without the hanger it looks awesome.
But, I've got the Mk XII MACO space and ground sets, so there's not much for me to do but grind for the Omega set.
If i'm gonna grind for another set, it will be the KHG set on my alt.

I really want this ship, but it seems kinda stupid to grind dil for 3 weeks for a ship I'm not gonna fly. I will probably hold off on getting it until there is new space content.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
06-12-2012, 07:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom61 View Post
The lack of an extra CRF2 or CSV2 by the split up Tac BOffs is probably made up with the DPS the fighters put out, at least over time.
Even that may not be necessary.

I could put out the following:

Ensign: Tactical Team 1
Lieutenant: Tactical Team 1, CRF1
Commander: THY1, CRF1, Beam Overload 3, APO:3

I've yet to be convinced that there is any serious difference between CRF1 and 2. At least in the encounters I've had with those I've volunteered to be a pin-cushion for.

I'm postulating, and the above is just an example, but it should be a simple matter of getting two lots of CRF or CSV in to this ship without sacrificing tactical teams.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
06-12-2012, 07:38 PM
Cool Ship, but why has this ship one more Boff than the Atrox Carrier?

This is declassifing the Atrox.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
06-12-2012, 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guili
Cool Ship, but why has this ship one more Boff than the Atrox Carrier?

This is declassifing the Atrox.
This is not uncommon.

While the new Escort-Carrier has more bridge officer slots, that are also - on average - not as high in rank as the bridge officers on the Atrox.

It's a layout mirrored in the Advanced Escort MVAM and Tactical Escort Retro as well:

Departments aside, compare;

Escort Carrier:
Ensign
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Lieutenant Commander
Commander

Prometheus MVAM:
Ensign
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Lieutenant Commander
Commander

And now the Tactical Retrofit:
Ensign
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Lieutenant Commander
Commander

...Seeing a pattern?

Each of the above is a Retrofit escort, tailored to each of the three careers - Science, Tactical and Engineering.

Nothing has been devalued.
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 06:55 AM.