Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 759
# 31
09-19-2012, 07:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexindcobra View Post
What are you talking about? The Excelsior is Engineer heavy. I owned and flew one.
I am uncertain as to what game you are playing? The T5 Excelsior has an 8 Turn Rate, which is the best of all Cruisers. It has a Lieutenant Commander Tactical BOFF slot, giving it access to many good Tactical abilities which other Cruisers do not have. It also has a third Tactical Console slot for added firepower. The Excelsior was the best Federation Tactical Cruiser in the game until the T5.5 Tactical Odyssey was introduced.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 759
# 32
09-19-2012, 07:57 AM
My hope would be that the Ambassador follow suit with the Odyssey and has a store version which is slightly better then any free version we might get in an event. I would like to have multiple Tier versions similar to the Excelsoir. As someone who plays multiple characters a larger variety of Cruisers at T3 would be nice.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,032
# 33
09-19-2012, 08:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrytarg View Post
As much as I like the Ambassador-Class myself, if the ingame-representation of it outclasses the Galaxy-R I'm going to scream
Well the problem I'm seeing with this is that a whole lot of people consider the Galaxy to be the worst T5 ship...yeah pretty much the worst T5 ship peroid.

So no matter how Cryptic were to implement a T5 Ambassador class with 9 console slots and 5 BO slots, in the eyes of those people the Galaxy-R would be outclassed.

So I'd have to ask, would you be one of them?

Or when would you consider the Galaxy-R outclassed?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,032
# 34
09-19-2012, 08:54 AM
Just to throw in something else, this is what the Yamaguchi in the Wolf 359 scenes of the DS9 pilot looked like:

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/442...llambhq001.jpg

it was basically an Ambassador refit with more Galaxy-like features:

-the Nacelles were lowered
-the collectors were more akin to those of the Galaxy
-the deflector was different
-the saucer was moved somewhat

There were also changes to the shuttle bay not visible from this image.

So there must have been enough Ambassadors around to have someone sit down and design an upgrade pattern.
Andthe basic class must have performed well enough to warrant such an upgrade.
Otherwise they'd have just scrapped the entire class instead of refitting it.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 267
# 35
09-19-2012, 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by f2pdrakron View Post
Dan Stahl stated he wanted to make it a Event Ship, in fact the exact quote is.



This was back in June.




Better turn rate and same layout as the Galaxy is not better?
Also lets see, the T5 Excelsior have 39,000 Hull as the T5 Galaxy have ... 40,000, you cannot average it out without being a joke since 500 hull points certainly do not equal 1 turn rate.

Of course that is at T5, nothing says we dont get a T3-4 ship or even lower.



I have been assuming a T5 ship, also dont think they are going to do two visual identical ships even if you can do that with the T5 Excelsior its still using the T3 parts options as each is its own model.

The Ambassador only had one studio model, there were only two modifications after the Enterprise C (that was battle damaged), the Zhukov and the Yamaguchi with the Zhukov being the one with most modifications.

Simply put, there is about as much visual differences of the "cleaned" Enterprise C and the Zhukov as there are of the Enterprise E before and after its refit at Nemesis ... and we know were Cryptic had just stand in the issue of the Sovereign refit.



I never heard of that "plan" since I been hearing about the Ambassador since I joined, only thing I know is that is "in the plans" and its supposed to be gained as a reward, apparently it will be on Season 7.

Of course with this game track record it might come in a box.
The reason I mentioned the possibility for the increased turn rate over a Galaxy is because it's considerably smaller than say, the Sovy (which has the turn rate of 7).

http://trekazoid.files.wordpress.com...24-sheet-8.jpg

http://www.cardassiaprimera.com.ar/G...tics_lcars.jpg

http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars...4-sheet-10.jpg


Devs could make it 7.5ish. The Ambassador's more recent refit saw a 30% boost in engines and speed. The reason I say slightly better than a 7, is because it is not as large as a Sovy. It might even be closer to an Excelsior at an 8.

Do you think we are expecting a ship that's going to BEST the Odyssey or something??? If you don't like the Ambassador "that's cool". But the negativity is hard to digest.

More recent waves of Ambassador Class refits that were documented...

"The remaining Ambassador Class ships would remain in service to supplement the new generation of Akira, Intrepid, Defiant and Sovergin class ships well into the late 2390s, undergoing several major upgrades and refits".

(Star Trek Online Geekipedia).
http://www.stogeek.com/wiki/Ambassador

It would not surprise me to see the Ambassador be a good ship. From 2390's refits to 2400 is not a long time.

Last edited by paragon92518; 09-19-2012 at 10:49 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,032
# 36
09-19-2012, 10:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
The reason I mentioned for the increased turn rate over a Galaxy is because it's considerably smaller than say, the Sovy (which has the turn rate of 7).

http://trekazoid.files.wordpress.com...24-sheet-8.jpg

http://www.cardassiaprimera.com.ar/G...tics_lcars.jpg

http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars...4-sheet-10.jpg
Since when is the Ambassador smaller than the Sovereign?
She's shorter, yes no question.
But there is more to a ship than length.
Saying the Ambassador is smaller than a Sovereign is like saying a stretch limo is bigger than a bus because it's longer.
Length is not the only determining factor because ships actually have 3 dimensions.

http://imageshack.us/a/img706/8012/ambsovcomp.jpg

There's also the mass difference between the two ships.
The TNG Technical Manual gives us a clear mass on the Ambassador class and the Starship Spotter gives us a clear info on the Sovereign.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
They might make it 7.5ish. The Ambassador's last refit saw a boost in engines and speed. The reason I say slightly better than a 7, is because it is not as large as a Sovy. It might even be closer to an Excelsior at an 8.
Not sure there's any canon evidence anywhere whether the Ambassador's engines were in any substantial way upgraded...
In any case the refit version still only has one single engine.
The Sovereign has two rather large inpulse engines.
Combined with the Ambassador's mass which is pretty much half way between the Galaxy and the Sovereign, the turnrate should be 6.5 or at the very best have partiy with the Sovereign.
Anything else seems rather out of place on such a massive ship.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 267
# 37
09-19-2012, 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterde3 View Post
Since when is the Ambassador smaller than the Sovereign?
She's shorter, yes no question.
But there is more to a ship than length.
Saying the Ambassador is smaller than a Sovereign is like saying a stretch limo is bigger than a bus because it's longer.
Length is not the only determining factor because ships actually have 3 dimensions.

http://imageshack.us/a/img706/8012/ambsovcomp.jpg

There's also the mass difference between the two ships.
The TNG Technical Manual gives us a clear mass on the Ambassador class and the Starship Spotter gives us a clear info on the Sovereign.



Not sure there's any canon evidence anywhere whether the Ambassador's engines were in any substantial way upgraded...
In any case the refit version still only has one single engine.
The Sovereign has two rather large inpulse engines.
Combined with the Ambassador's mass which is pretty much half way between the Galaxy and the Sovereign, the turnrate should be 6.5 or at the very best have partiy with the Sovereign.
Anything else seems rather out of place on such a massive ship.
Ambassador is smaller than a Sovreign (check the links, or reference a quick Google search). Size is not the only determining factor. But it does play a significant role. Besides which, even the mass is smaller than a Galaxy or Sovy. So, I cannot expect a turn rate lower than a "7" based on actual information.

The images you used were photo-shoped. The actual numbers are skewed.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,032
# 38
09-19-2012, 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
Ambassador is smaller than a Sovreign (check the links, or reference a quick Google search).
I have and that is what I have come up with after hours of search in several previous discussions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
Size is not the only determining factor. But it does play a significant role. Besides which, even the mass is smaller than a Galaxy or Sovy. So, I cannot expect a turn rate lower than a "7" based on actual information.
The actual information you used is a fancic website with random info.

http://www.stogeek.com/wiki/Star_Tre...ekipedia:About

"The Star Trek Online Geekipedia is not an encyclopedia of Star Trek Canon. Memory Alpha does that exceptionally well already and we have no desire to compete with such an historic and well-developed wiki."

and what does Memory Alpha say?

"The Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual further established that the Galaxy-class was designed to replace the aging Ambassador- and Oberth-classes as primary instruments of Starfleet's exploration programs. (pg. 1) The Technical Manual also explained that during the design phase, the combined vehicle mass of Ambassador was expected to be at least 3.71 million tons."

I do my research.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
The images you used were photo-shoped.
Even the website you linked to gives a height of 125m for the Ambassador and a height of 88 for the Sovereign.
Which are exactly the proportions you end up with when you compare the height of the two ships in my image.
I don't fake size comparisons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paragon92518 View Post
The actual numbers are skewed.
No, I have those books on my shelf.
They are signed-off by the license holders.
What info you use is horribly faulty.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 267
# 39
09-19-2012, 11:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterde3 View Post
I have and that is what I have come up with after hours of search in several previous discussions.



The actual information you used is a fancic website with random info.

http://www.stogeek.com/wiki/Star_Tre...ekipedia:About

"The Star Trek Online Geekipedia is not an encyclopedia of Star Trek Canon. Memory Alpha does that exceptionally well already and we have no desire to compete with such an historic and well-developed wiki."

and what does Memory Alpha say?

"The Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual further established that the Galaxy-class was designed to replace the aging Ambassador- and Oberth-classes as primary instruments of Starfleet's exploration programs. (pg. 1) The Technical Manual also explained that during the design phase, the combined vehicle mass of Ambassador was expected to be at least 3.71 million tons."

I do my research.



Even the website you linked to gives a height of 125m for the Ambassador and a height of 88 for the Sovereign.
Which are exactly the proportions you end up with when you compare the height of the two ships in my image.
I don't fake size comparisons.



No, I have those books on my shelf.
They are signed-off by the license holders.
What info you use is horribly faulty.
Ambassador's length vs. Sovys length (going by even your numbers) still is not even relatively close. Sovy is still considerably longer.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,416
# 40
09-19-2012, 11:30 AM
The Ambassador was designed as the middle step from the Excelsior class and the Galaxy class, I was averaging the differences of stats of those two ships as they are in game since it pretty what the Ambassador was designed as.

The T5 Excelsior is just too good and the T5 Galaxy is too lacking, this makes the averaging quite close to both ships (500 points of hull of difference) were the main difference comes with turn rate but being the same turn rate as the Sovereign/Assault Cruisers was just what happened when I average it out.

misterde3 already did a good job showing how the Ambassador even if shorter have more mass that the Sovereign, LENGTH does not equal MASS.
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 06:14 AM.