Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 298
# 11
02-01-2013, 09:04 PM
I'm not sure that ships are absolutely built normally just to be more powerfull than the ships before it. After the Iowa class battleship was built there hasn't been anything built with that kind of armor and gun size since. The Excelcior class to me was the Iowa class of its time. The hull was built up to support the experimental transwarp and the Federation had far fewer allies than enemies. As the federation expanded and still had the Excelsiors in service, is it possible that the new ships built were more geared to specific mission types? Have there been any difinitive "official like" stats on the "post excelsior" class ship designs?
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 437
# 12
02-02-2013, 12:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnymo1 View Post
I'm not sure that ships are absolutely built normally just to be more powerfull than the ships before it. After the Iowa class battleship was built there hasn't been anything built with that kind of armor and gun size since. The Excelcior class to me was the Iowa class of its time. The hull was built up to support the experimental transwarp and the Federation had far fewer allies than enemies. As the federation expanded and still had the Excelsiors in service, is it possible that the new ships built were more geared to specific mission types? Have there been any difinitive "official like" stats on the "post excelsior" class ship designs?
Unfortunately, you hit right on the big issue surrounding the Ambassador.

Anything we assume or surmise about the ship, is entirely assumption because there are no canonical stats to draw a concrete conclusion.

If we look at the progression of "Enterprise" class ships, we know this:

NX<Constitution<Constitution Refit<Excelsior

This is completely verifiable with canon stats. There were significant progressions in weapon strength, hull plating and general survivability in the progression of these 4 ships.

Galaxy<Sovereign

This particular progression is debatable, because one ship (Galaxy) had a scientific and diplomatic mission profile, while the other (Sovereign) had a much more militaristic mission profile. Certainly the armaments of the Sovereign outclassed the Galaxy by lightyears, but the Sovereign gave up some of it's other benefits in the scientific / operations realm as a result. So it's hard to say that one is truly superior to the other, except from a combat standpoint. They were simply diffferent ships, built for different purposes.

So, it's entirely possible that the Ambassador falls into this loophole category, that while it might have been stronger in some areas than Excelsior, it was weaker in others.

But, from an STO gameplay standpoint, that doesn't really matter, because the only thing a ship is judged on in STO, is it's combat effectiveness, because there are no alternate gameplay styles to make use of a ship's other qualities, be they scientific or operational.

What Im getting at is that Cryptic has a problem with their ship tiers. And it's far from being an easy problem to fix, and this is why sliding the Ambassador in, without having a gap between the Excelsior and the Galaxy (Tier 3 & 4) has resulted in a ship, which is chronologically and possibly technologically more advanced than the Excelsior, actually being portrayed as weaker.
The account formerly known as C_Carmichael
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack. I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 956
# 13
02-02-2013, 08:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccarmichael07 View Post

.....

What I'm getting at is that Cryptic has a problem with their ship tiers. And it's far from being an easy problem to fix, and this is why sliding the Ambassador in, without having a gap between the Excelsior and the Galaxy (Tier 3 & 4) has resulted in a ship, which is chronologically and possibly technologically more advanced than the Excelsior, actually being portrayed as weaker.
That's the crux of the matter, personally I feel Cryptic should get rid of the entire tier system, in favor of a upgrade token.

An upgrade token can be sold or earned in game and will allow a player to upgrade any vessel in game.

The upgrade is only limited by a tech tier that each vessel can be achieved:

Basis for a Tech tier:

A) Must be within the confines of canon or documented ship specs.

B) Can only be upgraded to the point where the next generation of its kind begins.

for example:

Connie cannot exceed the 1701 Refit or A, excelsior cannot exceed the Enterprise C etc...

The current tier not viable - for example you have the Nova Class inferior to the Excelsior - The Nova Class, despite it being a short range science vessel, is a far more advance vessel than the old Excelsior - same with the Centaur Class.

Special Upgrades (Via Lobi Store)
- Many will hate me for saying this, but the store is NOT going anywhere - Truth is I see choices as a flavor of life - The more choices we have the more flavor there is in the game.

In the Lobi Store - Cryptic should sell a special upgrade package for around 800 Lobi - This special package will upgrade any ship in the game at Tier 5 / any non-cstore bought or lobi earned ship.

The tier 5 package must not exceed Fleet versions, CStore versions, and the special Lock Box ships.
Ensign
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
# 14
02-03-2013, 04:07 AM
My first post on this forum...

I've very enjoyed the mission. Good story, and it's has voice. Very good.

Can't tell anything about the ships - I'm a tactician anyway.

The bad thing is that I've thought that we'll receive this yellow/blue worker outfit as a reward, i liked this too...
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 716
# 15
02-03-2013, 09:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccarmichael07 View Post
One can assume from design lineage, that the Ambassador should be closer in strength and power to the Galaxy, than it is to the Excelsior. The Ambassador was obviously meant to succeed the Excelsior, so it stands to reason the designers and engineers wouldn't build the ship to merely equal the Excelsior, much less be less powerful. That would be a waste, given the size increase from the Excelsior lineage to the Ambassador lineage.
I would reason that since we saw so many more Excelsiors in TNG and DS9, that the Ambassador actually wasn't as successful of a design than the Excelsior. It was probably more like the "DeLorean" of starships: designed to be iconic, but the actual ship is a dismal failure despite having a fancy name attached to it. Also it's fame is largely due to one instance of time travel.

Raptr profile
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 05:20 PM.