Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
02-22-2012, 06:08 PM
Since we have a Tactical-leaning T3.5 Advanced Heavy Cruiser (Excelsior), I see no problem with the Ambassador being a Science-leaning T3.5 Advanced Heavy Cruiser.

The Excelsior has:
  • 26K Hull
  • 750 Crew
  • 8 Turn Rate
  • .15 Impulse Mod
  • 30 Inertia
  • +5 to all power levels
  • Limited Transwarp.

So, lets alter the stats but not the Boff seating or Console Slots so that an Ambassador would have:
  • 24K Hull
  • 600 Crew
  • 10 Turn Rate
  • .18 Impulse Mod
  • 25 Inertia
  • +2 power to Shields, Engines & Weapons, +8 to Auxiliary
  • Deuterium Overload (increases turn rate by 2 at the cost of 1K Hull for 5 seconds)

The T5 Variant could have a 4/3/2/1/3/2 Boff set up (Sci to the Excelsior Retrofits Tac), a 4/3/2 Console set-up, three aft weapons and four fore weapons, and the following stats:
  • 35K Hull
  • 600 Crew
  • Turn Rate 12
  • .18 Impulse Mod
  • 35 Inertia
  • +3 power to Shields, Engines & Weapons, +9 to Auxiliary
  • Deuterium Burn (Increase turn rate by 3 at the cost of 3K Hull for 7 seconds)

And boom, the Ambassador has certain advantages over the Excelsior (turn rate and science powers), certain disadvantages (hull strength, crew, and fewer Tactical powers ), it's balanced vs other ships in it's tier (both T3 and T5 versions) and it doesn't outclass the Galaxy that replaced it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
02-22-2012, 06:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post
Since we have a Tactical-leaning T3.5 Advanced Heavy Cruiser (Excelsior), I see no problem with the Ambassador being a Science-leaning T3.5 Advanced Heavy Cruiser.

The Excelsior has:
  • 26K Hull
  • 750 Crew
  • 8 Turn Rate
  • .15 Impulse Mod
  • 30 Inertia
  • +5 to all power levels
  • Limited Transwarp.

So, lets alter the stats but not the Boff seating or Console Slots so that an Ambassador would have:
  • 24K Hull
  • 600 Crew
  • 10 Turn Rate
  • .18 Impulse Mod
  • 25 Inertia
  • +2 power to Shields, Engines & Weapons, +8 to Auxiliary
  • Deuterium Overload (increases turn rate by 2 at the cost of 1K Hull for 5 seconds)

The T5 Variant could have a 4/3/2/1/3/2 Boff set up (Sci to the Excelsior Retrofits Tac), a 4/3/2 Console set-up, three aft weapons and four fore weapons, and the following stats:
  • 35K Hull
  • 600 Crew
  • Turn Rate 12
  • .18 Impulse Mod
  • 35 Inertia
  • +3 power to Shields, Engines & Weapons, +9 to Auxiliary
  • Deuterium Burn (Increase turn rate by 3 at the cost of 3K Hull for 7 seconds)

And boom, the Ambassador has certain advantages over the Excelsior (turn rate and science powers), certain disadvantages (hull strength, crew, and fewer Tactical powers ), it's balanced vs other ships in it's tier (both T3 and T5 versions) and it doesn't outclass the Galaxy that replaced it.
There is one major flaw in all of that. The Ambassador is a bigger ship then The Excelsior so there is no way it should have a lower hull and crew count.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
02-22-2012, 07:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartzilla2007 View Post
When did this become canon?
Why would it not be canon? It comes from the graveyard scene in BoBW, same as the Cheyenne class. There are even pictures of the studio model out there.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
02-22-2012, 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cross82
There is one major flaw in all of that. The Ambassador is a bigger ship then The Excelsior so there is no way it should have a lower hull and crew count.
I can see that point of view. But my thinking was that the Excelsior was designed (as I've mentioned before) with the lessons gained from the Constitution in mind, shorter angled pylons for less exposed target areas, thicker shorter neck for stronger chassis.. Basically a tactically minded progression.

As such, hull strength and crew (for damage control parties, boarding parties, etc..) was part of the goal of her design.

The Ambassador, however, was a return to the more.. High minded.. Goals of Starfleet, with more science facilities and fewer combat-centric considerations.

There has to be a balance of advantage/disadvantage to the Ambassador and it's fellow Cruisers. Minor Stat adjustments are a part of that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
02-22-2012, 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post
I can see that point of view. But my thinking was that the Excelsior was designed (as I've mentioned before) with the lessons gained from the Constitution in mind, shorter angled pylons for less exposed target areas, thicker shorter neck for stronger chassis.. Basically a tactically minded progression.

As such, hull strength and crew (for damage control parties, boarding parties, etc..) was part of the goal of her design.

The Ambassador, however, was a return to the more.. High minded.. Goals of Starfleet, with more science facilities and fewer combat-centric considerations.

There has to be a balance of advantage/disadvantage to the Ambassador and it's fellow Cruisers. Minor Stat adjustments are a part of that.
The Ambassador is a cross and mix of both the Excelsior and the Galaxy so in a sense it would still be part science and part tactical. The Ambassador was the first ship to use beam arrays, If i recall right, and the bridge is by far from the one we have seen, is much more tactical then it is science, keep in mind we seen the Enterprise C as well and not a normal Ambassador so it should have had all the state of the art stuff for its time frame and it did not really look like a science ship to me.


I understand the want and need to add more kinds of ships to the game but what your talking about is turning a ship into something it may not have been to be. Sadly the info on the Ambassador is...well limited when look to other ships and past Enterprise's.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
02-22-2012, 11:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cross82
I understand the want and need to add more kinds of ships to the game but what your talking about is turning a ship into something it may not have been to be. Sadly the info on the Ambassador is...well limited when look to other ships and past Enterprise's.
And...this was not done with other ships in STO?...Hello Excelsior retrofit...Galor?...Jem?....Nothing will ever be an exact science.

The most important thing above all else is that the Devs make a ship that is unique, and fun to play, which adds something to the end-game class of ships to give players another choice beyond the limited crop of current ships available.. Take information known about the Ambassador and make that your starting point, or template, if you will and go from there. Have fun with it. Should the Devs begin confining themselves inside a box and begin to say "We can't do that", they might as well give up and scrap the idea completely.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
02-22-2012, 11:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cross82
The Ambassador is a cross and mix of both the Excelsior and the Galaxy so in a sense it would still be part science and part tactical. The Ambassador was the first ship to use beam arrays, If i recall right, and the bridge is by far from the one we have seen, is much more tactical then it is science, keep in mind we seen the Enterprise C as well and not a normal Ambassador so it should have had all the state of the art stuff for its time frame and it did not really look like a science ship to me.


I understand the want and need to add more kinds of ships to the game but what your talking about is turning a ship into something it may not have been to be. Sadly the info on the Ambassador is...well limited when look to other ships and past Enterprise's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by USS_Merriman
And...this was not done with other ships in STO?...Hello Excelsior retrofit...Galor?...Jem?....Nothing will ever be an exact science.

The most important thing above all else is that the Devs make a ship that is unique, and fun to play, which adds something to the end-game class of ships to give players another choice beyond the limited crop of current ships available.. Take information known about the Ambassador and make that your starting point, or template, if you will and go from there. Have fun with it. Should the Devs begin confining themselves inside a box and begin to say "We can't do that", they might as well give up and scrap the idea completely.
What if instead of making it lean either way we leave the T3 and T5 Tac/Sci slots Universals, allowing it to swing either way? Put it's hull, shields, and turn rate smack in the middle between a Tac-Cruiser and Sci-Cruiser, and let each ship be configured the way the players want it?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
02-22-2012, 11:23 PM
There is soo much talk about the Ambassador being a tier 4 or even a tier 3 vessel that I don't want it to suffer that fate. I would rather have it be a tier 5 giving us more variety at the end game.

If thats not feasible then I would rather see it become a skin for the Galaxy: REASON - You can reskin the tier 5 Venture, tier 5 exploration saucer seperation retrofit, tier 5 Dreadnought that shares the Galaxy skin.

So yeah, if it never comes out as an actual ship - and to spare it from becoming something lower than tier 5 - Than I rather have it become a Galaxy skin - so it can be used at tier 5 via the Galaxy Class refit variants.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
02-22-2012, 11:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katic View Post
What if instead of making it lean either way we leave the T3 and T5 Tac/Sci slots Universals, allowing it to swing either way? Put it's hull, shields, and turn rate smack in the middle between a Tac-Cruiser and Sci-Cruiser, and let each ship be configured the way the players want it?
make the LT.C Universal so it can be used a tac or sci, I like this. Putting the over all stats in the middle of a T5 Tac-Cruiser and Sci-Cruiser maybe a little tricky but ues iy could work it is a Cruiser above all so its going to get 8 weapons 4 slots 4 eng and well do we add 3 sci or 3 tac? Or maybe we make it so its 3-3-3, jack of all master of none?


And for BlackV7 I do not want it to be a skin I say make it a ship or don't make it at all. I love The Ambassador and it has a right to be its on ship and not a skin, it was an Enterprise after all.


For USS_Merriman, I am basing it off what little info there is about the ship thing is its all small so I'm working with that I got. The bug ship and galor are battle/war ships and they fill that role just fine the Excelsior is based of the one from DS9 and again fills the role they based it off.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
02-23-2012, 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cross82
make the LT.C Universal so it can be used a tac or sci, I like this. Putting the over all stats in the middle of a T5 Tac-Cruiser and Sci-Cruiser maybe a little tricky but ues iy could work it is a Cruiser above all so its going to get 8 weapons 4 slots 4 eng and well do we add 3 sci or 3 tac? Or maybe we make it so its 3-3-3, jack of all master of none?
I was thinking 4/3/3 consoles, with the turn rate closer to that of an sci/cruiser it won't be overpowered if they go Tac, and with a hull and shields closer to a Tac/Cruiser it won't be overpowered if they go sci.
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 03:55 AM.