Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 955
# 41
02-27-2013, 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkeith2011 View Post
Here are the base stats for my Chimera and Fleet Defiant

(snip)

Fleet Defiant

Base Hull: 33000
Shield Mod: 0.99
Crew 50
Turn: 17
Devices: 2

Chimera has a much larger crew, more flexible BOff stations, better hull and device slots.

Defiant has better turn rate, shield mod and an extra tactical console slot.
Point of fact: The FTER's shield modifier is only 0.9. It's pretty much the only Fleet ship to not receive a 10% boost to its shield modifier.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 437
# 42
02-27-2013, 11:00 AM
Sooo totally agreed!

They need to come out with a new 3 pack of ships every week.

This way.. and I've said this before:

The fed players can get all the great new shinies... weekly.. and eventually they won't be able to afford their internet bills, and be shut down! .. Then I could enjoy some game time. lol
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 727
# 43
02-27-2013, 11:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unangbangkay View Post
Seemingly by the logic shown a Regular destroyer is either smaller than a standard Escort (closer to a Klink BoP) or larger (closer to a Raptor), with cannon-heavy armament (and beam viability in the case of the heavy destroyers.

At the moment Feds have 3 officially classified Destroyers available: The Aquarius, the Chimera, and the Mobius. The Bug could theoretically be classed as a Destroyer, as possibly the Breen ship.

Practically speaking there's almost no difference between a destroyer and a standard Fed Escort, except perhaps the Heavy Destroyers (Chimmy/Penghu) and maybe the Breen ship (if you consider it a destroyer). Those ships have lower turn rate and higher crew, but have cannons and a stronger tactical layout than cruisers or science vessels. Klink Raptors erode the difference somewhat, but for Feds they're fairly unique.

But the main commonality between all the destroyers vs. the escorts is the presence of Universal Boff stations. This adds a level of versatility to the proceedings.
So, under these definations, wouldn't the Andorian "Escort" count actually as a destroyer?
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 44
02-27-2013, 12:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
So, under these definations, wouldn't the Andorian "Escort" count actually as a destroyer?
Most of the Fed escorts are in fact medium to heavy cruisers (everything but the Defiant, Saber and Aquarius pattern ships), but since Cryptic needed an arbitrary class delineation, they got labeled as "escorts"
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 727
# 45
02-27-2013, 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stirling191 View Post
Most of the Fed escorts are in fact medium to heavy cruisers (everything but the Defiant, Saber and Aquarius pattern ships), but since Cryptic needed an arbitrary class delineation, they got labeled as "escorts"
So if Cryptic decides to say "hey, let us rename the Andorian 'escorts' to 'destroyers'", would that not nullify the point of this thread?
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 851
# 46
02-27-2013, 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
So if Cryptic decides to say "hey, let us rename the Andorian 'escorts' to 'destroyers'", would that not nullify the point of this thread?
They should be classed as destroyers as they are not really a "glass cannon". I've seen these Andorian escorts with hull up to 44k+, 2K more than a standard issue Odyssey hull. Plus they have a shield modifier 0.1 less than the Galaxy - X Dreadnaught.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 727
# 47
02-27-2013, 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubblygumsworth View Post
They should be classed as destroyers as they are not really a "glass cannon". I've seen these Andorian escorts with hull up to 44k+, 2K more than a standard issue Odyssey hull. Plus they have a shield modifier 0.1 less than the Galaxy - X Dreadnought.
Therefore, the Federation already has the destroyer 3 pack by way of the Andorian "escorts" and by extension, renders this thread (for all intents and purposes) spam. Good day then gentlemen.
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 727
# 48
02-27-2013, 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkeith2011 View Post
Chimera has a much larger crew, more flexible BOff stations, better hull and device slots.

Defiant has better turn rate, shield mod and an extra tactical console slot.

So to answer the question: In general, Destroyers are slightly larger and slightly less maneuverable when compared most Escorts while being somewhat more durable and considerably more flexible in role.

At least in the case of the Chimera. I see no reason that would not remain true in the case of any future Destroyer 3-pack release.


edit
Corrected stats on Chimera.
And thus by dimensions, the Andorian 'escorts' are bigger than the Defiant by a 'small margin' as well has having a slightly worse turn rate than the Defiant. Comparing crew of 50 on the Defiant vs 85 on the Kumari, the Kumari has the larger crew. And the universal lt boff station is also shared by the Kumari and the Chimera.
On the subject of Abramsverse stuff in STO: http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/07...l-rivera-part/
And more reasons against JJ Trek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiQ9piVgtWM
And even more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REOjxvQPQNQ
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 238
# 49
02-27-2013, 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by a3001 View Post
Kittens are cute. Your argument is invalid.
Agreed. Kittens are indeed cute.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 939
# 50
02-27-2013, 02:26 PM
There's no point in offering the KDF any 3-packs because they won't buy them and Cryptic won't recoup any of the development costs. Why waste the time and effort to offer something that won't be accepted or even purchased?
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 02:17 AM.