@@Stu1701 Really not though honestly ones tactical ones universal but really has to be tactical 😂 in the end this is a terrible deal and an insult honestly
FYI - atm, unless there is a bug, you can use either the Excelsior II or the Obena. There are no options to change sections of the ship out. Also, for me only the Excelsior II is coming up on the ship customization. No Obena listed, even though I am using the Obena-class ship.
lol Starfleet Engineers (devs) seem to really dislike Starfleet ships sometimes! I am disappointed in the BO seating, but I do love a new, nice-looking ship!
I like the look of the ship, better modernized Excelsior than Picard's version. The stats are not great though. Feels like an event ship even more than the actual Winter Event ship. Well, at least the chaff is going into lockboxes so it isn't clogging up the Z-Store. This obsession on making these Federation Heavy Cruisers Engineering ships with 4-4 weapons layouts makes it seem like the dev team has _never_ actually thought about the Excelsior. Science/Command+Pilot is appropriate for the original with the models for all variants being heavily biased toward _forward_ firepower!
Will you (or have you) be getting an Obena class? I fell in love with the ship as soon as I saw it, deffo a contender for next years event prize for me
I dont mind 4-4 weapon layouts for a cruiser. I have lots of fun with them. However I don't feel that this ship is of the caliber that I would spend money on keys to gamble for.
Yeah, I'd say so. Excel II has one less ENG console slot, but most aren't going to want to run 8 Isomags anyway, you usually want to mix in some Universal consoles in as well. If it's a choice between the two, I'd get Excel II, it has better seating, and a way better console and trait.
I mean now with so many good click console ingame and if you not doing support run most of the best runs are only running 4 to 5 isomags so not having 8 eng console slots not really a big deal anymore long you have 4 to 6 you are find. Side not if you are doing a pet build you would still want the 8 eng slots as you want to run all 8 pet boots console but pet builds are bad until they buff base dps of pets by around 100 to 150% tbh
Eh, I like the look. I probably won't get it though. I do love my Excelsior II and the console is really fun. I grabbed it for the last campaign. I wish both were bashable with the others.
We can't have every ship be a battlecruiser. 4/4 cruisers should be more common than them when we are talking about the Federation. Just because it's the "meta" is not an excuse.
@@Stu1701 And things change all the time. Cloaking used to be only available for select ships, but now all my ships can cloak. So, it is possible to make changes to seating on all ships.
The trouble with trying to make Science and Engineering ships with science and engineering layouts (that would flow better towards Gene Rods visions of StarFleet for the Star Trek Universe), in a game mostly built, almost entirely around fighting and killing. The sad truth is, you would need mine craft like building mechanics and NPC interactions more advanced than Baldur's Gate 3, to ever have any chance of a Star Trek game that not only was still fun, but actually had a reasonable chance to apply the Star Trek ideals in game. Yeah, sorry, but it is the truth, no matter what nay sayers say, if anyone actually wants to try and apply the full spectrum of Star Trek ideals into a video, you absolutely will have to have minecraft like building mechanics and absolutely will have to have NPC interactions and NPC groath systems more advanced that BG3. Star Trek games and companies making them, have tried many other ways. Other non-startrek games have shown what works. there is no getting around it. This is what is left for a StarTrek game developer to try and do, assuming any developer that does actually try, does have enough sense to make the actual game play advancement appropriate and not pull some lazy BS of making a Roblox like Star Trek. No you are going to have to have smooth terrain, characters and objects like 7Days to die and No Man's Sky, when trying to go full minecraft.
I swear, the design team have a rule that a ship can't be both good looking, popular, and well-designed. You can't even necessarily get two out of 3.
Why does a ship have to be popular?
That's what you get with Kurtzman.
@@jonathanflugge3557 Kurtzman has literally nothing to do with this.
This is almost a carbon copy of the Princeton, it's kinda nuts. A lockbox ship that's got 99% of the stats of a C-Store ship.
Seating is slightly different, but you're not wrong. I hadn't realized that before.
@@Stu1701 Really not though honestly ones tactical ones universal but really has to be tactical 😂 in the end this is a terrible deal and an insult honestly
FYI - atm, unless there is a bug, you can use either the Excelsior II or the Obena. There are no options to change sections of the ship out. Also, for me only the Excelsior II is coming up on the ship customization. No Obena listed, even though I am using the Obena-class ship.
A star trek ship with a mighty neck! I thought such things were in the past.
I don't know if it's just the angle but damn that is one hell of a long neck 😂
lol Starfleet Engineers (devs) seem to really dislike Starfleet ships sometimes! I am disappointed in the BO seating, but I do love a new, nice-looking ship!
The 4/4 weapons doesn't bother me that much, the too much engi seating just means one less ship to worry about considering.
This is a very expensive copy and paste of the Princeton from the c store 😂 this is an insult to the player base honestly
you are technically correct.... the best kind of correct.
Yaaas! Beams All Day and Night!
I like the look of the ship, better modernized Excelsior than Picard's version. The stats are not great though. Feels like an event ship even more than the actual Winter Event ship. Well, at least the chaff is going into lockboxes so it isn't clogging up the Z-Store.
This obsession on making these Federation Heavy Cruisers Engineering ships with 4-4 weapons layouts makes it seem like the dev team has _never_ actually thought about the Excelsior. Science/Command+Pilot is appropriate for the original with the models for all variants being heavily biased toward _forward_ firepower!
I this its tradition excelsior has to have awful stats.
Well, if you have both ships maybe you can maker the Excelsior II look like the Obena
Will you (or have you) be getting an Obena class? I fell in love with the ship as soon as I saw it, deffo a contender for next years event prize for me
Yes, I plan to get it. I'll likely do something very similar to what I did on the Princeton, since the two are so similar.
I dont mind 4-4 weapon layouts for a cruiser. I have lots of fun with them. However I don't feel that this ship is of the caliber that I would spend money on keys to gamble for.
One day, I want a starship trait that is simply, *"Oh, @#$! We're in Danger!"*
Would the Excelsior II still be the better option if the Obena had all 8 console slots loaded with isomags?
Yeah, I'd say so. Excel II has one less ENG console slot, but most aren't going to want to run 8 Isomags anyway, you usually want to mix in some Universal consoles in as well. If it's a choice between the two, I'd get Excel II, it has better seating, and a way better console and trait.
I mean now with so many good click console ingame and if you not doing support run most of the best runs are only running 4 to 5 isomags so not having 8 eng console slots not really a big deal anymore long you have 4 to 6 you are find. Side not if you are doing a pet build you would still want the 8 eng slots as you want to run all 8 pet boots console but pet builds are bad until they buff base dps of pets by around 100 to 150% tbh
What's wrong with the L. Excelsior? Think it's a fun little ship :P
4/4 layout with too much Eng seating, much like with this ship.
I really prefer this style over the Picard Excelsior 2 style.
Why does the 4/4 lay out bug people so much
It's prettier than the Princeton (which oddly enough, I actually enjoy flying, based on Stu's build) but a bit disappointing for a lockbox ship.
Eh, I like the look. I probably won't get it though. I do love my Excelsior II and the console is really fun. I grabbed it for the last campaign. I wish both were bashable with the others.
Not being able to merge parts on a ship costing more than 100 dollars sucks, not that this one really has much of a visual difference to others...
I feel this should have been the event ship.
I'll never be able to get it, but I love the appearance.
It might be available as part of the campaign in the future. Maybe 2025 or 2026?
@johngamesman8783 Maybe so. I wasn't thinking about that.
We can't have every ship be a battlecruiser. 4/4 cruisers should be more common than them when we are talking about the Federation. Just because it's the "meta" is not an excuse.
Finally!
All seating for all ships should be universal. IMO
that would make it a Frigate
@ why?
Because that's how it works. Cruisers with mostly Uni seating are Frigates (ex: Bozeman, Freedom, Qulash).
@@Stu1701 And things change all the time. Cloaking used to be only available for select ships, but now all my ships can cloak. So, it is possible to make changes to seating on all ships.
Thumbs up for the video, but another lootbox ship. Nope.
We're really going to get Starship Dating Sim before a 5-3 Excelsior, aren't we
i know, right
The trouble with trying to make Science and Engineering ships with science and engineering layouts (that would flow better towards Gene Rods visions of StarFleet for the Star Trek Universe), in a game mostly built, almost entirely around fighting and killing. The sad truth is, you would need mine craft like building mechanics and NPC interactions more advanced than Baldur's Gate 3, to ever have any chance of a Star Trek game that not only was still fun, but actually had a reasonable chance to apply the Star Trek ideals in game.
Yeah, sorry, but it is the truth, no matter what nay sayers say, if anyone actually wants to try and apply the full spectrum of Star Trek ideals into a video, you absolutely will have to have minecraft like building mechanics and absolutely will have to have NPC interactions and NPC groath systems more advanced that BG3. Star Trek games and companies making them, have tried many other ways. Other non-startrek games have shown what works. there is no getting around it. This is what is left for a StarTrek game developer to try and do, assuming any developer that does actually try, does have enough sense to make the actual game play advancement appropriate and not pull some lazy BS of making a Roblox like Star Trek. No you are going to have to have smooth terrain, characters and objects like 7Days to die and No Man's Sky, when trying to go full minecraft.
I don't see the appeal. It's just an Excelsior with Sovereign nacelles. It would have been better to just release it as a free skin.
Connies and D7 also have this issue.
Of course it's a bloody lockbox ship
Looks: Yay. Stats: Nay.
Eh, let's keep this one locked away in its box and forget about it.
Eh , shit lockboxship again. I will not gamble for only one toon ,make them account unlock,then i will buy keys.
Oh hey look another useless excelsior class.
Sorry it wasn't as good as you hoped.
Booo lock boxes
i lost all interest the moment I saw it was going to be yet another MW 4/4 ship. this is just insulting.
as soon as i saw... 4 4 .... pass.