In order to add more value to Science Console slots, we are looking at changeing the following consoles from the Engineering Console Slot to the Science Consoel Slot:
Field Generator (Shield HP)
Shield Emitter Amplifier (Shield Regen)
This is also more consistent with the way skills are currently arranged.
These would be a conversion, not new consoles. So if you currently have one of these consoles slotted in an Engineering Console slot, they would stay there, but once you move them, they would only go back into a Science Console Slot.
Let us know your thoughts.
-geko
Comments
You also need to consider the fact that this makes Eng consoles worse, while leaving the best type of console (Tac) unchanged. It also makes Sci console slots on Sci ships worse, since they were actually using those slot already (unlike every other kind of ship.) This doesn't really sound like a great plan. Really, you need to do something about the bad science consoles, not just steal good consoles from engineering.
I will say that, thematically, it makes much more sense to have Sci consoles deal with shields, but I don't think that this change is nearly enough to level the playing field.
Really loving this, even though it'll take a bit to adapt to. Adds some value to sci slots on non-sci ships, rather than just having them be the default location for my universal consoles.
While it does mean that my MVAM will have to find a new home for one of its universal consoles, I still think this is a move in the right direction.
Obviously this is just the start- but it is relieving to know that you guys actually have time to look at this stuff now. I'll be looking forward to future improvements in this vein.
That said, I too feel that Sci consoles in general are less versatile.
Of course, They aren't useless, If you get the consoles that augment the sci abilities you have they are fine, but ALL captains benefit greatly from most Tac consoles. To be fair, I'm not sure how to fix this... Though a good idea might be to partially un-nerf them a bit. Or perhaps have other benefits.
Example: Sensor mod consoles also slightly increase accuracy of weapons. Consoles that augment graviton abilities also provide a slight resistance to the same.
I am going to bring up a science console that was sadly eliminated in the last skill change/update. Previously the Halon System boosted Hazard Emitters. Now, Hazard Emitters is a bit of a weird skill to start with since it's a hull heal (typically engy) but is a science power. But now the only power that affects it is Structural Integrity. So, the only console that affects it is Structural Integrity Field (no DOffs affect it either, including the Hazard Systems Officer which I thought was weird)
Am I suggesting moving the SIF Generator to science also? No. I'm suggesting that you should bring back a Hazard Emitter console. Maybe a hybrid Hazard Emitter-Shield console as a reward. It's just weird that a science power can't be boosted by a science console.
Mind you: start. The other science consoles would likely still need a look given to them so that they might seem competitive in turn with the performance offered by the Field Generators and Field Emitter Amplifiers - otherwise we're likely to end up with people filling their science slots with those if they don't serve as dump slots for universal C-Store obtained console.
As far as quelling the complaints of the Odyssey's science console slot number... this may work to a degree. But it doesn't mean the rest of the science console line-up doesn't need to be fixed as well. You might want to consider an approach like that taken by armor plating engineering consoles: that of fixing bonuses for 2 skills on one console. Or adding additional side-bonuses like a faster incrementation of sensor analysis with a sensor boosting console, or a higher ship inertia on a console that increases ship resistance against mobility debuffs, etcetera.
I don't think Engineering consoles are hurt much by this, since they still have a fairly good lineup available. The subsystem power bonus ones still need to be fixed (+3.5 power returned to +7) but otherwise I think they comparatively fare fairly well in contrast to tactical consoles (i.e.: +35% turn vs +26% phaser damage for Mk11 consoles).
Speaking of Turn Rate - though that's something pertaining the engineering consoles - maybe it'd be a good idea to enter something like "Gives the highest between +35% Turn Rate or +3.5 degree per Second" or something like that? One concern I've always had with high-level cruisers is how their turn rate is so low that turn rate console don't seem to yield a whole lot of results - thus giving a small bonus which is a fraction of an already small value, meaning only a small difference. (Sorry, I like my turn rate and was compelled to make a plug in here where I knew you'd look =P )
Ummm ... Does this mean we can have 4/3/4 console layout on the bortaS then? ... Just kidding, although I do feel a bit weak with only one sci console slot.
But we are Klingons. We always adapt.
I like it.
Mostly because they only provide a bonus when you activate a Sci ability (which have lengthy CDs), whereas Tac/Eng consoles are 'always on' bonuses, but also because non-Sci ships only have 2 Sci abilities and you can get away with no even using appropriate Sci consoles more often than not.
Now that the Field Generator (pretty much a must have) is a Sci console, people will be going with the Borg Console + Field Generator as their Sci and be done with it. If anything, this is an indirect buff as it will allow people to run more resists.
Let's not touch on the secondary issue of generic build 32094823. What you gots on your ships!? Shield consoles/Uniques in science; Weapon+ in tac/etc etc. Some of the current consoles need to be condensed and some new different ones need to be brought out. Yea more =/= always better, but now it's just the same thing for pretty much everyone and theres still a large descrpency in the usefulness of the consoles(once you get 1+ of each) being Tac > Eng > Sci.
If you're going to touch the console system at all it might as well be a make over. if you shuffle just a small number of things your going to create even more issues - especially with so many 'have to have' unique items' when compared to the average amount of slots on each ship. If every ship has two consoles everyones going to be running the two uniques anyways; same with uniques in other slots. The whole system really need a big tweaking with removals and additions.
Looks like all this is really going to create is an even SMALLER margin of shield strength between sci vessels and other classes since SCI will still use consoles that effect their abilties and everyone running non-unqieues will be running with shield consoles. Are science ships going to get larger shields globally to compensate for this?
Thanks for listening to the community on the terrible 'balance'/itemization but please give us a lot more change on this front..
If you are going to just boost the 'usefulness' of science consoles then they need latent abilities that have 100% uptime; wether it's resistance to certain abilities, added effects to common actions, etc etc something needs to be on there OTHER THEN +Deflector/etcetc
Eh i don't like to be to picky but you do know that sci vessel just have Four sci consol slot to put even another consol ontop of the already coming to change makes it quite tight with lot's of room on the engi side then.
While i do agree that Sci consol slots are in basic pretty useless instead on a sci vessel i don't see need to throw everything usefull now at those.
The idea of hybrid sci consols and/or maybe additional passive effect and or stats on sci consol is realy tempting and would imho better help to reduce the gap between tactical and engineering consols as it is know.
Ummm ... What about the bio console? ... Crew health is rather important from what I've seen. I swear that as it drops and goes low, my ship's performance bottoms out.
EDIT:
My reasoning for this is stated here: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Deflector_shield
You're just perceiving it.
Crew, quite literally, is useless. All it does is effect your passive and in-combat hull regeneration rates. And even at max crew, your in-combat hull regeneration rate is so tiny that it's pretty much a non-factor. Even outside of combat, you'll heal yourself far faster just using Aux to SIF.
EDIT: I should also add that it effects the +X bonus you get from Team abilities, but again, the bonus is so small and so short in duration (5 seconds) that you won't even notice the difference between 9999 crew and 4 crew.
Go figured .... ::: tells the science officer to pop it out and chunk it back into the cargo bay.
with the change over Geko, could you tell the UI info guys to include text that says "You can only use 1 Field Generator".
I tryed equiping 2 just to see no benefit. So only 1 works and that info should be included.
Also, I wholeheartedly approve of the suggestion to return the Halon Console to the game.
My thoughts that I posted elsewhere, shortened:
Boost Sci Consoles to +26 (levels the playing field somewhat with Tac/Engy Consoles) to +36 (their Old Prototype values; good for non sci ships, very dangerous for Sci ships).
Add in a Lvl 1 Version of a Ens/Lt Sci power (or boost a power you have slotted by one level); Limit one such additional power per ship.
Add secondary effects/passives to existing Sci Consoles.
What really needs to be done is to give science consoles a benefit other than just to science officer abilities. The need to benefit the ship, just look at one of the most commonly used consoles, the biofunction monitor. Why, because it helped the ship regardless of prof. The need an use overhaul not just switching consoles.
To add to the fact that does nothing for all the existing science consoles. If you guys are out of ideas why not just start a feedback thread on what type of abilities people would like to see with them. It does not have to be EVER console either, just more than one is a step in the right direction.
This is probably the best solution I have seen.
Nah, I'm pretty sure it would make it better (if only because it would be nearly impossible to make it worse.)
Absolutely correct, which is still better than today because there will actually be options. Maybe not as many as there should be, and maybe not great options, but today you can use Sci consoles effectively for the Borg console and... well, that's about it, really.
Or course, if you are a non-science ship with 3 sci consoles (*cough* Odyssey *cough*) then you still have a useless slot, but that's better than 2 useless slots. I mean its still terrible, but less so. Sorta like getting shot in the leg is better than getting shot in the head. It still sucks, of course, but most people would prefer the former.
Let's not look at the biofunction monitor, because it is kinda useless. I mean, yes, it preserves your crew, but since crew does nearly nothing, it's not that great of a deal. I do agree that ALL science modules need to be improved - and not by simply increasing what they already do. They all need to do things for your ship that are useful even when not using a science power - just like all of the other modules in the game. Until this happens science consoles will always be inferior (except for the stolen field console from engineering, which would be about a thousand times better than every other science module combined, as for as non-science ships go.)
Actually, I think it really does have to be every science console that gets improved, otherwise it would be an indirect nerf to the science ships that would continue to have to use the unimproved consoles to boost their science abilities, while the other ships would get to pick and choose from the improved consoles.
Really, I think a good start would be chucking every single existing science console in the bin and starting again from square one - because science consoles, as they exist today, do not conform to all of the other consoles in the game, and simply do not work properly as a system. If you are going to balance them against tac and eng consoles (and you need to, because you balance ships partly on the number of consoles they have) then they need to behave the same way as tac and eng consoles.
I think I can hear a thousand Fleet Escort captains crying out in anguish. Hell, I'm an Advanced Escort captain and this still looks painful. Guess I'm not moving my Field Generator ever again...
In DS9's pilot "Emissary", O'Brien lowered the station's inertial mass with the DEFLECTOR ARRAY, allowing the station's maneuvering thrusters to carry the station to the wormhole. Now, there are two things to consider here: first of all, it was the DEFLECTOR ARRAY that allowed this. Second, the IDEA to do it came from Dax who was the SCIENCE OFFICER.
(In turn, Scotty seemed to use the ENGINE POWER to boost the phasers on the Enterprises he served on.)
You're sortof bypassing one system to boost another even if that's not quite TECHNICALLY accurate. So here's my suggestion, take the concept of Bypass Displacers.
For example:
[Console - Science - Deflector Bypass Displacer]
Taps into your deflector array to lower your ship's effective mass.
- 10 Auxiliary Power, +18% Speed, +18% Turnrate
[Console - Engineering - Impulse Engine Bypass Displacer]
Taps into your ship's engine power to boost your energy weapons.
- 10 Engine Power, +26 Beam Weapons,
[Console - Tactical - Targeting System Bypass Displacer]
Redirects tactical targeting system to navigational sensors.
- 10% Weapon Accuracy, +18% Defense, +10 Starship Sensors, +1% Stealthsight.
Just as a for example. These kinds of consoles give you a boost from something your build may not specialize in while using a console slot that may be less desirable to your build.
Maybe make each one unique but have 2 flavors for each console type. (Ie. 1 Sci that boosts weapons at the cost of Aux and 1 sci that boosts turnrate/speed at the cost of aux. 1 Tac that boosts sci abilities at the cost of weapons and 1 Tac that boosts eng at the cost of weapons. 1 Eng that boosts sci at the cost of engines and 1 Eng that boosts tac at the cost of engines.)
This effectively lets people dip into the 25% minimum for areas they keep on minimum power settings.
I don't see why you would think that. Fleet Escorts have 2 science console slots. This change would cause exactly two useful science consoles to exist. The net effect is that Fleet Escorts get an extra usable Eng console.
It should also be noted that most Fleet Escort are already using a P2W console (like a grappler or something) in their second sci slot. Since it is universal, they can just move it to their newly freed up Eng console slot, and carry on as if nothing had happened.
Really, I see no downside to this at all for Fleet Escort captains.
Interesting. I like it. This may be the best suggestion yet. However, it still doesn't address the fact that science ships would have to continue using the old consoles. I know the existing sci consoles technically aren't broken for science vessels, but they are still sub-par.
I mean, ships skidding as if they were doing the race in the Winter event is not exactly appealing. I could be nice to have some extra control on that and manage tighter turns.
I don't think this is the right way to go.
It's not the slots that lack value, it's the consoles that lack value. Forcing an engineering console into a science slot is an unneeded nerf to ships that actually use science powers. And ships that don't use science powers make better use of the science slots as dump slots for universal consoles. The system works fine the way it is.
This would only be a negative metagame shift that would do more harm than good.