test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Star Trek Online General Discussion

Too many Tac Stations? From bad to terribad.

ussultimatumussultimatum Member Posts: 0 Arc User
edited February 2013 in Star Trek Online General Discussion
I really didn't think I'd see a day when the Defiant and MVAE, and Armitage dreaded three tactical ensign slots would ever be outdone.


I was wrong.


Now we have a ship, that has


CMD Tac
Ltc Tac
Lt Tac



Really? Lt Tac also? :confused:


Let's forget all the rest of the things going on with the ship in question, and just zero in on the main issue:

Adding "MOAR" low level tactical stations is about the least useful thing that could possibly be given to a ship - and yet, here we have it!


Cryptic has basically outdone themselves.

Fleet Defiant? Still haven't purchased it.

Fleet MVAE? Nope, no sale here.

Fleet HEC? Refuse to buy a ship with 3 tactical Ensigns.

Tactical Kumari: See the above, but now actually even more hilariously bad.



Throwing MOAR TAC at a ship doesn't make it MOAR effective.

It makes it less effective, and to be frank it just looks ridiculous.


Maybe there is some super special ensign boff power revamp on the horizon I'm aware of, or maybe yet another escort has been saddled with an atrocious BOFF layout.

At least we have the Sci and Eng variants I guess?



Dear mods: This post was a thread created about the issue of too many tactical stations on ALL escorts and is not specifically about the Kumari. This post does not belong here.
Post edited by ussultimatum on
«1

Comments

  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ussultimatum wrote: »
    Maybe there is some super special ensign boff power revamp on the horizon

    Sometime between Season 8 and the future season when they try to raise the level cap, they will absolutely revisit BOFF powers and tweak them.

    Probably breaking a lot of them. But still, yes, there will be a revamp.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • khayuungkhayuung Member Posts: 1,876 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    It is to balance the fact that this damn ship has FIVE Tac consoles. So take it and love it, for this is balanced.

    I'm loving the Sci layout. 4 plasma infused consoles AND 4 Tac consoles?! Further more I get TWO FIN FUNNELS?!

    YES PLEASE.

    "Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.

    Support the "Armored Unicorn" vehicle initiative today!

    Thanks for Harajuku. Now let's get a real "Magical Girl" costume!
  • hyplhypl Member Posts: 3,719 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I don't have much of an issue with the MVAE or Armitage, only that they lack a LtCmdr Tac slot in favor of a LtCmdr Sci or Eng slot. I prefer 7 Tac slots on my escort, doesn't matter much where, because that's all I need. Defiant and Kumari class have too many for my tastes, and having more Eng or Sci slots would be way more beneficial.

    The Khyzon class is more to my liking since I prefer more Sci slots than Eng slots.
    HyperLimited - UNUSED ROMULAN NOTIFICATIONS
    cNpFfly.jpg
  • wirtddwirtdd Member Posts: 211 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Funny.

    CMD Tac
    Ltc Tac
    Lt Tac

    Thats my only reason to buy the ship. Hopefully I can finally replace my Fleet Defiant and never go back to it.
    Bastet
  • captainbmoneycaptainbmoney Member Posts: 1,323 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Funny you're complaining about that. Try being a cruiser flyer and having so many fricken useless ensign engineers. Emergancy Power to WE NEED MORE ENSIGN ABILITIES.
    Like my fanpage!
    https://www.facebook.com/CaptainBMoney913
    Join Date: August 29th 2010
  • ussultimatumussultimatum Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    snoggymack22 wrote: »
    Sometime between Season 8 and the future season when they try to raise the level cap, they will absolutely revisit BOFF powers and tweak them.

    And it might not matter anyway.


    Lower stations are generally not nearly as useful as broader power availability and utility from SCI/ENG.


    khayuung wrote: »
    It is to balance the fact that this damn ship has FIVE Tac consoles.

    It has nothing to do with balance in any world where people don't balance by annoyance.

    And this thread is about the overuse of low level Tac (and eng) stations that suffer from really really poor value, and terrible design and not specifically one ship.

    I just feel like the design of this ship indicates we might actually one day see a Cruiser with CMD, LTC, LT, LT, Ensign ENG and the devs will tell us how awesomely thematic and tanky it is.


    captainbmoney wrote: »
    Funny you're complaining about that. Try being a cruiser flyer and having so many fricken useless ensign engineers. Emergancy Power to WE NEED MORE ENSIGN ABILITIES.

    I agree completely.

    Now imagine if the Galaxy-X had not an Ensign Eng but a Lt Eng!
  • fazemladaiyafazemladaiya Member Posts: 166 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Everything looks rightly balanced to me. I am not seeing an issue with anything you tried to point out in your thread other than the fact that you absolutely could not spell the word "more" if your life depended on it.

    Anyway, she looks like a fine ship, and it will be nice to have her to fly in place of my Defiant Retro for a bit. I bought the carrier also, but she never satisfied me near as much as the Defiant, but a very different cosmetic and bridge is a very welcome addition to the fleet.
    My Specs - Low end, I know, but I am working on it, I promise!
  • joshmaaaaaaansjoshmaaaaaaans Member Posts: 32 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Needs atleast Commander tac, Lt commander tac, Lt. tac and an Ensign tac before the ship is worth flying imo.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • twamtwam Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Mind the 5-weapon slot thing. Considering the extra weapon drain, it might well be worth it to run a torp in the fifth slot, meaning you can start adding torp skills in your "redundant" tac slots.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Actually, having a third Lieutenant tac slot isn't bad at all. You can put all kinds of good skills there.

    The reason the third ensign tac is bad is because a cannon-only build can't use anything at all in ensign tac except Tactical Team, and you can only have two of those. Meaning you're pretty much forced to include a torpedo or beam and even then the benefit is minimal. The Lt slot doesn't have such problems.
  • emacsheadroomemacsheadroom Member Posts: 994 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Just about every ship has at least one weakness that stops it being good at everything. An escort as powerful as the Kumari needs to have at least one weakness. I approve.
  • blznfunblznfun Member Posts: 241 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I suggested in another thread that cannons should be able to target sub-systems. That would make that 3rd Tac Ensign slot useful... Even it is rank 1...
    jeremy-t_doff_signiture5635.jpg
    =/\= 106th Fleet =/\=
    Website | Fleet Charter | Mission Statement | Forums | Join | F.A.Q.
    Joined: Oct/2008
    Original Handle: the_orig_jean_luc_picard
  • romuzariiromuzarii Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I could make use of the slot by adding 2 torp spreads, or a spread and volley, or a spread and HY2, and that's just for a cannon/torp build. The Lt slot is useful. The problem is it's not as useful as lt eng or sci but that's them breaks for a 5th cannon in your front instead of a third turret. It's now the best escort in the game for DPS. Everything is there for it. 4-5 tac consoles, commander/lt commander bo layout, 5/2 weapons layout. RIP Fleet Escorts/JHAS.


    I am confident I can make the kumari into a worthy rep for my JHAS . However I am not confident in that hull strength so ultimately the ship might never be STF PUG worthy. HOWEVER, in the hands of dedicated players who will do everything they can the right way and assuming the content forces the need for the right way, they will take full advantage of such a glassy escort because they know their tank is going to hold aggro.

    Now, for everyone else, or STFs in particular, they will probably be better off in the eng or sci versions. Which is weird to say because they're all escorts but anywho those ships are going to be far better for borg. So essentially the kumari is going to need some end game content and cruisers tanking for it for it to be useful or else it's a waste of a ship slot because you'll spend minute after minute waiting on respawn timers, and that's just the way it is.
  • ussultimatumussultimatum Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    romuzarii wrote: »
    The problem is it's not as useful as lt eng or sci but that's them breaks for a 5th cannon in your front instead of a third turret.


    No, it isn't.

    The Eng and Sci Kumari do not have the Tac Lt.

    They have balanced layouts, also have 5 fore weapons, also have access to all of the consoles/special weapons.


    They only thing they lack is the 5th Tac console.


    Here's a hint: if you have to start slotting Torpedos to make use of extra Tac stations - you've made major build sacrifices to do so (skill points, possibly consoles, loss of another fore DHC) or you are just running an inefficient set up to try and make use of a poorly designed BOFF layout.



    The Defiant, MVAE & HEC also all have this extra Tac Ensign - it's just gotten even more costly for the Tac Kumari as it also loses a Lt Eng or Sci in the process.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ussultimatum wrote: »
    possibly consoles

    Wait, what?

    Nobody slots projectile weapon consoles, except people running ALL torpedo/mine launcher builds. And I'm not even sure those builds exist anymore, but were usually science ships that ran them way back when.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • haravikkharavikk Member Posts: 278
    edited February 2013
    ussultimatum wrote: »
    The Defiant, MVAE & HEC also all have this extra Tac Ensign - it's just gotten even more costly for the Tac Kumari as it also loses a Lt Eng or Sci in the process.
    Oh no! Poor thing, you've got to find something to put in that third ensign tactical slot! It's not like you're getting a fifth tactical console and an extra Lieutenant and Lt. Commander as part of the bargain too on what is easily going to be the highest DPS escort ever with what is essentially six dual cannons?

    ?no wait, that's absolutely what's happening. There is literally nothing to complain about, maybe just accept the fact that it is a damage powerhouse and leave engineering abilities to the poor cruisers that will be stuck doing less than half the DPS if they're lucky.
    ____________________
    Game Balance - Ship Size and Wingmates
  • blznfunblznfun Member Posts: 241 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    haravikk wrote: »

    There is literally nothing to complain about, maybe just accept the fact that it is a damage powerhouse and leave engineering abilities to the poor cruisers that will be stuck doing less than half the DPS if they're lucky.

    Cruisers aren't supposed to do DPS...

    Don't forget, DPS isn't constant. There is energy drain to think about when it comes to multiple weapons to fire.

    Everyone wants to be a tac (DPS) without playing a tac.
    jeremy-t_doff_signiture5635.jpg
    =/\= 106th Fleet =/\=
    Website | Fleet Charter | Mission Statement | Forums | Join | F.A.Q.
    Joined: Oct/2008
    Original Handle: the_orig_jean_luc_picard
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    blznfun wrote: »
    Cruisers aren't supposed to do DPS...

    Don't forget, DPS isn't constant. There is energy drain to think about when it comes to multiple weapons to fire.

    Everyone wants to be a tac (DPS) without playing a tac.

    Klingon Cruisers and the Galaxy-X would like to have a word with you. ;)

    But yes, if this trend continues, we need more/better Ensign abilities.
  • blznfunblznfun Member Posts: 241 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    centersolace wrote: »
    Klingon Cruisers and the Galaxy-X would like to have a word with you. ;)

    Well yes, there are exceptions to EVERY rule. I know some engineer cruiser captains that can eat me alive. Its not because of DPS, its because of how they are set up and their skill level (Not talking skill tree for those that don't understand this game)... ;)
    jeremy-t_doff_signiture5635.jpg
    =/\= 106th Fleet =/\=
    Website | Fleet Charter | Mission Statement | Forums | Join | F.A.Q.
    Joined: Oct/2008
    Original Handle: the_orig_jean_luc_picard
  • totenmettotenmet Member Posts: 592 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    It is useless because of the boff ability cooldowns.
  • elandarkskyelandarksky Member Posts: 1,013 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    5 fore slots right?
    Dump the wings, slot in a torp,

    4cannons + 1 torp,

    3tact ensign and LT. slots?
    2tact teams and 2torp skills.

    Heck even throwing a set of beams for target 1+2 abilities adds some variety, nothing like a luck engine offline to soup up some start up strikes.

    Less sci/eng boff abilities on an escort? The Blog called it a "Glass Cannon", more dps (with your torps and torp skills), less survivability(spell check?).

    Sounds fine to me :)

    If you want the 'gimmick' of the wings, then go for it, losing 1 weapon slot, and 3 console slots, making the ship probably even more fragile, then that's your prerogative :p.

    Even though as a kdf player being disheartened not to see a friendly ship, i think balance-wise they have a fairly good idea when making this.
    [Combat (Self)] Your Bite deals 2378 (1475) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother.
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    totenmet wrote: »
    It is useless because of the boff ability cooldowns.

    not really. 2 cannon abilities, 2 Attack patterns, 2 TT and 2 torpedo abilities fills 8 slots...if you put a DBB on one of the 5 forward weapon slots you can have a BO aswell...makes 9

    now i do not argue that this is in any shape or form adviceable, but you can fill it without overlapping with a third power that shares one cooldown.
    Go pro or go home
  • shar487ashar487a Member Posts: 1,292 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    emacsheadroom wrote: »
    Just about every ship has at least one weakness that stops it being good at everything. An escort as powerful as the Kumari needs to have at least one weakness. I approve.

    What about the JHAS? It has no weaknesses whatsoever...
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Actually not a bad thing if you look at it closely.

    Cmdr Tac: TT1, CRF1, APB2, APO3
    LtCmdr Tac: TT1, CRF1, APO1
    Lt Tac: TS1, THY2

    Armaments: 3x DHC, Andorian DHC, Romulan Hyper Plasma Torp

    That way you can still do a TON of damage without having to slot a damage console for your torp. Imagine that setup with 3 purple Proj Weapons Officers (which most level 50s using mk XII blue or purple gear should have). Would be rather nasty. Above you have constant cycling of APO with an APB to fill the opening, and torp abilities that both work well on the Romulan Hyper Plasma (especially if you have the zero point equipped too, then your torps move quite quickly) and you still have the firepower of 4 DHCs AND a nasty torp.

    When this ship comes out I will be sure to experiment with it, and confirm it's ludicrous level of power.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • nicha0nicha0 Member Posts: 1,456 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Might be the first eng-scort with a purpose
    Delirium Tremens
    Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
    Nothing to do anymore.
    http://dtfleet.com/
    Visit our Youtube channel
  • fraghul2000fraghul2000 Member Posts: 1,590 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    shar487a wrote: »
    What about the JHAS? It has no weaknesses whatsoever...

    rarity. :D
  • redrickyredricky Member Posts: 1,004 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    nicha0 wrote: »
    Might be the first eng-scort with a purpose
    Ooooooh... now there's a thought.
    _______________
    CommanderDonatra@Capt.Sisko: ahhh is it supposed to do that?
    Norvo Tigan@dontdrunkimshoot: hell ya, maybe
  • resoundingenvoyresoundingenvoy Member Posts: 439
    edited February 2013
    You realise the whole basis for this thread is basically the OP calling beams and torpedoes useless?

    Why is a ensign tactical slot useless? Because 2 are useless if you don't use torpedoes. 6 are useless if you don't use beams. Which leave "yet another tactical team". It's almost like cannon abilities a slot higher because of they're already higher base damage, they're themed to be used by escort that already have a abundance of tac slots, there is now a intensive to use those "useless items", or the idea of adding five dual cannons to a ship that could easily be used sounded just a little too overpowered. :P

    (Not that I paralytically like beam array being fobbed off as a "plan Z" item.)
  • redrickyredricky Member Posts: 1,004 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    resoundingenvoy wrote: »
    You realise the whole basis for this thread is basically the OP calling beams and torpedoes useless?
    Yeah I didn't get that impression at all, and re-reading the OP I still don't. Maybe it's just because I think the Tac version is a trap for lots of other reasons. Mainly the inability to keep both EPTx and movement debuff immunity up at 100%. Run whatever weapons loadout you want, without a dedicated healer you're going to pop after your first alpha, be it STFs or PvP.
    _______________
    CommanderDonatra@Capt.Sisko: ahhh is it supposed to do that?
    Norvo Tigan@dontdrunkimshoot: hell ya, maybe
  • resoundingenvoyresoundingenvoy Member Posts: 439
    edited February 2013
    I might amend my reason with a additional cause, but I basically stick by it. (Also honestly, the reason you give redricky are another issue I'll ignore for now. :P One problem at a time...)
    Adding "MOAR" low level tactical stations is about the least useful thing that could possibly be given to a ship

    Why is it the least useful thing? I'm sticking by because a third tactical team doesn't directly or indirectly (by blowing up attackers faster) add to survivability. Why? Beam or torpedoes are clearly "about the least useful thing that could possibly be given to a ship". I'm mostly sure that wasn't OP original sentiment, but you can't make the statement he did without first deeming beams and torpedoes utterly useless.
Sign In or Register to comment.