The title is simple, because the question is simple. It has been suggested that noone is asking for a T6 Sci ship for the KDF and this thread was the brainchild of that suggestion. Mainly to prove it wrong.
You can discuss what you'd like to see it be, but frankly I think it would be quicker to just reply
YES PLEASE DEVS!
as this sorts out min 10 character post and should get the numbers up quickly by being quick and to the point. Of course, you are welcome to say no, but then why bother. Abstaining is just as good an indicator of not being bothered by wanting one as saying no thanks.
I'll start...
YES PLEASE DEVS!
:: Devil's advocate mode on ::
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
:: Devil's advocate mode off ::
Ugh... I need to go wash my mouth out.
In that case Geko will insist the market is already saturated with the ships everyone bought.:P
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
:: Devil's advocate mode off ::
Ugh... I need to go wash my mouth out.
If they want us to buy something, it has do what its intended to do. Just because a ship has some of the features of a science ship doesn't make it a science vessel, merely science based. The addition of 2ndary deflectors has reset the bar as well. The Dyson ships are t5/t5-u, with t6 fleet ships coming online, that just wont be cutting it either.
New home of the Romulan Republic.
I have an idea for what Season 11 should be; Season 11: The Big Bug Fix.
I have not been able to read my bug tickets in over a year, not even the tickets about not being able to see my tickets.
I find the drama of your signature proof of your immaturity, this means you, DR whiners.
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
Basically... no one bought the ones they offered because...
1) The Varanus was
a) A subpar port of a free Fed ship
b) That cost 2000 Zen
c) That handled worse than, and had a lower Shield Mod than, the lower-tier Phalanx
2) The KDF versions of the DSD's were
a) Bugged
b) Were not styled under any of the faction species' designs for at least a year
c) Had significant components of multiple ship-specific item sets locked behind a mind-numbing grind (with no account grind discount option that year) or a Lobi paywall (in addition to the C-Store purchase).
3) The Timeship was outside of many players' price range, both as a single-item unlock and with low odds of acquisition (and correspondingly high Exchange cost).
4) Absolutely none of the KDF or Romulan Science ships were buffed when they bumped the stats of the Federation C-Store Science Ships last October... making uncompetitive Science Ship options even less competitive by comparison.
In other words, they weren't designed to sell. If the same ships had been offered on the Federation side, they would have not sold either... case in point, how many DSD's do you see over ESD these days?
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
Basically... no one bought the ones they offered because...
1) The Varanus was
a) A subpar port of a free Fed ship
b) That cost 2000 Zen
c) That handled worse than, and had a lower Shield Mod than, the lower-tier Phalanx
2) The KDF versions of the DSD's were
a) Bugged
b) Were not styled under any of the faction species' designs for at least a year
c) Had significant components of multiple ship-specific item sets locked behind a mind-numbing grind (with no account grind discount option that year) or a Lobi paywall (in addition to the C-Store purchase).
3) The Timeship was outside of many players' price range, both as a single-item unlock add with low odds of acquisition (and correspondingly high Exchange cost).
4) Absolutely none of the KDF or Romulan Science ships were buffed when they bumped the stats of the Federation C-Store Science Ships last October... making uncompetitive Science Ship options even less competitive by comparison.
In other words, they weren't designed to sell. If the same ships had been offered on the Federation side, they would have not sold either... case in point, how many DSD's do you see over ESD these days?
That may be so, but it doesn't prove that a good sci ship would have done better.
Someone saying 'I didn't buy it because X' doesn't guarantee that they would have bought it if that particular problem didn't exist; that being the case, sales figures remain their most concrete way of measuring demand.
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
:: Devil's advocate mode off ::
Ugh... I need to go wash my mouth out.
Way back when... Ford released a new car called the Edsel...
Ford Players: Dear Ford, please give us a new car model that doesn't look like TRIBBLE and does what it's supposed to
Ford Dev: No, poor sales of the Edsel *PROVE* players do not want new cars.
You: If you want Ford to release new cars that look good and work, go buy the Edsel.
Ford Devs: Improved sales of the Edsel *PROVE* players are happy with the Edsel and do not want a new car that looks good and does what it's supposed to.
Yeah, that's gonna work...
<center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day... Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
So then Ford stopped making science ships and made battlecruisers instead; which people did buy.
But were they bought because they're battlecruisers or because they aren't plagued by bugs and paywalls and aren't lagging behind the competition due to inferior stats?
Would you buy a car whose named is considered an acronym for "every day something else leaks"?
That may be so, but it doesn't prove that a good sci ship would have done better.
Someone saying 'I didn't buy it because X' doesn't guarantee that they would have bought it if that particular problem didn't exist; that being the case, sales figures remain their most concrete way of measuring demand.
That may be so, but it doesn't prove that a good sci ship would not have done better.
Someone saying "You didn't buy x" doesn't guarantee that they wouldn't have bought it if said item were worth buying; that being the case, sales figures are not a concrete measure of demand when the item offered was not actually designed to sell.
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
But were they bought because they're battlecruisers or because they aren't plagued by bugs and paywalls and aren't lagging behind the competition due to inferior stats?
Would you buy a car whose named is considered an acronym for "every day something else leaks"?
One of the great mysteries of our time. I fear we will never know. :P
It does bring up another divide...it's like folks that were talking Scryer vs. Dauntless. They are very different groups looking to fly a Sci Vessel.
Which kind of gets into what a massive turnoff the ADSDs may have been to some folks, while others might have been fine with it.
Lots of folks dog the Varanus, and while I'm there complaining about various things that make it subpar to the DSSV...that's not quite the same as complaining about the DSSV. Would have been happier had the Varanus been on par with the DSSV sort of thing.
X, X X, X
X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci
It's...it's...it's...a Sci Vessel.
There's no cloak though, so why the lower shield modifier? Why +10 Aux instead of +15 Aux? Folks have to pay for it instead of getting it free...isn't that enough to compensate for it not being part of the normal lineup?
Then that difference in shield mod carries over into the Fleet version.
Cause going Fleet is +10%...so a difference of 0.1 becomes a difference of 0.11...the difference increasing by 10%.
And speaking of the Fleet...
DSSV -> Fleet: 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci -> 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 5 Sci
Varanus -> Fleet: 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci -> 3 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci
3 Tac? With six weapon hardpoints and a Lt Tac seat?
Sure, sure...when T5U came along, it added +1 Tac for the DSSV and +1 Sci for the Varanus..."balanced" that out.
Still left with paying for the lower shield mod and lower Aux boost.
That's where my beef with the Varanus lies...not that it's a Science Vessel instead of a Tac Science Vessel.
Somebody looking for a KDF Rhode Island...yeah, the Varanus wasn't going to do that for them. Lucky for me, I guess...I can't stand the Rhode Island. Just a Lt Eng? Only a single LCdr Sci slot? Meh...pass.
Just gets into different folks and different things...and that's before getting into the various arguments about species.
Perhaps the fake Cryptic Kickstarter sort of thing is the way to go - with just how diverse the playerbase can be on certain things.
Admittedly my suggestion it still more tac focused, but thats more from a point of view of; its a klingon vessel, aggressive is what they do. whats more with the DPS meta in the game these days tactical tends to sell better, which is what cryptic want.
The last word I heard on the matter, they have no intention of making a Klingon science ship. Last time they did, they say it sold mere dozens. Gorn ships aren't seen as Klingon ships because they are not. The Dyson science cruisers did not appeal to me at all. One debatably useful science boff post and it gets removed during tactical mode? If you ask me they didn't give a real Klingon science ship a decent try. That being said, I am highly indifferent to the idea of a real T5 or T6 true Klingon science ship. I would rather see a T6 Hegh'ta. It may not have a secondary deflector on it, but there would be advantages to it too. If they do put a real effort into making a Klingon science ship instead of that Dyson dumpster diver special, maybe they would sell more than the "dozens" that they made before
The last word I heard on the matter, they have no intention of making a Klingon science ship. Last time they did, they say it sold mere dozens. Gorn ships aren't seen as Klingon ships because they are not. The Dyson science cruisers did not appeal to me at all. One debatably useful science boff post and it gets removed during tactical mode? If you ask me they didn't give a real Klingon science ship a decent try. That being said, I am highly indifferent to the idea of a real T5 or T6 true Klingon science ship. I would rather see a T6 Hegh'ta. It may not have a secondary deflector on it, but there would be advantages to it too. If they do put a real effort into making a Klingon science ship instead of that Dyson dumpster diver special, maybe they would sell more than the "dozens" that they made before
Imagine if it had 4-5 Science console mods on it. Mmmm, Science-y BoP.
Qaw'Dun hull w/ "red glowey" Intel skin
Maybe merge the Scryer and Faeht stats...
Tier 6
Reconnaissance Bird of Prey
Hull: 29,040 (at level 50) and 35,200 (at level 60)
->Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Shield Modifier: 1.0
->between the Scryer and Faeht, though on the lower end of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Weapons: Fore 4, Aft 2, Can equip dual cannons
-> total of 6 like the Scryer, but more fore like the Faeht... and tada, it's a BoP payload
-> Scryer, Faeht, and BoPs can all equip dual cannons
Crew: 150
-> halfway between the Scryer and Faeht; though admittedly high for a BoP it's the price for other benefits
Bridge Officers: Cmdr Sci/Intel, Lt Cmdr Tac, Lt Cmdr Uni, Lt Uni/Intel, Ens Uni
-> loses some "Universalness" of the BoP, but has more than the Scryer or Faeht (payback for rounding most other aspects down), favoring Sci then Tac
Device Slots: 2
-> Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Consoles: 4 Tac, 4 Sci (5 Sci Fleet), 2 Eng
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, favoring Sci then Tac
Turn Rate: 20
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Impulse Modifier: 0.21
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Inertia rating: 70
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Bonus Power: +10 weapons power, +10 auxiliary power
-> Comparable to the Scryer, since it's intended as a more "BoPish" analogue of an Intel Science Vessel
Abilities:
Secondary Deflector, Subsystem Targeting, Sensor Analysis
-> The "Science" bits
Battle Cloak
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, and matches what a BoP gets normally
Active Sensor Arrays
-> The "Intel" bits from the Scryer and Faeht
Starship Mastery Package, hmmm...
I) Enhanced Particle Generators • +15% Damage to Exotic Damage abilities
II) Advanced Shield Systems • +10% Shield Hitpoints
III) Enhanced Restorative Circuitry • Improves Hull & Shield healing abilities by 10%
IV) Reactive Shield Technology • Shield Regeneration every 6 seconds, Reduces Damage to Shields by 5%
V) Starship Trait, hmmm... something that synergizes with our other Starship Traits... like all the Fed Intel traits do...
-> Science package, like the Scryer, since it is intended to primarily fill that gap in the lineup; a Raider set that swapped something for Enhanced Particle Generators would be more to the theme, but would require something ship-specific rather than an existing package
It takes two existing designs, splits the difference in as "BoPish" a way possible, and there you go... they wouldn't even have to bother making both an Intel BoP and Intel Science Vessel... this would fill the role for both. Eh?
With each passing day I wonder if I stepped into an alternate reality. The Cubs win the world series. Donald Trump is President. Britain leaves the EU. STO gets a dedicated PvP season. Engineers are "out of control" in STO.
Qaw'Dun hull w/ "red glowey" Intel skin
Maybe merge the Scryer and Faeht stats...
Tier 6
Reconnaissance Bird of Prey
Hull: 29,040 (at level 50) and 35,200 (at level 60)
->Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Shield Modifier: 1.0
->between the Scryer and Faeht, though on the lower end of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Weapons: Fore 4, Aft 2, Can equip dual cannons
-> total of 6 like the Scryer, but more fore like the Faeht... and tada, it's a BoP payload
-> Scryer, Faeht, and BoPs can all equip dual cannons
Crew: 150
-> halfway between the Scryer and Faeht; though admittedly high for a BoP it's the price for other benefits
Bridge Officers: Cmdr Sci/Intel, Lt Cmdr Tac, Lt Cmdr Uni, Lt Uni/Intel, Ens Uni
-> loses some "Universalness" of the BoP, but has more than the Scryer or Faeht (payback for rounding most other aspects down), favoring Sci then Tac
Device Slots: 2
-> Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Consoles: 4 Tac, 4 Sci (5 Sci Fleet), 2 Eng
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, favoring Sci then Tac
Turn Rate: 20
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Impulse Modifier: 0.21
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Inertia rating: 70
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Bonus Power: +10 weapons power, +10 auxiliary power
-> Comparable to the Scryer, since it's intended as a more "BoPish" analogue of an Intel Science Vessel
Abilities:
Secondary Deflector, Subsystem Targeting, Sensor Analysis
-> The "Science" bits
Battle Cloak
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, and matches what a BoP gets normally
Active Sensor Arrays
-> The "Intel" bits from the Scryer and Faeht
Starship Mastery Package, hmmm...
I) Enhanced Particle Generators +15% Damage to Exotic Damage abilities
II) Advanced Shield Systems +10% Shield Hitpoints
III) Enhanced Restorative Circuitry Improves Hull & Shield healing abilities by 10%
IV) Reactive Shield Technology Shield Regeneration every 6 seconds, Reduces Damage to Shields by 5%
V) Starship Trait, hmmm... something that synergizes with our other Starship Traits... like all the Fed Intel traits do...
-> Science package, like the Scryer, since it is intended to primarily fill that gap in the lineup; a Raider set that swapped something for Enhanced Particle Generators would be more to the theme, but would require something ship-specific rather than an existing package
It takes two existing designs, splits the difference in as "BoPish" a way possible, and there you go... they wouldn't even have to bother making both an Intel BoP and Intel Science Vessel... this would fill the role for both. Eh?
Or take the T3 Raptor and make it a scout/signal itelligence version more akin to the Raptor we saw on "Enterprise".:P
KDF needs a ship that lets Sci captains stretch their legs, by slotting decent numbers of sci powers / consoles.
That does *not* mean it needs to be a "pure" sci ship like the Dauntless.
I feel quite strongly that a T6 KDF "pure" Sci ship should be a low priority between more distinctive classes which allow for a strong science flavour - specifically, BoPs and Carriers.
Equally, don't constrain a BoP by making it excessively sci-heavy. When (if?) we finally get a T6 BoP, it needs to be as flexible as its low-tier counterparts as, frankly, every Klingon should be able to meaningfully fly one.
IMO, the proper solution to the KDF Sci ship requirement is what it's always been - the Carrier. Plenty of scope for science play, but focussed into a combat support function rather than the "pure" approach of Fed science vessels.
So, people constantly post "Science? Klingons don't do science! lol!!!". I don't think those people have been paying attention to cannon and what the reality is in STO.
As far as cannon goes, Klingons have always wanted to weaponize science. From TV shows, to books to movies, Klingons acquiring and using science as a weapon is well established.
The reality in STO is that science vessels are not peaceful ships that meander around and passively scan anomalies. Federation science vessels are armed vessels of war that destroy ships with weaponized science-magic. They kill the crews of enemy vessels with radiation, gravity, and other terrible scientific magic stuffs that someone made up.
The players of the KDF are not asking to passively study a pre-atomic age civilization. They are asking for a similar exotic murder ship that the Federation is so adept at building. The Federation is getting better at making battlecruisers. Why cant the KDF make exotic murder ships?
So, people constantly post "Science? Klingons don't do science! lol!!!". I don't think those people have been paying attention to cannon and what the reality is in STO.
As far as cannon goes, Klingons have always wanted to weaponize science. From TV shows, to books to movies, Klingons acquiring and using science as a weapon is well established.
The reality in STO is that science vessels are not peaceful ships that meander around and passively scan anomalies. Federation science vessels are armed vessels of war that destroy ships with weaponized science-magic. They kill the crews of enemy vessels with radiation, gravity, and other terrible scientific magic stuffs that someone made up.
The players of the KDF are not asking to passively study a pre-atomic age civilization. They are asking for a similar exotic murder ship that the Federation is so adept at building. The Federation is getting better at making battlecruisers. Why cant the KDF make exotic murder ships?
This. This guy gets it. I doubt we'll see the situation ever stated any clearer.
I wish they would make more Tier 1 ships because I just love making new characters. It really never gets old doing it billions of times over and over again. Oh and the xp grind for specializations I love it and I also love DR.
Mixed feelings personally I would rather see something like outlined below as to me it makes more sense. Any KDF Sci ship would seem inevitably be a sci/warship hybrid so why not just keep it with what the KDF knows so well..... this is my opinion YMMV but if we want a Pure Sci ship then I'd be more in favor of handing it off to one of the other KDF races to see what is possible.
Charge the standard 5000zen Bundle pack, never concern ourselves with wishing for a new BoP again. :cool:
4/2 weapons
Improved Kdf BattleCloak [Decloak damage bonus at 25% same as Romulan base]
3 Special consoles with a console set bonus
3 ship traits
Mix and match ship variant parts with a bonus of running the B'Rotlh/B'rel skin as optional overlay
Intel type skin coloring option + 3 new skins [1 per ship]
Comments
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
:: Devil's advocate mode on ::
The problem for the devs is not that noone is asking for a KDF sci ship; it's that hardly anyone bought the few they did make. People ask for things all the time; doesn't guarantee that they'd be willing to spend money on it if the devs obliged.
If people really want to show the devs that there is demand for KDF sci ships, then strictly speaking they should just buy some of the ones that are already out; to prove that there is money to be made from them.
:: Devil's advocate mode off ::
Ugh... I need to go wash my mouth out.
In that case Geko will insist the market is already saturated with the ships everyone bought.:P
If they want us to buy something, it has do what its intended to do. Just because a ship has some of the features of a science ship doesn't make it a science vessel, merely science based. The addition of 2ndary deflectors has reset the bar as well. The Dyson ships are t5/t5-u, with t6 fleet ships coming online, that just wont be cutting it either.
I have an idea for what Season 11 should be; Season 11: The Big Bug Fix.
I have not been able to read my bug tickets in over a year, not even the tickets about not being able to see my tickets.
I find the drama of your signature proof of your immaturity, this means you, DR whiners.
Yes, you do... that was already responded to in the Quote from Captain Geko about KDF science ships... basically no... thread.
Basically... no one bought the ones they offered because...
1) The Varanus was
b) That cost 2000 Zen
c) That handled worse than, and had a lower Shield Mod than, the lower-tier Phalanx
b) Were not styled under any of the faction species' designs for at least a year
c) Had significant components of multiple ship-specific item sets locked behind a mind-numbing grind (with no account grind discount option that year) or a Lobi paywall (in addition to the C-Store purchase).
3) The Timeship was outside of many players' price range, both as a single-item unlock and with low odds of acquisition (and correspondingly high Exchange cost).
4) Absolutely none of the KDF or Romulan Science ships were buffed when they bumped the stats of the Federation C-Store Science Ships last October... making uncompetitive Science Ship options even less competitive by comparison.
In other words, they weren't designed to sell. If the same ships had been offered on the Federation side, they would have not sold either... case in point, how many DSD's do you see over ESD these days?
That may be so, but it doesn't prove that a good sci ship would have done better.
Someone saying 'I didn't buy it because X' doesn't guarantee that they would have bought it if that particular problem didn't exist; that being the case, sales figures remain their most concrete way of measuring demand.
Way back when... Ford released a new car called the Edsel...
Yeah, that's gonna work...
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
So then Ford stopped making science ships and made battlecruisers instead; which people did buy.
But were they bought because they're battlecruisers or because they aren't plagued by bugs and paywalls and aren't lagging behind the competition due to inferior stats?
Would you buy a car whose named is considered an acronym for "every day something else leaks"?
That may be so, but it doesn't prove that a good sci ship would not have done better.
Someone saying "You didn't buy x" doesn't guarantee that they wouldn't have bought it if said item were worth buying; that being the case, sales figures are not a concrete measure of demand when the item offered was not actually designed to sell.
One of the great mysteries of our time. I fear we will never know. :P
Which kind of gets into what a massive turnoff the ADSDs may have been to some folks, while others might have been fine with it.
Lots of folks dog the Varanus, and while I'm there complaining about various things that make it subpar to the DSSV...that's not quite the same as complaining about the DSSV. Would have been happier had the Varanus been on par with the DSSV sort of thing.
X, X
X, X
X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci
It's...it's...it's...a Sci Vessel.
There's no cloak though, so why the lower shield modifier? Why +10 Aux instead of +15 Aux? Folks have to pay for it instead of getting it free...isn't that enough to compensate for it not being part of the normal lineup?
Then that difference in shield mod carries over into the Fleet version.
DSSV -> Fleet: 1.3 -> 1.43
Varanus -> Fleet: 1.2 -> 1.32
Cause going Fleet is +10%...so a difference of 0.1 becomes a difference of 0.11...the difference increasing by 10%.
And speaking of the Fleet...
DSSV -> Fleet: 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci -> 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 5 Sci
Varanus -> Fleet: 2 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci -> 3 Tac - 3 Eng - 4 Sci
3 Tac? With six weapon hardpoints and a Lt Tac seat?
Sure, sure...when T5U came along, it added +1 Tac for the DSSV and +1 Sci for the Varanus..."balanced" that out.
Still left with paying for the lower shield mod and lower Aux boost.
That's where my beef with the Varanus lies...not that it's a Science Vessel instead of a Tac Science Vessel.
Somebody looking for a KDF Rhode Island...yeah, the Varanus wasn't going to do that for them. Lucky for me, I guess...I can't stand the Rhode Island. Just a Lt Eng? Only a single LCdr Sci slot? Meh...pass.
Just gets into different folks and different things...and that's before getting into the various arguments about species.
Perhaps the fake Cryptic Kickstarter sort of thing is the way to go - with just how diverse the playerbase can be on certain things.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=23625821&postcount=34
Admittedly my suggestion it still more tac focused, but thats more from a point of view of; its a klingon vessel, aggressive is what they do. whats more with the DPS meta in the game these days tactical tends to sell better, which is what cryptic want.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
I want a 4/2 Science vessel.
Commander Science, Lt Science/Intel.
Lt Commander Tactical.
Lt Engineering.
Lt Universal.
That is all.
How about a special Science/Intel BoP?
Qaw'Dun hull w/ "red glowey" Intel skin
Maybe merge the Scryer and Faeht stats...
Tier 6
Reconnaissance Bird of Prey
Hull: 29,040 (at level 50) and 35,200 (at level 60)
->Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Shield Modifier: 1.0
->between the Scryer and Faeht, though on the lower end of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Weapons: Fore 4, Aft 2, Can equip dual cannons
-> total of 6 like the Scryer, but more fore like the Faeht... and tada, it's a BoP payload
-> Scryer, Faeht, and BoPs can all equip dual cannons
Crew: 150
-> halfway between the Scryer and Faeht; though admittedly high for a BoP it's the price for other benefits
Bridge Officers: Cmdr Sci/Intel, Lt Cmdr Tac, Lt Cmdr Uni, Lt Uni/Intel, Ens Uni
-> loses some "Universalness" of the BoP, but has more than the Scryer or Faeht (payback for rounding most other aspects down), favoring Sci then Tac
Device Slots: 2
-> Comparable to the Faeht, the weaker of the two reference designs in this aspect, since it's a BoP
Consoles: 4 Tac, 4 Sci (5 Sci Fleet), 2 Eng
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, favoring Sci then Tac
Turn Rate: 20
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Impulse Modifier: 0.21
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Inertia rating: 70
-> Just below the Faeht, since it adds many Scryer characteristics, but it's still a BoP
Bonus Power: +10 weapons power, +10 auxiliary power
-> Comparable to the Scryer, since it's intended as a more "BoPish" analogue of an Intel Science Vessel
Abilities:
Secondary Deflector, Subsystem Targeting, Sensor Analysis
-> The "Science" bits
Battle Cloak
-> Halfway between the Scryer and Faeht, and matches what a BoP gets normally
Active Sensor Arrays
-> The "Intel" bits from the Scryer and Faeht
Starship Mastery Package, hmmm...
I) Enhanced Particle Generators • +15% Damage to Exotic Damage abilities
II) Advanced Shield Systems • +10% Shield Hitpoints
III) Enhanced Restorative Circuitry • Improves Hull & Shield healing abilities by 10%
IV) Reactive Shield Technology • Shield Regeneration every 6 seconds, Reduces Damage to Shields by 5%
V) Starship Trait, hmmm... something that synergizes with our other Starship Traits... like all the Fed Intel traits do...
-> Science package, like the Scryer, since it is intended to primarily fill that gap in the lineup; a Raider set that swapped something for Enhanced Particle Generators would be more to the theme, but would require something ship-specific rather than an existing package
It takes two existing designs, splits the difference in as "BoPish" a way possible, and there you go... they wouldn't even have to bother making both an Intel BoP and Intel Science Vessel... this would fill the role for both. Eh?
Or take the T3 Raptor and make it a scout/signal itelligence version more akin to the Raptor we saw on "Enterprise".:P
That does *not* mean it needs to be a "pure" sci ship like the Dauntless.
I feel quite strongly that a T6 KDF "pure" Sci ship should be a low priority between more distinctive classes which allow for a strong science flavour - specifically, BoPs and Carriers.
Equally, don't constrain a BoP by making it excessively sci-heavy. When (if?) we finally get a T6 BoP, it needs to be as flexible as its low-tier counterparts as, frankly, every Klingon should be able to meaningfully fly one.
IMO, the proper solution to the KDF Sci ship requirement is what it's always been - the Carrier. Plenty of scope for science play, but focussed into a combat support function rather than the "pure" approach of Fed science vessels.
As far as cannon goes, Klingons have always wanted to weaponize science. From TV shows, to books to movies, Klingons acquiring and using science as a weapon is well established.
The reality in STO is that science vessels are not peaceful ships that meander around and passively scan anomalies. Federation science vessels are armed vessels of war that destroy ships with weaponized science-magic. They kill the crews of enemy vessels with radiation, gravity, and other terrible scientific magic stuffs that someone made up.
The players of the KDF are not asking to passively study a pre-atomic age civilization. They are asking for a similar exotic murder ship that the Federation is so adept at building. The Federation is getting better at making battlecruisers. Why cant the KDF make exotic murder ships?
This. This guy gets it. I doubt we'll see the situation ever stated any clearer.
Mixed feelings personally I would rather see something like outlined below as to me it makes more sense. Any KDF Sci ship would seem inevitably be a sci/warship hybrid so why not just keep it with what the KDF knows so well..... this is my opinion YMMV but if we want a Pure Sci ship then I'd be more in favor of handing it off to one of the other KDF races to see what is possible.
/10char
Right here guys. I took the time to hammer out a basic layout of not one, but two Orion science vessles.
From what I've read here. It seem the main arguement is who makes the ship.
Well for this lets look at our Races.
Klingons, mostly warriors, and some engineer.
Naussicans and Letheans are the same.
Orions already have a long history of space exploration and science.
Gorns have already given us science ships(sup-par as they maybe).