PvE Build critique: T6 Andromeda

yreodred

Several Weeks ago, i decided to send my previous Main character (tactical) into retirement. So please be not puzzled because that this character isn't even LvL 60 yet. (i like to take my time)

Here's my WIP T6 Andromeda (pure) PvE build.
Link to STOAcademy
It's just a boring Beam Boat build, because i'm really tired of giving myself a hard time by trying to make Torpedoes work.



Note:
Console Enhanced Neutronium Alloy [+turn] will be replaced with Plasmotic Leech
...and...
Ground DOFF Nurse, will be replaced with EMH.
...and...
Space DOFF Warp Core Engineer will be replaced with Marion DOFF. (As soon as i have enough loose cash. )

Device 3 (blank) is filled with Temporal Negotiator

Specialisation is:
Intelligence: Tier 1, (Space) and Tier 2 (Space)


I'm curious about your opinion.
(I hope i didn't forget anything.)

theraven2378

Not bad, the Iconian rep weapon set could really work with that build, the 2 piece gives an extra hull hp boost

Unknown

This content has been removed.

yreodred

westmetals wrote: »

I would swap out the Transfer Shield Strength BOFF power, possibly for Polarize Hull. And consider replacing the Command power you are using (which is pretty much for torpedoes only) with Overwhelm Emitters. As it stands, both of the current powers are useless to you.

Also since you are not getting a set bonus from it, and this is clearly a broadside build... why the antiproton omni? A standard array in that slot may get you more firepower overall... and if it doesn't, that's because you're relying on forward arc enough that you should have some DBBs up there.

Yeah, my fault. It's Overwhelm Emitters, instead of CF.
I'm going to correct that.


Regarding the omni, the differnces between the one i have installed and the other beam arrays is not that high. I'd like to keep it, just to be a bit more flexible. Even if they would be a bit weaker than beam arrays, i would happily install even more of them into the rear weapon slots.

ryakidrys

I too have the Andromeda and am liking it. I'm not sold on it being an upgrade over the Fleet Galaxy-X/ Dreadnought yet as a tanking platform, but it has been fun to run.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

yreodred

I'm way to much of a bad pilot to use DBBs on a Galaxy, lol.

stofsk

I'd keep the omnis. It's better to have flexibility than dee pee ess.

Sometimes nimble opponents can bob and weave and get outside of your broadside arc, in which case you can only hit him with one half of your weapons. If you have a few omni beam arrays then no matter what your target's position is in relation to yours you will always have most of your weapons on target. That would translate in having more damage overall and allow you to have flexibility in your manoeuvring even if having regular beam arrays would do more damage if your target is in the broadside arc.

cmdrscarlet

^ I support this post.

yreodred

stofsk wrote: »

I'd keep the omnis. It's better to have flexibility than dee pee ess.

Sometimes nimble opponents can bob and weave and get outside of your broadside arc, in which case you can only hit him with one half of your weapons. If you have a few omni beam arrays then no matter what your target's position is in relation to yours you will always have most of your weapons on target. That would translate in having more damage overall and allow you to have flexibility in your manoeuvring even if having regular beam arrays would do more damage if your target is in the broadside arc.

That's the logic i was pursuiting.
Especially since i prefer doing most stuff alone (as much as possible, of course).
I also prefer to have my ship as flexible as possible to adapt to most situations, like saving a almost failed STF for ex. or other things.
Regarding uber-Max DPS, i don't care much about that, i leave 30k+ to other people, my ship is supposed to represent a balance between offensive and defensive. I find that much more useful.

theraven2378

yreodred wrote: »

That's the logic i was pursuiting.
Especially since i prefer doing most stuff alone (as much as possible, of course).
I also prefer to have my ship as flexible as possible to adapt to most situations, like saving a almost failed STF for ex. or other things.
Regarding uber-Max DPS, i don't care much about that, i leave 30k+ to other people, my ship is supposed to represent a balance between offensive and defensive. I find that much more useful.

I use this set up with the omni aps and kcb on my fleet andromeda, it works really well in combat conditions with the ancient core having the ap damage boost from the two piece.

I do recommend the iconian rep weapon set, the 2 piece bonus as I posted in a earlier post, the full set allows your to fire a concentrated ap blast as well, when it crits, it crits hard with one clocked at 44k damage.

yreodred

theraven2378 wrote: »

I use this set up with the omni aps and kcb on my fleet andromeda, it works really well in combat conditions with the ancient core having the ap damage boost from the two piece.

I do recommend the iconian rep weapon set, the 2 piece bonus as I posted in a earlier post, the full set allows your to fire a concentrated ap blast as well, when it crits, it crits hard with one clocked at 44k damage.

It's a pity the 3 part set includes the torpedo. A more nimble ship may use torpedoes in a effective way.

But to be honest, i'm tired of trying to use Torpedoes on a heavy (slow turning) ship like the Galaxy, it's just not really feasible for me. (maybe for other players)
If a Torpedoes fireing arc would be connected to a ships turning rate (the lower the turnrate, the higher the torp. fireing arc bouns), it'd be much less of a pain to use torps on a GCS or any other slow turning ship.

stofsk

Do you have the Regent? The wide-arc quantum torpedo launcher is pretty good.

cmdrscarlet

That's a lot of real-world money for code and data that is not too impactful for fun.

I mean, if you have it then rock on. Call me jealous :P

stofsk

I got it when it first released. I'm a sucker for the Sovvy.

yreodred

stofsk wrote: »

Do you have the Regent? The wide-arc quantum torpedo launcher is pretty good.

Yeah, i bought that ship when it was released (couldn't resist then), but the only thing i use for years is that quantum torp.
I think STOs game mechanic doesn't really favour torpedoes in general (which is a pity). Beam arrays are much more effective and practical, sometimes they kill a enemy ship before even the torpedoes reach the target and even then the torpedoes impact is very unpredictable. (at least in my experience)

Not to say that the 180° quantum is the only one (besides a exorbitant photon torp) in the game.
Most weapon sets (like the Radiant Armaments Set) are simply pointless because their torpedoes have just 90° which makes them zero useable on a slow turning ship. (at least if you don't want it to become nimble like a jetfighter, which looks simply goofy imo). A full Beam configuration is much more effective at least if you don't want to fly in reverse all the time.:rolleyes:


So the Radiant Armaments Set looks nice on paper but that torpedo is simply stealing one weapon slot which could be used for a beam array. Idk what Cryptics devs where thinking tbh. Maybe they only have their beloved escorts in mind when creating those sets, but i'm really too tired to get agitated about their "politics" regarding Star Trek ships anymore.

Cryptics devs really should give Slow turning ships some bonus to their weapons fireing arc, at least to torpedoes.

cmdrscarlet

Not to be "that guy" but is it politics or conspiracy?

lately there have been a lot of talk about "Cruisers Online", when last year the game was AKA "Escorts Online". This is nomenclature made by the players based on the game. It's a perception. So, when weapon sets have this-or-that weapon type then is it some higher-up trying to manipulate the players to go in "that direction" while also feeding the lemmings what they already eat.

For example: the Radiant set has an Antiproton weapon, yet *I* don't use them. But If I wanted to, or planned to because A LOT of the current vocal community uses or recommends AP, then here is a flashy new set that helps me go in the direction.

At the same time, 3-pc bonus' are typically the best bonus in a set. Going back to Radiant set, if I want the 3-pc, then I'm going to have to use the Torp. This gets me away from the current meta of "Cruisers Online" (unless I make structural changes to my build that allows even the fattest-butt ship to turn ... better). Either I deal with a weapon that won't see much action in a fight, or I *gasp* play the game better, or I don't use a cruiser.

Another case-in-point: The latest CE event gave away a what? Antiproton Torpedo.

If you want the set then go for it and adjust. If I were in your shoes, with the build in mind, the 2-pc is as high as I would go and I'd use the Regent Torp because I paid for it and it is *still* a decent weapon *because* of its reach. Since I'm in my shoes I have decided to forgo torps because I'm that lazy. For now.

yreodred

cmdrscarlet wrote: »

Not to be "that guy" but is it politics or conspiracy?

lately there have been a lot of talk about "Cruisers Online", when last year the game was AKA "Escorts Online". This is nomenclature made by the players based on the game. It's a perception. So, when weapon sets have this-or-that weapon type then is it some higher-up trying to manipulate the players to go in "that direction" while also feeding the lemmings what they already eat.

For example: the Radiant set has an Antiproton weapon, yet *I* don't use them. But If I wanted to, or planned to because A LOT of the current vocal community uses or recommends AP, then here is a flashy new set that helps me go in the direction.

At the same time, 3-pc bonus' are typically the best bonus in a set. Going back to Radiant set, if I want the 3-pc, then I'm going to have to use the Torp. This gets me away from the current meta of "Cruisers Online" (unless I make structural changes to my build that allows even the fattest-butt ship to turn ... better). Either I deal with a weapon that won't see much action in a fight, or I *gasp* play the game better, or I don't use a cruiser.

Another case-in-point: The latest CE event gave away a what? Antiproton Torpedo.

If you want the set then go for it and adjust. If I were in your shoes, with the build in mind, the 2-pc is as high as I would go and I'd use the Regent Torp because I paid for it and it is *still* a decent weapon *because* of its reach. Since I'm in my shoes I have decided to forgo torps because I'm that lazy. For now.

That's what i wanted to say. Maybe it got lost because of all the other rigmarole i wrote.

IDK if i'm going to buy the Advanced Radiant Antiproton Beam Array anyways, i just love my [over] Beams.

yreodred

I've updated the Build a bit LINK to STOAcademy.

I'm not so sure about replacing the Assimilated console or Zero-Point energy console with the sustained Radiant field Console if anything.
I'd rather tend to get rid of the assimilated console, since its set bonus (Omega Weapon amplifier) doesn't have this much of an impact since the character is a engineer and Plasmotic leech console will be added anyways (somewhen ).
So there shouldn't be any energy problems imo.

theraven2378

yreodred wrote: »

It's a pity the 3 part set includes the torpedo. A more nimble ship may use torpedoes in a effective way.

But to be honest, i'm tired of trying to use Torpedoes on a heavy (slow turning) ship like the Galaxy, it's just not really feasible for me. (maybe for other players)
If a Torpedoes fireing arc would be connected to a ships turning rate (the lower the turnrate, the higher the torp. fireing arc bouns), it'd be much less of a pain to use torps on a GCS or any other slow turning ship.

If you go with the right pilot traits and the fleet neutronium with the + turn proc, it can be quite quick, torps work on cruisers really well depending on pilot skill, if I want to launch a ts3 it can be in the opening volley and any time I get the ship nose on to the target as I turn into the broadside.

Wide angles do the trick just as good with a torp added to the broadside.

yreodred

theraven2378 wrote: »

If you go with the right pilot traits and the fleet neutronium with the + turn proc, it can be quite quick, torps work on cruisers really well depending on pilot skill, if I want to launch a ts3 it can be in the opening volley and any time I get the ship nose on to the target as I turn into the broadside.

Wide angles do the trick just as good with a torp added to the broadside.

Sure, i could it make a AtD build, but seeing a Galaxy Class flying as nimble like a pilot escort is not why i play a Star Trek game. (if i wanted to fly such a ship i'd switch to a Pilot escort anyway).

Although many (escort) players say STO has become Cruisers online, the game mechanics treats Cruisers like slow escorts with more HP. Of course that's a basic flaw of STO and no one is going to change that, but turning a (supposedly) huge ship like the Galaxy into a jetfighter, is just meh. :eek:

Don't get me wrong, i actually tried to make a A2D build work, but it feels just bizarre and looks pretty stupid thb. lol. For ex. the ship becomes so fast its inertia makes it leave weapons range all the time, even with a higher turnrate. (as i said i really suck in flying jetfighters and to be honest, i'm not intersted in doing so.)

I hope this makes some sense to you.

sharpie65

Personally, I fly an Andromeda with phasers* and two torps (W-A Quantum in front, Grav-Photon in the boot) - it's a fun build, and not one I would change any time soon simply because of the cost implications (and because I never intend to be the highest DPS player**).

*I'm probably going to Hell for that comment.
**I think the highest my DPS has ever been is around 3-5k, mainly due to over-specialization of skill points and an extreme focus on healer-tank for my main Eng.

yreodred

sharpie65 wrote: »

Personally, I fly an Andromeda with phasers* and two torps (W-A Quantum in front, Grav-Photon in the boot) - it's a fun build, and not one I would change any time soon simply because of the cost implications (and because I never intend to be the highest DPS player**).

*I'm probably going to Hell for that comment.
**I think the highest my DPS has ever been is around 3-5k, mainly due to over-specialization of skill points and an extreme focus on healer-tank for my main Eng.

Certainly not from me.
If you like Phasers, use them. By any means!

As long as this build makes you archive what you seek, i don't see a reason to change it.

whamhammer1

If you do get the Ancient AP, I would suggest a180' torp in the front so you can do take advantage of ships with thier shields down. You would still have six beams firing forward.

yreodred

I've made a funny observation.

If i change to a 2xA2D build the ship gets a turnrate of 18.6 and speed of 45.98 (full throttle).
Now my Klingon character (which i have shamefully neglected for way too long ) flies a Negh'tev and archieves a turnrate of 22 (!) without any special gear whatsoever (using A2B and really crappy gear). (just want to show that 3 more base turnratre can make such a huge impact.)
If i would outfit the Negh'tev just like the Andromeda the difference would be much higher.


@whamhammer1
@theraven2378
@everyone else
Thank you so much for your assistance and support so far, i really appreciate it!


I've been pondering about permanently keeping a A2D build and using torpedoes (1 fore, 1 rear).
Incorporating the 180° quantum is self-evident imo. But which one would you suggest also?

As much as i can see there are

- Enhanced Bio-Molecular Photon Torpedo Launcher (Counter Command Ordnance)
- Neutronic Torpedo Launcher (Delta Alliance Ordnance)
Not so sure about those, i heard they are good, but i have no experience with them so far.

- Gravimetric Photon Torpedo Launcher (Protonic Arsenal)
I use this one with another character and the Gravimetric Rifts are quite helpful, especially when doing STFs (slowing down borg, etc.)

- Advanced Radiant Quantum Torpedo Launcher (Radiant Armaments Set)
This one would allow to use the 3 part Radiant Armaments Set:

Radiant Armaments Set bonuses
Set 2: Reinforced Radiant Field Projector

Passive
Improves Starship Structural Integrity Skill
Improves Temporary Hit Points provided by Radiant Field Projector procs

Set 3: Advanced Radiant Hypercharge

Affects self
Your Advanced Radiant Antiproton weapon fires an extremely powerful blast that deals additional damage if the target is below 50% hull.
This bonus damage increases as the target’s health decreases.

scififan78

Torpedoes can work well with a cruiser but, it can be a bit tricky. When I used torpedoes on my main's cruiser, I would use my beams to beat on the shields. Once the shields were weakened, I pop evasive to line up my torp.

Needless to say, my main was set up as a support cruiser so torpedoes were never really efficient for me. I have since replaced my torp with a KCB.

sharpie65

yreodred wrote: »

I've been pondering about permanently keeping a A2D build and using torpedoes (1 fore, 1 rear).
Incorporating the 180° quantum is self-evident imo. But which one would you suggest also?

As much as i can see there are

- Enhanced Bio-Molecular Photon Torpedo Launcher (Counter Command Ordnance)
- Neutronic Torpedo Launcher (Delta Alliance Ordnance)
Not so sure about those, i heard they are good, but i have no experience with them so far.

- Gravimetric Photon Torpedo Launcher (Protonic Arsenal)
I use this one with another character and the Gravimetric Rifts are quite helpful, especially when doing STFs (slowing down borg, etc.)

- Advanced Radiant Quantum Torpedo Launcher (Radiant Armaments Set)
This one would allow to use the 3 part Radiant Armaments Set:

Personally, I would go with either the Gravimetric Photon to make use of the rifts or the E-Bio Photon simply because I happen to have both of them and like the little gimmicks (the Radiation DoT(?) from the E-Bio Torp could also be an advantage).

whamhammer1

In regards to fore an aft torps on the ship, I dont know if it would work for your playstyle or not. I'd try out an inexpensive torpedo in the back and see if it works for you, if it does, step up, if not, you havent invested too much. If you flew in a Fed ball, I would say go for it more than not but I dont know if you PvP or not.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

yreodred

whamhammer1 wrote: »

In regards to fore an aft torps on the ship, I dont know if it would work for your playstyle or not. I'd try out an inexpensive torpedo in the back and see if it works for you, if it does, step up, if not, you havent invested too much. If you flew in a Fed ball, I would say go for it more than not but I dont know if you PvP or not.

That's a good advice in any case.
And no i don't do PvP anymore. It's too much drama, hate and other nasty stuff i consider fun killers. I prefer a more laid back playstyle and to play on my own pace.

westmetals wrote: »

Hmm. I was thinking about it, and I'd actually probably put the 180 torpedo in an aft slot, with the triple omni beams... then it can cover half of each of your broadside areas, and the other torp (whichever one you want, whether a rep one, the crafted special one, or just a regulation type) can fire forward along with all of your beam weapons.

This configuration would allow for all of your weapons (excepting the WAQT) to fire forward and all of the energy weapons into broadside (assuming you kept the single beams on the front as you mentioned earlier), with half of the broadside also covered by the WAQT. Aft you have the WAQT plus the three omnis.

That's actually a interesting idea, i'm going to try it!

yreodred

Here's a little experiment i have done. Link to STOAcademy
It's a A2D(x2)/Torpedo build i am planning.
I have yet to get the Radiant Armaments Set but so far it's fun to fly and works quite well for my requirements.

You may have noticed that the captain of that ship is a science officer, instead of a engineer like in the previous build.
I have found that a engineer is better suited in another good ship (fleet eclipse) of mine.
Science on the other hand has a better balance between offense and defense and therefore suits better to my playstyle flying the T6 Galaxy/Andromeda.