Thanks for agreeing. I love Intrepid, I waited for a T6 version to finally have a better one and jumped on it, despite this huge fallacy.
I'm not accusing Cryptic of anything by the way, I suppose they didn't realize that every T6 ship that didn't have a commander hybrid needed their LtCs to be hybrid, until the JHSS came out: from there followed the Samsar, Galaxy, Xindi Olean (LtC Command), Xindi Ateleth (LtC Command), Negh'Tev, D'Khellra, the two Elachi Sheshars, even the Ferengi Nandi now.
Now that they finally found that out, it's time to look back and bring up to standard the ships that were... "unlucky" to come out first, one of them being the Pathfinder that, among all of them, had the worst treatment.
I'd say cmd sci for intel really, you've got ltc sci for heals and a grav well, an intel/sci slot has the options of using up to ltc intel and still have grav well III
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
I'd say cmd sci for intel really, you've got ltc sci for heals and a grav well, an intel/sci slot has the options of using up to ltc intel and still have grav well III
Impossible. Commander hybrid is only for specialization specific ships, like the Scryer. LtC is as far as it can go, and as far as every other ship is going after the JHSS.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
Impossible. Commander hybrid is only for specialization specific ships, like the Scryer. LtC is as far as it can go, and as far as every other ship is going after the JHSS.
good point
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
I don't have a pathfinder so I should not even be in this thread...but when has that ever stopped someone on the STO forums.
People bought this ship clearly knowing what it is boff layout is. I'm willing to wager changing it would annoy the heck out of them. That is all.
How can they? Full access to Intelligence abilities, Universal is no longer locked to be given to engineering. It'd bring the ship up to current T6 standards as far as it goes for hybrid seats.
No one can possibly want to keep the Lt Engi/Hybrid. It forces you to give the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. Even so, you don't even have access to the full array of intel powers.
As far as I'm seeing in this thread everyone would happily trade the Lt for LtC. The only one was the first reply from someone who didn't even know what "Engineering" is.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
Also that intel would be too powerful compared to command is kind of bogus.
If you know how to build a real good torpedo-centric ship, Concentrate Firepower III is EXTREMELY powerful.
With the new vet ship and its trait, even more so than ever before.
Concentrate Firepower is deeply overrated for all versions.
Concentrate Firepower's perks are best in Single Player play and preferrably with as few to no friendly units with a torpedo on them. Once you get into multiplayer instances, adventure zones, missions, the benefit of that ability for the originator goes out the window. This is even more so if there are friendly hangar units that have a torpedo launcher (yes, hangar units can take your CF proc, you can test this yourself with hangar units that have torps and no torp buff like HYT). And this only gets worse with CF I & II. There's a lot of very specific parameters for CF to shine and when you go multiplayer, it goes to TRIBBLE.
How can they? Full access to Intelligence abilities, Universal is no longer locked to be given to engineering. It'd bring the ship up to current T6 standards as far as it goes for hybrid seats.
No one can possibly want to keep the Lt Engi/Hybrid. It forces you to give the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. Even so, you don't even have access to the full array of intel powers.
As far as I'm seeing in this thread everyone would happily trade the Lt for LtC. The only one was the first reply from someone who didn't even know what "Engineering" is.
Your idea looks to take the science out of THE science ship. I know science does have many fans but I'm one of them and I'm sure the other people who brough the Pathfinder is one too.
How can they? Full access to Intelligence abilities, Universal is no longer locked to be given to engineering. It'd bring the ship up to current T6 standards as far as it goes for hybrid seats.
No one can possibly want to keep the Lt Engi/Hybrid. It forces you to give the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. Even so, you don't even have access to the full array of intel powers.
As far as I'm seeing in this thread everyone would happily trade the Lt for LtC. The only one was the first reply from someone who didn't even know what "Engineering" is.
Indeed, I own the Pathfinder as well, and don't use it mainly for it's lack of engineering capabilities when using Intel.
I'd be more than happy to give up a couple of sci abilities for the Intel ones.
Your idea looks to take the science out of THE science ship. I know science does have many fans but I'm one of them and I'm sure the other people who brough the Pathfinder is one too.
What?... Taking out? You mean you wouldn't trade a science seat to slot Override 3 and automatically boost every science boff and captain ability? Or using Turbulence for debuffing? Or both of them which will make your science powers do even more wonders?
Or using Transport Warhead for the sake of feeling like Harry Kim during the series?
And if you have troubles with that, where's the problem? Give the universal to science.
Right now you can't even think of not giving the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. If you don't want to, well options are two: you bought a T6 ship for nothing, or you're not interested in them, which means it doesn't matter which stations for you gets the hybrid.
Indeed, I own the Pathfinder as well, and don't use it mainly for it's lack of engineering capabilities when using Intel.
I'd be more than happy to give up a couple of sci abilities for the Intel ones.
Exactly. With the only difference being that I use the Pathfinder and I feel that as a major downside.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
i am so in favor of this... i felt from the beginning that having the Intel. tacked to the Eng. was just an odd decision for a Science Ship, it should have been Lt.Com. Sci.\Intel. from the start...
OSS1 and IonicT1 have been plenty sufficient and sufficiently potent for the job (Adv and the few Elites I did play with one in), compared to the somewhat lackluster Command and Pilot Spec skills. Add in the new Destabilizing Resonance Beam and you're practically tearing through paper armor, while retaining enough reserve Sci seats to configure for skill double-up or for improved defensive capabilities (via FB or TBR or HE for example).
As well, has it even been confirmed that the rumored Defiant is going to follow the Andromeda path rather than the Pathfinder path?
Because unlike the Intrepid and Defiant, the Galaxy was gimped with an Eng version of those two's layouts, and did need the LtC Eng made a Hybrid seat as well as adding upgrading the Lt Tac to LtC Tac to give it a bit more offense in the current meta.
The Defiant in comparison is perfectly viable with a Cmdr Tac and LtC Tac, and can live without the LtC Pilot abilities the same way the Pathfinder can (and most high DPS Pathfinder builds make full use of the large Sci skill seats with either OsS1/2 and IonT1).
Pathfinder pilot here. I never minded the Intel seating in this ship. Personally I think it is fine as it is since I only needed Engineering Team 1 in Engineering. The ship already has a lot of potential as it is.
Now for PvP maybe it would be great to have the changes as the OP suggested, but for PvE, it's already a fine ship as is.
Your idea looks to take the science out of THE science ship. I know science does have many fans but I'm one of them and I'm sure the other people who brough the Pathfinder is one too.
Intel itself is a pretty Sci heavy (Boff) Spec...
Intel Team
Subspace Beacon
EMP Probe
Ionic Turbulence
Kinetic Magnet
SNB Carrier Wave
More than half (6/11) of the Intel BOff abilities are pretty Sci-centric, while a case can be made for a few others, too.
If anything, that gives the the Science ship access to more Science-esque abilities, making it more Science-y.
If it's such a problem to convert the LtC Sci into an LtC Sci/Intel because of the perceived "loss" of Sci seating, there's always the Universal Lt that can be used as a Sci.
More than half (6/11) of the Intel BOff abilities are pretty Sci-centric, while a case can be made for a few others, too.
If anything, that gives the the Science ship access to more Science-esque abilities, making it more Science-y.
If it's such a problem to convert the LtC Sci into an LtC Sci/Intel because of the perceived "loss" of Sci seating, there's always the Universal Lt that can be used as a Sci.
No because by your logic you remove the science to add sci-ish, but you basically would have extra sci-ish by replacing your engi powers with sci-isn and leaving yhe sci alone. Basically with the engi as the intel, you have the option of engi or more sci-ish. By your logic.
The issue here is that compared to a handful of intel powers, sci sucks.... or the intel power is op. Probably both. What needs to happen is NOT to make the sci seat the intel seat, but to make sci abilities just as damn good. When people are saying they want to remove the science on a science ship to make it worth a damn (in which they are correct) it should say something about the sorry state of science compared to the poster child intel.
So I say no, leave the Pathfinder as is, but fix Science to be useful.
OSS1 and IonicT1 have been plenty sufficient and sufficiently potent for the job (Adv and the few Elites I did play with one in), compared to the somewhat lackluster Command and Pilot Spec skills. Add in the new Destabilizing Resonance Beam and you're practically tearing through paper armor, while retaining enough reserve Sci seats to configure for skill double-up or for improved defensive capabilities (via FB or TBR or HE for example).
As well, has it even been confirmed that the rumored Defiant is going to follow the Andromeda path rather than the Pathfinder path?
Because unlike the Intrepid and Defiant, the Galaxy was gimped with an Eng version of those two's layouts, and did need the LtC Eng made a Hybrid seat as well as adding upgrading the Lt Tac to LtC Tac to give it a bit more offense in the current meta.
The Defiant in comparison is perfectly viable with a Cmdr Tac and LtC Tac, and can live without the LtC Pilot abilities the same way the Pathfinder can (and most high DPS Pathfinder builds make full use of the large Sci skill seats with either OsS1/2 and IonT1).
Think about it, how can this change affect you? If you only use 2 lt intel powers, you can always move the Universal to science and still feel it the same while. However, it'd open even more possibilities for other players by having access to the full array of Intel.
No because by your logic you remove the science to add sci-ish, but you basically would have extra sci-ish by replacing your engi powers with sci-isn and leaving yhe sci alone. Basically with the engi as the intel, you have the option of engi or more sci-ish. By your logic.
The issue here is that compared to a handful of intel powers, sci sucks.... or the intel power is op. Probably both. What needs to happen is NOT to make the sci seat the intel seat, but to make sci abilities just as damn good. When people are saying they want to remove the science on a science ship to make it worth a damn (in which they are correct) it should say something about the sorry state of science compared to the poster child intel.
So I say no, leave the Pathfinder as is, but fix Science to be useful.
Science? Useful? My Tractor Beam Repulsors deal already over 10k kinetic damage per pulse, FBP1 will oneshot escorts if they're not careful and my resonance beam can potentially kill someone with just one activation. If science is not already powerful for you, then you're doing it wrong.
If you put Subsystem Override 3 you're basically giving 175 auxiliary power to all your science powers: how can that suck for you? Plus, remember the Universal seating: you can give it to science easily and have access to 2 more science powers without worrying about suiciding in the engineering compartment. Tell me: in the current state, would you give the Lt Uni to science? Would you give it to tac?
Or would you give it to engineering? That universal is a false one.
Plus, the more I think about how it can't use Transport Warhead like Kim did, the more I'm convincing that I'm right.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
They haven't after release and I doubt they will do that because people would complain and demand refunds. So the Intrepid will for all times be stuck with the layout it has now. But I fully support the OPs proposal, it needed to be changed accordingly to create a balance between the ships.
In my opinion, a T6 Nebula should feature CMDR Sci, LTC Eng/Intel, LTC Uni (upgraded Lt Uni), Lt Tac, Ens Sci
No because by your logic you remove the science to add sci-ish, but you basically would have extra sci-ish by replacing your engi powers with sci-isn and leaving yhe sci alone. Basically with the engi as the intel, you have the option of engi or more sci-ish. By your logic.
The issue here is that compared to a handful of intel powers, sci sucks.... or the intel power is op. Probably both. What needs to happen is NOT to make the sci seat the intel seat, but to make sci abilities just as damn good. When people are saying they want to remove the science on a science ship to make it worth a damn (in which they are correct) it should say something about the sorry state of science compared to the poster child intel.
So I say no, leave the Pathfinder as is, but fix Science to be useful.
You're not required to run Intel abilities in those slots, it merely affords you the chance to. And, again, if losing those Sci seats is that crippling, then running a Sci Boff in the LT Uni seat should alleviate that.
I see both the players who want it buffed point of view, and also the Devs view - it's not a "full" Intel ship, so it should only get (at max) an Lt Spec seat, according to their development philosophy.
I agree 100% with your thoughts on Intel and Sci, though. One is over the top (spec) and the other needs a major buff so that Sci isn't just TBR with the occasional GW or FBP.
You're not required to run Intel abilities in those slots, it merely affords you the chance to. And, again, if losing those Sci seats is that crippling, then running a Sci Boff in the LT Uni seat should alleviate that.
But using that Universal Lt. slot for Science can also gimp you since that slot can also allow you 2 extra tactical skills.
I've given this more thought and I think I just feel more that making the Engineering slot the Intel seat as well is better for this ship in PVE (which is maybe 98-99% of the game anyway). In PvE, you don't need that many Engineering skills. I am happy just using Engineering Team 1. If you move the Intel seat to the Sci Lt. Cdr, you either lose some useful Science skills to use Intel, or you lose an extra Tactical seat if you use the Universal for Science.
Now in PvP (which seems to be what majority of the comments here seems to be about) I agree the additional Intel capabilities with the Sci Lt. Cdr. seat and more Engineering skills would be very useful. That's why I think the Scryer's seating is better than the Pathfinder here.
In my view, the ship was never meant to be an Intel ship. It's a Science ship that happened to have the capability to run a few Intel abilities if wanted.
Maybe we can ask Cryptic to just give us both Eng/Int and Sci/Int seating? The Scryer has both Tac/Int and Sci/Int. That would be more awesome IMO.
But using that Universal Lt. slot for Science can also gimp you since that slot can also allow you 2 extra tactical skills.
I've given this more thought and I think I just feel more that making the Engineering slot the Intel seat as well is better for this ship in PVE (which is maybe 98-99% of the game anyway). In PvE, you don't need that many Engineering skills. I am happy just using Engineering Team 1. If you move the Intel seat to the Sci Lt. Cdr, you either lose some useful Science skills to use Intel, or you lose an extra Tactical seat if you use the Universal for Science.
Now in PvP (which seems to be what majority of the comments here seems to be about) I agree the additional Intel capabilities with the Sci Lt. Cdr. seat and more Engineering skills would be very useful. That's why I think the Scryer's seating is better than the Pathfinder here.
In my view, the ship was never meant to be an Intel ship. It's a Science ship that happened to have the capability to run a few Intel abilities if wanted.
Maybe we can ask Cryptic to just give us both Eng/Int and Sci/Int seating? The Scryer has both Tac/Int and Sci/Int. That would be more awesome IMO.
Another reason why PvE should be harder. A ship needs at the very least 2 engineering slots, 1 is out of discussion but none? Sorry to say it but if you think "Engineering Team 1" is enough then you need someone to teach you game mechanics (or what's left of 'em).
Again: losing Science abilities? Give the lieutenant Uni to science then!. In the current state, that Universal is a false one for the reasons I've provided multiple times in the last pages and I'm not gonna repeat myself yet another time.
You lose tactical abilities? Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
Another reason why PvE should be harder. A ship needs at the very least 2 engineering slots, 1 is out of discussion but none? Sorry to say it but if you think "Engineering Team 1" is enough then you need someone to teach you game mechanics (or what's left of 'em).
Maybe you are right, PvE needs to be harder. Personally, I am doing fine with just ET1 in advanced queues while still pushing some decent DPS out of this ship. I am far from a great pilot, but I have seen Pathfinders out there pushing much higher numbers than I do (Ryan's 70kDPS for example) and we all know PVE is 90% is all about DPS in this game.
Again: losing Science abilities? Give the lieutenant Uni to science then!. In the current state, that Universal is a false one for the reasons I've provided multiple times in the last pages.
You lose tactical abilities? Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing.
If you need 2 Engineering skills, then you could lose Intel Skills. So back at you: "Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing."
Maybe you are right, PvE needs to be harder. Personally, I am doing fine with just ET1 in advanced queues while still pushing some decent DPS out of this ship. I am far from a great pilot, but I have seen Pathfinders out there pushing much higher numbers than I do (Ryan's 70kDPS for example) and we all know PVE is 90% is all about DPS in this game.
If you need 2 Engineering skills, then you could lose Intel Skills. So back at you: "Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing."
There's a difference between "choosing" and "outright bad". your "If you need" is wrong. It's "You MUST use 2 engineering skills". And those two are 2 cycling EPTX. You can't even pick up intel reliably because doing so forces you in one unique boff pattern for the ship.
Now, more straightforwardly, learn game mechanics, you made clear that you are overrating your knowledge of them.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
There's a difference between "choosing" and "outright bad". your "If you need" is wrong. It's "You MUST use 2 engineering skills". And those two are 2 cycling EPTX. You can't even pick up intel reliably because doing so forces you in one unique boff pattern for the ship.
In my example above, Ryan did not even need the Intel skills to get over 70k in that Pathfinder. And if I remember right, it wasn't even with his normal team backing him up. So in PvE, if you want to run the ship wiith 2 Engineering skills, you won't lose much without the intel skills.
Now, more straightforwardly, learn game mechanics, you made clear that you are overrating your knowledge of them.
I may be new, and I may still be learning, but I at least know enough of the game and its mechanics to build and fly a ship decently through majority of the game (PVE). I stand by my opinion, in PVE, you can build this ship to do well with just 1 Engineering skill.
PVP is of course a different thing. That's why I also pointed out that the Scryer's layout is much better suited here. Instead of forcing players like me who bought the ship because we liked both it and its layout to play with your desired layout, why not suggest it to be more similar to the Scryer (with 2 Intel seating options)? That would be even more ideal IMO.
In my example above, Ryan did not even need the Intel skills to get over 70k in that Pathfinder. And if I remember right, it wasn't even with his normal team backing him up. So in PvE, if you want to run the ship wiith 2 Engineering skills, you won't lose much without the intel skills.
I may be new, and I may still be learning, but I at least know enough of the game and its mechanics to build and fly a ship decently through majority of the game (PVE). I stand by my opinion, in PVE, you can build this ship to do well with just 1 Engineering skill.
PVP is of course a different thing. That's why I also pointed out that the Scryer's layout is much better suited here. Instead of forcing players like me who bought the ship because we liked both it and its layout to play with your desired layout, why not suggest it to be more similar to the Scryer (with 2 Intel seating options)? That would be even more ideal IMO.
You can't simply because Scryer is a full intel ship. Pathfinder is not.
Plus, I know many high DPSers in game and surprisingly(?), they share my opinion. Leave PvE and PvP bickering, they don't matter. Ship hybrid seat is objectively bad.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
You can't simply because Scryer is a full intel ship. Pathfinder is not.
Plus, I know many high DPSers in game and surprisingly(?), they share my opinion. Leave PvE and PvP bickering, they don't matter. Ship hybrid seat is objectively bad.
I wouldn't call it objectively bad. Compromised maybe. If it were as bad as you say it is, then no one would have gotten 70k out of it, and there wouldn't be people doing 50-60k on it. I don't even consider myself a good pilot but even I have hit 50k on it (using ET1 and OSS2 and I am not even a tac captain. ).
If you want to focus on PVE then I would say that the seating is "good enough" for PVE. It's not perfect, neither is it great, but it is good enough to tackle all of the game's content as any end-game ship can.
Like you said, the Pathfinder isn't a full intel ship. It's a Science ship first and foremost. And I am happy this is one Science ship you can actually go very deep into Science-based builds and abilities.
I wouldn't call it objectively bad. Compromised maybe. If it were as bad as you say it is, then no one would have gotten 70k out of it, and there wouldn't be people doing 50-60k on it. I don't even consider myself a good pilot but even I have hit 50k on it (using ET1 and OSS2 and I am not even a tac captain. ).
If you want to focus on PVE then I would say that the seating is "good enough" for PVE. It's not perfect, neither is it great, but it is good enough to tackle all of the game's content as any end-game ship can.
Like you said, the Pathfinder isn't a full intel ship. It's a Science ship first and foremost. And I am happy this is one Science ship you can actually go very deep into Science-based builds and abilities.
What you say has no logic. That ship is bad, and DPS isn't a reliable way to measure ship performance. It can go science heavy even with LtC Science/hybrid: I fly science ships since before the ice age to use a metaphor, I really don't need a DPS testing lesson just to tell me that I'm wrong. You said two EPTX are not needed; even high DPSers say they are needed. Thus, you invalidated your point on this one. Even the Scryer is first and foremost a science vessel, secondly an intel one.
Now, more straightforwardly, learn game mechanics, you made clear that you are overrating your knowledge of them.
...no offence meant, of course.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
What you say has no logic. That ship is bad, and DPS isn't a reliable way to measure ship performance. It can go science heavy even with LtC Science/hybrid: I fly science ships since before the ice age to use a metaphor, I really don't need a DPS testing lesson just to tell me that I'm wrong. You said two EPTX are not needed; even high DPSers say they are needed. Thus, you invalidated your point on this one. Even the Scryer is first and foremost a science vessel, secondly an intel one.
I'll do a temporal backstep and say it
...no offence meant, of course.
Two EPTX isn't needed for all builds. There are builds that don't need it such as torpedo-centric builds (which have gotten a nice boost btw with the new T6 vet ship trait). And IMO, the Pathfinder is a great torpedo platform. They aren't that rare either, since I run into a lot of Pathfinder torpedo boats when I PUG around too.
No offense taken. This is a discussion afterall and you bring valid points. I may not completely agree with you, but that doesn't mean I'll take offense if you have other views than I do.
Science? Useful? My Tractor Beam Repulsors deal already over 10k kinetic damage per pulse, FBP1 will oneshot escorts if they're not careful and my resonance beam can potentially kill someone with just one activation. If science is not already powerful for you, then you're doing it wrong.
If you put Subsystem Override 3 you're basically giving 175 auxiliary power to all your science powers: how can that suck for you? Plus, remember the Universal seating: you can give it to science easily and have access to 2 more science powers without worrying about suiciding in the engineering compartment. Tell me: in the current state, would you give the Lt Uni to science? Would you give it to tac?
Or would you give it to engineering? That universal is a false one.
Plus, the more I think about how it can't use Transport Warhead like Kim did, the more I'm convincing that I'm right.
By the simple fact that we are talking about removing a science+ slot for a non-science power just to make our ships rock speaks of the balance issue involved. It's a science ship and by that definition a LCDR slot should be filled with science. Not only that we should be agonizing over our builds and not just simply sliding in another of the same old skills.
The fact that this should be concidered speaks loudly over the state of science. Lets put system overload in because it's practically mandatory any more, and is hands down better then any lcdr science skill out there speaks volumes.]
By the simple fact that we are talking about removing a science+ slot for a non-science power just to make our ships rock speaks of the balance issue involved. It's a science ship and by that definition a LCDR slot should be filled with science. Not only that we should be agonizing over our builds and not just simply sliding in another of the same old skills.
The fact that this should be concidered speaks loudly over the state of science. Lets put system overload in because it's practically mandatory any more, and is hands down better then any lcdr science skill out there speaks volumes.]
So Icarus makes no sense in giving up tactical abilities, being an escort, to use pilot ones? Or Samsar/Galaxy to give up engineering abilities, being a cruiser, to use command ones? Why should the Pathfinder be different? Again, science is powerful enough that Override isn't even compulsory. However if you want to pick up something from Intel, the seatings immediately become overly inflexible. If picking up Intel gives you problems, you can give the Universal to science and solve them, if the LtC was a hybrid.
Plus, why can't the Pathfinder use Transport Warhead? With LtC science it would be able to at least. The T5 era is gone, don't think it like if it was the T5 Intrepid that has to use science slots for science abilities.
I need to get to him. I can't just leave him out there alone. - Sometimes you've got to makes sacrifices, Lara. You can't save everyone. - I know about sacrifices. - No, you know about loss. Sacrifice is a choice you make. Loss is a choice made for you. - I can't choose to let him die, Roth.
Comments
I'd say cmd sci for intel really, you've got ltc sci for heals and a grav well, an intel/sci slot has the options of using up to ltc intel and still have grav well III
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Impossible. Commander hybrid is only for specialization specific ships, like the Scryer. LtC is as far as it can go, and as far as every other ship is going after the JHSS.
good point
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
People bought this ship clearly knowing what it is boff layout is. I'm willing to wager changing it would annoy the heck out of them. That is all.
How can they? Full access to Intelligence abilities, Universal is no longer locked to be given to engineering. It'd bring the ship up to current T6 standards as far as it goes for hybrid seats.
No one can possibly want to keep the Lt Engi/Hybrid. It forces you to give the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. Even so, you don't even have access to the full array of intel powers.
As far as I'm seeing in this thread everyone would happily trade the Lt for LtC. The only one was the first reply from someone who didn't even know what "Engineering" is.
Concentrate Firepower is deeply overrated for all versions.
Concentrate Firepower's perks are best in Single Player play and preferrably with as few to no friendly units with a torpedo on them. Once you get into multiplayer instances, adventure zones, missions, the benefit of that ability for the originator goes out the window. This is even more so if there are friendly hangar units that have a torpedo launcher (yes, hangar units can take your CF proc, you can test this yourself with hangar units that have torps and no torp buff like HYT). And this only gets worse with CF I & II. There's a lot of very specific parameters for CF to shine and when you go multiplayer, it goes to TRIBBLE.
Command abilities are just straight up, mediocre.
Your idea looks to take the science out of THE science ship. I know science does have many fans but I'm one of them and I'm sure the other people who brough the Pathfinder is one too.
Indeed, I own the Pathfinder as well, and don't use it mainly for it's lack of engineering capabilities when using Intel.
I'd be more than happy to give up a couple of sci abilities for the Intel ones.
What?... Taking out? You mean you wouldn't trade a science seat to slot Override 3 and automatically boost every science boff and captain ability? Or using Turbulence for debuffing? Or both of them which will make your science powers do even more wonders?
Or using Transport Warhead for the sake of feeling like Harry Kim during the series?
And if you have troubles with that, where's the problem? Give the universal to science.
Right now you can't even think of not giving the universal to engineering if you want to pick up Intel. If you don't want to, well options are two: you bought a T6 ship for nothing, or you're not interested in them, which means it doesn't matter which stations for you gets the hybrid.
There's simply no way it can be a bad change.
Exactly. With the only difference being that I use the Pathfinder and I feel that as a major downside.
OSS1 and IonicT1 have been plenty sufficient and sufficiently potent for the job (Adv and the few Elites I did play with one in), compared to the somewhat lackluster Command and Pilot Spec skills. Add in the new Destabilizing Resonance Beam and you're practically tearing through paper armor, while retaining enough reserve Sci seats to configure for skill double-up or for improved defensive capabilities (via FB or TBR or HE for example).
As well, has it even been confirmed that the rumored Defiant is going to follow the Andromeda path rather than the Pathfinder path?
Because unlike the Intrepid and Defiant, the Galaxy was gimped with an Eng version of those two's layouts, and did need the LtC Eng made a Hybrid seat as well as adding upgrading the Lt Tac to LtC Tac to give it a bit more offense in the current meta.
The Defiant in comparison is perfectly viable with a Cmdr Tac and LtC Tac, and can live without the LtC Pilot abilities the same way the Pathfinder can (and most high DPS Pathfinder builds make full use of the large Sci skill seats with either OsS1/2 and IonT1).
Now for PvP maybe it would be great to have the changes as the OP suggested, but for PvE, it's already a fine ship as is.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Intel itself is a pretty Sci heavy (Boff) Spec...
More than half (6/11) of the Intel BOff abilities are pretty Sci-centric, while a case can be made for a few others, too.
If anything, that gives the the Science ship access to more Science-esque abilities, making it more Science-y.
If it's such a problem to convert the LtC Sci into an LtC Sci/Intel because of the perceived "loss" of Sci seating, there's always the Universal Lt that can be used as a Sci.
No because by your logic you remove the science to add sci-ish, but you basically would have extra sci-ish by replacing your engi powers with sci-isn and leaving yhe sci alone. Basically with the engi as the intel, you have the option of engi or more sci-ish. By your logic.
The issue here is that compared to a handful of intel powers, sci sucks.... or the intel power is op. Probably both. What needs to happen is NOT to make the sci seat the intel seat, but to make sci abilities just as damn good. When people are saying they want to remove the science on a science ship to make it worth a damn (in which they are correct) it should say something about the sorry state of science compared to the poster child intel.
So I say no, leave the Pathfinder as is, but fix Science to be useful.
Think about it, how can this change affect you? If you only use 2 lt intel powers, you can always move the Universal to science and still feel it the same while. However, it'd open even more possibilities for other players by having access to the full array of Intel.
Science? Useful? My Tractor Beam Repulsors deal already over 10k kinetic damage per pulse, FBP1 will oneshot escorts if they're not careful and my resonance beam can potentially kill someone with just one activation. If science is not already powerful for you, then you're doing it wrong.
If you put Subsystem Override 3 you're basically giving 175 auxiliary power to all your science powers: how can that suck for you? Plus, remember the Universal seating: you can give it to science easily and have access to 2 more science powers without worrying about suiciding in the engineering compartment. Tell me: in the current state, would you give the Lt Uni to science? Would you give it to tac?
Or would you give it to engineering? That universal is a false one.
Plus, the more I think about how it can't use Transport Warhead like Kim did, the more I'm convincing that I'm right.
Agreed!
Commander Science, Lieutenant Commander Engineering, Lieutenant Commander Universal, Lieutenant Tactical, Ensign Science
You're not required to run Intel abilities in those slots, it merely affords you the chance to. And, again, if losing those Sci seats is that crippling, then running a Sci Boff in the LT Uni seat should alleviate that.
I see both the players who want it buffed point of view, and also the Devs view - it's not a "full" Intel ship, so it should only get (at max) an Lt Spec seat, according to their development philosophy.
I agree 100% with your thoughts on Intel and Sci, though. One is over the top (spec) and the other needs a major buff so that Sci isn't just TBR with the occasional GW or FBP.
But using that Universal Lt. slot for Science can also gimp you since that slot can also allow you 2 extra tactical skills.
I've given this more thought and I think I just feel more that making the Engineering slot the Intel seat as well is better for this ship in PVE (which is maybe 98-99% of the game anyway). In PvE, you don't need that many Engineering skills. I am happy just using Engineering Team 1. If you move the Intel seat to the Sci Lt. Cdr, you either lose some useful Science skills to use Intel, or you lose an extra Tactical seat if you use the Universal for Science.
Now in PvP (which seems to be what majority of the comments here seems to be about) I agree the additional Intel capabilities with the Sci Lt. Cdr. seat and more Engineering skills would be very useful. That's why I think the Scryer's seating is better than the Pathfinder here.
In my view, the ship was never meant to be an Intel ship. It's a Science ship that happened to have the capability to run a few Intel abilities if wanted.
Maybe we can ask Cryptic to just give us both Eng/Int and Sci/Int seating? The Scryer has both Tac/Int and Sci/Int. That would be more awesome IMO.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Another reason why PvE should be harder. A ship needs at the very least 2 engineering slots, 1 is out of discussion but none? Sorry to say it but if you think "Engineering Team 1" is enough then you need someone to teach you game mechanics (or what's left of 'em).
Again: losing Science abilities? Give the lieutenant Uni to science then!. In the current state, that Universal is a false one for the reasons I've provided multiple times in the last pages and I'm not gonna repeat myself yet another time.
You lose tactical abilities? Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing.
Maybe you are right, PvE needs to be harder. Personally, I am doing fine with just ET1 in advanced queues while still pushing some decent DPS out of this ship. I am far from a great pilot, but I have seen Pathfinders out there pushing much higher numbers than I do (Ryan's 70kDPS for example) and we all know PVE is 90% is all about DPS in this game.
If you need 2 Engineering skills, then you could lose Intel Skills. So back at you: "Oh too bad for you, but you see, that's called choosing."
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
There's a difference between "choosing" and "outright bad". your "If you need" is wrong. It's "You MUST use 2 engineering skills". And those two are 2 cycling EPTX. You can't even pick up intel reliably because doing so forces you in one unique boff pattern for the ship.
Now, more straightforwardly, learn game mechanics, you made clear that you are overrating your knowledge of them.
In my example above, Ryan did not even need the Intel skills to get over 70k in that Pathfinder. And if I remember right, it wasn't even with his normal team backing him up. So in PvE, if you want to run the ship wiith 2 Engineering skills, you won't lose much without the intel skills.
I may be new, and I may still be learning, but I at least know enough of the game and its mechanics to build and fly a ship decently through majority of the game (PVE). I stand by my opinion, in PVE, you can build this ship to do well with just 1 Engineering skill.
PVP is of course a different thing. That's why I also pointed out that the Scryer's layout is much better suited here. Instead of forcing players like me who bought the ship because we liked both it and its layout to play with your desired layout, why not suggest it to be more similar to the Scryer (with 2 Intel seating options)? That would be even more ideal IMO.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
You can't simply because Scryer is a full intel ship. Pathfinder is not.
Plus, I know many high DPSers in game and surprisingly(?), they share my opinion. Leave PvE and PvP bickering, they don't matter. Ship hybrid seat is objectively bad.
I wouldn't call it objectively bad. Compromised maybe. If it were as bad as you say it is, then no one would have gotten 70k out of it, and there wouldn't be people doing 50-60k on it. I don't even consider myself a good pilot but even I have hit 50k on it (using ET1 and OSS2 and I am not even a tac captain.
If you want to focus on PVE then I would say that the seating is "good enough" for PVE. It's not perfect, neither is it great, but it is good enough to tackle all of the game's content as any end-game ship can.
Like you said, the Pathfinder isn't a full intel ship. It's a Science ship first and foremost. And I am happy this is one Science ship you can actually go very deep into Science-based builds and abilities.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
What you say has no logic. That ship is bad, and DPS isn't a reliable way to measure ship performance. It can go science heavy even with LtC Science/hybrid: I fly science ships since before the ice age to use a metaphor, I really don't need a DPS testing lesson just to tell me that I'm wrong. You said two EPTX are not needed; even high DPSers say they are needed. Thus, you invalidated your point on this one. Even the Scryer is first and foremost a science vessel, secondly an intel one.
I'll do a temporal backstep and say it
...no offence meant, of course.
Two EPTX isn't needed for all builds. There are builds that don't need it such as torpedo-centric builds (which have gotten a nice boost btw with the new T6 vet ship trait). And IMO, the Pathfinder is a great torpedo platform. They aren't that rare either, since I run into a lot of Pathfinder torpedo boats when I PUG around too.
No offense taken. This is a discussion afterall and you bring valid points. I may not completely agree with you, but that doesn't mean I'll take offense if you have other views than I do.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
By the simple fact that we are talking about removing a science+ slot for a non-science power just to make our ships rock speaks of the balance issue involved. It's a science ship and by that definition a LCDR slot should be filled with science. Not only that we should be agonizing over our builds and not just simply sliding in another of the same old skills.
The fact that this should be concidered speaks loudly over the state of science. Lets put system overload in because it's practically mandatory any more, and is hands down better then any lcdr science skill out there speaks volumes.]
So Icarus makes no sense in giving up tactical abilities, being an escort, to use pilot ones? Or Samsar/Galaxy to give up engineering abilities, being a cruiser, to use command ones? Why should the Pathfinder be different? Again, science is powerful enough that Override isn't even compulsory. However if you want to pick up something from Intel, the seatings immediately become overly inflexible. If picking up Intel gives you problems, you can give the Universal to science and solve them, if the LtC was a hybrid.
Plus, why can't the Pathfinder use Transport Warhead? With LtC science it would be able to at least. The T5 era is gone, don't think it like if it was the T5 Intrepid that has to use science slots for science abilities.