Lots of rectal pain and stamping of feet in this thread.
Personally, I like it. And considering the history of pure CARRIERS in this damned game (sorry folks, "science focused" doesn't necessarily mean "science vessel"), I'm cool with the stats. My only complaint is that it isn't "fleet grade" right out of the C-Store, like the Command Cruisers were. However, I can live with it. Intel also fits with my personal preferences, as opposed to Command and Pilot spec. So, I'm good with that too.
Overall, this is definitely on my "to buy" list. And I'm happy the mighty Jupiter is taking it's rightful place as a playable vessel.
A shout out to the developers and community team for this. Much thanks.
Stats comparison between Fleet Caitian Atrox & Fleet Jupiter Carriers
+ 12,650 hull HP
+ 0.055 shield mod
- 800 crew
+ 1 tac console slot
+ Lt Uni vs No Uni
+ Intel/Engi LtC hybrid vs no Spec
+ 1 turn rate
+ 10 inertial rating
+ 5 Shield subsystem power
+ special console (+acc/shield HP passive, +ally acc/dmg/hull hp active) vs none
+ starship trait for pets vs nothing
+ frigate pilot fighters with quad heavy cannons
+ starfleet design
The turn rate bonus will be noticeable, especially on the low end of things. The very good turn rates of Scryer, Dauntless, and Wells (+1 consecutively, in order) is noticeable considering the same great +turn/+engine power boosting equipment/traits still makes the Wells feel superior, so on the lowest turn rates it will be even more significant and that much more useful. On the top end, I got to test-fly the Manasa and the JHSS (+2 turn rate -5 engine power) and even there the difference was quite noticeable.
The lower inertia should make a difference as well, but probably not by much. A Scimitar or Odyssey are really high and kind of easy to overshoot things not to mention drifting away in effect losing turn rate. Hard to find a comparison, but suffice to say it will help 'effective' turn rate as well as impulse power responsiveness which, again, matter big time on the very lowest end of the scale trying to bring sci powers and weapon arcs on target and getting where you need to go which on an Atrox that's out of combat is like a fish out of water.
A +3,080 hull HP (and +5 defense) of Phantom over Faeht does indeed make a difference already considering out of the box the Phantom felt great while the Faeht seemed fragile (as it should be to match singularity abilities and e.b.cloak), so here it's a whole +12,650 as well as a boost to shield mods and shield subsystem power plus the intel OSS' ability to temporarily skyrocket shield strength and aux for defense/offense, and then there's subspace beacon, intel stealth, etc. Sure against quantum torp spread crits from Terrans especially on low or exposed shield facings it is insignificant, but on a buffed hull it's an extra bit of survival especially with +threat sci consoles that draws fire off of your fighters so they can do their thing.
Less crew is better in combat, and out of combat when damaged they'll be incapacitated/missing regardless, though the entire crew dynamics are still strange and could use a rework.
If anything, the stats and boosts coming out of the Jupiter are a big step up from the Atrox, unlike previous T5 to T6 changes, but a lot will depend on how well those frigates make use of their lock on target.
I took out the Fleet Atrox using a torp/turret/+partigen mixed build with +threat and elite yellowstones. Can't say it was good at anything, and relying on pets for damage (as a carrier should) considering how much they've been all-round nerfed means DPS will suffer greatly, although kill count should be moderately good (depending on how the new Frigates will perform and their AI).
Team coordination is hard, not so much because of multitasking trying to be and do nearly everything at once, but because team and NPCs pop in and out of range real quick. As pilot spec or command at least you could subspace jump next to them, but with intel's subspace beacon you're already mostly out of range to begin with hoping those torps make their long journey. As a +threat shield tank the stealthy/evasive/energy weapon focused intel spec is also really unusual, and from the outset seems mismatched, but then again there's much more tinkering with carrier classes to be done to understand how it should come together (assuming it does).
Lingering Questions
Someone must have also noticed earlier in the thread, but it says the Elite Callisto Light Escorts' Availability is the Dilithium Store. Is this correct?
Also, can we use these frigates on our other Carriers and Flight Deck Ships once they are unlocked by buying the C-Store and/or Fleet Variant Jupiter?
Post edited by alcyoneserene on
Devs: Provide the option to Turn OFF full screen flashes from enemy ship explosions
· ♥ · ◦.¸¸. ◦'¯`·. (Ɏ) V A N U _ S O V E R E I G N T Y (Ɏ) .·´¯'◦.¸¸. ◦ · ♡ ·
«» \▼/ T E R R A N ¦ R E P U B L I C \▼/ «»
﴾﴿ ₪ṩ ||| N A N I T E S Y S T E M S : B L A C K | O P S ||| ₪ṩ ﴾﴿
people are going into this with way to high expectations.
its a starfleet carrier. look at its counterpart on the kdf:
3,4,3 consoles, ltcom tac, com sci, ltcom eng, lt sci
2 hangars, bop pets.
i think the carrier here is the exact counterpart set to t6. its sci focussed, has fewer tac options (due to fed vs kdf) and enough enegineering to survive.
the only thing im surprised about is the intel hybrid. i mean, its not specifically stealthy ^^
but I am glad its NOT COMMAND AGAIN. we have enough command ships out there now.
id rather seen pilot (for additional squadron call ins, BUT lock trajectory would be insane on that carrier so ... pilot was not likely to appear i guess ^^)
intel has a lot of options to support your pets (ionic turbulence, electro probe, kinetic magnet, ...) so im fine with intel hybrid seating more than id been with command again.
it was clear that this carrier would not be tac focussed, cause there are lockbox and event ships out there if you want this.
basically tacheavy carriers dont make sense and are inherently op. (recluse, dom dread) cause they add firepower themselves a lot, and have big bad pets. thats just op.
something that has big damage pets should be dealing so much damage themselves, wich was the original reason why pets got nerfed anyway. cause carriers like the recluse and dominion dread were just overdoing it. they didnt dare to nerf the boxships, so they nerfed pets. (what i think was a big mistake)
i think the fed pets could have been even more agressive, due to the fact they are NOT paired with a 5/3 weapon and 5tac console "carrier" like dom dread and recluse. but im fine with it.
i think people should realign their expectations in a more realistic way, and stop mixing them up with "high hopes" and christmas wishes.
the only thing im surprised is the intel seat, but im better of with intel than command again.
the trait: i dont know. sounds interesting, im curious if its limited by "all 45seconds" thing or if i can actually activate 3intel+1tracbeam consecutively and have all my 12 fighter pets beam in warheads all the time ;-) - this would be fun somehow, i hope my enemies have enough room for beaming in so many projectiles ^^
The carrier really does deserve a bit more. It's replacing the Jupiter after all, which was classed as a dreadnought, and larger and longer than the Odyssey. Now I'm not asking for a Vonph or an Annorax or a JHDC. Something close to the Narcine is reasonable enough, as a T6 ship vs a T5U.
Again, a 4/3 option isn't unreasonable. It just permits an addition of a torpedo or another beam to the forward firing arc, which is going to see a lot of action given the Science-bent and the need to point the bow towards the planned victim of science assaults, and lets it get classed as a dreadnought carrier like the Narcine, which is also Science-oriented.
And if 4/3 isn't palatable, then a secondary deflector + Sensor Analysis, or at least just Sensor Analysis like the Science Odyssey. This would allow for additional single-target debuff to help the pets out. especially since their Frigate pets are cannon-centric and will need all the help they can get.
Or in an unusual twist, give the ship integrated continuous Point-Defense. All modern carriers in real life carry point-defense systems to deal with incoming missiles and aircraft, so an integrated Point-Defense would not make this ship any more OP than the others. It would just give the carrier more resistance to enemy hangar pets and HY torpedoes, while doing piddly damage vs larger targets.
Everything else can remain as-is (don't even need to alter the Boff layout). Just give it that little extra that would grant it a reasonable advantage befitting a ship this large.
if i knew it was a science ship i would not of gotten my hope up. Science characters suck in big ships just look at the krenim dreadnought, the stats are almost the same. if you want a the fleet one you have to be in a fleet with the capability to get it plus 4 or 5 ship modules that's 2000 -2500 zen, $20-$25. if you want the stars ship trait with that it's $25-$30 more to get both ships. i know you don't need both ships when the fleet one is just fine. but still it's a big slow science ship.
Only 3 Fore, 3 Aft weapons is a good trade for 2 hangers, i guess my main problem is that science ship dps requires you to face your target, so a ship like this needs at least one good advanced engineering rcs console, and three tac consoles are ok for a engineer or tac officer, but we all know that science officers do less dps with the same weapons and consoles then the others do. so why is this ship a science ship.
In pvp this ship is useless, Science abilities are useless in pvp. ya it can tank for a while until a escort one shots you because it dose significantly more damage and your gravity well 3 cant stop it. In pve you will last alot longer. solo will take foraver, and in group pve you end up being a support ship witch is slow and boring, while the rest of the team is having fun.
if you add one tac console and take out one science console, give it a standerd carrier package it might make a good engineer ship.
Then you're not using "Big Ships" right. I've run my Sci characters in All 3 types of ships and I find they do fine in "Big Ships", My Sci Character used them for quite awhile, I currently have him in one (t6 Battlecruiser for the Platforms), But he'll be swapping out for the carrier now.
After 11 pages of this thread I still don't get it... Why it should have 4/4 layout? It has 2 hangar bays, so then it would make all cruisers obsolite. Why it should have ltcmd tac? It has potentially 2 lt tac and tac is not even it's main thing. Why it should have 4 tac consoles? Again it has 2 hangars and cmd sci.
It seems like everything that doesn't have at least 4 tac consoles and ltcmd tac is TRIBBLE. If you don't feel like you are able to make decent runs with ship without these features, just don't buy it. You can buy pilot escorts or Avenger to vaporize everything with one button or command cruiser to do almost the same but without thinking about survivality. But beside you, there are still plp who want from STO more than hit spacebar for instant win. They will have fun with this ship. Even if it's not OP.
On the other hand: 2/2 and 3 hangar bays? It would be cool, but I suspect that it is limited by game engine or other tech thing and just can't be done for now.
No...I'm sorry your assumption is wrong...anything that isn't top of the line absolute best in its class is junk...how this toxic community sees it.
if i knew it was a science ship i would not of gotten my hope up. Science characters suck in big ships just look at the krenim dreadnought, the stats are almost the same. if you want a the fleet one you have to be in a fleet with the capability to get it plus 4 or 5 ship modules that's 2000 -2500 zen, $20-$25. if you want the stars ship trait with that it's $25-$30 more to get both ships. i know you don't need both ships when the fleet one is just fine. but still it's a big slow science ship.
Only 3 Fore, 3 Aft weapons is a good trade for 2 hangers, i guess my main problem is that science ship dps requires you to face your target, so a ship like this needs at least one good advanced engineering rcs console, and three tac consoles are ok for a engineer or tac officer, but we all know that science officers do less dps with the same weapons and consoles then the others do. so why is this ship a science ship.
In pvp this ship is useless, Science abilities are useless in pvp. ya it can tank for a while until a escort one shots you because it dose significantly more damage and your gravity well 3 cant stop it. In pve you will last alot longer. solo will take foraver, and in group pve you end up being a support ship witch is slow and boring, while the rest of the team is having fun.
if you add one tac console and take out one science console, give it a standerd carrier package it might make a good engineer ship.
Learn the game? If you buy the ship from the c-store you only need one flee module...and you don't know what you're talking about if you call Science useless in PvP...take away a Science console on a Science heavy ship? You're...well you don't know what you're talking about at all so I'll leave it at that.
the ship sucks any ways. I do know how to play, and if your beating escorts in pvp that player sucks to. and I'v never bought a C-store ship with a fleet counter part,so if it cost one than it should say it some where before you buy it so people know.
the only thing im surprised about is the intel hybrid. i mean, its not specifically stealthy ^^
but I am glad its NOT COMMAND AGAIN. we have enough command ships out there now.
id rather seen pilot (for additional squadron call ins, BUT lock trajectory would be insane on that carrier so ... pilot was not likely to appear i guess ^^)
intel has a lot of options to support your pets (ionic turbulence, electro probe, kinetic magnet, ...) so im fine with intel hybrid seating more than id been with command again.
That's the thing, the one ship that could definitely use Command and do so really well is the ship that doesn't get it.
This fact really takes away from its appeal, more so than the Hestia did in receiving Command as opposed to Intel or Pilot.
If anything, what's Command if not a big tanky ship that offers support and orchestrates a large attack force?
Devs: Provide the option to Turn OFF full screen flashes from enemy ship explosions
· ♥ · ◦.¸¸. ◦'¯`·. (Ɏ) V A N U _ S O V E R E I G N T Y (Ɏ) .·´¯'◦.¸¸. ◦ · ♡ ·
«» \▼/ T E R R A N ¦ R E P U B L I C \▼/ «»
﴾﴿ ₪ṩ ||| N A N I T E S Y S T E M S : B L A C K | O P S ||| ₪ṩ ﴾﴿
...
Other than that, the "dont buy it than" answer is so common and so lame....with a little bit more Flexibility in the Boff Layout it could appeal to more or most People
...
Not every ship needs to appeal to every player. The 'don't buy it' answer is perfectly valid. There are a lot of ship options, and I like the fact that some are very clearly not my playstyle while others very much are. And then I can also factor in looks - those in my playstyle that I like the design of, and those I'll take a pass on.
...
Stop always saying ME ME ME, it is a really nice looking new Ship with much Potential, everyone should be allowed to have some fun with it, restricting it to some while leaving others out is just Silly and bad Business.
I'm not saying "ME ME ME" at all. I'm saying the exact opposite, in that I'm not going to get up in arms when they release a ship that isn't geared to my playstyle. I don't need an escort to have a 3-pack with one of them being a science option - I'm just going to pass on the escort, and wait for the next cruiser or sci ship that comes out.
That's why this one appeals to me. It's a heavier sci-themed carrier. But I don't expect, or demand, that every ship release has an option that makes it useable for my playstyle.
Well, here is the thing: YOU dont need an escort to have a 3-Pack avaible, others appreciate it, cause they like the design AND can choose the right Version that fits their Playstyle.
This Ship appeals to you, cause your Playstyle, all fine and dandy, but just because you dont expect more Flexibility / Options does not mean that that goes for all.
Many / Some (pick one) People may Love the Design and the Pets that it comes with and maybe some other aspects of it, BUT the heavily restricted Boff Layout (and 3/3 Weapons) will make it just not workable for many / some of them, and that is the reason why there are so heated discussions on the Forum, thats why there is Frustration.
To much Restriction is always a bad idea, there are to many Playstyles in this Game for that, but most importantly there are the TAC the ENG and the SCI Captains, now if they love the Design they should be able to use that ship, and pick a Version that Fits them, in other words = 3 Pack (eng/tac/sci as secondary focus like the ltcom seat) and everyone is happy, persistently saying no no no, to this is - i am sorry to repeat that again - nothing but Sellfish and will create nothing but Heat and Frustration among the Playerbase, and that can be avoided so easily......if there is a will to do so that is.
okay well thats not what's happening. so saying it should be is utterly pointless.
And no, not every ship needs to appeal to all playstyles. Escorts for example have little use to sci captains.
Tac and Eng have PLENTY of options to choose from. A new ship is more
The Jem'Hadar, the Vonph and the Narcine too are escort carriers, that's why they have a 4/3. The Jupiter is a science carrier like the Recluse, the Vo'Quv or the Atrox. Also, Fed is a defensive faction. If you want a 4/3 carrier, go play Klg.
Wrong.. they are Dreadnought carriers... they are not escort carriers... dreads are 4/3 with 2 hangers... they said that this new ships is to "replace the Jupiter class Dreadnought" So yes people have some right to ask why this isn't a 4/3 layout.
just because its replacing a dread, does not mean the new one is obligated to be a dread. Imagine something being replaced with something different. What a concept. If you don't like the replacement, then you are under no obligation to give your money away.
Ah ok.. so when they replace the Scimitar and make it a 3/3 sci carrier or the Voqu and make it a 4/3 1 hanger tac carrier.. you don't thing the KDF or Romulan players would be up in arms about it?... give me a break.
seeing as the Jupiter was never a playable ship before now, you have no idea how the Jupiter npc was set up. Fo all you know the Jupiter NPC had the same set up as this does.
comparing a ship you can't play to one you can is insipid.
and again, this version of Jupiter was never stated that it was going to be a dreadnought. You might want to work on your reading comprehension.
First a big thank you to the ship artists, modelers and everyone who worked on this ship. It looks amazing. And especially a thank you to Trendy for been the heart of this project and for trying something similar for Rom and KDF factions. Also love this blog. So many beauty shots of the ship and pets
And even if stats wise I could nitpick here and there (too low hull and not a lt.c tac boff station), the ship is still great. And of course, omg... the federation finnaly gets frigate pets. YAY! Many thanks to the devs for adresing this issue.
That alone is awsone on its own thing. How good they will be we will have to see. Altho they look pretty strong.
Lingering Questions
Someone must have also noticed earlier in the thread, but it says the Elite Callisto Light Escorts' Availability is the Dilithium Store. Is this correct?
Also, can we use these frigates on our other Carriers and Flight Deck Ships once they are unlocked by buying the C-Store and/or Fleet Variant Jupiter?
Most likely a typo. The elite versions of hangar pets have allways came from fleet stores, and i think i've seen typos like this in the past blogs.
And I dont think we will use the frigates on other ships given their size and I dont think there is a precedent about this (except the herald frigates, but thats becouse those are not actually in the ship, but arrive via subspace gates).
Also liked your comparision with the fleet Atrox, but for me, at first, in mind I compared it with the breen carrier, wich sadly its a bit superior. Leaving boff station and console layout alone, if at hull points is balanced via more shield mod, the 6 vs 7 turn rate and 30 vs 35 inertia cant seem to balance anywhere.
Edit: nvm, was looking at c store version not fleet version. I guess extra ~1k hull and 0,175 shield mod of fleet jupiter is balanced by extra +1 turn rate and +5 inertia of the breen carrier.
Really curious about the console and what it means "Allies": hangar pets too(here is hoping )? summoned ships like fleet suport? photonic fleet ships? any friendly NPC ship players may encounter (like the random Enterprize and Bortasqu in the romulan patrols)?
One last thing. Can we please, in future dev blogs, get the admirality stats too? Would be nice.
Less crew is better in combat, and out of combat when damaged they'll be incapacitated/missing regardless, though the entire crew dynamics are still strange and could use a rework.
thats not because of crew, but how torpedos kill them.
its "10 crew or 10% whatever is more - is MORE, it should be "whatever is less" - than it would work correctly. im not even sure if this is sth cryptic maybe isnt even aware of, that their crew mechanic is upside down.
i basically think, crew shouldnt even die at all unless shields are gone or really big things hit you (tricobalt disable like ones) - i mean, otherwise the galaxyclass picard commanded would have been out of crew by episode three of season one ...
Regarding the "Dreadnought" argument, we only ever saw the NPC Jupiter classified as a Dreadnought-ranked ship. The same thing goes for the Voquv - even though it happens to be a Dreadnought-ranked NPC vessel, it is also a playable Carrier-classed ship.
In the gameplay guides on STOWiki (IIRC), an NPC Dreadnought is determined as a ship that requires multiple allied ships working together to defeat it quickly - fair enough if you can manage that solo.
I am still wondering what the customization options will be. Will there be any exchangeable parts? Or is it just none costume, and the only variations boil down to color/pattern choices?
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Ah ok.. so when they replace the Scimitar and make it a 3/3 sci carrier or the Voqu and make it a 4/3 1 hanger tac carrier.. you don't thing the KDF or Romulan players would be up in arms about it?... give me a break.
Not really a fair comparison now, is it? The Jupiter being replaced is an NPC... nobody has previously paid any money for it, nobody loses out financially or in terms of playability. If they changed the examples you offered... it would be appropriate for people to be up in arms.
And technically if they did a T6 Scim or Voqu there'd still be only limited scope to complain because they would be new ships and the devs could say that the T6 drew their inspiration from the originals buit were a different class.
I am still wondering what the customization options will be. Will there be any exchangeable parts? Or is it just none costume, and the only variations boil down to color/pattern choices?
It is a bit odd that there is no information on that, as all other ship stats announcements usually mention customization options. And there was this voting thing and a design blog, I would find it very strange if the ship has no options.
I am still wondering what the customization options will be. Will there be any exchangeable parts? Or is it just none costume, and the only variations boil down to color/pattern choices?
Probably none. Just skins and paint jobs, I imagine.
If this is going to be a science oriented carrier like the Atrox, then at least give us a secondary deflector for the bonus power and Sensor Analysis to help out the fighters and update the Atrox to also include the use of a secondary deflector and sensor analysis.
Or give it a 4/3 layout if a secondary deflector and sensor analysis is too much to ask. I don't mind 3/3 if the ship is a legit science vessel like the Vesta, but 3/3 on science-wannabe ships is just boring.
All previous (pure) carriers have had a 3/3 layout. As somebody posted earlier, the JH Dreadnought Carrier and the Narcine are dual-purpose ships - serving both the purpose of a dreadnought and that of a carrier..thus they have a 4/3 loadout with 2 hangars. All other pure carrier vessels in-game (Sarr Theln, Voquv, Atrox) have subsystem targeting and a science-heavy console/BOff seating arrangement.
Whilst they aren't and never were full-on science ships, the extra Auxiliary power comes in handy for when you need to spam pets to save your own hide in a firefight. Thus, it would make sense from a ship design standpoint to make Carriers science-focused vessels without the middling hull and/or somewhat fixed playstyle. ^^
If you were present for the Thread of Malcontent that was the unveiling of the Valiant (which I am doing rather well in, considering I'm using a hybrid beam-cannon build with a torp), you should know that the Ship Design Team are...loathe to alter the loadouts of one ship to appease the vocal minority of diehards clamouring for their hero ship to be elevated to God-Ship Status.
When I purchase ships these days I tend to look for the cross factional packs i.e. escort carrier, and the battle cruiser pack. Why not just make the cross factional bundles when making Fed Sci ships or Carriers. The mega bundles can be a bit unaffordable at $100-$120 but the bundles at $50-$60 I'm much more likely to spring for. I would have definitely bought a cross faction bundle for this ship.
"The Jupiter Class Carrier is the first of its kind to be built by Starfleet Engineering. It was designed to serve as a mobile fighter launching platform with durability and fleet support in mind.
The Jupiter Class Carrier features a Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Intel bridge officer seat."
Why did you choose intel if it's supposed to be a fleet support ship? Command makes sense, intel doesn't... That's my only beef with the Jupiter.
I think I'll have a looksie..if it is, then I'll be waiting impatiently for Friday. On the flipside, if not then I'll still be waitng impatiently for Friday.
I could use this straight out of the bag as it would fit my current build on my Scryer of Pathfinder easily. It lacks a secondary deflector and sensor analysis yes, but it will still be good fun to use.
And to people saying it needs extra tac consoles or weapons or a Lt. Com tac seat.....try flying something without all that for once and see if you can enjoy it before slagging off something you've never tried. 6 guns is plenty for a ship with that much potential for science trickery. And having 2 Lt. tac seats possible is plenty as well as most of your attacks come from your fighters or from science abilities.
I think I'll have a looksie..if it is, then I'll be waiting impatiently for Friday. On the flipside, if not then I'll still be waitng impatiently for Friday.
What was said or posted at any point in this event by any authority figure that could have possibly led any of you to assume this was ever going to be a dreadnought?
What was said or posted at any point in this event by any authority figure that could have possibly led any of you to assume this was ever going to be a dreadnought?
I concur. The Development Team CLEARLY was making a Carrier. Don't know why people would assume it would have a dreadnought set-up with 4/4. It's a carrier, meaning, limited armament. It's meant for long range tactical strikes with fighters and escorts, not a freaking dreadnought for ship to ship. Carriers operate poorly in Ship to Ship Combat, so they use their fighters and escorts for long range attacks.
What was said or posted at any point in this event by any authority figure that could have possibly led any of you to assume this was ever going to be a dreadnought?
I concur. The Development Team CLEARLY was making a Carrier. Don't know why people would assume it would have a dreadnought set-up with 4/4. It's a carrier, meaning, limited armament. It's meant for long range tactical strikes with fighters and escorts, not a freaking dreadnought for ship to ship. Carriers operate poorly in Ship to Ship Combat, so they use their fighters and escorts for long range attacks.
The worst thing is that we've just had a Dreadnought that can launch fighters - granted it only had one hangar, but nonetheless..... no pleasing some.
Oh, you mean the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought? Sorry, that doesn't fit in the carrier classification, regardless if it had a hanger. It was designed as a Dreadnought. Only reason it had a hanger slot is because of the Jem'Hadar Fighter.
What was said or posted at any point in this event by any authority figure that could have possibly led any of you to assume this was ever going to be a dreadnought?
I concur. The Development Team CLEARLY was making a Carrier. Don't know why people would assume it would have a dreadnought set-up with 4/4. It's a carrier, meaning, limited armament. It's meant for long range tactical strikes with fighters and escorts, not a freaking dreadnought for ship to ship. Carriers operate poorly in Ship to Ship Combat, so they use their fighters and escorts for long range attacks.
it's replacing a KNOWN Dreadnought. ANd it's a T6 so they expect more for their money or effort.
For me insteadof a bunble have the commander slot be universal. gives the ship flexibility and a 4/3 layout for weapons. I wish the frigate pet was a miranda though.
Comments
Fleet Defiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support | Fleet Manticore Kinetic Strike Ship | Tactical Command Kinetic Siege Refit | Fleet Defiant Quantum Phase Escort | Fleet Valiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support
Turning the Galaxy-X into a Torpedo Dreadnought & torpedo tutorial, with written torpedo guide.
"A good weapon and a great strategy will win you many battles." - Marshall
I knew using Kinetics would be playing the game on hard mode, but what I didn't realize was how bad the deck is stacked against Kinetics.
Personally, I like it. And considering the history of pure CARRIERS in this damned game (sorry folks, "science focused" doesn't necessarily mean "science vessel"), I'm cool with the stats. My only complaint is that it isn't "fleet grade" right out of the C-Store, like the Command Cruisers were. However, I can live with it. Intel also fits with my personal preferences, as opposed to Command and Pilot spec. So, I'm good with that too.
Overall, this is definitely on my "to buy" list. And I'm happy the mighty Jupiter is taking it's rightful place as a playable vessel.
A shout out to the developers and community team for this. Much thanks.
+ 12,650 hull HP
+ 0.055 shield mod
- 800 crew
+ 1 tac console slot
+ Lt Uni vs No Uni
+ Intel/Engi LtC hybrid vs no Spec
+ 1 turn rate
+ 10 inertial rating
+ 5 Shield subsystem power
+ special console (+acc/shield HP passive, +ally acc/dmg/hull hp active) vs none
+ starship trait for pets vs nothing
+ frigate pilot fighters with quad heavy cannons
+ starfleet design
The turn rate bonus will be noticeable, especially on the low end of things. The very good turn rates of Scryer, Dauntless, and Wells (+1 consecutively, in order) is noticeable considering the same great +turn/+engine power boosting equipment/traits still makes the Wells feel superior, so on the lowest turn rates it will be even more significant and that much more useful. On the top end, I got to test-fly the Manasa and the JHSS (+2 turn rate -5 engine power) and even there the difference was quite noticeable.
The lower inertia should make a difference as well, but probably not by much. A Scimitar or Odyssey are really high and kind of easy to overshoot things not to mention drifting away in effect losing turn rate. Hard to find a comparison, but suffice to say it will help 'effective' turn rate as well as impulse power responsiveness which, again, matter big time on the very lowest end of the scale trying to bring sci powers and weapon arcs on target and getting where you need to go which on an Atrox that's out of combat is like a fish out of water.
A +3,080 hull HP (and +5 defense) of Phantom over Faeht does indeed make a difference already considering out of the box the Phantom felt great while the Faeht seemed fragile (as it should be to match singularity abilities and e.b.cloak), so here it's a whole +12,650 as well as a boost to shield mods and shield subsystem power plus the intel OSS' ability to temporarily skyrocket shield strength and aux for defense/offense, and then there's subspace beacon, intel stealth, etc. Sure against quantum torp spread crits from Terrans especially on low or exposed shield facings it is insignificant, but on a buffed hull it's an extra bit of survival especially with +threat sci consoles that draws fire off of your fighters so they can do their thing.
Less crew is better in combat, and out of combat when damaged they'll be incapacitated/missing regardless, though the entire crew dynamics are still strange and could use a rework.
If anything, the stats and boosts coming out of the Jupiter are a big step up from the Atrox, unlike previous T5 to T6 changes, but a lot will depend on how well those frigates make use of their lock on target.
I took out the Fleet Atrox using a torp/turret/+partigen mixed build with +threat and elite yellowstones. Can't say it was good at anything, and relying on pets for damage (as a carrier should) considering how much they've been all-round nerfed means DPS will suffer greatly, although kill count should be moderately good (depending on how the new Frigates will perform and their AI).
Team coordination is hard, not so much because of multitasking trying to be and do nearly everything at once, but because team and NPCs pop in and out of range real quick. As pilot spec or command at least you could subspace jump next to them, but with intel's subspace beacon you're already mostly out of range to begin with hoping those torps make their long journey. As a +threat shield tank the stealthy/evasive/energy weapon focused intel spec is also really unusual, and from the outset seems mismatched, but then again there's much more tinkering with carrier classes to be done to understand how it should come together (assuming it does).
Lingering Questions
Someone must have also noticed earlier in the thread, but it says the Elite Callisto Light Escorts' Availability is the Dilithium Store. Is this correct?
Also, can we use these frigates on our other Carriers and Flight Deck Ships once they are unlocked by buying the C-Store and/or Fleet Variant Jupiter?
its a starfleet carrier. look at its counterpart on the kdf:
3,4,3 consoles, ltcom tac, com sci, ltcom eng, lt sci
2 hangars, bop pets.
i think the carrier here is the exact counterpart set to t6. its sci focussed, has fewer tac options (due to fed vs kdf) and enough enegineering to survive.
the only thing im surprised about is the intel hybrid. i mean, its not specifically stealthy ^^
but I am glad its NOT COMMAND AGAIN. we have enough command ships out there now.
id rather seen pilot (for additional squadron call ins, BUT lock trajectory would be insane on that carrier so ... pilot was not likely to appear i guess ^^)
intel has a lot of options to support your pets (ionic turbulence, electro probe, kinetic magnet, ...) so im fine with intel hybrid seating more than id been with command again.
it was clear that this carrier would not be tac focussed, cause there are lockbox and event ships out there if you want this.
basically tacheavy carriers dont make sense and are inherently op. (recluse, dom dread) cause they add firepower themselves a lot, and have big bad pets. thats just op.
something that has big damage pets should be dealing so much damage themselves, wich was the original reason why pets got nerfed anyway. cause carriers like the recluse and dominion dread were just overdoing it. they didnt dare to nerf the boxships, so they nerfed pets. (what i think was a big mistake)
i think the fed pets could have been even more agressive, due to the fact they are NOT paired with a 5/3 weapon and 5tac console "carrier" like dom dread and recluse. but im fine with it.
i think people should realign their expectations in a more realistic way, and stop mixing them up with "high hopes" and christmas wishes.
the only thing im surprised is the intel seat, but im better of with intel than command again.
the trait: i dont know. sounds interesting, im curious if its limited by "all 45seconds" thing or if i can actually activate 3intel+1tracbeam consecutively and have all my 12 fighter pets beam in warheads all the time ;-) - this would be fun somehow, i hope my enemies have enough room for beaming in so many projectiles ^^
Again, a 4/3 option isn't unreasonable. It just permits an addition of a torpedo or another beam to the forward firing arc, which is going to see a lot of action given the Science-bent and the need to point the bow towards the planned victim of science assaults, and lets it get classed as a dreadnought carrier like the Narcine, which is also Science-oriented.
And if 4/3 isn't palatable, then a secondary deflector + Sensor Analysis, or at least just Sensor Analysis like the Science Odyssey. This would allow for additional single-target debuff to help the pets out. especially since their Frigate pets are cannon-centric and will need all the help they can get.
Or in an unusual twist, give the ship integrated continuous Point-Defense. All modern carriers in real life carry point-defense systems to deal with incoming missiles and aircraft, so an integrated Point-Defense would not make this ship any more OP than the others. It would just give the carrier more resistance to enemy hangar pets and HY torpedoes, while doing piddly damage vs larger targets.
Everything else can remain as-is (don't even need to alter the Boff layout). Just give it that little extra that would grant it a reasonable advantage befitting a ship this large.
the ship sucks any ways. I do know how to play, and if your beating escorts in pvp that player sucks to. and I'v never bought a C-store ship with a fleet counter part,so if it cost one than it should say it some where before you buy it so people know.
That's the thing, the one ship that could definitely use Command and do so really well is the ship that doesn't get it.
This fact really takes away from its appeal, more so than the Hestia did in receiving Command as opposed to Intel or Pilot.
If anything, what's Command if not a big tanky ship that offers support and orchestrates a large attack force?
okay well thats not what's happening. so saying it should be is utterly pointless.
And no, not every ship needs to appeal to all playstyles. Escorts for example have little use to sci captains.
Tac and Eng have PLENTY of options to choose from. A new ship is more
seeing as the Jupiter was never a playable ship before now, you have no idea how the Jupiter npc was set up. Fo all you know the Jupiter NPC had the same set up as this does.
comparing a ship you can't play to one you can is insipid.
and again, this version of Jupiter was never stated that it was going to be a dreadnought. You might want to work on your reading comprehension.
And even if stats wise I could nitpick here and there (too low hull and not a lt.c tac boff station), the ship is still great. And of course, omg... the federation finnaly gets frigate pets. YAY! Many thanks to the devs for adresing this issue.
That alone is awsone on its own thing. How good they will be we will have to see. Altho they look pretty strong.
Most likely a typo. The elite versions of hangar pets have allways came from fleet stores, and i think i've seen typos like this in the past blogs.
And I dont think we will use the frigates on other ships given their size and I dont think there is a precedent about this (except the herald frigates, but thats becouse those are not actually in the ship, but arrive via subspace gates).
Also liked your comparision with the fleet Atrox, but for me, at first, in mind I compared it with the breen carrier, wich sadly its a bit superior. Leaving boff station and console layout alone, if at hull points is balanced via more shield mod, the 6 vs 7 turn rate and 30 vs 35 inertia cant seem to balance anywhere.
Edit: nvm, was looking at c store version not fleet version. I guess extra ~1k hull and 0,175 shield mod of fleet jupiter is balanced by extra +1 turn rate and +5 inertia of the breen carrier.
Really curious about the console and what it means "Allies": hangar pets too(here is hoping
One last thing. Can we please, in future dev blogs, get the admirality stats too? Would be nice.
thats not because of crew, but how torpedos kill them.
its "10 crew or 10% whatever is more - is MORE, it should be "whatever is less" - than it would work correctly. im not even sure if this is sth cryptic maybe isnt even aware of, that their crew mechanic is upside down.
i basically think, crew shouldnt even die at all unless shields are gone or really big things hit you (tricobalt disable like ones) - i mean, otherwise the galaxyclass picard commanded would have been out of crew by episode three of season one ...
In the gameplay guides on STOWiki (IIRC), an NPC Dreadnought is determined as a ship that requires multiple allied ships working together to defeat it quickly - fair enough if you can manage that solo.
Not really a fair comparison now, is it? The Jupiter being replaced is an NPC... nobody has previously paid any money for it, nobody loses out financially or in terms of playability. If they changed the examples you offered... it would be appropriate for people to be up in arms.
And technically if they did a T6 Scim or Voqu there'd still be only limited scope to complain because they would be new ships and the devs could say that the T6 drew their inspiration from the originals buit were a different class.
It is a bit odd that there is no information on that, as all other ship stats announcements usually mention customization options. And there was this voting thing and a design blog, I would find it very strange if the ship has no options.
Probably none. Just skins and paint jobs, I imagine.
Or give it a 4/3 layout if a secondary deflector and sensor analysis is too much to ask. I don't mind 3/3 if the ship is a legit science vessel like the Vesta, but 3/3 on science-wannabe ships is just boring.
Whilst they aren't and never were full-on science ships, the extra Auxiliary power comes in handy for when you need to spam pets to save your own hide in a firefight. Thus, it would make sense from a ship design standpoint to make Carriers science-focused vessels without the middling hull and/or somewhat fixed playstyle. ^^
If you were present for the Thread of Malcontent that was the unveiling of the Valiant (which I am doing rather well in, considering I'm using a hybrid beam-cannon build with a torp), you should know that the Ship Design Team are...loathe to alter the loadouts of one ship to appease the vocal minority of diehards clamouring for their hero ship to be elevated to God-Ship Status.
The Jupiter Class Carrier features a Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Intel bridge officer seat."
Why did you choose intel if it's supposed to be a fleet support ship? Command makes sense, intel doesn't... That's my only beef with the Jupiter.
Nope,I have noticed though sometimes when holodeck unlocks earlier than normal the ship didn't go live until 6pm. (UK time)
And to people saying it needs extra tac consoles or weapons or a Lt. Com tac seat.....try flying something without all that for once and see if you can enjoy it before slagging off something you've never tried. 6 guns is plenty for a ship with that much potential for science trickery. And having 2 Lt. tac seats possible is plenty as well as most of your attacks come from your fighters or from science abilities.
Nope, it's not there (yet).
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
it's replacing a KNOWN Dreadnought. ANd it's a T6 so they expect more for their money or effort.
For me insteadof a bunble have the commander slot be universal. gives the ship flexibility and a 4/3 layout for weapons. I wish the frigate pet was a miranda though.