The number of Tactical consoles do not matter for these ships given how small the actual bonus Tactical consoles really give. The one of the top Fed DPS cruisers only has 2 Tactical consoles for example.
Building a Science ship is different from building a Tactical-oriented cruiser, or escort. There are way more (better) options to Tactical consoles irregardless of whether you are min-maxing DPS or not for these kinds of ships.
These ships are fine. Just because you've been playing since Season 7 doesn't make you right.
Again, i saw what i saw, people do with those tactical consoles what you deny, but have your way. One can build a Tactical oriinted Cruiser, Escort AND even Science Ship, maybe thats not what you do but enough others do it, and they are happy with it, so whats the problem? And just because your opinnion differs from mine, does not make you right either.
BTW, whenever i open a new Topic on the forums, iam quickly reminded why thats not such a good idea (and why the majority of people stay away all together), cant say a thing without being attack from people with other oppinions, you have yours i have mine, you dont give a damn about my oppinion, fine i dont give a damn about yours than? Still no reason to attack me, so get down from your damn high horses you self proclaimed Pros.
Call me ludicrous or whatever you want if that makes you happy, but know this, its by far not just "Highlandrise" who has this opinion, not even close and the last part of your comment the "($&!^ing UNRELEATED." yea cursing and swearing makes your post more valid.
It makes it more colorful, which is mostly because there ought to be some entertainment value in this thread and really, you' haven't brought it. I've haven't seen enough of a pattern yet to gauge if you are ludicrous, but your belief that ships need to have even less variety because you don't like not having a certain minimum number of X console? Yeah. Ludicrous, and I hope in your heart of hearts you know that. And if you're gonna try some half-baked appeal to authority, NUMBER OF CAPTAINS ain't it. Oh and this new tact, of "there's a silent body standing behind me and that makes me right"? It ain't any better.
Really, I look forward to a more interesting discussion of pros and conns of the new ships from you. Put the weak start aside and try again.
Aren't these the same thing? Or are they 2 different logical fallacies? Seems more like a bandwagon appeal than an appeal to authority, but I could be mistaken on the definition of the bandwagon appeal.
Speaking as a relative layman when it comes to sci ships, out of my eleven captains one of them flies such, a Krenim Science Vessel. The only reason he's not my main is because I, personally, don't enjoy the style as much as more weapon-focused builds; fact is he's got by far the best damage output of any of them.
KSV has three tac console slots. I don't remember off the top of my head exactly what I've got in them, but at most two of them actually are tac at the moment, and I don't think those are top-of-the-line. The real damage comes from the Gravity Wells, Subspace Vortexes, Destabilizing Resonance Beams, and Tractor Beam Repulsors (backed by Graga Mal) that can rip ships apart without ever worrying about pesky things like battering down shields.
I'm sure it's perfectly possible to make a decent beam-based DPS build on a sci ship. Nonetheless, saying that not being able to do so--even if true that having a mere two tac consoles prevents that, which I'm not at all certain of--makes the ship somehow greatly hampered... shows a distinct lack of experience with the entire ship category.
My beef with T6 ships it that they still bother to put an Ensign level seat. And usually of a type that's useless. If they're gonna put a single power seat, at least make it a universal on T6 ships!
Sometimes I think I play STO just to have something to complain about on the forums.
My beef with T6 ships it that they still bother to put an Ensign level seat. And usually of a type that's useless. If they're gonna put a single power seat, at least make it a universal on T6 ships!
That, I totally agree with. Fixed Ensign stations need to go away forever.
Yes!! I don't see a point in dedicated ensign seats after T5 RA ships, buts that's already done with...but T6, and especially fleet versions whhhyyyyyyy
anyway that's not what this thread is about
Can't really give advice on SCi because I've been gone since DR, and been working on getting my TAC, and ENG toons up to par, and I've neglected my SCI, but reading this thread is giving me a nice refresher course in SCI, and what I've missed since the days of the Neft Empire when SCI was neutered
Also seeing that Romulan Sci Ship , I so want to bring my Sci Romulan out of retirement.
Wouldn't be me if i didn't say something snarky.....47 character really not something to gloat about that just tells me you're not focused on one play style, or farm like a madman, especially when you can just respec.
Aren't these the same thing? Or are they 2 different logical fallacies? Seems more like a bandwagon appeal than an appeal to authority, but I could be mistaken on the definition of the bandwagon appeal.
Its the difference between pointing to a single entity with authority or respect (often but not always the speaker themselves) as why a statement is correct vs pointing to a multitude of individuals who agree as an argument for saying the statement is correct. (When that multitude all converse amongst themselves and cheerfully accept the echo chamber they create it tends to shift over to that charming phenomena called 'groupthink'.)
Now, the statement may still actually BE correct, but not because of either of those reasons .
My beef with T6 ships it that they still bother to put an Ensign level seat. And usually of a type that's useless. If they're gonna put a single power seat, at least make it a universal on T6 ships!
That, I totally agree with. Fixed Ensign stations need to go away forever.
The powercreep will get there, and then we'll think all these old ships are garbage and it's time to buy new ones .
The Promo! temporal T6s and their 4 BOff layouts were breathtaking in their promise that more of the potential patterns will eventually be deployed as actual offerings. The first time ships offer dual commander seat people are going to lose their minds. It'll be mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together.
And glorious to see the shipcrafting to come of it.
My beef with T6 ships it that they still bother to put an Ensign level seat. And usually of a type that's useless. If they're gonna put a single power seat, at least make it a universal on T6 ships!
I'm ok with Ensign seats, but I wish they were always universal. Having them fixed is rather limiting.
A serious Science Build demands specialization. Exotic Dmg? DrainX? They demand a lot of build space, a lot of points if they are going to be any sort of effective.
For the same way a DPS'er relying on weapons does everything in his power to promote his damage output, the same way a Science Build has to also, but with different skills, different equipment focus. My TAC Console Slots on most of my SCI Vessels are used for anything that increases Science capability.
There's so many universal consoles that boost damage in various ways that I would think you could recoup enough of the loss from only two tac consoles that it wouldn't make much difference. Noticeable, sure, but small. It's certainly not going to stop me from throwing money at them to pad their numbers and hopefully encourage more oddball fan-wished releases like this.
Personally, though, I'd keep the Fed ship as it is but give the Rom and KDF versions a third Tac console at Fleet instead of Eng. 2/5/3 out of the box on all three is fine.
As an example to illustrate, in case you can't visualize how a ship might operate without tac consoles, let me write out the console setup for my Edoulg (ISA 100k as a fed Eng, since that's a more familiar context):
2 Eng/5 Sci/4 Tac consoles
Eng:
Plasmonic Leech (Exchange) (Can also be Denuos console for set bonus, or other of my choice, since Aux power is ~130 anyway) Quantum Deceleration Field Generator (Ship-unique, 15% cat2 exotic passive and 10% sci ability c/d reduction)
Sci:
4x Restorative Particle Focuser (6% cat2 all dmg on use of heals, stacks up to 5x)
1x Exotic Particle Field Exciter (+75 EPG skill)
Tac:
Chronometric Capacitor (This is actually a Tac console, but here for the set bonus that buffs exotic, as well as the +37.5 EPG)
Thank you for sharing this. I hadn't realized several of those were cat 2... I hadn't imagined they'd throw around such big numbers when introducing cat 2 bonuses. Might be time to do a little shopping !
If you use weapons to deal damage on a sci vessl you're doing it wrong
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Well, there's a case to be made for the Annorax and Paradox as directed energy or torp boats since both are 4/3 science, but their console arrangements reflect that. They're like angry science ships.
If you use weapons to deal damage on a sci vessl you're doing it wrong
Eh... what about sci/torp hybrids?
You don't rely on two torp consoles to deal the damage, don't you?
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Oh lord did i just wake up to find this mess here?!?!?
Seriously, i'f you're worried about how many tac console slots you have on your SCIENCE vessel then you're doing it all wrong.
Yes it can be nice to have tac slots if you're running some sort of tac/sci torp boat hybrid and want to boost torp damage but they really are not needed.
The whole point of a science vessel is that it gets its damage from somewhere other than the obvious tactical route using pure weapon damage. That means using your boff abilities or other secondary effects like secondary deflectors, debuffs etc to put out an alternative form of damage. None of that needs X number of tactical slots to be effective, about the only thing you'd definitely want on a sci ship is 5 sci console slots. The rest will pretty much be filled with universal consoles for set bonuses or to those that have passive boosts to one of the main science areas (EPG, CtrlX, DrainX etc.).
Honestly in all those 47 odd characters you have, how come you've not realised that those tac slots are best used for something other than tac consoles when building a science ship?
How often have you seen a sci build posted here or STO Academy or Reddit that shows only uni or set pieces in those few tac slots?
I'd seriously recommend you learn what you're talking about before you come on here and berate the devs and then attack all the guys who know it better than most because they've been doing it for years.
If you seriously want to learn to fly science come to The Science Channel in game, we'll be glad to help you out.
But no matter what Character, or what ship, Tac Slots are always Tac Consoles only for me, and again i cant complain about their Performance, it works so i must doing something right
Aha, the crux of the matter.... "I do better than most so I must be perfect and inflexible. All other build types are obviously wrong because they don't do it my way."
But no matter what Character, or what ship, Tac Slots are always Tac Consoles only for me, and again i cant complain about their Performance, it works so i must doing something right
Aha, the crux of the matter.... "I do better than most so I must be perfect and inflexible. All other build types are obviously wrong because they don't do it my way."
Please dont tell me the OP of this thread is one of those types? Sigh
I'm obviously late, but yeah... OP, you can totally put tac consoles in respective slots should you wish to do that, however it is certainly not the only way of playing the game efficiently. Plenty of ppl doing amazing dmg without any tac consoles at all.
Just because you don't happen to like how new ships are designed doesn't mean they will be totally awful and undesirable for everybody.
I'm obviously late, but yeah... OP, you can totally put tac consoles in respective slots should you wish to do that, however it is certainly not the only way of playing the game efficiently. Plenty of ppl doing amazing dmg without any tac consoles at all.
Just because you don't happen to like how new ships are designed doesn't mean they will be totally awful and undesirable for everybody.
I have always been of the opinion "Its not the ship, its her captain".
A great captain can take a two tactical console ship and turn it into a NPC's and players worst nightmare.
What bothers me the most about this thread is just how much the 'tactical console=only thing that matters' idea that permeates through everything the OP said and how much that viewpoint still has currency with the wider community. Which makes me worried that these ships won't sell enough. I'm worried that in a month from now Geko will be on a podcast and shrug his shoulders and say 'Welp, we tried guys. Guess we better go back to making a hundred million different types of cruiser instead.'
This is another thing that is sadly true about the STO community. There are a lot of very good players who realise this way of thinking is ridiculous but the unwashed masses are still fed this nonsense on a daily basis by people who cannot see past the end of their phaser cannon or torp launcher.
You don't need tac consoles to be good, heck I've seen plenty of shuttle builds that could out-DPS the pants of many full sized ships seen in pugs and they often don't even have one tac console slot!
People need to stop measuring a ship by its tac seating and see it for what it is, a platform to try new things on. You never know you might find out that looking for more tac slots all those years wasn't worth it, maybe you can do more with alternative build styles less reliant on tac.
BTW, whenever i open a new Topic on the forums, iam quickly reminded why thats not such a good idea (and why the majority of people stay away all together), cant say a thing without being attack from people with other oppinions, you have yours i have mine, you dont give a damn about my oppinion, fine i dont give a damn about yours than? Still no reason to attack me, so get down from your damn high horses you self proclaimed Pros.
Stubborness is being between a hard place and a rock. You believe science ships need at least THREE tac consoles, several people here have stated you don't need a THIRD tac console to have a terrific DPS. Why do you fixate on a science ship needing a third tac slot just to be "good"?
Holy TRIBBLE man......went to bed, came back just to see that half the forum here jumps at my throat, many of you (not all) claiming that iam SOOOO wrong, and you are SOOOO right, so many posts that iam not starting to quote them. All who say "bla bla 47 char means nothing, you dont focus" or whatever, give me a fu*** break. ALL of those 47 chars are basically MAXED in everything, all 60, all maxed R&D (level20) all maxed reputation, all at least 3-4 Specialization done, all with their own unique Ship and either Rep, lockbox or equivalent Gear. And my Second Account (Support Account) with another 18 Characters (all 60)? lets not even mention that (ups i did it).
I Probably spend way more time (probably more than its good for me) than some of you together! The Fact alone that my 2 Accounts were BANNED some times earlier cause i was accused of botting is a SAD but strong indication for that, in the end it was solved with them admiting that my playtimes are "very unusual" and they monitored me for around 2 Weeks Playing around over 18 Hours per DAY, call me a freak, i probably am, but NO ONE of you can tell me that iam new, that i dont know what iam doing, and that iam not testing around stuff, i bet most of you did not spend nearly as much time with sto as i, or EVEN my fiancee who also plays sto and has a similar ammount of chars and playtime. So stop acting so conceited, like you are all sooooo much better than me or anyone who does not share your oppinion, talking about oppinion, i CANT remember having said anything about my oppinion being better than yours, its just ONE of many maybe not better, maybe not worse, but DIFFERENT.
Some of you said it allready, some or many people wont buy those ships cause they did not fit their playstyle, and YES one tac console more or less can make the difference, you cannot build something for the "minority" but build it so that as many as possible, in other words the mainstream can somewhat make use of it. Countless Times i heard people saying that they wont touch anything with less than 3 Tac Consoles, well thats THEIR right, and again most of you filling the tac slots with Universals could still do it and achieve the SAME even with 3 Tac Slots, so have what you want, and others can also make it work for them, NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK OF THAT.
Those Ships most Probably will still sell, just because of the Admiralty System, but should it be otherwise, than that ONE Tac Console could be the Key reason , again no matter if you agree or not, but most "mainstream" people, who dont completly specialize in such stuff, see that "low number" in tac and will think, "NAH MAN ill pass" and if that hurts te sales to such a degree that Cryptic is not happy with it, than getting more Science Ships in the Future could be more Difficult, ESSPECIALLY for Roms and KDFs, so again, if you want to sell something, than you better make sure that it also looks somewhat attractive to the Mainstream, this goes for EVERY business out there, sto is no different.
In the end, no matter what i say, you will still bombard me with your counter arguments, cause of course everything i say is so wrong and ludicrous, and so different from your believes (again not everyone but enough of you)
Since its - sadly - more than unlikely that Cryptic will change anything, it will be just the same as usuall, new ship does not fit Playstyle = Pass on it and go on. No need to turn this into a battlefield of arguments, unlike you people enjoy it.
BTW: English is not my native language, so keep errors, mistakes what ever that you find for yourself, its free.
Comments
Aren't these the same thing? Or are they 2 different logical fallacies? Seems more like a bandwagon appeal than an appeal to authority, but I could be mistaken on the definition of the bandwagon appeal.
KSV has three tac console slots. I don't remember off the top of my head exactly what I've got in them, but at most two of them actually are tac at the moment, and I don't think those are top-of-the-line. The real damage comes from the Gravity Wells, Subspace Vortexes, Destabilizing Resonance Beams, and Tractor Beam Repulsors (backed by Graga Mal) that can rip ships apart without ever worrying about pesky things like battering down shields.
I'm sure it's perfectly possible to make a decent beam-based DPS build on a sci ship. Nonetheless, saying that not being able to do so--even if true that having a mere two tac consoles prevents that, which I'm not at all certain of--makes the ship somehow greatly hampered... shows a distinct lack of experience with the entire ship category.
That, I totally agree with. Fixed Ensign stations need to go away forever.
anyway that's not what this thread is about
Can't really give advice on SCi because I've been gone since DR, and been working on getting my TAC, and ENG toons up to par, and I've neglected my SCI, but reading this thread is giving me a nice refresher course in SCI, and what I've missed since the days of the Neft Empire when SCI was neutered
Also seeing that Romulan Sci Ship , I so want to bring my Sci Romulan out of retirement.
Wouldn't be me if i didn't say something snarky.....47 character really not something to gloat about that just tells me you're not focused on one play style, or farm like a madman, especially when you can just respec.
Its the difference between pointing to a single entity with authority or respect (often but not always the speaker themselves) as why a statement is correct vs pointing to a multitude of individuals who agree as an argument for saying the statement is correct. (When that multitude all converse amongst themselves and cheerfully accept the echo chamber they create it tends to shift over to that charming phenomena called 'groupthink'.)
Now, the statement may still actually BE correct, but not because of either of those reasons
The powercreep will get there, and then we'll think all these old ships are garbage and it's time to buy new ones
The Promo! temporal T6s and their 4 BOff layouts were breathtaking in their promise that more of the potential patterns will eventually be deployed as actual offerings. The first time ships offer dual commander seat people are going to lose their minds. It'll be mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together.
And glorious to see the shipcrafting to come of it.
I'm ok with Ensign seats, but I wish they were always universal. Having them fixed is rather limiting.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
For the same way a DPS'er relying on weapons does everything in his power to promote his damage output, the same way a Science Build has to also, but with different skills, different equipment focus. My TAC Console Slots on most of my SCI Vessels are used for anything that increases Science capability.
Personally, though, I'd keep the Fed ship as it is but give the Rom and KDF versions a third Tac console at Fleet instead of Eng. 2/5/3 out of the box on all three is fine.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
Thank you for sharing this. I hadn't realized several of those were cat 2... I hadn't imagined they'd throw around such big numbers when introducing cat 2 bonuses. Might be time to do a little shopping
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Possibly even mad science
You don't rely on two torp consoles to deal the damage, don't you?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
This it why we can't have nice things... No matter what people will complain...
:rolls eyes:
Seriously, i'f you're worried about how many tac console slots you have on your SCIENCE vessel then you're doing it all wrong.
Yes it can be nice to have tac slots if you're running some sort of tac/sci torp boat hybrid and want to boost torp damage but they really are not needed.
The whole point of a science vessel is that it gets its damage from somewhere other than the obvious tactical route using pure weapon damage. That means using your boff abilities or other secondary effects like secondary deflectors, debuffs etc to put out an alternative form of damage. None of that needs X number of tactical slots to be effective, about the only thing you'd definitely want on a sci ship is 5 sci console slots. The rest will pretty much be filled with universal consoles for set bonuses or to those that have passive boosts to one of the main science areas (EPG, CtrlX, DrainX etc.).
Honestly in all those 47 odd characters you have, how come you've not realised that those tac slots are best used for something other than tac consoles when building a science ship?
How often have you seen a sci build posted here or STO Academy or Reddit that shows only uni or set pieces in those few tac slots?
I'd seriously recommend you learn what you're talking about before you come on here and berate the devs and then attack all the guys who know it better than most because they've been doing it for years.
If you seriously want to learn to fly science come to The Science Channel in game, we'll be glad to help you out.
Aha, the crux of the matter.... "I do better than most so I must be perfect and inflexible. All other build types are obviously wrong because they don't do it my way."
Please dont tell me the OP of this thread is one of those types? Sigh
Just because you don't happen to like how new ships are designed doesn't mean they will be totally awful and undesirable for everybody.
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
I have always been of the opinion "Its not the ship, its her captain".
A great captain can take a two tactical console ship and turn it into a NPC's and players worst nightmare.
This is another thing that is sadly true about the STO community. There are a lot of very good players who realise this way of thinking is ridiculous but the unwashed masses are still fed this nonsense on a daily basis by people who cannot see past the end of their phaser cannon or torp launcher.
You don't need tac consoles to be good, heck I've seen plenty of shuttle builds that could out-DPS the pants of many full sized ships seen in pugs and they often don't even have one tac console slot!
People need to stop measuring a ship by its tac seating and see it for what it is, a platform to try new things on. You never know you might find out that looking for more tac slots all those years wasn't worth it, maybe you can do more with alternative build styles less reliant on tac.
...circular reasoning...
Tautologies are the ony way to be sure, since tautologies are the ony way to be ... certain.
I Probably spend way more time (probably more than its good for me) than some of you together! The Fact alone that my 2 Accounts were BANNED some times earlier cause i was accused of botting is a SAD but strong indication for that, in the end it was solved with them admiting that my playtimes are "very unusual" and they monitored me for around 2 Weeks Playing around over 18 Hours per DAY, call me a freak, i probably am, but NO ONE of you can tell me that iam new, that i dont know what iam doing, and that iam not testing around stuff, i bet most of you did not spend nearly as much time with sto as i, or EVEN my fiancee who also plays sto and has a similar ammount of chars and playtime. So stop acting so conceited, like you are all sooooo much better than me or anyone who does not share your oppinion, talking about oppinion, i CANT remember having said anything about my oppinion being better than yours, its just ONE of many maybe not better, maybe not worse, but DIFFERENT.
Some of you said it allready, some or many people wont buy those ships cause they did not fit their playstyle, and YES one tac console more or less can make the difference, you cannot build something for the "minority" but build it so that as many as possible, in other words the mainstream can somewhat make use of it. Countless Times i heard people saying that they wont touch anything with less than 3 Tac Consoles, well thats THEIR right, and again most of you filling the tac slots with Universals could still do it and achieve the SAME even with 3 Tac Slots, so have what you want, and others can also make it work for them, NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK OF THAT.
Those Ships most Probably will still sell, just because of the Admiralty System, but should it be otherwise, than that ONE Tac Console could be the Key reason , again no matter if you agree or not, but most "mainstream" people, who dont completly specialize in such stuff, see that "low number" in tac and will think, "NAH MAN ill pass" and if that hurts te sales to such a degree that Cryptic is not happy with it, than getting more Science Ships in the Future could be more Difficult, ESSPECIALLY for Roms and KDFs, so again, if you want to sell something, than you better make sure that it also looks somewhat attractive to the Mainstream, this goes for EVERY business out there, sto is no different.
In the end, no matter what i say, you will still bombard me with your counter arguments, cause of course everything i say is so wrong and ludicrous, and so different from your believes (again not everyone but enough of you)
Since its - sadly - more than unlikely that Cryptic will change anything, it will be just the same as usuall, new ship does not fit Playstyle = Pass on it and go on. No need to turn this into a battlefield of arguments, unlike you people enjoy it.
BTW: English is not my native language, so keep errors, mistakes what ever that you find for yourself, its free.