test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

[PC] The Command Cruiser Dreadnought Bundle!

1246

Comments

  • Options
    strathkinstrathkin Member Posts: 2,666 Bug Hunter
    edited April 2019
    The KEY to creativity implied by Cryptic & doing 'very' well DPS wise with the ship lies within 2-3 missions, which missions will vary drastically depending upon your build, and perhaps also the Ion Storm Console. Also note the use of Torp's with Command, and using SET bonuses.

    ♫♪♫♪♪ - each mission resides (mostly) in a different ARC's & 2 SETs of '3' fully possible, there are 2 sets of 3 and one set of 4 quite viable for Phaser &/or Disruptor builds however. Yet Polaron and Tetyron can have similar yet very viable options as well.

    I to say 'no' more however, so each will have to discover, or explore possibilities below...

    - - - UPDATE - - - | to my post above.
    ▪ Focus the Commander ENG / Command on Offense Command Skills exclusively, and SET Primary SPEC as well.
    ╘ Use the Lt Universal for ENG with EptW &/or Engineering Team, extra SCI, or TAC based on your Class.
    ▪ Consider in the Lt. Commander SCI station using either 1/2 of 'Scramble Sensors' + Photonic Officer.
    ╘ Pair will 'Inspirational Leader' Personal Space Trait from Discovery Era + others.
    ╘ Scramble Sensors, Jam Targeting Sensors, Photonic Officer, Feedback Pulse, & Gravity Well work with inspiration.
    ─► to provide 10% chance of +10 to most Starship skills 'got to check skills slot at Hud Stations thought'.
    ▪ If you consider 'Emergency Weapon Cycle' &/or 'History will Remember' + others many may rethink this ship...

    NOTE: All SET bonus include a Torp, Energy Weapon, and Console. While you are limited to 1 Torp of each type from each SET, you are free to use 1 SET Torp up Front and the other in the Stern; you'll also more than likely have '3' 360 ARC weapons in the Aft as well.

    HINTS for Phasers: A Dying Star in one ARC, a Prominent Engineer working by your side in another, and first ARC yet possibly last choice to consider has a Vulcan Admiral in it.
    Post edited by strathkin on
    0zxlclk.png
  • Options
    avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,205 Arc User
    I love my Presidio with my current torpedo build, the only thing I don't like about the ship is the lack of a second lt. commander slot.
    I stream on Twitch, look for Avoozl_
  • Options
    questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,429 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    While i may purchase the ship eventually, i can't say i like the shape of the saucer. 4 Nacelles is nice, but i dislike the saucer.

    For an engineering heavy vessel with lots of command i would recommend slotting the cardassian torpedo console. It just looks like it has good synergy.

    Quietly hoping for a Cheyenne class.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • Options
    notagain#5499 notagain Member Posts: 18 Arc User
    I have to agree with almost all who say no Lt. Cmdr Tactical is a deal breaker. I didn't see that the first time I read over it. Looks great, but it is what it can do not how pretty it looks that determines if it is a ship to get.

    In regards to Dreadnought, I also agree only use it sparingly. The Word Dreadnought first appear on the H.M.S. Dreadnought, it was a new class of ship in the Royal Navy that over night had changed the naval balance of power. Only 5 years after Dreadnought was built (maybe sailed) a new class given the name of Super Dreadnought.

    Back to issue. Will this be allowed to use the Command Cruisers Geneva, Presidio and Concorde consoles - the tachyon, the phaser, the mine layer and fleet support turret? Or does the word Dreadnought in front disqualify.

    I agree the Klingon ship looks like some tried to do a drawing sticks to see who had to build it when they came up with the idea, take one long straw and two same size use something between each and call it Klingon. If this and the Federation are based on the Discovery series gives me more reason not to ever bother watching the show and would encourage me to reduce playing time in the STO universe. I sure hope CBS realizes not everyone is a fan of their "Discovery" show and allows you to move some focus back on the universe STO was heading before the Discovery label was slapped onto the theme of the game (guess better than trying to design a new STO with Discovery stats, would probably have failed, instead with the STO having good fan support we have inherited the new Discovery need for a computer game.

    Finally, Where?????? are the command cruisers fleet variants. I have never seen them even with a fleet that is maxed on all projects/structures. Those of us with the Command Bundle for our faction are still waiting and waiting and waiting.

    You allow the consoles on and change the tac boff seating and I would probably buy it but as it stands, it is missing two many of the right things to make it a good ship (sorry looks don't cut it).

    Also why not make future Super Dreadnoughts truly the power house, with either 2-3 more consoles, hull, shields, personnel or other features and do the daring of giving the ship maybe a 5 fore 4 aft config or a 4/4 with 2 hanger bays, something that says this ship is meant to truly be the king.
  • Options
    pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 4,209 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    strathkin wrote: »
    The KEY to creativity & doing 'extremely' well DPS wise with the ship lies within 2-3 missions, which missions will vary drastically depending upon your build, and perhaps also the Ion Storm Console. Also note the use of Torp's with Command and using SET bonuses.

    ♫♪♫♪♪ - each mission resides (mostly) in a different ARC's & 2 SET fully possible.

    Yeah, to be honest it's the BOFF layout that hampers this ship the most. I mean, tactical capability can be supplimented using universal consoles with weapon-benefitting passives, such as (for example) the Approaching Agony console which offers +15 to phasers & 1.5% Crit chance.
    The hanger needs to factor into this too - those Elite pets + various hanger buffs could be a pretty effective suppliment to the ship.
    Again - the issue is more than the tactical BOFF layout limits the application of said power.

    I did wonder if it'd make a good torpedo boat, but I don't think it's science emphasis is quie that strong (not to mention the lack of a secondary deflector).

    On the fence here. It's an absolutely stunning ship (in fact the visuals may be what swings it for me) and I don't doubt it can be made to work if some real thought is put into it - but can't help but feel you'd end up being reminded that the Command Cruisers can do the same thing a little better.
    I guess you could make a high yield torpedo boat with x2 Confire power, Delphic torpedo and subspace warheads trait with exotic stacked up to spam subspace tears? The problem is you can recreate the bridge officer layout of this ship on other command ships only with extras like a 2nd lt commander slot.

    Not only can we recreate the bridge office slots only better but a lot of the other command ships have a universal lt commander slot so you gain a massively wider range of build options.

    I think I am just going to back to the command cruisers as like you say they do the same job only better and more flexible.
  • Options
    ak255ak255 Member Posts: 317 Arc User
    LMAO, everyone here complaining about the BOFF layout! You do realize for like the past year or so, EVERY ship practically had the same layout: Commander, 2 Lt. Commander, Lt. and Ensign? It was so predictable and just made any new ship pointless to buy because I already had like 3 or 4 (not including the free Summer and Winter ships) that had the exact same layout. This is LITERALLY the most unique ship we've had in years just for this layout. Is it good? No, but it was actually surprising for once.
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    sophlogimo wrote: »
    The boff layout is interesting, something new to try out. Of course, those who only care for DPS will miss the ability to use the overpowered level 3 AOE powers like TS or FAW, but having yet another ship with the same boring layout wouldn't have done the game much good.

    Ask yourselves, folks: Can you make a decent ship out of this, or are you just into carbon-copying your old ship builds?

    It's more complicated than just a DPS obsession. It's a 4/4 ship that can load dual cannons. Ok not optimal but whatever. I still enjoy DC's on my 4/4 ships. But then you can only get lieutenant tac powers meaning if you do load dual cannons, you can only use CSV/CRF 1. Not even rank 2 which makes you ask "what's the point of this ship being able to load DC's?"

    Continuing, it's yet another 4/4 ship with command spec. How many of those do I have? Seems like 15 or 20. Why would I want another one? Especially when all the ones I already have are all better? Well besides that horrific Samsar. I actually don't have a problem with the console layout. I'm not obsessed with the mentality of "MUST HAVE 4 or 5 TAC CONSOLES!!!" But when you add the console layout to the other negatives about this ship it all adds up to be too many negatives for me to consider buying it.

    And while I do love how it looks I only realized today that the model is much MUCH smaller than I thought it was so I'm not that unhappy about the ship stats being so lackluster. I guess I just headcanoned it as being an ST:D version of a Vengeance in terms of size.

    Well said on all of it.. the ship is a complete disappointment in every way. I also agree that it's way too small.

    I have however, come to terms with all of it.. and it's fine.

    If some people like this and think it's worth their money then great.. get it and I honestly hope you enjoy it.

    Personally, this ship does not meet my needs in any possible way and I will not be buying it. It's fine.. I already got the ships I wanted (Gagarin/Qugh) and I am perfectly happy with those.

    I look forward to the weekend, it will be fun carrying all these ships through Advanced Queues. :lol:

    What gets me about size is .... That slow turn rate.
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    azrael605 wrote: »
    > @sophlogimo said:
    > The boff layout is interesting, something new to try out. Of course, those who only care for DPS will miss the ability to use the overpowered level 3 AOE powers like TS or FAW, but having yet another ship with the same boring layout wouldn't have done the game much good.
    >
    > Ask yourselves, folks: Can you make a decent ship out of this, or are you just into carbon-copying your old ship builds?

    It's as actually a very similar Boff/console setup to the Kheldon, I don't have any problem making a build for this, I'm already planning it out.

    Kheldon has a Lt. Cmdr. tactical BOFF seat + is intel, not Command.
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    awlaforgeawlaforge Member Posts: 235 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    The fed ship looks gorgeous. The KDF ship looks like something my dog would vomit up. No romulan ship still...so yeah...no to all of it still.

    I'd be glad CBS hasn't screwed up Romulans. When Cryptic gets over the Discovery phase, I am sure the rommie ships will be coming. I think Ambassador Kael has said as much during live streams.

  • Options
    seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    genhauk wrote: »
    What gets me about size is .... That slow turn rate.

    Yeah, this ship has the turn rate of a large ship (6) but it's still tiny.

    It's like they just tried to make a ship that has everything I hate. :lol:
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • Options
    kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,576 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    re: keys, wtf

    The keys (and module) just seem like they're there to 'bulk out' the bundle, since it doesn't have a third Rom ship (and since the Klingon ship is so ugly - add some more general bonus stuff in an attempt to get a few more people going for the bundle instead of just the Fed ship)
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    I've been thinking about it and you know what the BOFF layout on this bird reminds me of? .... The original Ambassador-class when it first launched. She two lacked the Lt. Cmdr. Tac slot ... or option for it.

    Yes, she was only a T5 ... but how many of them did you see rolling around the game on a regular basis? Not many and not for long.

    Those who got her did so as they loved the ship design ... but ended up shelving her and moving on to others that performed the job better than she.

    Sadly, there are better options out there. Better Tactical heavy cruisers ... Better Engineering heavy cruisers. Better Science heavy cruisers. ... And better cruisers that are a mix.

    She simply doesn't bring anything to the table and is outdated and outclassed before she is even shoved out of spacedock.

    Not her fault, but the bar was set hiring in ship BOFF layouts. Just the way it is.

    AND ... I'm all for creative challenges. Just being realistic.

    ::: shrugs
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 4,209 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    ak255 wrote: »
    LMAO, everyone here complaining about the BOFF layout! You do realize for like the past year or so, EVERY ship practically had the same layout: Commander, 2 Lt. Commander, Lt. and Ensign? It was so predictable and just made any new ship pointless to buy because I already had like 3 or 4 (not including the free Summer and Winter ships) that had the exact same layout. This is LITERALLY the most unique ship we've had in years just for this layout. Is it good? No, but it was actually surprising for once.
    I don’t see how downgrading a lt.commander to lt. makes a ship desirable or unique in a good way. All it does it give you more limited options.

    My current command ship still has access to the same commander Engineering, same Lt.Commadner Science the main difference is that it also has lt.commander Tactical instead of just Lt Tactical. Not that I would, but I could just not to slot anything in the rank 3 Tactical slot and have the same lt tactical slot as this command Dreadnought.

    The slots are not of equal value. A rank 3 slot is worth more than a rank 2 slot. Taking away a rank 3 slot to gain a rank 2 slot is not an equal trade and overall gives you less options and gives less functionality.

    An example of what I mean 1 lt.commander Tactical with 1 Ensign Tactical. Gives 4 tactical slots. This ship with 2 Lt. Tactical still has 4 slots so access to all the same powers but those powers will be lower rank. This layout with 2 Lt. doesn't open anything new up, all it does is mean you are forced into less options and weaker options.

    Plus a universal lt.commander is far more flexible allowing a wider build range with more options then a lt universal. I believe these are the reasons why some players are seeing the layout of this ship as poor. Because it doesn't offer the player any benefit all it does it reduce what we can take.

    Post edited by pottsey5g on
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    azrael605 wrote: »
    I flew the T5 Ambassador until long after Delta Rising, flew the Kamarag too, its still my favoritr KDF ship.

    We each have our favorites. I flew a Temporal Destroyer T5 for a long time.

    Doesn't change the fact that for most players, it was shelved early in it's life .... And is already outdated and less flexible than the other ships already out there.

    Heck ... My Vor'ral is running a Lt. Cmdr. Tac & and Lt. Cmdr Sci with a Lt. Tac, Ens Sci and Cmdr. Eng.

    She's classified as a Support Battlecruiser and sadly can be more tac oriented than a "dreadnought."

    If the new ships were science cruisers, I'd feel differently.
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    davehilanderdavehilander Member Posts: 40 Arc User
    I understand the concern about BOff seating, however I still enjoy flying my DHC K't'inga and that had even worse tac seating for a cannon build (which has higher tac slot requirements than a beam build). This ship is far more durable and has basically the same console slots (accounting for the t6 upgrade). We shall see when I try it out tomorrow, but it looks like it will be a pretty solid beam tank.
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    sophlogimo wrote: »
    So, to summarize, it's not just about the DPS, you also want to do lots of damage. :smiley:

    Not really. For me, I just want the basic stats of the ship to be on par with the others I've already purchases. Right now it feels lacking.

    Just the Narendra has 1 Cmdr seat, 2 Lt. Cmdr. seats, 1 Lt. seat and 1 ens. seat.

    This new one has 1 Cmdr, 1 Lt. Cmdr., 2 Lt., and 1 ensign.

    For me, the inclusion of a hanger doesn't equal the the loss of that Lt. Cmdr. power slot.

    Although ... I would be happy if the sci Lt. Cmdr. slot went to one of the Lt. slots and the Lt. Cmdr became a universal. Would be same level of seats but give folks more flexibility to play to their style.

    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,571 Arc User
    Their take as to play to your style is to buy three different ships. ;)
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    l don't know.
    l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
    That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • Options
    f8explorer#7814 f8explorer Member Posts: 1,328 Arc User
    ltminns wrote: »
    Their take as to play to your style is to buy three different ships. ;)

    Give us three variants then. :D
    Joint Forces Commander ... / ... proud member of ... boq botlhra'ghom / AllianceCenCom!
    " We stand TOGETHER and fight with HONOR!"

    U.S.S. Maelstrom, NCC-71417 (Constitution III-class/flagship) --- Fleet Admiral Hauk' --|-- Dahar Master Hauk --- I.K.S. qu'In 'an bortaS (D7-class / flagship)
  • Options
    phoenix841phoenix841 Member Posts: 487 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    What I don't like
    The inclusion of keys in a 2-ship pack. Keys? Seriously?
    If you are going to include extras please keep it to ship related items like dry dock slots or ship slots.
    You would have hooked me (hard) if there was a small craft Disco class C shuttle or playable House Mo’kai Fighter as a bundle extra.

    I can't relate to, nor do I see the logic of including keys in a 2-ship pack (and I really hope this isn't a new normal). I buy ship bundles - to get bundles of ... ships.
    Keys and ship module are worthless to me. I've only ever acquired two fleet ships in my nearly 10 years of playing, and one of which was right before T6 came out, and soured me on it. The second I still fly, and was acquired with the a free T6 rep module. If I buy this pack, those extras will immediately be sold on the exchange for pennies. I understand the mentality behind adding it to the pack, but since fleet ships are per character, they are worthless IMO. Given that, you are really paying 3000 zen for two ships, which is the same as the cost of one ship not discounted. I do like the look of the Fed 2410 ship, so that's a consideration for me.
    Finally, Where?????? are the command cruisers fleet variants. I have never seen them even with a fleet that is maxed on all projects/structures. Those of us with the Command Bundle for our faction are still waiting and waiting and waiting.

    Every single ship pack on the C-Store that comes in 3-per-faction variety are always fleet level out of the box. Count the consoles. They have 11, which is fleet level for T6. This has been true since forever. Odyssey, Vesta, Dyson, Command, Allied, etc. All fleet level (at time of release).
    EDIT: Actually, I forgot, the fleet oddy is actually worse than the C-store version, but there's a history behind that.
    LTS Since Beta (Jan 2010).
  • Options
    lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,848 Arc User
    I have to agree, I mean it's a very beautiful ship and easily my favorite design from Discovery, but the stats of the ship I just don't think I can like.

    Just feels like she is a space whale with a weak bite
  • Options
    duasynduasyn Member Posts: 492 Arc User
    The Boff layout doesn't bother me for a cruiser. I've always liked having a LC Sci option. And sure you don't get any level 3 tac powers, but you can get 6 tac powers total if you want. Personally, I've been getting tired of 5/3 layout + LC Tac boff cruisers.

    Is this ship going to win any DPS races? No. They could have called these Command Support Dreadnoughts.
  • Options
    ikonn#1068 ikonn Member Posts: 1,450 Arc User
    edited April 2019
    I would have thought the Buran would have a size comparable to the Dakota/Cheyenne... the STO iteration is sized like it's an escort ship.

    The Cardenas (Buran) was the one Fed ship I voted for back when we had the polls asking what ships to add from DSC. I had hoped back when we voted that this would be my "spiritual successor" to the Dakota/Cheyenne design as I just love that X layout (i.e. Eclipse), and not the offset upper/lower or different sized nacelles (i.e. Europa or Presido). However, I just can't justify buying it with the current BOFF layout. I could care less about the DSC Klingon ships. Though, I have to admit, the Fleet Qugh is a beast to fly :)
    -AoP- Warrior's Blood (KDF Armada) / -AoP- Qu' raD qulbo'Degh / -AoP- Project Phoenix
    Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
  • Options
    mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    The low turn rate doesn't seem quite warranted for a ship of its size.

    I am not particularly enthusiastic about ships with Triple Lts instead of Twin Lt.Cmdr BO layouts. A Lt.Cmdr ability is almost always more powerful option than a Lt. ability, and the ship will need something to compensate for that.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Sign In or Register to comment.