test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Q's Winter Wonderland Grand Prize 2021?

124

Comments

  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 2,595 Arc User
    westmetals wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    Addendum-- it should also be noted that *having* access to those skills comes at the cost a fair bit of the ship's tac capabilities, since the only other ltcomm station is the MW station, and the other tac station is only Lt. Not exactly as good as you seem to think.

    Here's how I would build this year's event ship versus a Gagarin...

    I do see the loss of using a torpedo (with spread 1) as there's room for this instead of kemocite laced weaponry 1 on the Gagarin.

    The Torpedo Spread I could be regained via the Entwined Tactical Matrices trait.


    Hey that seems like using "half" the trait in a way :smile:

    Cause sometimes it's being used to get a bfaw out of a torpedo spread on it's alternate rotation.

    I'm going to call it ahead of time... most people will be using DHC's on their event ship so no need for a torpedo.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,019 Arc User
    There is ALWAYS a need for a torpedo - this isn't like 5 years ago when having one among a set of energy weapons took away from your overall damage.​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 2,595 Arc User
    There is ALWAYS a need for a torpedo - this isn't like 5 years ago when having one among a set of energy weapons took away from your overall damage.​​

    Let me know how you'd like to incorporate a torpedo into the event ship. Then it's time for a parse.
  • kayajaykayajay Member Posts: 1,990 Arc User
    So...yet another sanitary ware ship. This looks like a toilet pedestal. I suppose that's apt, with the toilet seat joining the Infinity Lock Box. I just really wish whoever is designing these wouldn't do it when they're in the bathroom and taking inspiration from that.
  • corinthalascorinthalas Member Posts: 2,235 Arc User
    edited December 2021
    westmetals wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    Reverse shield polarity combined with something to reduce it's cool down is an essential and important engineering bridge officer ability for a good number of players.

    It works great for me. I use it... pretty well every time I play on a ship that has it.

    Other engineering bridge officer abilities that work really good are emergency power to engines (with an emergency conn officer doff), ep2 shields, ep2 auxiliary, ep2 weapons, aux to damp, aux to SIF, DEM, engineering team, structural integrity collapse, and aux to batt. Many of these are staples of a lot of builds.

    I was specifically listing abilities that could be profitably used as the commander-level ability (to counter the prior poster's statement that there are no useful skills for the slot), which is why I left off the emergency power skills, engineering team, etc, and specified Aux2Bat 3.

    I get their argument being that it's a wasted slot but I don't agree. In particular... I've run full Aux2Bat builds with that configuration where I did not even need a second engineer BOFF....

    Ens.: Eng Team 1
    Lt.: Aux2Bat 1
    LtC.: EP to Weapons 3
    Cmdr.: Aux2Bat 3

    (i.e.... you need two copies of Aux2Bat... but they don't both have to be Aux2Bat 1....!)

    And to say a LtC Eng slot is a "negative"????? Have you ever HEARD of EP to Weapons?

    You can easily overcap weapon power with EPTW II. The only difference is the miniscule bonus to energy weapon damage that III offers over II, which is to say, not a big deal. In fact, you can get most of that from the *ensign* rank of the skill. So, yeah, ltc engineering is kind of a waste. If you can get an ensign and a lt, ltc and commander aren't offering you anything that important. Which is the problem. All the additional skills are niche at best. Projectile builds and energy builds can make full use of all four ranks of commander tac station, and all four of them add plenty of value. Science builds (of basically any setup) make full use of almost as many science stations you can throw at them. But engineering? Nah. You can get by with a LT station. LT and ensign is almost perfect. Everything after that just isn't contributing much.

    And yes, compared to what OTHER stations you give up to have a ltcomm or a commander engineering station, it absolutely *IS* a negative. Other stations would have offered far more/better.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 4,509 Arc User
    If I end up running out of basic Eng skill things to do with seating like that I often stick one of the winter powers in, they are not bad (though probably still not quite as effective as the meta).
  • captainhunter1captainhunter1 Member Posts: 1,604 Arc User
    avoozuul wrote: »
    Such an ugly ship, I usually try to get every event ship possible but this time I don't even feel the grind is even worth it because of the ship currently involved in my own personal opinion.

    Edit: However upon further inspection it does seem closer to an Asari ship design from Mass Effect but not near as good.

    I believe the design is a 'future' version (continuation) of the Oberth-class science vessel. You can definitely see the same lines in it.
  • brex#6815 brex Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    Nope its the ugly and poorly made Eisenberg-class Star Cruiser as the prize. Guessing the higher ups want Cryptic to keep shoving ST Discovery style ships down our throats till we either get used to them or leave the game.

    I will skipping this years festivities for the first time since playing. That poorly designed ship isn't worth it.
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,217 Arc User
    In profile, it looks like they were trying to make a ship shaped like the Federation chevron symbol.

    Ah, well - it's free. Not sure what people were expecting, really. They don't make event ships to compete with C-Store ones, let alone box or promo ones. They are just "good enough" to get by with if you don't want to spend money.
  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 2,595 Arc User
    ... ltc engineering is kind of a waste. If you can get an ensign and a lt, ltc and commander aren't offering you anything that important. Which is the problem. All the additional skills are niche at best. ... But engineering? Nah. You can get by with a LT station. LT and ensign is almost perfect. Everything after that just isn't contributing much.
    Some of the most powerful bridge officer abilities in the game are found as engineering LtC and Commander rank skills. I already tried to explain that on the previous page in detail, giving multiple examples, uptimes, and even a couple full ship boff comparative layouts. It just takes seconds to be baselessly negative though.
    westmetals wrote: »
    Essentially what this all boils down to, is you whining that the ship is a cruiser and not an escort.
    If this had of been stated outright I wouldn't even have bothered responding.
  • bigblackafricabigblackafrica Member Posts: 116 Arc User
    Am I the only one who hates these hideous 32nd century ship designs with the detached nacelles? I mean, the structural integrity of a ship in many pieces seems dubious at best, and they DO NOT "look cool" with all those separate bits flying around together claiming to all be part of one ship.

    I'm intrigued by the console, and always welcome another admiralty card, but I doubt I'll spend much time flying this ship after I unlock the trait.
  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 4,695 Arc User
    Am I the only one who hates these hideous 32nd century ship designs with the detached nacelles? I mean, the structural integrity of a ship in many pieces seems dubious at best, and they DO NOT "look cool" with all those separate bits flying around together claiming to all be part of one ship.

    I'm intrigued by the console, and always welcome another admiralty card, but I doubt I'll spend much time flying this ship after I unlock the trait.

    No, you're not the only one. Whilst I get the principle of 'reduced mass' on the propulsive/reactive hull sections, I'd want to know how they combat those sections flying off due to 'interference' from radiation etc. Those 'magnetic' bonds must be using some power.
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • corinthalascorinthalas Member Posts: 2,235 Arc User
    edited December 2021
    westmetals wrote: »
    westmetals wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    Reverse shield polarity combined with something to reduce it's cool down is an essential and important engineering bridge officer ability for a good number of players.

    It works great for me. I use it... pretty well every time I play on a ship that has it.

    Other engineering bridge officer abilities that work really good are emergency power to engines (with an emergency conn officer doff), ep2 shields, ep2 auxiliary, ep2 weapons, aux to damp, aux to SIF, DEM, engineering team, structural integrity collapse, and aux to batt. Many of these are staples of a lot of builds.

    I was specifically listing abilities that could be profitably used as the commander-level ability (to counter the prior poster's statement that there are no useful skills for the slot), which is why I left off the emergency power skills, engineering team, etc, and specified Aux2Bat 3.

    I get their argument being that it's a wasted slot but I don't agree. In particular... I've run full Aux2Bat builds with that configuration where I did not even need a second engineer BOFF....

    Ens.: Eng Team 1
    Lt.: Aux2Bat 1
    LtC.: EP to Weapons 3
    Cmdr.: Aux2Bat 3

    (i.e.... you need two copies of Aux2Bat... but they don't both have to be Aux2Bat 1....!)

    And to say a LtC Eng slot is a "negative"????? Have you ever HEARD of EP to Weapons?

    You can easily overcap weapon power with EPTW II. The only difference is the miniscule bonus to energy weapon damage that III offers over II, which is to say, not a big deal. In fact, you can get most of that from the *ensign* rank of the skill. So, yeah, ltc engineering is kind of a waste. If you can get an ensign and a lt, ltc and commander aren't offering you anything that important. Which is the problem. All the additional skills are niche at best. Projectile builds and energy builds can make full use of all four ranks of commander tac station, and all four of them add plenty of value. Science builds (of basically any setup) make full use of almost as many science stations you can throw at them. But engineering? Nah. You can get by with a LT station. LT and ensign is almost perfect. Everything after that just isn't contributing much.

    And yes, compared to what OTHER stations you give up to have a ltcomm or a commander engineering station, it absolutely *IS* a negative. Other stations would have offered far more/better.

    a) You are assuming a non-Aux2Bat build. I am not. In most cases such builds are thought to require 2xAux2Bat 1... but it can actually be done with a higher rank skill.

    b) While yes you are correct about EPtW, placing it as the LtC skill makes way for lower level skills. As in my post above... where I demonstrated how you can run a full Aux2Bat with EPtW and Eng Team with only one BOFF.

    c) If you aren't doing Aux2Bat, the same slots could be filled with things like DEM, RSP, or Aux2Damp, among other examples.

    While yes you can "get by" with only low level Eng skills... looking at it from a perspective of what the ship is set up for, I do not see this ship's amount of engineering BOFF space as a negative. Particularly because there is enough to do a dual EP Aux2Bat build... which means, among other things, you don't need to use one of those science slots for Photonic Officer.

    Yes, the ship's BOFF layout as a whole is a bit awkward, namely the fact that the only LtC slot useable as Tac is also a spec slot.... but the engineering BOFF is not solely at fault there, the spec could have been placed on the science slot.

    And considering what has been said about DHCs....

    Essentially what this all boils down to, is you whining that the ship is a cruiser and not an escort.

    No, not that it's not an escort. I fly plenty of ships with commander-level *SPECIALITY* engineering stations. One of my favorite ships is one of them, and there are a couple others I like that way too. Hell they could have made the commander station *UNIVERSAL* and I'd be ecstatic -- let the player decide how they want the ship to play. And it wouldn't be unprecedented either. The KDF-recruit bird of prey has a universal commander station.

    I'm irritated that it's got a *commaner-level* *non-specialty* engineering station, after this summer's event ship was the exact same garbage. Because everything beyond a lt station is niche, pathetically weak, or useless. There aren't enough good, genuinely useful engineering skills to fill out a non-specialty commander engineering station. Mostly it's a bunch of 'whatever' skills because they're better than nothing at all. But not by much. -edit- It's the same reason why I don't fly any of the past event cruisers.
    Post edited by corinthalas on
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    Any more pictures of it from other angles?
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 4,509 Arc User
    edited December 2021
    Any more pictures of it from other angles?

    Here it is directly from the side from the show itself:
    nog-900x601.png

    This one is a lot clearer, but I don't know if it is completely accurate:
    u_s_s__nog__eisenberg_class__by_dmitryraven_detc5ps-pre.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NzIwIiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvZDA1NDFiMWMtYTMyNi00ODAyLWFhMTUtOTkxYWU0MjA5MThmXC9kZXRjNXBzLWY4NzQ4Y2Q4LTRhOWYtNDVjNi1iYjc3LTViODAwOTRlMmU5Yi5qcGciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTI4MCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.6e28yWby1SlyTI9vMXelVpHrh4iaLJi7dx8k0fbLQKY

    And here is an Eaglemoss illustration of it from the front:
    ship-dsc-nog.jpg


  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,494 Arc User
    I dig it, nice to see some of them look good.

    Reminds me of a miniaturized voth city ship
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • zedbrightlander1zedbrightlander1 Member Posts: 14,617 Arc User
    I want a a ship made of cookies and candy.

    This!
    11th-Doctor-bowtiesarecool.jpg
    f5cc65bc8f3b91f963e328314df7c48d.jpg
    Sig? What sig? I don't see any sig.
  • alcyoneserenealcyoneserene Member Posts: 2,412 Arc User
    I'm irritated that it's got a *commaner-level* *non-specialty* engineering station, after this summer's event ship was the exact same garbage. Because everything beyond a lt station is niche, pathetically weak, or useless. There aren't enough good, genuinely useful engineering skills to fill out a non-specialty commander engineering station. Mostly it's a bunch of 'whatever' skills because they're better than nothing at all. But not by much. -edit- It's the same reason why I don't fly any of the past event cruisers.

    I tend to agree with this and the overall summary of Engineering. I have to state up front I don't chase DPS or know how to build for DPS since I play the game in my own way, chasing what I personally find fun & interesting and discovering on my own terms.

    Also partly agreeing with the opposite point of view, that Cmd Eng can have valuable powers, and I am sure those flying DPS tanks know the scenarios where boff low CD RSP is needed. I personally really enjoy EP2S with shield overload starship trait, or Aux2Damp to help turn a heavy DHC ship. Etc.

    What I think is causing the problem is the game's own design.
    - Excess self-healing from damage dealt. Pair with: dead targets don't shoot back. No need for heals/self-heals when focusing on damage gives consistent self-healing.
    - DPS-gated content (elite TFOs). Tanks need to deal high damage to attract aggro. Low DPS tanks are dead weight.
    - High HP mobs (millions of HP) that require DPS. Most throw the occasional heavy torp spread, often invisible, bypassing defense rating, obliterating even good shields if more than 1 does this simultaneously (elite patrols).
    - Excess auto-health regen: just cloak or evasive maneuver out of range (except where enemies chase you, still too stupid to scan and decloak you too).
    - In-game events happen very quickly, often out of the minuscule 10km range, so being a healer/tank/debuff/cc (nannie) has no role outside of I suppose nannying to boost someone's DPS indirectly.
    - In-game events unpredictable: useless to have a boffed Aux2Damp on a heavy ship because A) already running into hard caps on all dmg res, B) lighter ships that could use the all dmg res don't need the speed, C) when you need it it's too late (ex. sudden torp spread spam) and the buff duration is too short
    - Enemy NPCs don't deal consistent damage, especially not energy or even exotic damage. They either don't chase at all, or much too quickly (elite patrols) for speed to be useful, neither are they programmed to run from you or employ any kind of strategy

    I don't have solutions to propose, and even if I did, they'd be ignored. Pre-Delta Rising I believe the game balance was more manageable. Now, it's all just space magic where some abilities are overly powerful and useful, others make up the general landfill of trash, and some are good but really out of place unless highly specific to limited team-oriented scenarios.

    It's not just STO that's thrown any regard for balance out the window, but I think a common trend to start with a reasonable balanced game, then throw at it endless things until it breaks into a 'meta or gtfo' with follow up balance attempts that results in a joke of the actual gameplay that was once to be had.
    Y945Yzx.jpg
    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 ﴾﴿
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 7,907 Arc User
    protoneous wrote: »
    There is ALWAYS a need for a torpedo - this isn't like 5 years ago when having one among a set of energy weapons took away from your overall damage.​​

    Let me know how you'd like to incorporate a torpedo into the event ship. Then it's time for a parse.

    Depending if you prefer cannons or beams either the terran or discovery 3-piece.
    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.
  • psymantispsymantis Member Posts: 329 Arc User
    It's 1 of 2 32c ships I like the look of. The other is the Angelou-class but that makes no sense as a fighting ship, to me. Although it'd fit as the novelty Risa event prize. With a small landscape in the previous yacht and now a whole resort.
  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 2,595 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    There is ALWAYS a need for a torpedo - this isn't like 5 years ago when having one among a set of energy weapons took away from your overall damage.​​

    Let me know how you'd like to incorporate a torpedo into the event ship. Then it's time for a parse.

    Depending if you prefer cannons or beams either the terran or discovery 3-piece.

    Yes but how can I incorporate a torpedo into the build of my winter event ship when it seems my tactical bridge officer skills slots are all used up. There doesn't seem to be room for a torpedo firing mode boff ability yet apparently there's "always" a need for a torpedo lol.

    Tactical team, an attack pattern, two miracle worker boff abilities (narrow sensor bands & mixed armament synergy) and a beam or cannon LtC firing mode -

    TT1, APB1,
    NSB1, MAS1, BFAW or BO or CSV3
    EPtE1, A2B1, EPtW3, RSP3
    ET
    ST1, HE2, PO2
  • brex#6815 brex Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    leemwatson wrote: »
    Am I the only one who hates these hideous 32nd century ship designs with the detached nacelles? I mean, the structural integrity of a ship in many pieces seems dubious at best, and they DO NOT "look cool" with all those separate bits flying around together claiming to all be part of one ship.

    I'm intrigued by the console, and always welcome another admiralty card, but I doubt I'll spend much time flying this ship after I unlock the trait.

    No, you're not the only one. Whilst I get the principle of 'reduced mass' on the propulsive/reactive hull sections, I'd want to know how they combat those sections flying off due to 'interference' from radiation etc. Those 'magnetic' bonds must be using some power.

    Except the whole "reduce mass" argument is utter nonsense that breaks the suspension of disbelief. The ship is still dragging the nacelles along with it thus they are connected to it, thus they still retain the mass of the nacelles.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,361 Arc User
    I wish they'd bring back what they did with the T6 Corvette. Give us an option to use a fleet module to get a fleet variant with full specialty.
    If I could get a full miracle worker version of this I would in a heartbeat.
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • zedbrightlander1zedbrightlander1 Member Posts: 14,617 Arc User
    kayajay wrote: »
    Maybe we're underestimating STO this year...maybe it will be the Protostar and the Event ship that people will want to fly for more than a fortnight.

    All I know is the Prodigy has two sister ships; Sears and Roebuck.

    Only people my age will get that joke, I think.
    f5cc65bc8f3b91f963e328314df7c48d.jpg
    Sig? What sig? I don't see any sig.
  • zedbrightlander1zedbrightlander1 Member Posts: 14,617 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    kayajay wrote: »
    It is strange, because they keep updating Leeta in STO, to actually look more like Chase Masterson does today and yet, they've not updated Q to look ANYTHING like John De Lancie...ever. His toon is just the bog-standard male, stuck in the costume. It's fine if John himself wants nothing to do with the game, but surely they could make him the toon like even remotely like him.

    STO's Q isn't the John DeLancie Q though.

    The Q we see in STO is 'Junior' (Q's son, first seen in Voyager).
    https://sto.fandom.com/wiki/Q

    But is Q Jr. Trelane like the fan theory suggests, Trelane is accepted as a Q by fans and as result Q Junior also seems like the perfect candidate, plus John Delancie did based the entire Q Continuum off this TOS Character.

    If you want an enjoyable story that combines Q and Trelane, Read: Q Squared. I've read it three times. It's a complicated tale that spans several Star Trek timeline. It even includes a timeline where James R. Kirk had kill his best friend Gary Mitchel because Trelane had trapped Q in the Energy Barrier at the Galactic edge of that timeline and he had gained much of Q's power on contact. Like I said, it's a complicated and fun read.
    f5cc65bc8f3b91f963e328314df7c48d.jpg
    Sig? What sig? I don't see any sig.
  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 2,595 Arc User
    As I said... Entwined Tactical Matrices trait. I know it's not the way a lot of people use it, but I use it on ships that are lacking in tactical space for exactly this (to "fake" a Torp Spread I as an "extra" Tac BOFF ability), and if you want to use NSB and MAS, it throws you into that category (as if I am counting correctly you only have 3 Tac BOFF slots left over after carving out those two).

    Also... having the torpedo means you have a trigger for MAS.

    I personally will probably set mine up exactly as you describe, except for swapping the RSP for Aux2Bat3, (I'm not as big of an RSP fan as you are) and then that frees up the LtC Sci slot... might put Polarize there, or something else. (Sometimes I like to have ST, HE, and Polarize; a LtC seat lets me do that all on one BOFF). [/quote]
    protoneous wrote: »
    questerius wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    There is ALWAYS a need for a torpedo - this isn't like 5 years ago when having one among a set of energy weapons took away from your overall damage.​​

    Let me know how you'd like to incorporate a torpedo into the event ship. Then it's time for a parse.

    Depending if you prefer cannons or beams either the terran or discovery 3-piece.

    Yes but how can I incorporate a torpedo into the build of my winter event ship when it seems my tactical bridge officer skills slots are all used up. There doesn't seem to be room for a torpedo firing mode boff ability yet apparently there's "always" a need for a torpedo lol.

    Tactical team, an attack pattern, two miracle worker boff abilities (narrow sensor bands & mixed armament synergy) and a beam or cannon LtC firing mode -

    TT1, APB1,
    NSB1, MAS1, BFAW or BO or CSV3
    EPtE1, A2B1, EPtW3, RSP3
    ET
    ST1, HE2, PO2

    Was throwing the question out there again in an attempt to get a little more info from those suggesting putting a torpedo into the build.

    Your solution seems to be the only way to make a torp work so far and might be the only solution that doesn't have a net loss which would be a big plus.

    The solution does require owning a full Miracle Worker battlecruiser (the Gagarin).

    If there's no other way to get the job done then I'll assume the advice being given was to throw a torpedo on it if you have the Entwined Tactical Matrices trait.

    Not sure about using this setup with cannons though. I think the loss of one of four forward main weapon is going to be hard to replace.
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 7,907 Arc User
    I'm not too worried about builds on this ship since i will most likely only level it for its mastery and then dismiss it afterward.

    The trait and console would have some use, but the ship itself doesn't really offer anything i want in a ship over the options i currently have available.
    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.
  • corinthalascorinthalas Member Posts: 2,235 Arc User
    edited December 2021
    westmetals wrote: »
    westmetals wrote: »
    westmetals wrote: »
    protoneous wrote: »
    Reverse shield polarity combined with something to reduce it's cool down is an essential and important engineering bridge officer ability for a good number of players.

    It works great for me. I use it... pretty well every time I play on a ship that has it.

    Other engineering bridge officer abilities that work really good are emergency power to engines (with an emergency conn officer doff), ep2 shields, ep2 auxiliary, ep2 weapons, aux to damp, aux to SIF, DEM, engineering team, structural integrity collapse, and aux to batt. Many of these are staples of a lot of builds.

    I was specifically listing abilities that could be profitably used as the commander-level ability (to counter the prior poster's statement that there are no useful skills for the slot), which is why I left off the emergency power skills, engineering team, etc, and specified Aux2Bat 3.

    I get their argument being that it's a wasted slot but I don't agree. In particular... I've run full Aux2Bat builds with that configuration where I did not even need a second engineer BOFF....

    Ens.: Eng Team 1
    Lt.: Aux2Bat 1
    LtC.: EP to Weapons 3
    Cmdr.: Aux2Bat 3

    (i.e.... you need two copies of Aux2Bat... but they don't both have to be Aux2Bat 1....!)

    And to say a LtC Eng slot is a "negative"????? Have you ever HEARD of EP to Weapons?

    You can easily overcap weapon power with EPTW II. The only difference is the miniscule bonus to energy weapon damage that III offers over II, which is to say, not a big deal. In fact, you can get most of that from the *ensign* rank of the skill. So, yeah, ltc engineering is kind of a waste. If you can get an ensign and a lt, ltc and commander aren't offering you anything that important. Which is the problem. All the additional skills are niche at best. Projectile builds and energy builds can make full use of all four ranks of commander tac station, and all four of them add plenty of value. Science builds (of basically any setup) make full use of almost as many science stations you can throw at them. But engineering? Nah. You can get by with a LT station. LT and ensign is almost perfect. Everything after that just isn't contributing much.

    And yes, compared to what OTHER stations you give up to have a ltcomm or a commander engineering station, it absolutely *IS* a negative. Other stations would have offered far more/better.

    a) You are assuming a non-Aux2Bat build. I am not. In most cases such builds are thought to require 2xAux2Bat 1... but it can actually be done with a higher rank skill.

    b) While yes you are correct about EPtW, placing it as the LtC skill makes way for lower level skills. As in my post above... where I demonstrated how you can run a full Aux2Bat with EPtW and Eng Team with only one BOFF.

    c) If you aren't doing Aux2Bat, the same slots could be filled with things like DEM, RSP, or Aux2Damp, among other examples.

    While yes you can "get by" with only low level Eng skills... looking at it from a perspective of what the ship is set up for, I do not see this ship's amount of engineering BOFF space as a negative. Particularly because there is enough to do a dual EP Aux2Bat build... which means, among other things, you don't need to use one of those science slots for Photonic Officer.

    Yes, the ship's BOFF layout as a whole is a bit awkward, namely the fact that the only LtC slot useable as Tac is also a spec slot.... but the engineering BOFF is not solely at fault there, the spec could have been placed on the science slot.

    And considering what has been said about DHCs....

    Essentially what this all boils down to, is you whining that the ship is a cruiser and not an escort.

    No, not that it's not an escort. I fly plenty of ships with commander-level *SPECIALITY* engineering stations. One of my favorite ships is one of them, and there are a couple others I like that way too. Hell they could have made the commander station *UNIVERSAL* and I'd be ecstatic -- let the player decide how they want the ship to play. And it wouldn't be unprecedented either. The KDF-recruit bird of prey has a universal commander station.

    I'm irritated that it's got a *commaner-level* *non-specialty* engineering station, after this summer's event ship was the exact same garbage. Because everything beyond a lt station is niche, pathetically weak, or useless. There aren't enough good, genuinely useful engineering skills to fill out a non-specialty commander engineering station. Mostly it's a bunch of 'whatever' skills because they're better than nothing at all. But not by much. -edit- It's the same reason why I don't fly any of the past event cruisers.

    Every cruiser has Cmdr Engineering. And as mentioned event ships rarely if ever have had Cmdr-level spec seats... so the fact that it has a Cmdr Eng non-spec seat is because of the fact that it is a cruiser. Therefore you are against it being a cruiser.

    And... Cmdr Universal seats are a raider/bird-of-prey thing. Again you are whining about it being a cruiser.

    And every time you rant about the uselessness of high-level Eng BOFF slots, all I see is that you are incompetent at shipbuilding and want to build all of your ships one particular way and that way doesn't fit into a cruiser template.

    Learn to be flexible.

    No, all you see is what you want to see, which is BS. I have and fly many ships which have commander level-engineering stations. They're just not *ONLY* engineering stations, so I don't have pick 2-3 skills of little or no value, which is apparently beyond your grasp. It's not about being 'flexible'. It's about most engineering skills being pointlessly niche, weak, or useless. But since you can't get that through your skull...

    Finally, event ships never have commander-level spec seats. None of them do. Until one does. Like, oh, I don't know, a ship specifically named for a major Star Trek actor. Because the current alternative is "Here's another typical mediocre ship. Its named it after you. That's great, right?"
Sign In or Register to comment.