I like sharing my thoughts, so can be long winded. Here's the TL;DR: The Nebula is, according to the shows, really an advanced sensors cruiser. This fits STO's role of 'Science ship' more than 'Cruiser'. However, with 3/3 weapon slots, and the bulk of a Galaxy it will be a failure. Thus, game mechanics/hull size wise, it fits squarely in the role of Cruiser and not Science. Either give it more teeth than a traditional DSSV, or keep it a cruiser. Besides, we have 5 cruisers. Why not 6? It makes it a safe bet for skill points for those who want to fly more flexible ships.
I know this thread has tons of 'Me too!' when it comes to the requests to make the Nebula a science ship, and plenty of good reasons have been posted; mainly, we have lots of cruisers already. So, here's another reason it'd make a better fit as a science vessel, with some caveats: While it was portrayed as a cruiser, its role in shows was usually was showing off advanced sensors and equipment or in humanitarian or medical roles. It was also designed as a lighter hulled ship after the Galaxy, with stronger shields if I recall. Both of these fit the STO model of a science vessel very well. Also, making it science adds more unique styles to ships in the game. This would give us more cross-over sorts of ships than keeping the very strict roles. My one complaint about all the initial T5 ships was that each of the flavors were really too similar to each other to be much more than cosmetic variants. People like flexibility options and unique roles.
However, if it's going to be slow like a cruiser, it needs to have the firepower to back that up. The shields/hull isn't so much of a big deal as the inability to run or bring its deflector to bear. It won't be able to perform as a science ship very well without being able to maneuver. I think the best bet is to make it a hybrid and bridge the gap. Give it a fourth forward weapon slot and make it squarely fit between the two classes. Add science component targeting powers to keep with the canon fancy electronics platform, make it turn like an Excelsior, and keep the Cdr Eng slot and LtCdr Science (or universal) Make the hull/shields like a science ship. Console layout .. either would work. For this ship, the best approach, in my opinion, is to take the cruiser stance and tweak it to give it a few more science powers. Come on DStahl! Break the mold!
But by far, the coolest idea (which likely can't be implemented any time soon without just doing 3 separate versions), is to have its stats reconfigurable to some degree so it can be used in any role. As for how you'd make a tactical version.. that would be a big diversion from the standard escort mold. I simply don't see this maneuvering well enough to be a cannon ship. Or even see how cannons would fit. But hey, works for the Dreadnought, right? Maybe something interesting with the mission pod and torpedos? Perhaps a shorter torpedo cooldown? A launcher with a separate cooldown? Something to make it a torpedo ship would be cool. Likewise with the Akira and Steamrunner (poor, maligned Steamrunner model).
More thoughts: See if you can capitalize on the sensor pod idea. I know there's not yet a mechanic to change a ship's slot layout with changing a costume part, but that would be the IDEAL solution. A combat pod adding a forward weapon slot (even if it's a launcher restricted slot), the sensor pod for the tachyon grid, then some other cool idea. Or, like has been posted, to make it more technically feasible, have purchasing it unlock three versions, each with a different power. Maybe the engineer one has the cruiser stats and the science one has the science stats. But would be awesome if you could reconfigure a single hull. And, as lame as it sounds, I'd honestly prefer the costume look not be tied to the functionality. Cause I get picky about ship looks, and would be unhappy having to fly with a configuration I don't like cause it has the more appropriate ability, or vice versa.
And last, I'll throw in a lingering desire I've had for science ships since the Nebula epitomizes this role for me: Have science ships offer some non-combat science coolness. With all of these diplomatic and exploration missions, it would be real nice to see ship roles actually affect non-combat gameplay in some manner. I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but I want my science ship to be the one I take out when I'm exploring the B'Tran cluster because it's better at exploration. Maybe they're better at aid the planet missions. (or maybe cruisers are, or something) I'm sure someone will come up with ideas.
Edited to revise thoughts based on reading more of the posts here.
Then what does that make the BoP's with all universal slots. All this allows is more choice.
it makes the BoPs pretty much balanced due to having the paper thin shields and hull to combat the strength of the universal slots.
Whether the Devs decide to take the nebula down the cruiser or DSSV route, game balance needs to be kept in mind... While I agree that having the LTC slot be universal would be most ideal and fitting to the multi-role aspect of the nebula, I think that game balance may suffer... Looking at it objectively, would it be unbalancing to give another cruiser access to HYT3 or BO3, or to give DSSV's their first ever access to those abilities? From an objective standpoint, while I don't think that having a single universal slot, be it LT or LTC would make too much of a difference, I can see reason for caution before giving it carte blanche approval,
Nebula
A Retrofit. It utilizes the Retrofit Cruiser Skill.
Requires:
Rear Admiral
Weapons:
4 Fore
4 Aft
Boff seats (4 Boffs, 11 Powers):
1 Lt Tact
1 Lt Science
1 LC Universal
1 Cm Eng
Mods:
3 Eng
3 Sci
3 Tact
3 Device Slots
750 Crew
Unique Ability:
Tachyon Detection Grid: PBAoE buff that increases your, and allies w/in 10k, Starship Sensor Stat and Cloak Detection. Each buffed ally in turn will buff more allies within 10k of them - thus extending the grid.
Turn Rate = Galaxy
Any other stats not mentioned are the same as a Retrofit Cruiser.
This Build would make it usable by every class of player whilst keeping it less powerful than any other type of ship for one specific role. I.E. It can be science healing based or a tank or a battlecruiser but wont be as effective as a ship specifically designed for those tasks.
This seems like this is the best solution for the Nebula's layout. It may be lacking for specific tasks but it can do any and isnt that the point? It is clear that everyone who wants to buy this ship has completely opposed views on how it should work. Some are certain it is a science ship and that it was commissioned for that purpose, others think it is simply a lighter, cheaper to manufacture Galaxy, hence a cruiser, and some like myself feel it should be a battlecruiser/Heavy Escort as it was used in all of star trek canons greatest engagments and it has a freakin torpedo pod on top. With this spec everyone can buy it and use it effectively for their officer type without it being overpowered. Also from cryptics point of view this would be best because it is likely to attract the largest area of interest amongst the STO population.
Will there be both the slim and the traditional (yet bulkier) design available?
Personally I'm not a huge fan of the skinnier one... I know it sounds weird but I prefer the thicker original version of it... it just looks more balanced with the Galaxy'esque saucer. As seen in the Generations Movie (at the end one of the rescue ships on Veridian III was the Farragut... and original Nebula Class)
it makes the BoPs pretty much balanced due to having the paper thin shields and hull to combat the strength of the universal slots.
Whether the Devs decide to take the nebula down the cruiser or DSSV route, game balance needs to be kept in mind... While I agree that having the LTC slot be universal would be most ideal and fitting to the multi-role aspect of the nebula, I think that game balance may suffer... Looking at it objectively, would it be unbalancing to give another cruiser access to HYT3 or BO3, or to give DSSV's their first ever access to those abilities? From an objective standpoint, while I don't think that having a single universal slot, be it LT or LTC would make too much of a difference, I can see reason for caution before giving it carte blanche approval,
The problem with trying to make the Nebula a "Jack of all Trades" is that the Bird-of-Prey exists in that role and it pays for it by being made of papier-m
It is pointless to release another science ship with the 3/3 weapons setup. Please PLEASE give it some teeth. If not... well this is at least one person who won't bother with it and would have preferred it to remain a cruiser.
Not that a single vote counts for much, however i've brought every other variant ship (including the lemon Galaxy X) and as a dedicated science player will not buy this as a science ship in it current 3/3 weapons form.
It won't hold a candle to the intrepid in this form.
I would argue that Science could actually use 7 instead of 6 weapon slots at tier 5 in the first place.
Cruisers have 8 weapon slots and get only beams.
Escorts get 7 weapon slots but have dual cannons.
Science Vessels get 6 weapon slots and get only beams.
I think the step sholud have been:
Science Vessels get 7 weapon slots and get only beams.
The Universal Slot is nice in theory, but I don't think the option to use it with tactical BOs will be used very often. Science ships justd don't rely that much on weapons and can get that much out of weapon buffs then Cruisers or Escorts can. Engineering or Science will always be the better choice here. The available cooldown subsystems for tacticals will also conflict with the innate target subsystems.
I would argue that Science could actually use 7 instead of 6 weapon slots at tier 5 in the first place.
Cruisers have 8 weapon slots and get only beams.
Escorts get 7 weapon slots but have dual cannons.
Science Vessels get 6 weapon slots and get only beams.
I think the step sholud have been:
Science Vessels get 7 weapon slots and get only beams.
The Universal Slot is nice in theory, but I don't think the option to use it with tactical BOs will be used very often. Science ships justd don't rely that much on weapons and can get that much out of weapon buffs then Cruisers or Escorts can. Engineering or Science will always be the better choice here. The available cooldown subsystems for tacticals will also conflict with the innate target subsystems.
It depends on what kind of science ship you are running. The more aux, the less weapons power, and the less weapons power the less weapons you can effectively support owing to power drain. 3/3 isn't a big sacrifice if you're running 50/25/25/100, since you can only support two or at most three energy weapons anyway.
If you want a science ship designed to cater to people running 100 weapons power, then you do want more weapons in your layout. But in that case I think the Super Star Cruiser is the way to go, rather than Super DSSV with 4/4. Super Star Cruiser could still support 5 science powers.
The Universal Slot is nice in theory, but I don't think the option to use it with tactical BOs will be used very often. Science ships justd don't rely that much on weapons and can get that much out of weapon buffs then Cruisers or Escorts can. Engineering or Science will always be the better choice here. The available cooldown subsystems for tacticals will also conflict with the innate target subsystems.
I completely agree with your points here, it's why I don't think that a LTC universal slot will make a huge amount of difference. Saying that however, I think that a certain amount of caution before giving the universal LTC slot the thumbs up is warranted.
I'd hate to tell you, but CaptainGekko did do a rough and ready stat layout for a DSSV version of the nebula to gauge reaction from the community if it were to be changed. From the discussions I've read so far since he did it, it seems to be a pretty popular idea.
I have to say the Nebula as a science vessel is terribly weak. I'm not sure why that is even an option, Cryptic. The balance issues are clear as day to me.
The DSSV "version" of the Nebula has a terrible turn rate, and has pretty much the same stats as any other science vessel. That LTC engineer doesn't begin to make up for that turn rate and low hull. Want proof? Look at the Vo'Quv, similar layout and lousy turn rate, yet it has fighters and a huge crew and a lot more hull, and its still not well liked! The Nebula in science ship form is like a defanged Vo'Quv.
There is a huge reason most science players either use the RSV or Intrepid refit, because the DSSV turn rate is atrocious and does not lend itself to the science ship role or fragility. The same reason is why the Kar'fi and Vo'Quv are complained about. Science BOs have huge limitations on a ship with a lousy turn rate.
I'm not going to buy the Nebula, either way, however, you're making a terribly weak ship with the science ship layout. I suggest you take a hard look at it and make it a real hybrid, its own unique class, whichever skill set it uses.
If it is going to keep the low hull, it needs a significant upgrade in turn rate. 8-9 I would say. However, the DSSV also needs its turn rate increased, so I would do that at the same time. There really is no reason it should have a Galaxy turn rate. Its much more compact than the Galaxy.
However if the Galaxy turn rate is set in stone, then it needs cruiser level hull, even if it retains science ship weapon loadouts. Again, look at the Vo'Quv and Kar'Fi.
I'm also very bothered by the special power the Nebula has. It seems like it has the potential to be extremely powerful, and just makes every other science ship useless for the cloak detection role. We have been begging for better cloak detection mechanics, even something exactly like this, a kind of net to lay out, and now the only way to have that is to buy it in the Cstore. That is really sad. Of course it remains to be seen how effective it is, but I highly suggest you make this power available as a science BO power, just like any ship can have cloak if they give up a slot for MES.
Again, for the love of gawd, this game would be so much better without the arbitrary class designations.
There's no such things as 'Tactical captains' or 'Science captains', an it makes no sense to randomly label ships 'science vessels' or 'escorts', just to fit into an inappropriate class structure.
In 99% of cases, a starship is a starship is a starship. These classes don't exist in STAR TREK and so have no place in this game.
Actually I am sorry but the Defiant does not have the science cabability of say a oberth or even a nova class starship so these classes do exist its just the fact that cruisers as a hole fit a multi role designation, the only reason voyager was ever able to be in the Delta Quadrant is because it was originally designed for long term missions.
I have to say the Nebula as a science vessel is terribly weak. I'm not sure why that is even an option, Cryptic. The balance issues are clear as day to me.
The DSSV "version" of the Nebula has a terrible turn rate, and has pretty much the same stats as any other science vessel. That LTC engineer doesn't begin to make up for that turn rate and low hull. Want proof? Look at the Vo'Quv, similar layout and lousy turn rate, yet it has fighters and a huge crew and a lot more hull, and its still not well liked! The Nebula in science ship form is like a defanged Vo'Quv.
There is a huge reason most science players either use the RSV or Intrepid refit, because the DSSV turn rate is atrocious and does not lend itself to the science ship role or fragility. The same reason is why the Kar'fi and Vo'Quv are complained about. Science BOs have huge limitations on a ship with a lousy turn rate.
I'm not going to buy the Nebula, either way, however, you're making a terribly weak ship with the science ship layout. I suggest you take a hard look at it and make it a real hybrid, its own unique class, whichever skill set it uses.
If it is going to keep the low hull, it needs a significant upgrade in turn rate. 8-9 I would say. However, the DSSV also needs its turn rate increased, so I would do that at the same time. There really is no reason it should have a Galaxy turn rate. Its much more compact than the Galaxy.
However if the Galaxy turn rate is set in stone, then it needs cruiser level hull, even if it retains science ship weapon loadouts. Again, look at the Vo'Quv and Kar'Fi.
I agree, the nebula as a science ship in it current "science" form won't hold a candle to an intrepid. If anything all it's doing is watering down science. It'll be an ok (only ok) PvE ship but rubbish at pvp.
It is pointless to release another science ship with the 3/3 weapons setup.
T5 Science Ships have 3/3, so no it's not. That's like saying it's pointless not to throw 5/4 or 5/5 on the Excelsior because the Sovereign, GalR and Star have 4/4... the Excelsior has other benefits (most would argue too many with how the ships currently stand).
I can't stress this enough; these are NOT supposed to be T6 ships.
I would argue that Science could actually use 7 instead of 6 weapon slots at tier 5 in the first place.
Cruisers have 8 weapon slots and get only beams.
Escorts get 7 weapon slots but have dual cannons.
Science Vessels get 6 weapon slots and get only beams.
I think the step sholud have been:
Science Vessels get 7 weapon slots and get only beams.
Science Vessels also have the best shields and subsystem targeting, as well as the most versatile BOff powers (some offence, some defence, some CC). It's not a coincidence that Sci ships have fewer weapons, nor that it has been the major target for nerfs (it's actually gone a little TOO far there in some cases in my eyes, and some of the BOff powers could use another "once over"... but that not something that can be "solved" through the Nebula balancing).
The Universal Slot is nice in theory, but I don't think the option to use it with tactical BOs will be used very often. Science ships justd don't rely that much on weapons and can get that much out of weapon buffs then Cruisers or Escorts can. Engineering or Science will always be the better choice here.
And so you don't choose tactical and instead alternate between Eng/Sci. This is not a realistic disadvantage.
I have to say the Nebula as a science vessel is terribly weak. I'm not sure why that is even an option, Cryptic. The balance issues are clear as day to me.
The DSSV "version" of the Nebula has a terrible turn rate, and has pretty much the same stats as any other science vessel. That LTC engineer doesn't begin to make up for that turn rate and low hull. Want proof? Look at the Vo'Quv, similar layout and lousy turn rate, yet it has fighters and a huge crew and a lot more hull, and its still not well liked! The Nebula in science ship form is like a defanged Vo'Quv.
The DSSV version would have a special ability as well as better turning and inertia, which offsets the main complain levelled at the Vo'Quv. The fact that it IS so close to a vessel already in the game is a pretty decent that it's in a spot that's about right. If it were outstripping the Vo'Quv that would tend to point to there being a problem.
There is a huge reason most science players either use the RSV or Intrepid refit, because the DSSV turn rate is atrocious and does not lend itself to the science ship role or fragility.
And while the DSSV lacks manoeuvrability for little gain, the Nebula would gain 250 crew, a special ability, more of an Engineering focus (to help offset the lower turn rate) and thus more versatility, and a universal BOff slot (so even more versatility). While there isn't much of a compelling reason to consider the DSSV proper, a DSSV version of the Nebula offers something different.
I have to say the Nebula as a science vessel is terribly weak. I'm not sure why that is even an option, Cryptic. The balance issues are clear as day to me.
The DSSV "version" of the Nebula has a terrible turn rate, and has pretty much the same stats as any other science vessel. That LTC engineer doesn't begin to make up for that turn rate and low hull. Want proof? Look at the Vo'Quv, similar layout and lousy turn rate, yet it has fighters and a huge crew and a lot more hull, and its still not well liked! The Nebula in science ship form is like a defanged Vo'Quv.
There is a huge reason most science players either use the RSV or Intrepid refit, because the DSSV turn rate is atrocious and does not lend itself to the science ship role or fragility. The same reason is why the Kar'fi and Vo'Quv are complained about. Science BOs have huge limitations on a ship with a lousy turn rate.
I'm not going to buy the Nebula, either way, however, you're making a terribly weak ship with the science ship layout. I suggest you take a hard look at it and make it a real hybrid, its own unique class, whichever skill set it uses.
If it is going to keep the low hull, it needs a significant upgrade in turn rate. 8-9 I would say. However, the DSSV also needs its turn rate increased, so I would do that at the same time. There really is no reason it should have a Galaxy turn rate. Its much more compact than the Galaxy.
However if the Galaxy turn rate is set in stone, then it needs cruiser level hull, even if it retains science ship weapon loadouts. Again, look at the Vo'Quv and Kar'Fi.
I'm also very bothered by the special power the Nebula has. It seems like it has the potential to be extremely powerful, and just makes every other science ship useless for the cloak detection role. We have been begging for better cloak detection mechanics, even something exactly like this, a kind of net to lay out, and now the only way to have that is to buy it in the Cstore. That is really sad. Of course it remains to be seen how effective it is, but I highly suggest you make this power available as a science BO power, just like any ship can have cloak if they give up a slot for MES.
I would fly the science Version of the Nebula and a lot other people too. Cause it makes no sense for you this doesn't mean it makes no sense for others.
Tac only has 3 as well. The current ship balance shouldn't effect what this ship is made to be. I voted for it because it is my favourite Star Trek ship and after waiting 2 months I'm being told that I wasted my time because a tac. officer in the ship wouldn't work.
plain and simple to all of the people complaining that it should be a science vessel,
1st... if you make it a sci vessel, then what about me, the tac officer, who would then be the only class to not have a ship added. you say it balances it, but if you learn to look past your own nose, it doesnt.
the ship would make no sense in either escort or sci, as it has 750 crew, probably has huge hull (compared to other sci and tac vessels) and would be massivley op.. imagine it, a sci ship that even if you can get through the shields, you then have to fight a "cruiser variant" hull wise.
it is a cruiser. plain and simple. it was meant to be one, not a sci vessel. further more, stop being so narrow minded, i play with very good players, we down infected and cure in 40 minutes, we know what we are doing. and the 2 engineers i play with use tac escorts.... the sci uses an escort as well, and the 2 tac officers use cruiser. and a sci ship. this is proof that if you can open your mind, you can use a cruiser as a sci capt. instead of being ****ed that its not a sci vessel and critisizing stahl about it, why dont you help improve the boff slots, or help try to get it to be a little more universal... they are not gonna change the classification, but could be prodded to "adjust" the boff layout and mybe some other features.....
this future ship they are thinking about coming out with could very well be an advanced sci ship. and they could easily make the nx an escort spreading the love around... if you think that they are never again going to release a sci vessel, then do all of us a favor who have open minds and like what we see, and uninstall the game and leave, there is no room for narrow minded, pig headed people in here....
plain and simple to all of the people complaining that it should be a science vessel,
1st... if you make it a sci vessel, then what about me, the tac officer, who would then be the only class to not have a ship added.
Wait... WHAT!?
Seriously. WHAT!?
If you want a ship ideally designed for a Tactical officer how about the Tactical Escort Retrofit? How about the Excelsior with the Tac LtC? How about either of the other two Escorts? How about the Assault Cruiser?
There are several VERY Tac-specific ships, and a few Tac-themed Cruisers.
So yeah.... what!?
Now, count how many Science Vessels there are. Now count how many Escorts there are (you know, the Tac-type vessel incarnate). See the discrepancy? What about THOSE captains?
...you can open your mind, you can use a cruiser as a sci capt. instead of being ****ed that its not a sci vessel and critisizing stahl about it...
And you can't use an Assault Cruiser? Or an ExR? Or a GalX? Or Tactical Escort Refit? Or an Advanced Escort? Or a Fleet Escort? Or a Reconnaissance Science Vessel?
Comments
I know this thread has tons of 'Me too!' when it comes to the requests to make the Nebula a science ship, and plenty of good reasons have been posted; mainly, we have lots of cruisers already. So, here's another reason it'd make a better fit as a science vessel, with some caveats: While it was portrayed as a cruiser, its role in shows was usually was showing off advanced sensors and equipment or in humanitarian or medical roles. It was also designed as a lighter hulled ship after the Galaxy, with stronger shields if I recall. Both of these fit the STO model of a science vessel very well. Also, making it science adds more unique styles to ships in the game. This would give us more cross-over sorts of ships than keeping the very strict roles. My one complaint about all the initial T5 ships was that each of the flavors were really too similar to each other to be much more than cosmetic variants. People like flexibility options and unique roles.
However, if it's going to be slow like a cruiser, it needs to have the firepower to back that up. The shields/hull isn't so much of a big deal as the inability to run or bring its deflector to bear. It won't be able to perform as a science ship very well without being able to maneuver. I think the best bet is to make it a hybrid and bridge the gap. Give it a fourth forward weapon slot and make it squarely fit between the two classes. Add science component targeting powers to keep with the canon fancy electronics platform, make it turn like an Excelsior, and keep the Cdr Eng slot and LtCdr Science (or universal) Make the hull/shields like a science ship. Console layout .. either would work. For this ship, the best approach, in my opinion, is to take the cruiser stance and tweak it to give it a few more science powers. Come on DStahl! Break the mold!
But by far, the coolest idea (which likely can't be implemented any time soon without just doing 3 separate versions), is to have its stats reconfigurable to some degree so it can be used in any role. As for how you'd make a tactical version.. that would be a big diversion from the standard escort mold. I simply don't see this maneuvering well enough to be a cannon ship. Or even see how cannons would fit. But hey, works for the Dreadnought, right? Maybe something interesting with the mission pod and torpedos? Perhaps a shorter torpedo cooldown? A launcher with a separate cooldown? Something to make it a torpedo ship would be cool. Likewise with the Akira and Steamrunner (poor, maligned Steamrunner model).
More thoughts: See if you can capitalize on the sensor pod idea. I know there's not yet a mechanic to change a ship's slot layout with changing a costume part, but that would be the IDEAL solution. A combat pod adding a forward weapon slot (even if it's a launcher restricted slot), the sensor pod for the tachyon grid, then some other cool idea. Or, like has been posted, to make it more technically feasible, have purchasing it unlock three versions, each with a different power. Maybe the engineer one has the cruiser stats and the science one has the science stats. But would be awesome if you could reconfigure a single hull. And, as lame as it sounds, I'd honestly prefer the costume look not be tied to the functionality. Cause I get picky about ship looks, and would be unhappy having to fly with a configuration I don't like cause it has the more appropriate ability, or vice versa.
And last, I'll throw in a lingering desire I've had for science ships since the Nebula epitomizes this role for me: Have science ships offer some non-combat science coolness. With all of these diplomatic and exploration missions, it would be real nice to see ship roles actually affect non-combat gameplay in some manner. I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but I want my science ship to be the one I take out when I'm exploring the B'Tran cluster because it's better at exploration. Maybe they're better at aid the planet missions. (or maybe cruisers are, or something) I'm sure someone will come up with ideas.
Edited to revise thoughts based on reading more of the posts here.
... ... ...uh... .... ... yeah..
it makes the BoPs pretty much balanced due to having the paper thin shields and hull to combat the strength of the universal slots.
Whether the Devs decide to take the nebula down the cruiser or DSSV route, game balance needs to be kept in mind... While I agree that having the LTC slot be universal would be most ideal and fitting to the multi-role aspect of the nebula, I think that game balance may suffer... Looking at it objectively, would it be unbalancing to give another cruiser access to HYT3 or BO3, or to give DSSV's their first ever access to those abilities? From an objective standpoint, while I don't think that having a single universal slot, be it LT or LTC would make too much of a difference, I can see reason for caution before giving it carte blanche approval,
This seems like this is the best solution for the Nebula's layout. It may be lacking for specific tasks but it can do any and isnt that the point? It is clear that everyone who wants to buy this ship has completely opposed views on how it should work. Some are certain it is a science ship and that it was commissioned for that purpose, others think it is simply a lighter, cheaper to manufacture Galaxy, hence a cruiser, and some like myself feel it should be a battlecruiser/Heavy Escort as it was used in all of star trek canons greatest engagments and it has a freakin torpedo pod on top. With this spec everyone can buy it and use it effectively for their officer type without it being overpowered. Also from cryptics point of view this would be best because it is likely to attract the largest area of interest amongst the STO population.
Personally I'm not a huge fan of the skinnier one... I know it sounds weird but I prefer the thicker original version of it... it just looks more balanced with the Galaxy'esque saucer. As seen in the Generations Movie (at the end one of the rescue ships on Veridian III was the Farragut... and original Nebula Class)
Here you go...
The problem with trying to make the Nebula a "Jack of all Trades" is that the Bird-of-Prey exists in that role and it pays for it by being made of papier-m
This has been lost to the great debate however...
It is pointless to release another science ship with the 3/3 weapons setup. Please PLEASE give it some teeth. If not... well this is at least one person who won't bother with it and would have preferred it to remain a cruiser.
Not that a single vote counts for much, however i've brought every other variant ship (including the lemon Galaxy X) and as a dedicated science player will not buy this as a science ship in it current 3/3 weapons form.
It won't hold a candle to the intrepid in this form.
its worth it for the extra weapon hardpoints.
Cruisers have 8 weapon slots and get only beams.
Escorts get 7 weapon slots but have dual cannons.
Science Vessels get 6 weapon slots and get only beams.
I think the step sholud have been:
Science Vessels get 7 weapon slots and get only beams.
The Universal Slot is nice in theory, but I don't think the option to use it with tactical BOs will be used very often. Science ships justd don't rely that much on weapons and can get that much out of weapon buffs then Cruisers or Escorts can. Engineering or Science will always be the better choice here. The available cooldown subsystems for tacticals will also conflict with the innate target subsystems.
Good thing it isnt a science ship.
perhaps
science ship
cruiser ship
release both types
see what people go for and stick with the winner, or if they dont want to release both then just option of either science or cruiser.
this would be one the of the times where a poll would be most relevant as your just looking to go one way or the other
If you want a science ship designed to cater to people running 100 weapons power, then you do want more weapons in your layout. But in that case I think the Super Star Cruiser is the way to go, rather than Super DSSV with 4/4. Super Star Cruiser could still support 5 science powers.
I completely agree with your points here, it's why I don't think that a LTC universal slot will make a huge amount of difference. Saying that however, I think that a certain amount of caution before giving the universal LTC slot the thumbs up is warranted.
Agreed finally a good suggestion
I'd hate to tell you, but CaptainGekko did do a rough and ready stat layout for a DSSV version of the nebula to gauge reaction from the community if it were to be changed. From the discussions I've read so far since he did it, it seems to be a pretty popular idea.
Aye, a poll would be a great idea.
The DSSV "version" of the Nebula has a terrible turn rate, and has pretty much the same stats as any other science vessel. That LTC engineer doesn't begin to make up for that turn rate and low hull. Want proof? Look at the Vo'Quv, similar layout and lousy turn rate, yet it has fighters and a huge crew and a lot more hull, and its still not well liked! The Nebula in science ship form is like a defanged Vo'Quv.
There is a huge reason most science players either use the RSV or Intrepid refit, because the DSSV turn rate is atrocious and does not lend itself to the science ship role or fragility. The same reason is why the Kar'fi and Vo'Quv are complained about. Science BOs have huge limitations on a ship with a lousy turn rate.
I'm not going to buy the Nebula, either way, however, you're making a terribly weak ship with the science ship layout. I suggest you take a hard look at it and make it a real hybrid, its own unique class, whichever skill set it uses.
If it is going to keep the low hull, it needs a significant upgrade in turn rate. 8-9 I would say. However, the DSSV also needs its turn rate increased, so I would do that at the same time. There really is no reason it should have a Galaxy turn rate. Its much more compact than the Galaxy.
However if the Galaxy turn rate is set in stone, then it needs cruiser level hull, even if it retains science ship weapon loadouts. Again, look at the Vo'Quv and Kar'Fi.
I'm also very bothered by the special power the Nebula has. It seems like it has the potential to be extremely powerful, and just makes every other science ship useless for the cloak detection role. We have been begging for better cloak detection mechanics, even something exactly like this, a kind of net to lay out, and now the only way to have that is to buy it in the Cstore. That is really sad. Of course it remains to be seen how effective it is, but I highly suggest you make this power available as a science BO power, just like any ship can have cloak if they give up a slot for MES.
I am waiting (with my C-points) to buy bug fixes from the C-store:rolleyes:
Actually I am sorry but the Defiant does not have the science cabability of say a oberth or even a nova class starship so these classes do exist its just the fact that cruisers as a hole fit a multi role designation, the only reason voyager was ever able to be in the Delta Quadrant is because it was originally designed for long term missions.
I agree, the nebula as a science ship in it current "science" form won't hold a candle to an intrepid. If anything all it's doing is watering down science. It'll be an ok (only ok) PvE ship but rubbish at pvp.
So sorry bud ....
vote for "Science ship" or "both ships (science + engineer)".
See ... the engineers (VA) have to time 5 ships .. (with nebula 6)
The science (VA) only have 3 at moment
Sorry, bud 100% more for only one group and the other groups get nothing? No thanks
T5 Science Ships have 3/3, so no it's not. That's like saying it's pointless not to throw 5/4 or 5/5 on the Excelsior because the Sovereign, GalR and Star have 4/4... the Excelsior has other benefits (most would argue too many with how the ships currently stand).
I can't stress this enough; these are NOT supposed to be T6 ships.
Science Vessels also have the best shields and subsystem targeting, as well as the most versatile BOff powers (some offence, some defence, some CC). It's not a coincidence that Sci ships have fewer weapons, nor that it has been the major target for nerfs (it's actually gone a little TOO far there in some cases in my eyes, and some of the BOff powers could use another "once over"... but that not something that can be "solved" through the Nebula balancing).
And so you don't choose tactical and instead alternate between Eng/Sci. This is not a realistic disadvantage.
The DSSV version would have a special ability as well as better turning and inertia, which offsets the main complain levelled at the Vo'Quv. The fact that it IS so close to a vessel already in the game is a pretty decent that it's in a spot that's about right. If it were outstripping the Vo'Quv that would tend to point to there being a problem.
And while the DSSV lacks manoeuvrability for little gain, the Nebula would gain 250 crew, a special ability, more of an Engineering focus (to help offset the lower turn rate) and thus more versatility, and a universal BOff slot (so even more versatility). While there isn't much of a compelling reason to consider the DSSV proper, a DSSV version of the Nebula offers something different.
I would fly the science Version of the Nebula and a lot other people too. Cause it makes no sense for you this doesn't mean it makes no sense for others.
MfG Michael
Bout time feds got a ship with a universal slot.
Please don't make it ANOTHER C-store item thats better than their in game counter part like the excelsior.
1st... if you make it a sci vessel, then what about me, the tac officer, who would then be the only class to not have a ship added. you say it balances it, but if you learn to look past your own nose, it doesnt.
the ship would make no sense in either escort or sci, as it has 750 crew, probably has huge hull (compared to other sci and tac vessels) and would be massivley op.. imagine it, a sci ship that even if you can get through the shields, you then have to fight a "cruiser variant" hull wise.
it is a cruiser. plain and simple. it was meant to be one, not a sci vessel. further more, stop being so narrow minded, i play with very good players, we down infected and cure in 40 minutes, we know what we are doing. and the 2 engineers i play with use tac escorts.... the sci uses an escort as well, and the 2 tac officers use cruiser. and a sci ship. this is proof that if you can open your mind, you can use a cruiser as a sci capt. instead of being ****ed that its not a sci vessel and critisizing stahl about it, why dont you help improve the boff slots, or help try to get it to be a little more universal... they are not gonna change the classification, but could be prodded to "adjust" the boff layout and mybe some other features.....
this future ship they are thinking about coming out with could very well be an advanced sci ship. and they could easily make the nx an escort spreading the love around... if you think that they are never again going to release a sci vessel, then do all of us a favor who have open minds and like what we see, and uninstall the game and leave, there is no room for narrow minded, pig headed people in here....
that should include you science guys, give me one reason why not?
Wait... WHAT!?
Seriously. WHAT!?
If you want a ship ideally designed for a Tactical officer how about the Tactical Escort Retrofit? How about the Excelsior with the Tac LtC? How about either of the other two Escorts? How about the Assault Cruiser?
There are several VERY Tac-specific ships, and a few Tac-themed Cruisers.
So yeah.... what!?
Now, count how many Science Vessels there are. Now count how many Escorts there are (you know, the Tac-type vessel incarnate). See the discrepancy? What about THOSE captains?
And you can't use an Assault Cruiser? Or an ExR? Or a GalX? Or Tactical Escort Refit? Or an Advanced Escort? Or a Fleet Escort? Or a Reconnaissance Science Vessel?
Might want to read this.
Do you know what "irony" means?
so what i get from the link is that it, like the galaxy, is a multi role ship, not really a sci, not really a tac, but more of an inbetween.
The mission profile of the Nebula-class varied from performing various scientific roles to conducting patrol and transport duties
so i could argue that because it is a patrol ship as well that it should be an escort......
but i wont, cause i agree with it being in the happy median, as a cruiser...
nuff said... hehe thank you for the link so i could help clear this debate up a little...