Basically, like I said above, the role designations are for practical purposes pretty much archaic. Escorts used to be lightly armed and worked in groups while frigates were someone of a cross between the roles of a destroyer and an escort. The primary difference being in tonnage in the old nautical ways. None of which applies to Star Trek but as the shows progressed the multi function of all ships became more apparent and their individual roles became blurred.
I agree with you on this. I think one of the problems is that the effective role and function of the ship is being defined into a specific set of classes when this is counter to the general idea of star trek ship concepts, with a few exceptions. In star trek it has always seemed as though the role of the ship was more dependent upon it's equipment load-out and crew compliment and not so much it's specific hull design. I honestly feel that Cryptic needs to abandon the sci/esc/cruiser concept and shift to something more cannon. The manner in which someone would choose powers in Champions online to define their focus and role is in someways more in line with the concept of how Star Trek ships should function than the current class based concept.
I have been on both sides of that... both the elation and the WTF? moments
Yeah, that's not a usual reaction. From my experience people always ask why would I bother if I hardly ever actually kill anyone. Not realizing it not about personal glory, its all about the team win.
While they're wasting time getting annoyed that I'm constantly healing myself, the real threats are picking apart the rest of their team. :rolleyes:
Looks like they bowed down to the silly notion that this ship is a science vessel. funny how the dozens of star trek games before this never did such a thing, much less the show or movies. We get it... science needs some ships, so give them some ships, but don't give them such a sought after design such as the nebula which has the most in common with the Galaxy more than any other ship. This is soo dissapointing, effectively all the rest of us can't use it. The former build posted by dstahl was a perfect ship to opposite the Excelsior, and anyone could have made that effective. this build is rubbish. It will be complete Fail in PvP. I think they HEAVILY overestimate the use of cloak and its influence on the battle, and ignoring that alot of players just FvF PvP anyway, I don't care if you fly a cloaked defiant, I'll still blow you outta the sky me Vs you w/or w/o a silly Detection grid.
I've been looking forward to the release of this ship since the game began and was a huge fan of the design before this game existed, to be pigeonholed to just science.... If they're going to bow to popular sentiment when even misplaced, this game will only suffer in the future. The majority is not always right, and I'll feel somewhat vindicated showing everyone first hand just how stupid this build will be in PvP. I can only hope that with tribble testing we can improve the model. Question, do I have to still buy this worthless heap on tribble to just Test it?
I agree with you on this. I think one of the problems is that the effective role and function of the ship is being defined into a specific set of classes when this is counter to the general idea of star trek ship concepts, with a few exceptions. In star trek it has always seemed as though the role of the ship was more dependent upon it's equipment load-out and crew compliment and not so much it's specific hull design. I honestly feel that Cryptic needs to abandon the sci/esc/cruiser concept and shift to something more cannon. The manner in which someone would choose powers in Champions online to define their focus and role is in someways more in line with the concept of how Star Trek ships should function than the current class based concept.
See, I think this aligns more with my crafting revamp idea (ie. a stock ship may serve one role but crafting allows you to tailor it) but I'd also agree that the ship skill tree is one of the biggest sources of bloat and overspecialization in the game, to a point where you not only must specialize in one of the three types but a subset of one of the three types, which seems to undermine the game's vast potential for ship hopping.
For those of us that play the game more than you do ... 6 weapon slots = subpar damage potential. Science consoles ... stack em as high as you want. They've been nerfed and defanged and do not give much return for the investment.
That's why this ship won't be very effective.
As Fed vs. Fed PVP indicates, the cloak rush isn't exactly the heart and soul of PVP.
And the KDF was most likely going to have to adjust to non-cloak tactics anyways, as I don't recall Nausicaan, Gorn or Orion ships having cloaks.
In the long run, this ship doesn't seem to be worth the investment.
As with most PVP, the high priority targets are the ones that die the fastest. That's usually escorts ... then science ships ... then cruisers.
Uh. Battle Cloak are you sure you mean Battle Cloak?
I think you overvalue what Cloak does in the game.
But meh, what do I know. I only fly the ships. You folks design em and stuff!
/sigh
Superchum is indeed the man. The very inspirational fellow.
The ONLY way to solve this would be to designate the role you wish your ship to play and set up BOFF slots, weapon slots etc on every ship in the ship editor. Then, voila, you have an infinite number of starship combinations. That will light PvP up a tad. Simple. I am sure Starfleet tech is modular.
Looks like they bowed down to the silly notion that this ship is a science vessel. funny how the dozens of star trek games before this never did such a thing, much less the show or movies. (...)
Actually it was sent into the badlands to investigate the disappearance of a Starfleet operative who happened to be part of the ship's crew (as designated by the Captain). The Intrepids were not designed for front line combat (but to be fair Starfleet rarely designs ships for that purpose), however Starfleet designs all of it's ships to be able to handle multiple situations as they are likely to be on their own during missions.
Not entirely true.
The Nova class was designed to be short range and Janeway even expressed awe in Ransom's ability to keep the Equinox together for as long as he did. It was also specifically introduced as a "science" ship. To my knowledge no other ship in the history of Trek has had an on-screen introduction that specific, except the Defiant in her combat role.
The "new age" classes have shown to be much more specialized. Even "general purpose" ships such as the Sovereign--arguably the Galaxy's replacement--has much more combat capacity relative its other roles.
The Galaxy: Long range exploration/science
The Nebula: Science (as far as I'm concerned...)
The Defiant: Combat
The Akira: Combat
The Nova: Science
The Prometheus: Long range tactical (ie, combat)
The Sovereign: General purpose
Captain Janeway's professional orientation aside; the fact that the Intrepids have an abundance of science labs, and a serious lacking of spare photon torpedoes (Voyager is quoted in Season 1 as having around 27 photon torpedoes to make due with) does not endear the ship as a combat craft.
An abundance? I remember reference to "Science Lab 2", which is where One was "born". And it was a pretty tiny little thing. I don't recall mention of any ones higher in number than that. Got a source to prove this "abundance"?
Your reaching...
," SPECIAL WEAPONS"... Nothing in that game implies Science, just like nothing else in canon does either. And what I love the most about your paticular source is that they're clearly 3 distinct abilities. One Sci, on Tac, and on engy...seems kinda Multirole don't ya think. Hardly Just Science.
I'd love to hear from someone a reference to just what exactly makes this ship more science than anything else? I've seen TNG, and recently watch most of the Eps concerning the Nebula, and I"m unconvinced that its anything close to being more one thing over another. Just saying something doesn't make it true.
Alot of ppl just latched onto this idea about the nebula being a science vessel and managed to Ruin a complete Ship class before it ever launched in the game. We need more Science ships, the Nebula wasn't one of them, espeically a 3-3 Weapons loadout. The Original build by Dstahl was fine, I never imagined the science ppl would want something else. an LTC slot in a cruiser?! I thought that was pretty awesome.
And I can't agree more with everyone that our Main issue here is the games need to fit all ships into 3 classes, get rid of that, add some really neat customizations in terms of layout/build and you've got yourself a game.
ok, so flying around esd today i noticed that the nebula was rebadged a sci vessel, now my hope is that they are just rying to throw people off cause it is a cruiser. i as a tac officer was actually looking forward to playing my favorite ship, and now that is possibly an impossability... i will not buy it if it is a sci vessel, and i will whine and cry like the sci's for equal right as far as an escort goes... thus the escorts would be the only peeps getting no love...
plz cryptic leave the nebula as a cruiser so we can "all" enjoy it. there is no reason a sci player cannot use a cruiser, they are just being stubborn...
the other problem this brings up with me is the lack of canonality with this move. the nebula was an explorer cruiser, it has the same armaments as a galaxy, and is just a bit smaller. three for and three aft weapons hardly would do it justice, and the fact that only sci peeps would benefit from it (being a multi role ship in canon) further makes me lose the star trek feel. i have been drooling for this ship since the game released and now i feel like because a couple of people complained, (though a far vaster majority wanted it to stay cruiser) u guys caved in. i have baught every cruiser you released, but i have baught no sci vessels, and i will continue to not purchase sci vessels (as i know most tacs and engineers feel the same way..). a vessel loses to much when it is a sci vessel for it to be apealing to tac and engineer.... if your gonna give the sci's something, develop a new ship that no one cares about... but be fair and make the cannon ships (unless otherwise slated like a defient being an escort, or the olympic being a sci for example) cruisers.
again i am disapointed that the devs decided to make it a cruiser, and then caved.... really lame for the rest of us... the disapointment makes me lose interest in the game....
I accept your resignation... please sign here and be on your way now...
I for one am perfectly fine with the Nebula being a science vessel. I'm not as selfish to think only of myself (I don't have a science officer) and to try to hoard all ships under an umbrella that I will play. We honestly need some variety, the more variety the better. I don't want every ship that comes out to be a Cruiser (Galaxy X), Cruiser (Excelsior), Cruiser (proposed Nebula).
I think making the Nebula a science vessel, with 6 slots for weapons an impressive sci console load out and a universal Boff slot actually genius. Not every ship needs to be "beam weapons o' death".
And don't talk about "Canon" There is nothing "canon" about STO breaking up Starships into 3 categories in the first place. Not only does Starfleet have all naval designations for their ships but they have "new" ones such as "explorer" which the Navy doesn't have. The way STO breaks up the starships was only an attempt (and rightfully so) to mimic common MMO archetypes of Tanker/DPSer/Healer/Buffer. So yeah, its not "canon" but STO isn't really "canon" to begin with.
I agree with you on this. I think one of the problems is that the effective role and function of the ship is being defined into a specific set of classes when this is counter to the general idea of star trek ship concepts, with a few exceptions. In star trek it has always seemed as though the role of the ship was more dependent upon it's equipment load-out and crew compliment and not so much it's specific hull design. I honestly feel that Cryptic needs to abandon the sci/esc/cruiser concept and shift to something more cannon. The manner in which someone would choose powers in Champions online to define their focus and role is in someways more in line with the concept of how Star Trek ships should function than the current class based concept.
To do this would entail deploying a lot of universal BO slots, not a bad idea would would throw the current balance of power between classes into the wind. Not a bad idea, just not sure how it could be pulled off at this time. Still a good idea though, the way cryptic implemented ships is a little wonky. Each ship should have a set of base stats expandable via various equipment, officer abilities and crew compliment.
Adding enlisted personnel might be a good start by allowing the player to dictate the make up of the crew and by bringing in senior enlisted who can buff a ship's stats. They could work just like the current boffs, but be able to have + to something abilities in place of active skills which would remain in effect even if they are not assigned a spot in the BO seating chart.
Dictating the make up of the crew a la Simon and Schuster's Starship Creator might also make for a good addition. For those who don't know or don't remember, part of making a ship involved adjusting a pie chart of the crew to dictate what % of the ship's compliment would be command, science, medical, engineering, or security. Each department granted some bonus to the ship, but focusing too much in one area would leave the ship unable to perform certain tasks.
Adding this would allow a player to adjust the performance characteristics of their ship to better compliment the captain's skill set. A science ship might still be limited in terms of weapon load out and tactical abilities, but the crew could be adjusted to better take advantage of what combat capability it does have.
Your reaching...
," SPECIAL WEAPONS"... Nothing in that game implies Science, just like nothing else in canon does either. And what I love the most about your paticular source is that they're clearly 3 distinct abilities. One Sci, on Tac, and on engy...seems kinda Multirole don't ya think. Hardly Just Science.
Shield Disruptor (temporarily disables the shields of enemy ships in range)
Gemini Effect (creates a duplicate of a friendly ship which, while only existing temporarily, is useful in battle)
Those both sound science-class to me.
Point Defense Phasers (destroys enemy torpedoes within range)
Engineering Teams (can be transported to friendly ships, restoring shields to at least 50% and increasing rate of repair)
The former doesn't sound like anything too specific, but "escort" if you really needed to specify. Engineering team sounds "cruiser". So 2 sci skills, 1 tac skill, 1 eng skill. Sounds about up the alley for "science" in STO, which is also focused on science while allowing a bit of others.
I accept your resignation... please sign here and be on your way now...
I for one am perfectly fine with the Nebula being a science vessel. I'm not as selfish to think only of myself (I don't have a science officer) and to try to hoard all ships under an umbrella that I will play. We honestly need some variety, the more variety the better. I don't want every ship that comes out to be a Cruiser (Galaxy X), Cruiser (Excelsior), Cruiser (proposed Nebula).
I think making the Nebula a science vessel, with 6 slots for weapons an impressive sci console load out and a universal Boff slot actually genius. Not every ship needs to be "beam weapons o' death".
And don't talk about "Canon" There is nothing "canon" about STO breaking up Starships into 3 categories in the first place. Not only does Starfleet have all naval designations for their ships but they have "new" ones such as "explorer" which the Navy doesn't have. The way STO breaks up the starships was only an attempt (and rightfully so) to mimic common MMO archetypes of Tanker/DPSer/Healer/Buffer. So yeah, its not "canon" but STO isn't really "canon" to begin with.
Want Canon? Go play Bridge Commander.
Your missing the point. I don't think that anyone disagrees that Sci needs resources/ships. I certainly don't. My only contention is why this ship, why the nebula, wrong class of ship to fit these needs. The Science needs should have been met with a different class. I'm sorry if that means waiting a little later, But I'd rather Sci players get a new ship right now and me wait a whole year for a Nebula class resembling Dstahls original build than to than to fly this worthless in PvP heap out into the skies...Its like saying the excelsior is a science ship because it has transwarp and used its deflector dish that one time in generations, and if that sounds like a really stupid example try hearing a good reason why the nebula is a science ship?
Its all poor timing, they were about to release thier 3rd cruiser in a row and it looks really bad that thier are no new sci ships...so what do we do, we slap a Science sticker on this class and hope all the disgusted Nebula class fans still pay to play with it....
Shield Disruptor (temporarily disables the shields of enemy ships in range)
Gemini Effect (creates a duplicate of a friendly ship which, while only existing temporarily, is useful in battle)
Those both sound science-class to me.
Point Defense Phasers (destroys enemy torpedoes within range)
Engineering Teams (can be transported to friendly ships, restoring shields to at least 50% and increasing rate of repair)
The former doesn't sound like anything too specific, but "escort" if you really needed to specify. Engineering team sounds "cruiser". So 2 sci skills, 1 tac skill, 1 eng skill. Sounds about up the alley for "science" in STO, which is also focused on science while allowing a bit of others.
Now your really reaching, your going to point to a bad Trek game and say " see, 2 quasi Sci abilities and only 1 tac and engy abilities!! see!" ... not going to cut it. Hardly a reason why everyone jumped on this bandwagon...
again, bad timing...3 cruisers in a row?...looks bad, sorry sci ppl we stamped a sci label on this ship thats clearly a cruiser rather than make you guys a ship...please deposit your 15 $ now...and for what...the original build had sufficient science Cap imo.
To do this would entail deploying a lot of universal BO slots, not a bad idea would would throw the current balance of power between classes into the wind. Not a bad idea, just not sure how it could be pulled off at this time. Still a good idea though, the way cryptic implemented ships is a little wonky. Each ship should have a set of base stats expandable via various equipment, officer abilities and crew compliment.
Adding enlisted personnel might be a good start by allowing the player to dictate the make up of the crew and by bringing in senior enlisted who can buff a ship's stats. They could work just like the current boffs, but be able to have + to something abilities in place of active skills which would remain in effect even if they are not assigned a spot in the BO seating chart.
Dictating the make up of the crew a la Simon and Schuster's Starship Creator might also make for a good addition. For those who don't know or don't remember, part of making a ship involved adjusting a pie chart of the crew to dictate what % of the ship's compliment would be command, science, medical, engineering, or security. Each department granted some bonus to the ship, but focusing too much in one area would leave the ship unable to perform certain tasks.
Adding this would allow a player to adjust the performance characteristics of their ship to better compliment the captain's skill set. A science ship might still be limited in terms of weapon load out and tactical abilities, but the crew could be adjusted to better take advantage of what combat capability it does have.
Reminds me of the idea I had making it slightly more EVE-like in ship design.
Ships would have base stats (power output, CPU capacity, base maneuverability, space, etc.), and we fit whatever equipment we want so long as we have the resources to support the equipment. Consoles count as equipment and, similar to kits, offer abilities to the ship.
Likewise, BOFF's don't have "abilities" in space, but stats that help improve the performance of ship abilities coming from the console they're manning.
But.. that'd be too much of a reversal now, from what they have. =(
Your missing the point. I don't think that anyone disagrees that Sci needs resources/ships. I certainly don't. My only contention is why this ship, why the nebula, wrong class of ship to fit these needs. The Science needs should have been met with a different class. I'm sorry if that means waiting a little later, But I'd rather Sci players get a new ship right now and me wait a whole year for a Nebula class resembling Dstahls original build than to than to fly this worthless in PvP heap out into the skies...
Worthless in PvP... are you hinting that you think science ships are weak and worthless?
You know, the alternate approach could be for you to go and use the Nebula as a science ship, and then being an active player of it then actively comment and contribute on the Science forum/Tribble test server in order to inspire the Devs to have the science vessels favorably rebalanced. ~_^
Personally, I'm a little jealous of the Nebula. You get a nice team stealth detection ability and a tactical slot on the excuse that you have a swappable pod... but the Deep Space Science Vessel and the Reconnaissance Science Vessels both also boast interchangeable pods and yet apparemtly they don't deserve a snazzy inbuilt science-like ability or an universal officer slot.
Your missing the point. I don't think that anyone disagrees that Sci needs resources/ships. I certainly don't. My only contention is why this ship, why the nebula, wrong class of ship to fit these needs. The Science needs should have been met with a different class. I'm sorry if that means waiting a little later, But I'd rather Sci players get a new ship right now and me wait a whole year for a Nebula class resembling Dstahls original build than to than to fly this worthless in PvP heap out into the skies...Its like saying the excelsior is a science ship because it has transwarp and used its deflector dish that one time in generations, and if that sounds like a really stupid example try hearing a good reason why the nebula is a science ship?
Its all poor timing, they were about to release thier 3rd cruiser in a row and it looks really bad that thier are no new sci ships...so what do we do, we slap a Science sticker on this class and hope all the disgusted Nebula class fans still pay to play with it....
I actually thought they might release the Excelsior as Science because Sulu had that prolonged assignment to catalog gaseous anomalies in the beta quadrant in the Excelsior.
Really, I kinda think ships ought to have a default "class" but a good crafter should be able to mod them to their heart's content by investing into making the ship the style of ship you want to fly.
Want a Galaxy or Intrepid class escort? We've seen canon loadouts of these ships that suggest it's possible. (Yesterday's Enterprise shows us a Galaxy warship that retained much of the basic design and Living Witness showed us that a relatively complete set of scans/information on the Intrepid could lead to it being seen as a warship.)
My suggestion? Mod the UI to identify what class someone is more easily and allow any ship to be modded from its designated class with crafting and skill allocation. (I kinda think crafting should mod the base stats and console layout and BO slots should be tied to rank/skills/captain, not ship.)
Now your really reaching, your going to point to a bad Trek game and say " see, 2 quasi Sci abilities and only 1 tac and engy abilities!! see!" ... not going to cut it. Hardly a reason why everyone jumped on this bandwagon...
again, bad timing...3 cruisers in a row?...looks bad, sorry sci ppl we stamped a sci label on this ship thats clearly a cruiser rather than make you guys a ship...please deposit your 15 $ now...
You're the one who made the argument that the Nebula class in Armada didn't have abilities that were science in nature. With your argument rebutted, the best you can do now is discredit Armada as "a bad Trek game" and try to make it look irrelevant?
Good strategy you've got there.
And I hate to break it to you but Armada was one of the most successful Trek games, and one I continue to play.
Oh and... if you want something more canon, Data's use of his Nebula class to decloaking the Romulans, and mentionings of a Nebula class having "high-energy scans" also lend it to being science-focused. The Star Trek Encyclopedia also refers to the top superstructure as the "upper sensor pod".
Face it... there's more material--both in hard and soft canon--pointing to the Nebula having more of a science focus than a simple multi-role cruiser. You just don't like it.
Worthless in PvP... are you hinting that you think science ships are weak and worthless?
You know, the alternate approach could be for you to go and use the Nebula as a science ship, and then being an active player of it then actively comment and contribute on the Science forum/Tribble test server in order to inspire the Devs to have the science vessels favorably rebalanced. ~_^
Personally, I'm a little jealous of the Nebula. You get a nice team stealth detection ability and a tactical slot on the excuse that you have a swappable pod... but the Deep Space Science Vessel and the Reconnaissance Science Vessels both also boast interchangeable pods and yet apparetly they don't deserve a sazzy inbuilt science-like ability or an universal officer slot.
Quite the opposite, I just think THIS paticular build will be worthless as is. And I do intend to test it and add constructively.....Cloak is over-rated and over feared. I have no probs surviving an alpha strike, whether it comes from a bop or a defiant, I like the ability, but it doesn't exactly save the day. and LT Tac abilities aren't exactly awesome. decent maybe, but far from very usefull.
I have a VERY hard time taking down Refit Intrepids in PvP, a good player in one of those ruins my day, and I love flying it. Just dissapointed with the nebula, having seen what it "was" and what it "will be", like giving me candy and then taking it away lol.
You're the one who made the argument that the Nebula class in Armada didn't have abilities that were science in nature. With your argument rebutted, the best you can do now is discredit Armada as "a bad Trek game" and try to make it look irrelevant?
Good strategy you've got there.
And I hate to break it to you but Armada was one of the most successful Trek games, and one I continue to play.
Oh and... if you want something more canon, Data's use of his Nebula class to decloaking the Romulans, and mentionings of a Nebula class having "high-energy scans" also lend it to being science-focused. The Star Trek Encyclopedia also refers to the top superstructure as the "upper sensor pod".
Face it... there's more material--both in hard and soft canon--pointing to the Nebula having more of a science focus than a simple multi-role cruiser. You just don't like it.
The original build Had a science focus, the problem here is its now VERY science. thats way off the from the intent of the design. And we've gone from 4-4 weps to 3-3, thats a bit much.
And I've been waiting for some one to bring up the Ep where data did his nifty Scan! he had to modify the ship to even make it possible!
Saying armada was successful trek game is like saying that it sold 30 copies compared to Legacies 12.
And for those nerds of us who bought the manual, it also mentions it as a possible torpedo deck, or even a hangar bay.
ANd for the millionth time, I liked the science lean, was very excited about a LTC slot. I don't like the FULL science build. I really don't think it will amount to nething in PvP. Only testing will tell, and who knows maybe they'll make some good changes.
I actually thought they might release the Excelsior as Science because Sulu had that prolonged assignment to catalog gaseous anomalies in the beta quadrant in the Excelsior.
Really, I kinda think ships ought to have a default "class" but a good crafter should be able to mod them to their heart's content by investing into making the ship the style of ship you want to fly.
Want a Galaxy or Intrepid class escort? We've seen canon loadouts of these ships that suggest it's possible. (Yesterday's Enterprise shows us a Galaxy warship that retained much of the basic design and Living Witness showed us that a relatively complete set of scans/information on the Intrepid could lead to it being seen as a warship.)
My suggestion? Mod the UI to identify what class someone is more easily and allow any ship to be modded from its designated class with crafting and skill allocation. (I kinda think crafting should mod the base stats and console layout and BO slots should be tied to rank/skills/captain, not ship.)
I'd be game for that but we'd have to ditch the "escort" idea for something more generally like "warship", or peel out "battlecruiser". Maneuverability is a defining attribute of current escorts, and a Galaxy class would never obtain that. It could, however, have superior weapons loadouts due to its size and power output.
A point system would work.
Different consoles/BOFF skills give you points towards different "classes".
I'd follow the warrior/mage/thief example of some RPGs, as the "base classes", then ones to fill the gaps in between. For instance...
Really bad example. That whole episode was based around lies and propaganda more than actual evidence. Ergo the 'Witness' part of the title.
The core point stands that you can retain the basic design while having major functional changes.
You want a Defiant class Science Ship? Do it. You just have to put the work into making it happen. Might mean keeping 75% of the crew in tesseracts or transporter pattern buffers as part of the upgrade process.
You want to make a Sovereign Escort? Part of the refitting process is buying and making crafting components designed to staff the ship on 100 people.
That way, "out of the box" ships function quite normally. But you can completely mod the functionality. In some cases, someone might ask, "Why would you want to?" And in those cases, maybe the crafting is so involved that most people wouldn't bother. But you want it THAT BAD? Do it.
The key then is just making the ships identifiable by class via UI rather than the ship's profile.
Your reaching...
," SPECIAL WEAPONS"... Nothing in that game implies Science, just like nothing else in canon does either. And what I love the most about your paticular source is that they're clearly 3 distinct abilities. One Sci, on Tac, and on engy...seems kinda Multirole don't ya think. Hardly Just Science.
I'd love to hear from someone a reference to just what exactly makes this ship more science than anything else? I've seen TNG, and recently watch most of the Eps concerning the Nebula, and I"m unconvinced that its anything close to being more one thing over another. Just saying something doesn't make it true.
Alot of ppl just latched onto this idea about the nebula being a science vessel and managed to Ruin a complete Ship class before it ever launched in the game. We need more Science ships, the Nebula wasn't one of them, espeically a 3-3 Weapons loadout. The Original build by Dstahl was fine, I never imagined the science ppl would want something else. an LTC slot in a cruiser?! I thought that was pretty awesome.
And I can't agree more with everyone that our Main issue here is the games need to fit all ships into 3 classes, get rid of that, add some really neat customizations in terms of layout/build and you've got yourself a game.
Never the less it did way less damage than the cruisers in game. But that is not the point ... i wanted to show that you where wrong concering it was never shown as Science.
The more important Thing ist that Cryptic kann make it what ever CBS allows ... Interpid is Science, Luna is Science both could be considered for your definition of canon as Cruisers but they are Science ships ingame.
Additionally i think a dev said the Nebula was delayed because CBS did not approve it. So you could read this as CBS did not agree with Nebula beeing a cruiser.
But why do we argue? A part of the community will always be disappointed never the less which descision Cryptic makes. So i like the idea that there is a new ship that is NOT a cruiser.
The original build Had a science focus, the problem here is its now VERY science. thats way off the from the intent of the design. And I've been waiting for some one to bring up the Ep where data did his nifty Scan! he had to modify the ship to even make it possible!
Saying armada was successful trek game is like saying that it sold 30 copies compared to Legacies 12.
And for those nerds of us who bought the manual, it also mentions it as a possible torpedo deck, or even a hangar bay.
ANd for the millionth time, I liked the science lean, was very excited about a LTC slot. I don't like the FULL science build. I really don't think it will amount to nething in PvP. Only testing will tell, and who knows maybe they'll make some good changes.
So it sounds like you're using the Nebula class as a springboard about your dislike of STO's escort/cruiser/science-ship model. There *are* no middle-grounds in the current components. If you think it had a science focus then that's really justification enough for it to be in the science group now.
If you have an issue with the 3-class mechanic, that has nothing to do with the Nebula specifically, and debating about its use in canon is irrelevant.
Another blow to my faith in Cryptic's decision making skills. They seem to be bowing down to the majority thinking. Most of the time the majority of people are idiots though.
And it's not like I have any faith in their decision making skills anymore anyways. I gradually lost it and it's been completely gone for a small while now.
UGC is the last hope for this game. If that fails too...
What qualifies it as a bad choice aside from you not agreeing with it?
Nebula makes sense as a science vessel. This is not the first example of the Nebula class being portrayed as a Support vessel (Star Trek armada anyone?)
Furthermore, i don't see how your faith or lack of will predict this game's fate, or why UCG is its last hope.
I guess it is just idiotic for the majority to not want every single new ship ever included into the game made into a Fed cruiser :rolleyes: What were we thinking?
The core point stands that you can retain the basic design while having major functional changes.
You want a Defiant class Science Ship? Do it. You just have to put the work into making it happen. Might mean keeping 75% of the crew in tesseracts or transporter pattern buffers as part of the upgrade process.
You want to make a Sovereign Escort? Part of the refitting process is buying and making crafting components designed to staff the ship on 100 people.
That way, "out of the box" ships function quite normally. But you can completely mod the functionality. In some cases, someone might ask, "Why would you want to?" And in those cases, maybe the crafting is so involved that most people wouldn't bother. But you want it THAT BAD? Do it.
The key then is just making the ships identifiable by class via UI rather than the ship's profile.
I really like all of this. There really is a lack of customization and work that a player could put into his build. At least then we can stop fighting over what we consider ships to be, because as you pointed out ealier theres an episode for every different type of modification that can be made, so its almost anybodies guess whats canon or not, but one things for sure starfleet ships are somewhat modular. I'd love to see the kind of options your talking about. Espicially with crafting .
The core point stands that you can retain the basic design while having major functional changes.
You want a Defiant class Science Ship? Do it. You just have to put the work into making it happen. Might mean keeping 75% of the crew in tesseracts or transporter pattern buffers as part of the upgrade process.
You want to make a Sovereign Escort? Part of the refitting process is buying and making crafting components designed to staff the ship on 100 people.
That way, "out of the box" ships function quite normally. But you can completely mod the functionality. In some cases, someone might ask, "Why would you want to?" And in those cases, maybe the crafting is so involved that most people wouldn't bother. But you want it THAT BAD? Do it.
The key then is just making the ships identifiable by class via UI rather than the ship's profile.
I just can't picture this idea working. Putting the mass of a Sovereign aside, can you really visualize a ship that big pulling off the kind of maneuvers that makes an escort effective? I can imagine it, and it looks more than a little silly.
I like the idea of being able to mod a ship quite a bit, but some of the combinations just don't jive.
Full Impulse is practically lightspeed in any ship anyway. Given the crazy resources we see in Trek, I kinda think you could make a Galaxy as maneuverable as a Defiant, you'd just need to farm materials and pump resources into doing it. It wouldn't be common because the resources and systems would be so expensive/exotic. But you could do it.
You just might have to get your hands on Cytherian tech that's a 0.5% drop to get that kind of engine advancement.
But get that engine tech, apply it to a Galaxy's impulse engines and you have an escort.
So it sounds like you're using the Nebula class as a springboard about your dislike of STO's escort/cruiser/science-ship model. There *are* no middle-grounds in the current components. If you think it had a science focus then that's really justification enough for it to be in the science group now.
If you have an issue with the 3-class mechanic, that has nothing to do with the Nebula specifically, and debating about its use in canon is irrelevant.
I do dislike the classification system, but its a little late for that argument don't ya think. I only go the canon argument because some people tried to use the very isolated evidence that it was a Full fledged Science vessel. I agree that its modular design would give it a science lean, and was excited to see its introduction under dstahls build. My thinking is ANY class can fly a cruiser and make it work, Sci captains in cruisers are deadly, but a tac in an Sci ship isn't as effective by comparison.
Comments
I agree with you on this. I think one of the problems is that the effective role and function of the ship is being defined into a specific set of classes when this is counter to the general idea of star trek ship concepts, with a few exceptions. In star trek it has always seemed as though the role of the ship was more dependent upon it's equipment load-out and crew compliment and not so much it's specific hull design. I honestly feel that Cryptic needs to abandon the sci/esc/cruiser concept and shift to something more cannon. The manner in which someone would choose powers in Champions online to define their focus and role is in someways more in line with the concept of how Star Trek ships should function than the current class based concept.
Yeah, that's not a usual reaction. From my experience people always ask why would I bother if I hardly ever actually kill anyone. Not realizing it not about personal glory, its all about the team win.
While they're wasting time getting annoyed that I'm constantly healing myself, the real threats are picking apart the rest of their team. :rolleyes:
I've been looking forward to the release of this ship since the game began and was a huge fan of the design before this game existed, to be pigeonholed to just science....
See, I think this aligns more with my crafting revamp idea (ie. a stock ship may serve one role but crafting allows you to tailor it) but I'd also agree that the ship skill tree is one of the biggest sources of bloat and overspecialization in the game, to a point where you not only must specialize in one of the three types but a subset of one of the three types, which seems to undermine the game's vast potential for ship hopping.
Superchum is indeed the man. The very inspirational fellow.
The ONLY way to solve this would be to designate the role you wish your ship to play and set up BOFF slots, weapon slots etc on every ship in the ship editor. Then, voila, you have an infinite number of starship combinations. That will light PvP up a tad. Simple. I am sure Starfleet tech is modular.
Star Trek Armada featured the Nebula as a science Ship. It had no great weapon power but some interesting special science abilities.
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Armada
MfG Michael
Not entirely true.
The Nova class was designed to be short range and Janeway even expressed awe in Ransom's ability to keep the Equinox together for as long as he did. It was also specifically introduced as a "science" ship. To my knowledge no other ship in the history of Trek has had an on-screen introduction that specific, except the Defiant in her combat role.
The "new age" classes have shown to be much more specialized. Even "general purpose" ships such as the Sovereign--arguably the Galaxy's replacement--has much more combat capacity relative its other roles.
The Galaxy: Long range exploration/science
The Nebula: Science (as far as I'm concerned...)
The Defiant: Combat
The Akira: Combat
The Nova: Science
The Prometheus: Long range tactical (ie, combat)
The Sovereign: General purpose
An abundance? I remember reference to "Science Lab 2", which is where One was "born". And it was a pretty tiny little thing. I don't recall mention of any ones higher in number than that. Got a source to prove this "abundance"?
Your reaching...
," SPECIAL WEAPONS"... Nothing in that game implies Science, just like nothing else in canon does either. And what I love the most about your paticular source is that they're clearly 3 distinct abilities. One Sci, on Tac, and on engy...seems kinda Multirole don't ya think. Hardly Just Science.
I'd love to hear from someone a reference to just what exactly makes this ship more science than anything else? I've seen TNG, and recently watch most of the Eps concerning the Nebula, and I"m unconvinced that its anything close to being more one thing over another. Just saying something doesn't make it true.
Alot of ppl just latched onto this idea about the nebula being a science vessel and managed to Ruin a complete Ship class before it ever launched in the game. We need more Science ships, the Nebula wasn't one of them, espeically a 3-3 Weapons loadout. The Original build by Dstahl was fine, I never imagined the science ppl would want something else. an LTC slot in a cruiser?! I thought that was pretty awesome.
And I can't agree more with everyone that our Main issue here is the games need to fit all ships into 3 classes, get rid of that, add some really neat customizations in terms of layout/build and you've got yourself a game.
I accept your resignation... please sign here and be on your way now...
I for one am perfectly fine with the Nebula being a science vessel. I'm not as selfish to think only of myself (I don't have a science officer) and to try to hoard all ships under an umbrella that I will play. We honestly need some variety, the more variety the better. I don't want every ship that comes out to be a Cruiser (Galaxy X), Cruiser (Excelsior), Cruiser (proposed Nebula).
I think making the Nebula a science vessel, with 6 slots for weapons an impressive sci console load out and a universal Boff slot actually genius. Not every ship needs to be "beam weapons o' death".
And don't talk about "Canon" There is nothing "canon" about STO breaking up Starships into 3 categories in the first place. Not only does Starfleet have all naval designations for their ships but they have "new" ones such as "explorer" which the Navy doesn't have. The way STO breaks up the starships was only an attempt (and rightfully so) to mimic common MMO archetypes of Tanker/DPSer/Healer/Buffer. So yeah, its not "canon" but STO isn't really "canon" to begin with.
Want Canon? Go play Bridge Commander.
To do this would entail deploying a lot of universal BO slots, not a bad idea would would throw the current balance of power between classes into the wind. Not a bad idea, just not sure how it could be pulled off at this time. Still a good idea though, the way cryptic implemented ships is a little wonky. Each ship should have a set of base stats expandable via various equipment, officer abilities and crew compliment.
Adding enlisted personnel might be a good start by allowing the player to dictate the make up of the crew and by bringing in senior enlisted who can buff a ship's stats. They could work just like the current boffs, but be able to have + to something abilities in place of active skills which would remain in effect even if they are not assigned a spot in the BO seating chart.
Dictating the make up of the crew a la Simon and Schuster's Starship Creator might also make for a good addition. For those who don't know or don't remember, part of making a ship involved adjusting a pie chart of the crew to dictate what % of the ship's compliment would be command, science, medical, engineering, or security. Each department granted some bonus to the ship, but focusing too much in one area would leave the ship unable to perform certain tasks.
Adding this would allow a player to adjust the performance characteristics of their ship to better compliment the captain's skill set. A science ship might still be limited in terms of weapon load out and tactical abilities, but the crew could be adjusted to better take advantage of what combat capability it does have.
Shield Disruptor (temporarily disables the shields of enemy ships in range)
Gemini Effect (creates a duplicate of a friendly ship which, while only existing temporarily, is useful in battle)
Those both sound science-class to me.
Point Defense Phasers (destroys enemy torpedoes within range)
Engineering Teams (can be transported to friendly ships, restoring shields to at least 50% and increasing rate of repair)
The former doesn't sound like anything too specific, but "escort" if you really needed to specify. Engineering team sounds "cruiser". So 2 sci skills, 1 tac skill, 1 eng skill. Sounds about up the alley for "science" in STO, which is also focused on science while allowing a bit of others.
Your missing the point. I don't think that anyone disagrees that Sci needs resources/ships. I certainly don't. My only contention is why this ship, why the nebula, wrong class of ship to fit these needs. The Science needs should have been met with a different class. I'm sorry if that means waiting a little later, But I'd rather Sci players get a new ship right now and me wait a whole year for a Nebula class resembling Dstahls original build than to than to fly this worthless in PvP heap out into the skies...Its like saying the excelsior is a science ship because it has transwarp and used its deflector dish that one time in generations, and if that sounds like a really stupid example try hearing a good reason why the nebula is a science ship?
Its all poor timing, they were about to release thier 3rd cruiser in a row and it looks really bad that thier are no new sci ships...so what do we do, we slap a Science sticker on this class and hope all the disgusted Nebula class fans still pay to play with it....
Now your really reaching, your going to point to a bad Trek game and say " see, 2 quasi Sci abilities and only 1 tac and engy abilities!! see!" ... not going to cut it. Hardly a reason why everyone jumped on this bandwagon...
again, bad timing...3 cruisers in a row?...looks bad, sorry sci ppl we stamped a sci label on this ship thats clearly a cruiser rather than make you guys a ship...please deposit your 15 $ now...and for what...the original build had sufficient science Cap imo.
Reminds me of the idea I had making it slightly more EVE-like in ship design.
Ships would have base stats (power output, CPU capacity, base maneuverability, space, etc.), and we fit whatever equipment we want so long as we have the resources to support the equipment. Consoles count as equipment and, similar to kits, offer abilities to the ship.
Likewise, BOFF's don't have "abilities" in space, but stats that help improve the performance of ship abilities coming from the console they're manning.
But.. that'd be too much of a reversal now, from what they have. =(
Worthless in PvP... are you hinting that you think science ships are weak and worthless?
You know, the alternate approach could be for you to go and use the Nebula as a science ship, and then being an active player of it then actively comment and contribute on the Science forum/Tribble test server in order to inspire the Devs to have the science vessels favorably rebalanced. ~_^
Personally, I'm a little jealous of the Nebula. You get a nice team stealth detection ability and a tactical slot on the excuse that you have a swappable pod... but the Deep Space Science Vessel and the Reconnaissance Science Vessels both also boast interchangeable pods and yet apparemtly they don't deserve a snazzy inbuilt science-like ability or an universal officer slot.
I actually thought they might release the Excelsior as Science because Sulu had that prolonged assignment to catalog gaseous anomalies in the beta quadrant in the Excelsior.
Really, I kinda think ships ought to have a default "class" but a good crafter should be able to mod them to their heart's content by investing into making the ship the style of ship you want to fly.
Want a Galaxy or Intrepid class escort? We've seen canon loadouts of these ships that suggest it's possible. (Yesterday's Enterprise shows us a Galaxy warship that retained much of the basic design and Living Witness showed us that a relatively complete set of scans/information on the Intrepid could lead to it being seen as a warship.)
My suggestion? Mod the UI to identify what class someone is more easily and allow any ship to be modded from its designated class with crafting and skill allocation. (I kinda think crafting should mod the base stats and console layout and BO slots should be tied to rank/skills/captain, not ship.)
Really bad example. That whole episode was based around lies and propaganda more than actual evidence. Ergo the 'Witness' part of the title.
You're the one who made the argument that the Nebula class in Armada didn't have abilities that were science in nature. With your argument rebutted, the best you can do now is discredit Armada as "a bad Trek game" and try to make it look irrelevant?
Good strategy you've got there.
And I hate to break it to you but Armada was one of the most successful Trek games, and one I continue to play.
Oh and... if you want something more canon, Data's use of his Nebula class to decloaking the Romulans, and mentionings of a Nebula class having "high-energy scans" also lend it to being science-focused. The Star Trek Encyclopedia also refers to the top superstructure as the "upper sensor pod".
Face it... there's more material--both in hard and soft canon--pointing to the Nebula having more of a science focus than a simple multi-role cruiser. You just don't like it.
Quite the opposite, I just think THIS paticular build will be worthless as is. And I do intend to test it and add constructively.....Cloak is over-rated and over feared. I have no probs surviving an alpha strike, whether it comes from a bop or a defiant, I like the ability, but it doesn't exactly save the day. and LT Tac abilities aren't exactly awesome. decent maybe, but far from very usefull.
I have a VERY hard time taking down Refit Intrepids in PvP, a good player in one of those ruins my day, and I love flying it. Just dissapointed with the nebula, having seen what it "was" and what it "will be", like giving me candy and then taking it away lol.
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Berkeley_%28NCC-64720%29
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Nightingale_%28NCC-60805%29
The Berkeley was definitely a science ship, and the Nightingale was a support ship/hospital ship.
The Nebula DOES make sense as a science ship.
If its still close to Geckos stats:
Then you can have:
Ltcmdr eng + Lt Eng (in the universal slot) for a total of 5 eng BO skills
3 eng consoles
So you're losing the 1 eng. console, the cmdr eng skill (and I guess an ensign. slot of some sort?) but you gain tons of flexibility.
The cloak thing? Meh. But the Excelsiors special wasnt even combat related. Its transwarp.
The original build Had a science focus, the problem here is its now VERY science. thats way off the from the intent of the design. And we've gone from 4-4 weps to 3-3, thats a bit much.
And I've been waiting for some one to bring up the Ep where data did his nifty Scan! he had to modify the ship to even make it possible!
Saying armada was successful trek game is like saying that it sold 30 copies compared to Legacies 12.
And for those nerds of us who bought the manual, it also mentions it as a possible torpedo deck, or even a hangar bay.
ANd for the millionth time, I liked the science lean, was very excited about a LTC slot. I don't like the FULL science build. I really don't think it will amount to nething in PvP. Only testing will tell, and who knows maybe they'll make some good changes.
I'd be game for that but we'd have to ditch the "escort" idea for something more generally like "warship", or peel out "battlecruiser". Maneuverability is a defining attribute of current escorts, and a Galaxy class would never obtain that. It could, however, have superior weapons loadouts due to its size and power output.
A point system would work.
Different consoles/BOFF skills give you points towards different "classes".
I'd follow the warrior/mage/thief example of some RPGs, as the "base classes", then ones to fill the gaps in between. For instance...
Frigate (speed)
-- Escort (speed & firepower)
Battleship (firepower)
-- Cruiser (firepower & buffs/debuffs)
Science vessel (buffs/debuffs)
-- Exploration vessel (buffs/debuffs & speed)
Frigate (speed)
Some classes would lean towards a certain part of the spectrum, but could be altered by a Captain's decision for consoles and BOFFs.
The core point stands that you can retain the basic design while having major functional changes.
You want a Defiant class Science Ship? Do it. You just have to put the work into making it happen. Might mean keeping 75% of the crew in tesseracts or transporter pattern buffers as part of the upgrade process.
You want to make a Sovereign Escort? Part of the refitting process is buying and making crafting components designed to staff the ship on 100 people.
That way, "out of the box" ships function quite normally. But you can completely mod the functionality. In some cases, someone might ask, "Why would you want to?" And in those cases, maybe the crafting is so involved that most people wouldn't bother. But you want it THAT BAD? Do it.
The key then is just making the ships identifiable by class via UI rather than the ship's profile.
Never the less it did way less damage than the cruisers in game. But that is not the point ... i wanted to show that you where wrong concering it was never shown as Science.
The more important Thing ist that Cryptic kann make it what ever CBS allows ... Interpid is Science, Luna is Science both could be considered for your definition of canon as Cruisers but they are Science ships ingame.
Additionally i think a dev said the Nebula was delayed because CBS did not approve it. So you could read this as CBS did not agree with Nebula beeing a cruiser.
But why do we argue? A part of the community will always be disappointed never the less which descision Cryptic makes. So i like the idea that there is a new ship that is NOT a cruiser.
MfG Michael
So it sounds like you're using the Nebula class as a springboard about your dislike of STO's escort/cruiser/science-ship model. There *are* no middle-grounds in the current components. If you think it had a science focus then that's really justification enough for it to be in the science group now.
If you have an issue with the 3-class mechanic, that has nothing to do with the Nebula specifically, and debating about its use in canon is irrelevant.
What qualifies it as a bad choice aside from you not agreeing with it?
Nebula makes sense as a science vessel. This is not the first example of the Nebula class being portrayed as a Support vessel (Star Trek armada anyone?)
Furthermore, i don't see how your faith or lack of will predict this game's fate, or why UCG is its last hope.
I guess it is just idiotic for the majority to not want every single new ship ever included into the game made into a Fed cruiser :rolleyes: What were we thinking?
I really like all of this. There really is a lack of customization and work that a player could put into his build. At least then we can stop fighting over what we consider ships to be, because as you pointed out ealier theres an episode for every different type of modification that can be made, so its almost anybodies guess whats canon or not, but one things for sure starfleet ships are somewhat modular. I'd love to see the kind of options your talking about. Espicially with crafting .
I just can't picture this idea working. Putting the mass of a Sovereign aside, can you really visualize a ship that big pulling off the kind of maneuvers that makes an escort effective? I can imagine it, and it looks more than a little silly.
I like the idea of being able to mod a ship quite a bit, but some of the combinations just don't jive.
Full Impulse is practically lightspeed in any ship anyway. Given the crazy resources we see in Trek, I kinda think you could make a Galaxy as maneuverable as a Defiant, you'd just need to farm materials and pump resources into doing it. It wouldn't be common because the resources and systems would be so expensive/exotic. But you could do it.
You just might have to get your hands on Cytherian tech that's a 0.5% drop to get that kind of engine advancement.
But get that engine tech, apply it to a Galaxy's impulse engines and you have an escort.
I do dislike the classification system, but its a little late for that argument don't ya think. I only go the canon argument because some people tried to use the very isolated evidence that it was a Full fledged Science vessel. I agree that its modular design would give it a science lean, and was excited to see its introduction under dstahls build. My thinking is ANY class can fly a cruiser and make it work, Sci captains in cruisers are deadly, but a tac in an Sci ship isn't as effective by comparison.