Because the cruiser folks have no clue how to play a science Ship. It's true that Science ships are not too effective unless you invest heavily in science skills, But when you do, they are more than viable. Engineer and Tactical skill help each other out a good deal, but higher tier science skills don't carry over well at all.
So When a cruiser captain Tries a science ship with their skills all in Weapons and Engineering with a few token science skills, They can't run a Science ship effectively and thus deeming it sucky.
My science captain is heavily invested in science skills.
My science captain is heavily invested in science skills.
They still suck.
Fair enough you feel that way, but that means the Class needs to be un-nerfed, not that they should be ignored and denied ships given the fact there are plenty of science captains who disagree and will be happy at with a new and iconic ship that they can use effectively without respeccing. As i said, Cruiser captains are not short on new ships.
Fair enough you feel that way, but that means the Class needs to be un-nerfed, not that they should be ignored and denied ships given the fact there are plenty of science captains who disagree and will be happy at with a new and iconic ship that they can use effectively without respeccing. As i said, Cruiser captains are not short on new ships.
I'm fine with the Nebula being science if science is un-nerfed. However, I don't think any new science vessels should be built until such time as science is un-nerfed. As science is still nerfed, I think the Nebula should not be science right now.
I'm fine with the Nebula being science if science is un-nerfed. However, I don't think any new science vessels should be built until such time as science is un-nerfed. As science is still nerfed, I think the Nebula should not be science right now.
Make sense now?
I get what you are saying, but:
1: There are people who play and enjoy Science ships even though you don't.
2: Those players deserve a ship just as cool as the excelsior.
3: Your opinion does not matter more than the aforementioned people.
4: Not every new ship should be a Cruiser, and Cruisers now have more ships than either of the other two types.
My science captain is heavily invested in science skills.
They still suck.
You know it's funny, because when I take my sci ship into pvp I'm consistently one of the top damage dealers. You have to fly an escort different than a cruiser, so why are you trying to fly a science ship like a cruiser? Maybe this play-style isn't for you, but that doesn't mean it sucks.
You know it's funny, because when I take my sci ship into pvp I'm consistently one of the top damage dealers. You have to fly an escort different than a cruiser, so why are you trying to fly a science ship like a cruiser? Maybe this play-style isn't for you, but that doesn't mean it sucks.
Dmg matters little. Kill counts. An escort can get 100K and kill 2 people. Science ship can get 1 mil. and not score a single kill....
The LtC slot is always the "subspec" of the ship (assaults are more tactical, starcruisers more science, DSSV are sci/eng)
Thus the Nebula is subspec engineering, too. The difference is, the Lt slot isnt locked in as Science, its universal, so it could be Lt Eng OR Lt Tac.
which makes its pretty versatile.
the consoles arent that important, esp. if its 4-3-2
Yeah, no. That's just not correct. All Federation T5 ships (except the Excelsior and now apparently the Nebula) have a commander and a ltc BO slot in their corresponding profession. That's tactical for escorts, engineer for cruisers and science for science vessels. The "subspec" of the ship is reflected in an additional ensign slot.
Dmg matters little. Kill counts. An escort can get 100K and kill 2 people. Science ship can get 1 mil. and not score a single kill....
but if they did a million (i know it's an exaggeration) points of damage, that means they have done significant damage to each ship to where they are much easier to kill for the other ship types. I suppose you can argue that the enemy can heal that damage first and let the cool-downs recharge, effectively not helping at all, but that would be due to Escort/cruiser laziness not capitalizing on an opportunity.
It is also not an argument that science ships are worse, but simply better suited in support than direct killing. Though i am sure MJLogan75 can tell you he has gotten his share of kills plenty of times.
Dmg matters little. Kill counts. An escort can get 100K and kill 2 people. Science ship can get 1 mil. and not score a single kill....
And that is one of the reason why there is so much failboating in pvp. Kills don't count to be honest. (Depending on the map.) I have seen cruisers do lots of damage and not kill a thing but because they "tanked" and took fire from the escorts, the escorts took down the others rather easily.
It goes back to what I said earlier. There are too many folks who want to get in and get the kills and think they are all L33T. Kills don't make you leet or a hard core PVP player. Not in this game at least.
Science ships when played correctly are some very viable pvp ships. It depends a lot on the team as well so you can't point at one ship and say "It fails" as it might for you but not for others.
And that is one of the reason why there is so much failboating in pvp. Kills don't count to be honest. (Depending on the map.) I have seen cruisers do lots of damage and not kill a thing but because they "tanked" and took fire from the escorts, the escorts took down the others rather easily.
It goes back to what I said earlier. There are too many folks who want to get in and get the kills and think they are all L33T. Kills don't make you leet or a hard core PVP player. Not in this game at least.
Science ships when played correctly are some very viable pvp ships. It depends a lot on the team as well so you can't point at one ship and say "It fails" as it might for you but not for others.
The point is, arenas are won on kills. Dont get me wrong, i like science ships in pvp (hate them in pve), but compared to other ships i could use, they seem underwhelming.
But its more about the nebula layout, which is imho weak. No real bonuses, plenty of drawbacks wrapped in good look.
As it is, its doomed to be pure healer boat/semi-support ship, with horrible turn rate, 1 BO less because of universal slots, which 99% of players will only choose sci or eng and special ability used mainly in KvF pvp (majority does FvF), which is based upon false assumption that cloak is overpowered and very dangerous Klingon ability.
Im not really asking for it to be cruiser, im asking for it to have better layout to be on comparable power to other ships available.
The point is, arenas are won on kills. Dont get me wrong, i like science ships in pvp (hate them in pve), but compared to other ships i could use, they seem underwhelming.
But its more about the nebula layout, which is imho weak. No real bonuses, plenty of drawbacks wrapped in good look.
As it is, its doomed to be pure healer boat/semi-support ship, with horrible turn rate, 1 BO less because of universal slots, which 99% of players will only choose sci or eng and special ability used mainly in KvF pvp (majority does FvF), which is based upon false assumption that cloak is overpowered and very dangerous Klingon ability.
Im not really asking for it to be cruiser, im asking for it to have better layout to be on comparable power to other ships available.
I admit I am not to happy about the special ability but to be honest the Exe special isn't useful either so as far as that goes I don't see that haven't much of a bearing overall.
Layout wise, I am not too sure that it is gimped from the beginning but it will have to be tested to make 100 percent certainty. However, at first glance I can see how it will still be useful in pvp (FVF) depending on the specs and load outs.
As of right now, I would take the Nebula as is and make it a beam boat and depending on how I arrange my boffs, I can see it being viable as a mixed damage/support healer.
I have a feeling the layout will be tweaked a bit during testing to be honest.
I'd like to chime in here, having had the chance to play around with the Nebula class a bit.
As of this writing, the Nebula is a Science Vessel, with 3 hard points front and 3 back, and stacked with Science consoles. That may be subject to change, but I think it is a good fit.
Why? Because gameplay-wise, the Nebula is a solid support ship. The low-tier version has an impressive scan ability, and the high-tier is able to create a tachyon web amongst nearby ships, which increases stealth detection by a good margin. This is a very effective PVP vessel because it can smoke out cloaked enemies from a wider distance than standard sensor scan, and good timing can shut down a cloak rush before it happens.
This also makes it a high-priority target for teams that use cloak, because if you are able to knock out the Nebula before it uses its ability you are free to use battle cloak more effectively until the Nebula re-enters the fight.
And since the Nebula currently has a universal boff station, there is a large amount of flexibility available. Obviously not as much as a Bird-of-prey, but a skilled Nebula captain will undoubtedly be able to turn fights to his or her advantage by predicting rushes and adjusting accordingly.
And keep in mind that boffs can be traded out during PVP as long as the ship is out of combat, so the amount of flexibility on the Nebula is unparalleled on the Fed side.
actually i think it is good that it will be a Sci vessel.
Because at Tier 3 i will use the Excelsior over the Nebula with my latest Cruiser ALT.
Having Excelsior AND Nebula added as Tier 3 Cruiser and nothing on the Sci and Tac front would be kinda stupid.
BUT tier 3?
It should be a Tier 4 vessel, just like the Galaxy Class, same turn speed too! It uses all the same parts after all.
I admit I am not to happy about the special ability but to be honest the Exe special isn't useful either so as far as that goes I don't see that haven't much of a bearing overall.
The difference is, the excelsior has that ability for "free" and doesn't pay anything for it. The nebula lacks 1 B O.
The excelsior has its turn base upped for free...the nebula got its turn rate reduced for nothing....
That proves what ? that the ship participated in killing 13 people ?
It proves several things, 1: science ships can have high damage out put. 2: it answers your concern that high dps is nothing without kill counts. 3: Science ships are viable in PVP. 4: Science ships most certainly do not suck. But if you think the only way to prove PVP viability is to solo kill 15 ships on your own, good luck proving that with any ship.
That proves what ? that the ship participated in killing 13 people ?
Participated in killing 13 people and did the most damage. That proves he was more than carrying his weight in the match. That proves that The right player can make a Science ship kick some behind in PVP. It can be done, this anyone who claims it cannot be done because they tried themselves, they are doing it wrong.
It proves several things, 1: science ships can have high damage out put. 2: it answers your concern that high dps is nothing without kill counts. 3: Science ships are viable in PVP. 4: Science ships most certainly do not suck. But if you think the only way to prove PVP viability is to solo kill 15 ships on your own, good luck proving that with any ship.
Huh, but I said neither of that....
1. I never said sci ships cant have high damage, i said it matters little if it doesnt lead to a kill. Transphasic mine spam comes to mind.
2. Its not kill count, its amount of kills in which the ship participated.
3.I never said they aren't.
4. I also never said that, i said compared to others, they have lesser overall potential
The last line was unnecessary garbage not worth commenting.
I only said, the last known nebula layout/stats are TRIBBLE compared to other ships.
The difference is, the excelsior has that ability for "free" and doesn't pay anything for it. The nebula lacks 1 B O.
The excelsior has its turn base upped for free...the nebula got its turn rate reduced for nothing....
The excelsior ability is a non combat ability this is a combat ability. But a Universal Bo slot is nothing to sneeze at. Turn rate is turn rate. You act like you're getting nothing in return.
1. I never said sci ships cant have high damage, i said it matters little if it doesnt lead to a kill. Transphasic mine spam comes to mind.
2. Its not kill count, its amount of kills in which the ship participated.
3.I never said they aren't.
4. I also never said that, i said compared to others, they have lesser overall potential
The last line was unnecessary garbage not worth commenting.
I only said, the last known nebula layout/stats are TRIBBLE compared to other ships.
So in a lesser vessel I did the most damage and most kills. I like your definition of lesser. It's different. You wouldn't dream of flying an escort like you would a cruiser, so flying a science ship like a cruiser is fail.
The excelsior ability is a non combat ability this is a combat ability. But a Universal Bo slot is nothing to sneeze at. Turn rate is turn rate. You act like you're getting nothing in return.
And what exactly did get the nebula in return for its galaxy like turn rate ? aka -3 ? I'm curious...And what exactly did Excelsior lost for its +1 turn rate ? I'm also curious about that....
So in a lesser vessel I did the most damage and most kills. I like your definition of lesser. It's different. You wouldn't dream of flying an escort like you would a cruiser, so flying a science ship like a cruiser is fail.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you weren't the "best" in your team.
I'd like to chime in here, having had the chance to play around with the Nebula class a bit.
As of this writing, the Nebula is a Science Vessel, with 3 hard points front and 3 back, and stacked with Science consoles. That may be subject to change, but I think it is a good fit.
Why? Because gameplay-wise, the Nebula is a solid support ship. The low-tier version has an impressive scan ability, and the high-tier is able to create a tachyon web amongst nearby ships, which increases stealth detection by a good margin. This is a very effective PVP vessel because it can smoke out cloaked enemies from a wider distance than standard sensor scan, and good timing can shut down a cloak rush before it happens.
But what does it do for PvE? Is there a reason for a non-PvPer to fly a Nebula?
The universal slot already has its drawback with it, 1 less BO.
Special combat ability ? Pure pvp ability working only in KvF ?
Ltc engineering ? doesnt it loose ltc. science instead ? A fair tradeoff.
So it seems to be a fair deal to you ? Oh......fine then.
So you're saying that you've never seen a pve ship cloak? I can think of at least one STF encounter that this ability might come in handy in. Defiant class and Galaxy X also have cloaking devices. So it works in FvF as well.
So, it seems like your only real concern here is the turn rate? So all they have to do is give you the turn rate of a regular sci ship and you're on board? I mean as you've already pointed out here all the other changes are balanced.
So you're saying that you've never seen a pve ship cloak? I can think of at least one STF encounter that this ability might come in handy in. Defiant class and Galaxy X also have cloaking devices. So it works in FvF as well.
So, it seems like your only real concern here is the turn rate? So all they have to do is give you the turn rate of a regular sci ship and you're on board? I mean as you've already pointed out here all the other changes are balanced.
Of course, that would be logical. The galaxy-like turn rate is unnecessary drawback with no justification but what pretty much defines the usage of the ship, its offensive and defensive capabilities.
I still don't like the universal lt. slot, or rather the lost 1 BO skill because of semi-universal slot. But the horrid turn rate (which prevents the universal usage of the ship, see tactical) is something which bothers me the most, the other stuff is more or less cosmetic to me.
But my point is. If its gonna be science vessel, don't make it a crappy one.
Of course, that would be logical. The galaxy-like turn rate is unnecessary drawback with no justification but what pretty much defines the usage of the ship, its offensive and defensive capabilities.
I still don't like the universal lt. slot, or rather the lost 1 BO skill because of semi-universal slot. But the horrid turn rate (which prevents the universal usage of the ship, see tactical) is something which bothers me the most, the other stuff is more or less cosmetic to me.
But my point is. If its gonna be science vessel, don't make it a crappy one.
Fair enough. But I, and many others don't see this as a crappy one. Sure I would like faster turn rate, and like you I'd be willing to forgo the universal for a straight up lt sci abillity and an ensign sci. But I like a science ship with a lt.cmdr. eng slot.
Fair enough. But I, and many others don't see this as a crappy one. Sure I would like faster turn rate, and like you I'd be willing to forgo the universal for a straight up lt sci abillity and an ensign sci. But I like a science ship with a lt.cmdr. eng slot.
No you get me wrong. I don't like the lt. universal slot because it in my oppinion doesn't justifies the loss of one BO skill. The BoP for example is fully universal and has also 1 BO station less. Doesn't feel right to me.
I would much rather see it with lt.cmd universal somehow implemented, so there is truly some kind of flexibility.
I dont think the idea of 2x Lt. tactical seems useful to anyone, especially on science ship. When for example APO starts at lt.cmd. Hence why i call it semi-universal. As majority will just pick sci or eng.
No you get me wrong. I don't like the lt. universal slot because it in my oppinion doesn't justifies the loss of one BO skill. The BoP for example is fully universal and has also 1 BO station less. Doesn't feel right to me.
I would much rather see it with lt.cmd universal somehow implemented, so there is truly some kind of flexibility.
I dont think the idea of 2x Lt. tactical seems useful to anyone, especially on science ship.
What makes you so sure that we will get exact the version CaptainGecko posted?
I will wait and see what's up on Tribble by Thursday . and THEN you have still a lot of time to send feedback and give reasons why it should be changed.
BTW ... dstahls cruiser variant also lacks one BO and has a universal BO slot. So in your opinion this is TRIBBLE too :rolleyes:?
What makes you so sure that we will get exact the version CaptainGecko posted?
I will wait and see what's up on Tribble by Thursday . and THEN you have still a lot of time to send feedback and give reasons why it should be changed.
BTW ... dstahls cruiser variant also lacks one BO and has a universal BO slot. So in your opinion this is TRIBBLE too :rolleyes:?
MfG Michael
Well the cruiser variant is a bit better. Because its cruiser with 4/4 layout so the tactical abilities are more usable, while extra science abilities come handy on cruiser. Its not that focused on pure healing/support and has the engineering slots to help with the turn rate. So its actually much more universal.
Of course we have to wait, but what else one can do at work ? then to lurk on forums and discuss ?
Comments
My science captain is heavily invested in science skills.
They still suck.
Fair enough you feel that way, but that means the Class needs to be un-nerfed, not that they should be ignored and denied ships given the fact there are plenty of science captains who disagree and will be happy at with a new and iconic ship that they can use effectively without respeccing. As i said, Cruiser captains are not short on new ships.
I'm fine with the Nebula being science if science is un-nerfed. However, I don't think any new science vessels should be built until such time as science is un-nerfed. As science is still nerfed, I think the Nebula should not be science right now.
Make sense now?
I get what you are saying, but:
1: There are people who play and enjoy Science ships even though you don't.
2: Those players deserve a ship just as cool as the excelsior.
3: Your opinion does not matter more than the aforementioned people.
4: Not every new ship should be a Cruiser, and Cruisers now have more ships than either of the other two types.
Are we on the same page? (serious question)
You know it's funny, because when I take my sci ship into pvp I'm consistently one of the top damage dealers. You have to fly an escort different than a cruiser, so why are you trying to fly a science ship like a cruiser? Maybe this play-style isn't for you, but that doesn't mean it sucks.
Dmg matters little. Kill counts. An escort can get 100K and kill 2 people. Science ship can get 1 mil. and not score a single kill....
Just quoting for truth.
Yeah, no. That's just not correct. All Federation T5 ships (except the Excelsior and now apparently the Nebula) have a commander and a ltc BO slot in their corresponding profession. That's tactical for escorts, engineer for cruisers and science for science vessels. The "subspec" of the ship is reflected in an additional ensign slot.
but if they did a million (i know it's an exaggeration) points of damage, that means they have done significant damage to each ship to where they are much easier to kill for the other ship types. I suppose you can argue that the enemy can heal that damage first and let the cool-downs recharge, effectively not helping at all, but that would be due to Escort/cruiser laziness not capitalizing on an opportunity.
It is also not an argument that science ships are worse, but simply better suited in support than direct killing. Though i am sure MJLogan75 can tell you he has gotten his share of kills plenty of times.
And that is one of the reason why there is so much failboating in pvp. Kills don't count to be honest. (Depending on the map.) I have seen cruisers do lots of damage and not kill a thing but because they "tanked" and took fire from the escorts, the escorts took down the others rather easily.
It goes back to what I said earlier. There are too many folks who want to get in and get the kills and think they are all L33T. Kills don't make you leet or a hard core PVP player. Not in this game at least.
Science ships when played correctly are some very viable pvp ships. It depends a lot on the team as well so you can't point at one ship and say "It fails" as it might for you but not for others.
The point is, arenas are won on kills. Dont get me wrong, i like science ships in pvp (hate them in pve), but compared to other ships i could use, they seem underwhelming.
But its more about the nebula layout, which is imho weak. No real bonuses, plenty of drawbacks wrapped in good look.
As it is, its doomed to be pure healer boat/semi-support ship, with horrible turn rate, 1 BO less because of universal slots, which 99% of players will only choose sci or eng and special ability used mainly in KvF pvp (majority does FvF), which is based upon false assumption that cloak is overpowered and very dangerous Klingon ability.
Im not really asking for it to be cruiser, im asking for it to have better layout to be on comparable power to other ships available.
Okay, but the original complaint was the lack of damage out put. but if you want kill counts:
http://yfrog.com/0jscreenshot2010092106533j
I admit I am not to happy about the special ability but to be honest the Exe special isn't useful either so as far as that goes I don't see that haven't much of a bearing overall.
Layout wise, I am not too sure that it is gimped from the beginning but it will have to be tested to make 100 percent certainty. However, at first glance I can see how it will still be useful in pvp (FVF) depending on the specs and load outs.
As of right now, I would take the Nebula as is and make it a beam boat and depending on how I arrange my boffs, I can see it being viable as a mixed damage/support healer.
I have a feeling the layout will be tweaked a bit during testing to be honest.
That proves what ? that the ship participated in killing 13 people ?
Beside in that screen, Iblis obviously was greatest asset to its team.
actually i think it is good that it will be a Sci vessel.
Because at Tier 3 i will use the Excelsior over the Nebula with my latest Cruiser ALT.
Having Excelsior AND Nebula added as Tier 3 Cruiser and nothing on the Sci and Tac front would be kinda stupid.
BUT tier 3?
It should be a Tier 4 vessel, just like the Galaxy Class, same turn speed too! It uses all the same parts after all.
The difference is, the excelsior has that ability for "free" and doesn't pay anything for it. The nebula lacks 1 B O.
The excelsior has its turn base upped for free...the nebula got its turn rate reduced for nothing....
It proves several things, 1: science ships can have high damage out put. 2: it answers your concern that high dps is nothing without kill counts. 3: Science ships are viable in PVP. 4: Science ships most certainly do not suck. But if you think the only way to prove PVP viability is to solo kill 15 ships on your own, good luck proving that with any ship.
Participated in killing 13 people and did the most damage. That proves he was more than carrying his weight in the match. That proves that The right player can make a Science ship kick some behind in PVP. It can be done, this anyone who claims it cannot be done because they tried themselves, they are doing it wrong.
Huh, but I said neither of that....
1. I never said sci ships cant have high damage, i said it matters little if it doesnt lead to a kill. Transphasic mine spam comes to mind.
2. Its not kill count, its amount of kills in which the ship participated.
3.I never said they aren't.
4. I also never said that, i said compared to others, they have lesser overall potential
The last line was unnecessary garbage not worth commenting.
I only said, the last known nebula layout/stats are TRIBBLE compared to other ships.
The excelsior ability is a non combat ability this is a combat ability. But a Universal Bo slot is nothing to sneeze at. Turn rate is turn rate. You act like you're getting nothing in return.
And what exactly did get the nebula in return for its galaxy like turn rate ? aka -3 ? I'm curious...And what exactly did Excelsior lost for its +1 turn rate ? I'm also curious about that....
Enlighten me, please.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you weren't the "best" in your team.
Uhm Universal bridge officer slot, a combat special ability, and a Ltc Engineering slot. I'd say those things are pretty good.
The universal slot already has its drawback with it, 1 less BO.
Special combat ability ? Pure pvp ability working only in KvF ?
Ltc engineering ? doesnt it loose ltc. science instead ? A fair tradeoff.
So it seems to be a fair deal to you ? Oh......fine then.
So you're saying that you've never seen a pve ship cloak? I can think of at least one STF encounter that this ability might come in handy in. Defiant class and Galaxy X also have cloaking devices. So it works in FvF as well.
So, it seems like your only real concern here is the turn rate? So all they have to do is give you the turn rate of a regular sci ship and you're on board? I mean as you've already pointed out here all the other changes are balanced.
Of course, that would be logical. The galaxy-like turn rate is unnecessary drawback with no justification but what pretty much defines the usage of the ship, its offensive and defensive capabilities.
I still don't like the universal lt. slot, or rather the lost 1 BO skill because of semi-universal slot. But the horrid turn rate (which prevents the universal usage of the ship, see tactical) is something which bothers me the most, the other stuff is more or less cosmetic to me.
But my point is. If its gonna be science vessel, don't make it a crappy one.
Fair enough. But I, and many others don't see this as a crappy one. Sure I would like faster turn rate, and like you I'd be willing to forgo the universal for a straight up lt sci abillity and an ensign sci. But I like a science ship with a lt.cmdr. eng slot.
No you get me wrong. I don't like the lt. universal slot because it in my oppinion doesn't justifies the loss of one BO skill. The BoP for example is fully universal and has also 1 BO station less. Doesn't feel right to me.
I would much rather see it with lt.cmd universal somehow implemented, so there is truly some kind of flexibility.
I dont think the idea of 2x Lt. tactical seems useful to anyone, especially on science ship. When for example APO starts at lt.cmd. Hence why i call it semi-universal. As majority will just pick sci or eng.
What makes you so sure that we will get exact the version CaptainGecko posted?
I will wait and see what's up on Tribble by Thursday
BTW ... dstahls cruiser variant also lacks one BO and has a universal BO slot. So in your opinion this is TRIBBLE too :rolleyes:?
MfG Michael
Well the cruiser variant is a bit better. Because its cruiser with 4/4 layout so the tactical abilities are more usable, while extra science abilities come handy on cruiser. Its not that focused on pure healing/support and has the engineering slots to help with the turn rate. So its actually much more universal.
Of course we have to wait, but what else one can do at work ? then to lurk on forums and discuss ?