test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Fleet Assault Cruiser - Stations Inconsistency
tilarta
Member Posts: 1,801 Arc User
I was examining the Fleet Assault Cruiser to see how easy it would be to migrate my Assault Cruiser spec when I am eventually able to purchase one.
I was a bit miffed to discover the stations were incompatible with my skill allocations:
Assault Cruiser_____Fleet Assault Cruiser
Lt Tactical___________LtComm Tactical
Ensign Tactical________Ensign Tactical
Comm Engineering_____Comm Engineering
LtComm Engineering___Lt Engineering
LtScience____________Lt Universal
According to this, migrating to Fleet Assault Cruiser will cost me one Engineering skill, the one currently allocated to the top level of LtComm Engineering.
For a baseline comparision, I analyzed the KDF Negh'var and the only difference is the Ensign Engineering becomes an Ensign Universal.
Is there a reason why the Fleet Assault Cruiser sacrifices an engineering ability when it's KDF counterpart does not?
This ship is now less appealing to me, because I don't really see the point of losing a Engineering skill.
And to forestall the inevitable argument, do not discuss how useful it is to get another tactical skill or the merits of beam overload.
None of these things interest me, so I won't respond to any feedback about those topics.
I was a bit miffed to discover the stations were incompatible with my skill allocations:
Assault Cruiser_____Fleet Assault Cruiser
Lt Tactical___________LtComm Tactical
Ensign Tactical________Ensign Tactical
Comm Engineering_____Comm Engineering
LtComm Engineering___Lt Engineering
LtScience____________Lt Universal
According to this, migrating to Fleet Assault Cruiser will cost me one Engineering skill, the one currently allocated to the top level of LtComm Engineering.
For a baseline comparision, I analyzed the KDF Negh'var and the only difference is the Ensign Engineering becomes an Ensign Universal.
Is there a reason why the Fleet Assault Cruiser sacrifices an engineering ability when it's KDF counterpart does not?
This ship is now less appealing to me, because I don't really see the point of losing a Engineering skill.
And to forestall the inevitable argument, do not discuss how useful it is to get another tactical skill or the merits of beam overload.
None of these things interest me, so I won't respond to any feedback about those topics.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Post edited by tilarta on
0
Comments
The Fleet Dreadnaught Cruiser has the same BOFF layout as the Standard AC if that's more appealing to you...
As for why, because they decided that the Assault Cruiser, which is more of a tactically focused cruiser than most, made more sense with a higher level tactical ability.
Of course, I'm also a tactical captain and can train FAW III for myself.
And as pointed out, if the Boff layout isn't to your liking, you can use the Fleet Dreadnaught since that should support your current layout fine.
Yes. This is essentially the end of a long drawn out "debate" players had with the developers over the layout of the Excelsior. Essentially the Assault Cruiser side of the debate felt that a ship called "assault" cruiser should have more tactical slant and felt like the Excelsior was a bit old and dated to be the heavy hitter of the cruiser class.
So this layout is the eventuality of that debate.
It's a better layout overall. If you want to maintain what you currently have, stay in your old ship.
A slow brick.
The reason I use the Assault cruiser is the rapid turning rate.
Since I broadside my targets as a consistent tactic, being able to turn fast is key to that strategy.
And I have no interest in RCS consoles, because the Engineering Console slots are already occupied.
I'm still skeptical as to the logic of the "it's got a tactical name, so it needs tactical focus" statement.
It's a Cruiser, which means Engineering should be it's focus.
If tactical stations was my interest, I'd be in an Escort.
But realistically, now that I've discovered this, it just lessened my motivation to keep working to reach T5 shipyard.
If there's no reward at the end of the rainbow, why bother running there? You'd slow down to a walking pace instead.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Of course I also like flying science ships as a tactical captain more than escorts as well.
I wouldn't really call 7 base turn "rapid". :P
That aside, it is a noticeable difference once you factor in skills and all the what nots.
I had the same debate with myself a long time ago and on one of my engineers, I actually went with the Fleet Heavy Cruiser. It has the same Boff layout that you want, from the Assault cruiser, but its got a base turn of 8, which again, is noticeable.
A bit less hull that a fleet cruiser should net you, but it might be something to look into for yourself.
Edit
You really should try to factor in at least ONE RCS/Fleet RCS console with some resist or something. I know you said all your slots were spoken for, but it really does make a world of difference, even broadsiding.
And broadsiding doesn't rely so much on turn rate, either.
The Fleet Assault Cruiser has the layout it does because it's the Fleet Assault Cruiser Refit, and so has the bridge layout of that Refit.
True, but that wasn't the point I was making.
7 isn't exactly a rapid turn rate.
However, I would still argue that turn is still somewhat important, even when broadsiding.
Edit
I have a feeling I might have taken your comment a bit out of context. I thought you were being hostile towards me the way I read it. Sorry mate.
Oddy has the same turn rate issues as the dreadnaught, which is something the OP pointed out he was not a fan of.
Just saying... If turn was your only obstacle...
Edit: Same with the Ody, or they are really close, not sure, but a separated Galaxy class is highly maneuverable.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Basically, I orbit the target enemy so they find it hard to concentrate fire on a specific shield facing.
I do this so that if a shield facing is about to fail, one of the fully charged shields can take damage for a while instead of the weakened one.
You can see why I need turn rate, if the ship is ascribing a tight circle of a distance of 5km around a central point.
I don't really believe in seperation principles, it's just a worthless gimmick.
Plus, I have a personal issue with the lack of customization of the weapons systems on seperated parts, which caused me to stop using it.
Case in point, the MVAM Prometheus.
I've set it up to use plasma dual cannons/turrets, but when it seperates, the AI controlled sections start using phaser beams and torpedos.
I haven't checked recently, but I also found it annoying that when the parts seperated, they reverted to default models and lost the shield graphical effect (Reman).
Also, I don't really go off ingame stats, I base my judgement on what I observe ingame.
The Sovereign class turns more neatly then any other Starfleet vessel of comparable mass (at least, the ones I've tried).
That's all I care about.
Another personal issue is that Sovereign class is my favorite ship model for cruiser class, I just don't find any other ship as visually appealling.
The Galaxy class model I think is a weird design, so I refuse to use it.
Simply, Sovereign=warship, Galaxy=oversized diplomatic cargo ship.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
It's not about logic. It was about a debate on the forums. Over hundreds of threads back when the Excelsior debuted. All of it is in the past, but probably still sunk deep within these forums as "archived post."
Does it have a commander Engineering BOFF seat? Yes? Then Engineering IS its focus.
Tactical is its secondary/tertiary/ancillary focus.
Let's take a trip back in time. Back before the Z-Store existed. Back before Free to Play. Back before Freatured Episodes. Back back back ... to when the game was just launched. The level cap was Reard Admiral, and there were no ships for sale on the Cryptic Store.
What happened when you levelled up from the Captain level band to the Rear Admiral was you were given TWO ships to choose from instead of just one. And each with three skins apiece, giving you all sorts of customization options. The way ship layout worked and what not, the level bump to RA came with another weapon slot in the rear for cruisers, giving them 8. As well as IIRC a fourth device slot.
Now here's the fun thing they did. Each ship classification had its PRIMARY focus. Cruisers were Engineering. Escorts were Tactical. And Science were Science (I'm just talking about the federation here, as the KDF was a tad different what with Birds of Prey being off the rails).
So what they did with the RA ships was they shunted each choice into a different secondary. So Cruisers got Commander Engi, and then had either a science slant (star cruiser) or a tactical slant (assault cruiser).
Escorts and Science ships did the same thing in their split.
So that's how that all started. Skip ahead to present day. The Assault Cruiser has gone through a refit and a fleet version of the refit. But it's still a tactical slanted ship. And because of the bias toward the excelsior it was the subject of heated and vitriolic debate for quite some time.
Ah, so this is good. For once I feel like we have a solution for you. The Retrofit Galaxy! This sucker has ALLLLLLLLLLL the Engineering Focus you need.
I highly recommend it if you want Engi focus. It's got oodles of Engineering focus. And it's Fleet ship becomes available at what, T2? T3? It's been forever since I looked.
The Romulan Scimitar has a similar BOFF station layout.
Basically, I'm restricted to using one Engineering Hull Heal instead of two.
I have to use Hazard Emitters in place of the 2nd Engineering Hull Heal.
It's harder to keep my Scimitar functional then it is a Sovereign or a Negh'var, which support the full engineering spec.
Which is why I'm not going to try this again.
And please stop discussing the Galaxy and it's associated variants, I've already said I'm not interested in that ship.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
You're not an easy customer :P.
You should rather stay in the RA Sovvy then...
Try the new Mirror Universe Cheyenne. And if you like that, get the fleet variant of that cruiser.
It's to balance out the fact it's gaining a Lt Cmdr tac station. This means the fleet assault cruiser can have have access to 6 tactical bridge office powers (4 if you use the universal Lt station for science or engineering).
Without aux2bat, that'll let you chain 2x tactical teams and 2x fire at will.
Daizen - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
Selia - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
Yeah the fleet Heavy Cruiser was my suggestion as well. Added bonus of it being T1, if that was a factor at all, I don't know.
Its got the layout you want,a heavy engineer focus, higher turn that what your currently using, and its not a galaxy dreadnaught. It also has no gimmicky consoles.
I ran with one for some time. I personally wasn't thrilled with how it looked (or its inertia for such a small cruiser), but there are some nice customization options on it to make it look.....less bad at least.
Actually, this "inconsistency" isn't an inconsistency at all, and it's explained by the very name of the ship.
The Fleet Assault Cruiser is not actually the Fleet version of the Assault Cruiser. It's the Fleet version of the Assault Cruiser REFIT, i.e. the Regent.
sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Assault_Cruiser_Refit
The Regent uses the very boff slots you find inconsistent, but this is because the Regent is a REFIT of the Sovereign/Noble/Majestic classes, and has different boff slots.
Thusly, you shouldn't be comparing the Fleet Assault Cruiser refit with the Assault Cruiser (which has no fleet version), but you should be comparing it to the standard Assault Cruiser Refit, in which case the only the tac consoles and shield/hull stats are different.
And yes, it sort of loses an engineer ability, but that's the price of having a more tactically focused layout
According to the data I just researched, there is no Fleet Assault Cruiser.
Why would you not supply a Fleet Version of a standard ship?
Is there something inherently bad about having two different versions of the same vessel in the Fleet store?
To me, it looks like they just decided you would only get only kind of Fleet Assault Cruiser and they chose the Refit for some reason.
I guess this topic is over now, as the ship I was seeking is not available in Fleet Version at all, there's nothing more to say.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Unless you are extremely stubborn about having an "Assault Cruiser", no substitutes accepted - that's VERY stubborn and I would go so far as to call it almost unreasonable - all versions of the Assault Cruiser Refit can use every single skin of the Assault Cruiser. This includes the Noble, Majestic, Sovereign, Regent, and the Fleet-version-exclusive Imperial. If you want your clone of the Enterprise-E, you can have it, no muss, no fuss. Most people flying a Regent use the sovereign skin anyway.
You are getting virtually everything the Assault Cruiser has in the Assault Cruiser Refit, with the added benefit of a Lt. Tactical slot becoming an LtC tac slot, and the Lt. Science Slot becoming universal, meaning you can be flexible. If you want to put science in that universal slot, go ahead and do it. I'd even recommend it since if you don't go with Science you end up squishier than you might want to be.
There is almost no way in which the standard freebie assault cruiser is superior to either version of the Assault Cruiser Refit. Well, except that the freebie assault cruiser is free, and the regent costs money, and you get one less LtC engineering ability, but that's really not much compared to the added damage potential of having access to an LtC tactical ability.
I would recommend you Just get an Odyssey and put two Dilithium mine Neutronium +turn consoles on it, at the highest mark level your fleet has. Setup like that it turns just like a Sovvie, though it has considerably more inertia. I actually learned to use the inertia to my advantage when dropping out of full impulse by cutting full impulse at 15-16 km out and skidding into weapon range with my broadside turned towards the enemies.
I use the same boff layout as my old assault cruiser. It's actually quite effective for elite STFs with DEM 1 and 2 on the LCDR boff.
This sort of thing was a product of an older era in STO, in which the devs would troll you by making sure your ship didn't have an actual direct Fleet upgrade. This practice is rampant in the older KDF Fleet Ship line: The Fleet version of the Vorcha, the Torkaht, is a vorcha in appearance only, as its layout has basically no similarity whatsoever. You are instead offered as a replacement either the Fleet K'Tinga or the Fleet Neghvar.
It also used to be that the Fleet version often gained a Uni, as seen in the Fleet Patrol Escort, the Fleet Neghvar, and as recently as the Fleet Amby.
Some of the more recent Fleet offerings, on the other hand, don't do this, as seen in the Fleet Karfi and Atrox, where the boff layout remains completely locked and retains all of the annoying defects of the original as a result.
Until fairly recently, there *WAS* no Fleet Assault Cruiser of ANY flavor. This is actually a relatively recent addition to the Fleet lineup, and if you wanted ANY kind of Fleet Assault Cruiser prior to that point, you were SOL. That niche was taken up by Fleet Heavy Cruiser and Odyssey instead.
I just bought the C-Store Assault Cruiser, and I can now tell you difinitivly. The Assault Cruiser is slower than both the Galaxy and the Odyssey, assuming you use 1 console slot for an RCS on the Sovie and 1 slot for the Separation console on the other ships. By a country mile. It's painful.
From all the crowing Sovie pilots do about how slow Ody's and Gal's are, I was expecting something more. Slowest Fed cruiser? The Sovereign!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Your engine power must royally suck then. 20+ turn can be achieved on an Imperial very easily, and that's all you need on a beamboat.
I obviously have the ability to set my engine power to any setting I want.
I didn't say it was unplayable, I said the other ships beat it in the maneuverability department, and all the bragging Sovie pilots do about their mobility is a downright falsehood.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
What is it you mean by slow? How fast it takes to get from point a to point b? Turn rate? Inertia?
I've flown a bunch of the cruisers and the Sovereign doesn't seem slow to me at all. It's not the quickest turning cruiser. It's actual speed in getting places really just depends on the engine equipped. So I'm kind of lost here in terms of what you mean by slow.