test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Ship Masteries and T5-U
haeds
Member Posts: 7 Arc User
The Galor's T5-U changes and masteries have me baffled. Why does a cruiser who's emphasis on shield power and hitting power get +1 engineering console (as opposed to a +1 tactical console) and four masteries that have absolutely nothing to do with its shields or firepower, and instead are all about hull tanking?
I love the T5-U system and I love the mastery system. The starship mastery system is a good way to make playing the same ship for a while feel like it has progression and T5-U is a very nice thing that Cryptic could have easily left out.
But there are some oddball decisions for ships on both fronts, like with the Galor. Where a T5-U either has an odd console choice or a ship's masteries feel disconnected from the ship they're on or as if they don't really benefit the ship well enough. Another example would be the Tal Shiar battlecruiser, which I would say is also fairly shield focused as well, but it gets hull masteries.
Here's a google doc that has all of the ship masteries/T5-U console additions in it, as far as I know.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zftXJvd3jOWLOuP4NPRMFemqE9YcOr-8p8LCj3kCiV4/edit
I'd also like to apologize if this thread is in the wrong place. I couldn't find any 'generic spaceship talk' subforum.
I love the T5-U system and I love the mastery system. The starship mastery system is a good way to make playing the same ship for a while feel like it has progression and T5-U is a very nice thing that Cryptic could have easily left out.
But there are some oddball decisions for ships on both fronts, like with the Galor. Where a T5-U either has an odd console choice or a ship's masteries feel disconnected from the ship they're on or as if they don't really benefit the ship well enough. Another example would be the Tal Shiar battlecruiser, which I would say is also fairly shield focused as well, but it gets hull masteries.
Here's a google doc that has all of the ship masteries/T5-U console additions in it, as far as I know.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zftXJvd3jOWLOuP4NPRMFemqE9YcOr-8p8LCj3kCiV4/edit
I'd also like to apologize if this thread is in the wrong place. I couldn't find any 'generic spaceship talk' subforum.
Post edited by haeds on
0
Comments
I think the ship masteries were decided more out of classification/name than what the ship tends towards.
The engineering console is because the extra console was determined in part by highest bridge officer station.
The masteries are because they want ALL cruisers to get the same increased focus on survivability. Cruisers all got the same Mastery traits. Escorts got the same Mastery traits. Science vessels got the same mastery traits.
I think Destroyers and Dreadnoughts were treated the same as escorts.
I have argued before that the Galor should be classed as a Destroyer, not a Cruiser, and should get cannon capability (seen in TNG episodes at least once and referenced in the DS9 tech manual).
That would not influence the console layout, which is based on bridge officer stations. But it would influence the Mastery options and ability to equip cannons.
The Galor was called a Destroyer frequently. Though also called a "cruiser", any military ship in Star Trek seems to get called that periodically.
I also don't think it is determined by the highest BOFF seating considering the Jem'Hadar dreadnought carrier's highest BOFF seating is tactical, but it also gets another engineering console with T5-U.
Their first rule was to try to mirror highest BOff seating. Their second was to avoid giving ships 5 Tac consoles. Overall, they didn't want the upgrade to emphasize damage too much and are trying to push people towards more non-damage roles.
In the case of the bug, it probably has less to do with the vision of curbing the damage and more because they don't want its primary role to be damage but maneuverability. The 5 Eng consoles reinforce it as the most maneuverable ship in the game by keeping it the maximum potential turnrate ship.