test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Building the Jupiter

2456725

Comments

  • qjuniorqjunior Member Posts: 2,023 Arc User
    I guess Intel sells better than Command, because Command would make much more sense, especially when looking at the console....

    I do like the fact that there are finally frigate type pets for Feds, can those only be used on the Jupiter or on other ships like the Atrox as well ?

    I read the "few science ships for the Feds" part three times, because I thought I misread, but okay....

    While I like the general design and love carriers in general, the pet nerfs combined with the ever increasing A.I. stupidity on them makes me not want the ship. Half the time my pets are doing something elsewhere which makes my carriers gimped space whales with hangars.

    :'(
  • tancrediivtancrediiv Member Posts: 728 Arc User
    It's a carrier. In STO carriers have a 3/3 weapons layout. That's the way it is.

    Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER

    Expatriot Might Characters in EXILE
  • martakurillmartakurill Member Posts: 456 Arc User
    szim wrote: »
    I like it, especially the new class of hangar pets, the Callisto light escorts. One question remains though. Why would this craft have warp engines if they are supposed to be launched from a carrier? :D

    Here's more questions: Are these light escorts equippable on the Atrox? What about on the Command Cruisers? My guess would be yes to the first one and no to the second.
  • qjuniorqjunior Member Posts: 2,023 Arc User
    tancrediiv wrote: »
    It's a carrier. In STO carriers have a 3/3 weapons layout. That's the way it is.

    My Jem'hadar Dreadnought Carrier begs to differ, but you are mostly right. o:)
  • ddesjardinsddesjardins Member Posts: 3,056 Media Corps
    rahmkota19 wrote: »
    So, when can we expect the similar good development blog on the KDF and Romulan counterparts?

    Seeing as you mentioned the lack of science vessels on Federation side, surely you must have noticed the absolute count of zero T6 Romulan and KDF science vessels, and at T5 only 1 on KDF side and 0 on Romulan (not counting the Dyson Schizofrenic Destroyers, since you cannot call those proper science vessels). Yes, at least the KDF gets the Vo'Quv with some science options. I guess this is gonna be the T6 Carrier for KDF, with Romulans getting another design contest?

    (for the record, this post indeed contains so much sarcasm that if you were to place a golden bucket under it, you could have your own Gold-Pressed Sarcasm. This is because I am absolutely unimpressed by the incredible lack of KDF/Romulan T6 science ships, which forces my KDF main into the Sarr Theln. Which is a good ship, but not a Klingon one).

    If this promotion works well, we'll very likely see similar ones for the KDF and Romulans.
  • specter2222specter2222 Member Posts: 8 Arc User

    You know whats even more insulting than not making a KDF carrier to go with this? the following is from the blog ' Starfleet players have access to plenty of Escort and Cruiser options, but not very many Science ships and even fewer Carriers.'

    Starfleet players have limited science ships?, if what the feds have is considered not many Cryptic really dont have a clue, the Feds have many sci choices suitable to fit any role a sci player would want. They need to look at the KDF (and Roms), at last count neither faction had a single T6 sci ship ( or carrier, and the last new KDF carrier was the Karfi, and that was what? nearly 4 years ago now?)

    As i said in my previous post it just feels like annother case of SSDD over at Cryptic HQ.
  • blitzy4blitzy4 Member Posts: 839 Arc User
    szim wrote: »
    I like it, especially the new class of hangar pets, the Callisto light escorts. One question remains though. Why would this craft have warp engines if they are supposed to be launched from a carrier? :D

    Here's more questions: Are these light escorts equippable on the Atrox? What about on the Command Cruisers? My guess would be yes to the first one and no to the second.

    I really hope so, and I hope the stalkers can be used on this too.
    jKixCmJ.jpg
    "..and like children playing after sunset, we were surrounded by darkness." -Ruri Hoshino



  • qjuniorqjunior Member Posts: 2,023 Arc User
    rahmkota19 wrote: »
    So, when can we expect the similar good development blog on the KDF and Romulan counterparts?

    Seeing as you mentioned the lack of science vessels on Federation side, surely you must have noticed the absolute count of zero T6 Romulan and KDF science vessels, and at T5 only 1 on KDF side and 0 on Romulan (not counting the Dyson Schizofrenic Destroyers, since you cannot call those proper science vessels). Yes, at least the KDF gets the Vo'Quv with some science options. I guess this is gonna be the T6 Carrier for KDF, with Romulans getting another design contest?

    (for the record, this post indeed contains so much sarcasm that if you were to place a golden bucket under it, you could have your own Gold-Pressed Sarcasm. This is because I am absolutely unimpressed by the incredible lack of KDF/Romulan T6 science ships, which forces my KDF main into the Sarr Theln. Which is a good ship, but not a Klingon one).

    If this promotion works well, we'll very likely see similar ones for the KDF and Romulans.

    I don't think that makes much sense, people who want KDF/Romulan stuff aren't buying this ship for a chance at getting what they actually want.
  • verusisraelverusisrael Member Posts: 93 Arc User
    fool me once with the atrox, shame on me. fool me twice with this pos? sorry, I aint biting. I was SO excited to finally be able to upgrade my JHDC but no. there is literally NOTHING to make me want to switch ships. bad trait, bad console, bad console lay out, bad weapons layout, bad starship trait, bad pets....I mean there is literally nothing here that would make me want to change ships. It would have been nice to see trait that when you faw, or csv it makes your pets faw or csv instead of the current single target version, hell give me a trait that makes my pets fire hy or torp spread.....but transport torpedo? ugh gross. The pets dont even have a beam on them! how the hell am I supposed to make them BO when I BO? I cant. "oh but you can make them crf!" sure, if I want to use up one of the few precious tac slots this ship has with crf...and put cannons on the damn thing, then sure yeah I could do that....it would also suck balls as a ship, but that doesn't really seem to matter to cryptic.
  • sevenofnine13141sevenofnine13141 Member Posts: 4,274 Arc User
    szim wrote: »
    I like it, especially the new class of hangar pets, the Callisto light escorts. One question remains though. Why would this craft have warp engines if they are supposed to be launched from a carrier? :D

    Carrier-based fighters and escorts and sometimes Bombers launched from Carriers and often did long distance strikes during World War II, so it's reasonable for the Callisto to be equipped with Warp Engines for long range tactical strikes.
    6a68715ix1os.png
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    (...)As big if not bigger than an Odyssey and easily twice the mass. So why 3/3 why not finally give science characters that little bit of DPS they've been lacking for nearly 6 years and give them 4/3? (...)

    Just want to adress that: If you need weapons to add dps do your science build you're doing it wrong pig-2.gif besides, what would that one fore weapon give you? A sci ship needs as much sci consoles as possible to deal damage.
    If you play a Science ship and don't run full Aux, you're not running a Science ship.
    If you don't run full weapon power, you can't really utilize a lot of weapon slots.
    I agree however that 4 sci consoles and those stats are, from a science point of view, rather subpar compared to the Pathfinder/Intrepid and Nebula.​​
    I think only ships specialized for the Science, Escort or Cruiser role get the 5 full consoles in one professions. Raiders and Carriers need not apply.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • qjuniorqjunior Member Posts: 2,023 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    (...)As big if not bigger than an Odyssey and easily twice the mass. So why 3/3 why not finally give science characters that little bit of DPS they've been lacking for nearly 6 years and give them 4/3? (...)

    Just want to adress that: If you need weapons to add dps do your science build you're doing it wrong pig-2.gif besides, what would that one fore weapon give you? A sci ship needs as much sci consoles as possible to deal damage.
    If you play a Science ship and don't run full Aux, you're not running a Science ship.
    If you don't run full weapon power, you can't really utilize a lot of weapon slots.
    I agree however that 4 sci consoles and those stats are, from a science point of view, rather subpar compared to the Pathfinder/Intrepid and Nebula.​​
    I think only ships specialized for the Science, Escort or Cruiser role get the 5 full consoles in one professions. Raiders and Carriers need not apply.

    I wanted to add that usually science ships don't come with two hangars, comparing a full carrier to a science ship will never work well. :)
  • pwlaughingtrendypwlaughingtrendy Member Posts: 2,966 Arc User
    Yes. I get it. Romulan and KDF ships.

    I'm working on trying to make that a reality. You can stop posting about that.
  • sevenofnine13141sevenofnine13141 Member Posts: 4,274 Arc User
    Yes. I get it. Romulan and KDF ships.

    I'm working on trying to make that a reality. You can stop posting about that.

    The Great Trendy has spoken!!! Seriously though, thanks for the carrier!
    6a68715ix1os.png
  • This content has been removed.
  • alastorforthrighalastorforthrigh Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    captaind3 wrote: »
    As someone who served on a carrier truth be told, the strength and power of any ship called a carrier is in the wing, not the guns.
    This is true in real life yes, however in STO, actual carriers have been notorious, in my experience, for being woefully under powered due to pet AI. Activate a cannon ability, fly off in the other direction, refuse to dock when ordered to, refuse to attack when ordered to. Add in that this ship can't even actually produce a decent science build due to it's layout and it's neither a good carrier, a good cruiser, nor a good science ship. Short of fitting this thing with Swarmers or Scorpions, being the best pets (unless you like tractorbeams) due to their AP beam overloads and heavy Plasma torpedoes respectively, this ship lacks umph.
    2qTOAB3.gif
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    This one is tremendously pleased by the sciency-ness of this vessel.
    This one will change from his vesta into this.

    This one congratulates you on a job well done.



    Also: Best cheaply available pet ever?!

    Capable of BO due to CoAssaulT? Check. Capable of rapid fire through CoAssault? CHECK! Has scatter volley on its own? CHECK!!!!!


    consider me a buyer.


  • mayito2009mayito2009 Member Posts: 643 Arc User
    Nice design, cant wait to see it in action.
    Seek and ye shall find. Ask and ye shall receive. Rabboni
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" (Benjamin Franklin).

    Most unexpectedly, this turned into a flame-fest! Closed it goes!. /sigh What flamefestery is this? pwlaughingtrendy
  • verusisraelverusisrael Member Posts: 93 Arc User
    So cryptic, you gonna let me bind the four carrier commands to my tray? IIRC before I left when delta came out I could do that. now I have to manually click these super small icons on the hanger tray. Used to be that I could put those actually in my tray and click 1 or 2 to make them come out or go away. and if not....WHY NOT. oh yeah, are you finally gonna fix the pet ai? my pets are still dumb as rocks, they dont follow correctly, can't keep up and I have no way to bind them to "attack my target"

    This game started going down a dark path with hanger pets a long time ago and now its getting out of control. a freaking garumba has a hanger bay, but a d'deridex doesn't? the d'd has MASSIVE hanger bays (two of them actually) on its underside that you guys took the time to model, but does the t6 version get pets? no. but a freaking garumba does. why is this? wtf is your design strategy, because it isn't logic, or reason. fine, lets cut the TRIBBLE, its money. and with part gens and kemo being what they are and sci being able to bust out enormous damage, you figured you could make a c-store ship to rival but not beat the krenim time ship. well TRIBBLE you and your pathetic attempt to pander. you even let the community pick how it looks ffs. this is the worst kind of pandering...the kind that doesn't actually get anything done.
  • rahmkota19rahmkota19 Member Posts: 1,929 Arc User
    Yes. I get it. Romulan and KDF ships.

    I'm working on trying to make that a reality. You can stop posting about that.

    And that is all I wanted to hear. Like mentioned by @specter2222 that one specific line about ship variety in Fed side really raised a lot of fears about if any of these ships was even being considered. But considering Trendy is on the case, I can relax a bit again.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    szim wrote: »
    I like it, especially the new class of hangar pets, the Callisto light escorts. One question remains though. Why would this craft have warp engines if they are supposed to be launched from a carrier? :D

    Carrier-based fighters and escorts and sometimes Bombers launched from Carriers and often did long distance strikes during World War II, so it's reasonable for the Callisto to be equipped with Warp Engines for long range tactical strikes.

    There lies really the fundamental conundrum of Carriers in Star Trek.

    Aircraft Carriers can't go on land and move to an inland target. Planes and Carriers use different mediums for travel, and have different ranges and speed, and have different times they can "loiter" in a territory before they need to refuel and rearm.

    But Carriers in space? Carriers and their fighter craft are warp-capable. Ships can attack planetary targets just as well as fighter craft. Starships are most likely a lot faster than one of the ships they transport, they have a longer range, they can last longer in remote (and possibly hostile) territory, and they pack more firepower.

    Hence, Carriers don't make sense in Star Trek. Maybe not even in most Sci-Fi franchises that feature them.

    Fighters can make sense as a low-cost option to defend or patrol an area against lighter craft, basically creating a certain "barrier" for technological development and logistics of potential attackers.
    Shuttles make sense to transport people or materials to locations when the ship can't leave its current position, or is on a different course.


    But ... Who cares anymore? (I do?) THe only question for STO is whether they are fun to play. (Meh. But your mileage may vary.)
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • pwlaughingtrendypwlaughingtrendy Member Posts: 2,966 Arc User
    ...language....

    I get that you're unhappy; that's valid and you can be critical. But as soon as you start using vitriol and dropping the F-bomb, it's time for you to go on a vacation!
  • banatinebanatine Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    I'm loving the look of the Jupiter too. The one thing about it that seems a little 'off' is the lack of windows. For some reason, that make it feel a little blank on those big wide sides...

    But yes. It's a nice addition to Starfleet, and the fact that i can perfectly transplant my Vesta's current setup into it means i will definately give it a go :)

    Real Temporal Operative: Purchased the Special Temporal Agent pack before it was even officially announced!
  • captpatrick01captpatrick01 Member Posts: 27 Arc User
    I wonder how the Callisto compares against the Aquarius... And will this new Jupiter replace the old models in previous foundry instances?
  • sevenofnine13141sevenofnine13141 Member Posts: 4,274 Arc User
    As for the comments regarding weapon slots, Carriers in the Second World War and the Cold War and current conflicts have limited armament. Just anti-Submarine weapons and Anti-Aircraft weapons. Essentially, the Carrier was not designed for Ship to Ship combat, it was actually intended for long range and short range tactical strikes with fighters and escorts.
    6a68715ix1os.png
  • icegavelicegavel Member Posts: 991 Arc User
    ...language....

    I get that you're unhappy; that's valid and you can be critical. But as soon as you start using vitriol and dropping the F-bomb, it's time for you to go on a vacation!

    And the worst part, Trendy? The thing he asked about is still possible. I do it all the time. You have to drag and drop the powers from the weapons tray to the power tray.
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    captaind3 wrote: »
    As someone who served on a carrier truth be told, the strength and power of any ship called a carrier is in the wing, not the guns.
    This is true in real life yes, however in STO, actual carriers have been notorious, in my experience, for being woefully under powered due to pet AI. Activate a cannon ability, fly off in the other direction, refuse to dock when ordered to, refuse to attack when ordered to. Add in that this ship can't even actually produce a decent science build due to it's layout and it's neither a good carrier, a good cruiser, nor a good science ship. Short of fitting this thing with Swarmers or Scorpions, being the best pets (unless you like tractorbeams) due to their AP beam overloads and heavy Plasma torpedoes respectively, this ship lacks umph.

    Well, that's an issue of the implementation not the ship, though you're right.

    I'd like to see more variety in the pets themselves. Customized wings. Like give type 8 shuttles a TSS and have it cross heal other shuttles like the Hazari teams. Extend the Stalker's ability so that it can stealth the whole wing before attack. Things like that. Every hangar pet is designed to be used in a unit. Even ships with one bay launch three fighters at a time. Why aren't they structured to work as a unit?

    So if you could set up what ships launch, like I want my wing to be two healing Type 8s, two shield dropping peregrines, and two torpedo bomber Delta Flyers, that would be cool.
    So cryptic, you gonna let me bind the four carrier commands to my tray? IIRC before I left when delta came out I could do that. now I have to manually click these super small icons on the hanger tray. Used to be that I could put those actually in my tray and click 1 or 2 to make them come out or go away. and if not....WHY NOT. oh yeah, are you finally gonna fix the pet ai? my pets are still dumb as rocks, they dont follow correctly, can't keep up and I have no way to bind them to "attack my target"
    That can't be done?

    I know I have launch on my bar.
    This game started going down a dark path with hanger pets a long time ago and now its getting out of control. a freaking garumba has a hanger bay, but a d'deridex doesn't? the d'd has MASSIVE hanger bays (two of them actually) on its underside that you guys took the time to model, but does the t6 version get pets? no. but a freaking garumba does. why is this? wtf is your design strategy, because it isn't logic, or reason. fine, lets cut the TRIBBLE, its money. and with part gens and kemo being what they are and sci being able to bust out enormous damage, you figured you could make a c-store ship to rival but not beat the krenim time ship. well TRIBBLE you and your pathetic attempt to pander. you even let the community pick how it looks ffs. this is the worst kind of pandering...the kind that doesn't actually get anything done.

    Actually according to Probert those are for ground troops. The shuttle bays are up top ahead of the Impulse engines I believe.

    Not that they couldn't be repurposed.
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • mmps1mmps1 Member Posts: 381 Arc User
    After some discussion, we finally settled on making a Carrier. Starfleet players have access to plenty of Escort and Cruiser options, but not very many Science ships and even fewer Carriers. This gave us a perfect opportunity to fill that gap.

    Poor feds :'( they have so little choice in ships, unlike the roms or kdf. It's about time you redressed this imbalance, good on you!
    "Mr talks down to the peasants."
  • letsfadeawayletsfadeaway Member Posts: 110 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    Yes. I get it. Romulan and KDF ships.

    I'm working on trying to make that a reality. You can stop posting about that.

    Good, please keep on working on that and please tell whoever wrote this announcement for Mr. Zeleski that he/she is either ignorant or out of touch with the game. Stating boldly that there is no variety in science ships for FED players is really just adding "insult to injury".
    Or was that a planned and thinly veiled middle finger to all non-FEDs?
  • eighrichteeighrichte Member Posts: 338 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    But it's pretty clear that this is the design you guys (devs) were going for. Or would it be named Jupiter even if, say, Delta had won?

    I dearly hope Delta gets used for something. It could make for a huge deep space exploration vessel, kind of a 200-year ancestor of the Universe class.
    What would have been nice is if the Callisto light vessel would come as a small craft for people purchasing the Jupiter, like the D'Kyr bringing it's own small craft as well.​​

    The Callisto seems more like an updated Aquarius than a small craft. I was thinking it might be released as a separation pet for the updated Odyssey, and as a T6 update to the Aquarius (with costume option), but I don't really see how it could fold up to dock with the Odyssey.
Sign In or Register to comment.