test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Vizier class any good ?

24

Comments

  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    The VIzier is a command spec ship. Which means it's spec is borderline useless. As others have said, the Archon is better since it has intel. I'm praying for a miracle worker version in the future. Also a galaxy class miracle worker ship.

    The only real reason to buy the Vizier is if for some reason you want the useless console set bonus or if you really really like the vizier skin.

    Command isn't useless. It's full of terrible powers with terrible cooldowns, but concentrate firepower is fantastic for torpedoes. Overwhelm emitters is definitely useful, suppression barrage has its uses as well. A case can also be made for Phalanx formation.

    Intel isn't that different, though. While surgical strikes has obvious value, for a beam ship it's arguable whether its worth it over the new BO, and highly debateable whether it is valuable on a cannon ship. Overload subsystem safeties is great, aside from needing to babysit it with an engineering team. Ionic turbulence would be nice if it didn't take forever to get to the target. Everything else is meh.
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,789 Arc User
    Surgical strikes is not a very good power. OSS is obviously good. Concentrate firepower would be good for a full torpedo boat but the Vizier wouldn't make a very good torpedo boat. Hence the borderline uselessness that I referred to. And phalanx formation? REALLY?
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,762 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    Surgical strikes is not a very good power. OSS is obviously good. Concentrate firepower would be good for a full torpedo boat but the Vizier wouldn't make a very good torpedo boat. Hence the borderline uselessness that I referred to. And phalanx formation? REALLY?
    Why doesn't it make a good torpedo boat? I found it fantastic as a torpedo boat along with a mine boat and even as an anomaly exotic boat. I can understand someone not liking the ship but I cannot understand someone calling it borderline useless.

    I ran so many variations of Vizier builds from full mine boat, full torpedo boat, full exotic and even for a long time I ran it as a hybrid of all 3 with torpedos/mines that also spammed a vast amount of exotic anomalies. So I really don't understand all this talk about its not a good ship.

    Command is not useless its amazing for exotic builds and mine layer builds along with the more common torpdeo use. It does depend on your build but I would take a Vizier over a Archon any day of the week.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Moderators, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 55,882 Community Moderator
    And nobody mentions Overwhelm Emitters...
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,789 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    Surgical strikes is not a very good power. OSS is obviously good. Concentrate firepower would be good for a full torpedo boat but the Vizier wouldn't make a very good torpedo boat. Hence the borderline uselessness that I referred to. And phalanx formation? REALLY?
    Why doesn't it make a good torpedo boat? I found it fantastic as a torpedo boat along with a mine boat and even as an anomaly exotic boat. I can understand someone not liking the ship but I cannot understand someone calling it borderline useless.

    I ran so many variations of Vizier builds from full mine boat, full torpedo boat, full exotic and even for a long time I ran it as a hybrid of all 3 with torpedos/mines that also spammed a vast amount of exotic anomalies. So I really don't understand all this talk about its not a good ship.

    Command is not useless its amazing for exotic builds and mine layer builds along with the more common torpdeo use. It does depend on your build but I would take a Vizier over a Archon any day of the week.
    I didn't say that the ship is borderline useless. I said command spec seating is borderline useless. Those are two completely different statements. Sci torp boats are far and away superior to whatever you could do with torps on the vizier. At the end of the day, the Vizier is just ANOTHER 4/4 weapons command ship. Completely unremarkable in any way. That's all people like me and @coldnapalm are saying.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,762 Arc User
    “I didn't say that the ship is borderline useless. I said command spec seating is borderline useless. Those are two completely different statements”
    Which I don’t agree with. While command has a lot of rubbish powers it is a long way from borderline useless. I find command is the strongest choice for mine layer builds and one of if not the best choices for exotic torpedo builds. As well as being a great choice for torpedoes boats.

    “Completely unremarkable in any way.”
    Which is wrong as I have some unique builds like the gas cloud exotic build on the Vizier that doesn’t really work as well on other ship that I can think off. Its not just another 4/4 Command ship. Its has a really nice Bridge officer layout and can be built around a gas theme unlike the other ships.

    “Sci torp boats are far and away superior to whatever you could do with torps on the vizier.”
    Unless they have command they won’t do anywhere near as well with exotic torpedoes as the Vizier can.
  • lasoniolasonio Member Posts: 451 Arc User
    Personally, I don't find the ship to be viable in this era if you are not resource flushed. Maybe when she was first introduced.... maybe...

    As I have said before and as many no doubt have posted its just not good from an X's and O's stand point. It's a little too niche and in what it it excels in; other ships can do better and faster.

    It can be nitpicked left and right for what it has and dos not have and in comparison to ABC but as I point to and continue to say, it's probably one of the most aesthetically appealing ships in the game. Without any coverings or additives from shields and such she is very attractive to the eyes. The color scheme is just really nice.

    Beyond that its middle to low end when it comes to a min max dps build so I personally will just skip over it if I were new to low end.

    Now as many people have pointed out; any and every ship can be made into paradigms of power. But that has to come with not only knowledge and skill but also resources and the ability to bring it together in one cohesive package. With the battle cloak and the right traits this ship could be a beast, just off the top of my head, stand Off, attack pattern delta prime, ceaseless momentum, concealed repairs, Exitus Acta Probat, Entwined weapon metrices, Super charged Weapons. Strike from the shadows, Vaulting Ambition.... just thinking about it makes me want to make a new build with it just to test it.... but that's beside the point.

    The average player will not be able to easily make this ship go. And most players that play this game are average and below. And I believe that's something that most players forget. They will put out builds that seem easy enough and make statements that are elementary, but thats only to other players in their field. Much in the way it is difficult to follow rocket scientist or medical doctors when they begin to use jargon and enjoy each others company. While the rest stopped paying attention the moment they used a moniker.

    There are plenty of times when experts fail to understand each others intentions so imagine how hard it is for a layman.

    Anyhow, i say that to say this. It is a ship that is most certainly not worth 3500 to everyone... doubt its worth that much to some. It has its place but it most certainly isn't a star in anyone's armada. But if it came down to looks, imho she is one of the few space queens that can turn heads. And I would get her for that alone, but that's just me.
    Even god rested. No work ethic.
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,351 Community Moderator
    Yea if u think that ship to be any good for tanking then big congratulations for the lucrative purchase to you. :)

    Unlike DMG dealing it is just too bad that tanking is an activity which is not required for any content we face or we would certainly have a larger player group pursuing it. This activity is sadly not even rewarding in any way.

    I already had the ship from the Wizkids promo so I had no need to buy it from the Mudd market.

    You know ultimately I hear this type of claim quite a bit, and while you may not mean it to come off this way, or maybe you do for all I know, it strikes me as the classic "DPS is everything. If you're not playing for pure numbers you're doing it wrong," type of mentality. I always laugh when I see that kind of attitude because it usually means those people can't see the rest of the game for their DPS charts being in the way. I also hear that tanking isn't a necessary thing for anything and perhaps to some extents that is true. However if there is no reward to tanking, answer this for me: Why has every single record setting DPS run as of late had some form of tank in the run, especially the 1m+ runs? No tanking isn't for everyone which is something I've learned over the 11 years in WoW and STO. However one only needs to look at the parses and what's on those super DPS ships to know they're befitting from that tank in the run and would get cut down like tissue paper without that tank there.
    Sadly this game has too many “just deal DMG well and heal yourself that way better that you otherwise would” elements available than to make survivability through direct gear (and boff powers) even worth considering:

    - DPRM (!)
    - AP Beta Doff
    - Nakuhl Doff
    - Protomatter Colony Tac consoles (!!)
    - more and more traits like the Energy Referequencer (!)

    For the way you play it may not be worth considering, but that's purely your particular brand and philosophy behind ship building. Personally I never leave home without at least one "oh s***" button. Call me old school in that I suppose. The powers you've named are valuable tools certainly, but honestly, how many of the average playerbase are going to have more than one or two of those powers? The average playerbase generally does not have the resource generation that you or I do in order to come by all of those powers on the same ship. Fewer still are in a place where they can sacrifice a locator or exploiter to pick up a protomatter console, and many fleets are just now getting to tier 5 colony. While you or I might be able to sink millions of EC and dilithium into a build we are the minority in that aspect. If you prefer to go towards the pure glass cannon side of the DPS/tank spectrum then by all means. I prefer however to be more towards the middle but leaning towards the tank side of things. Personally I despise the "DPS is everything" mentality as it takes away your ability to see the rest of the game for the charts in front of you. Not saying you specifically on that but simply making the point.
    I have been tanking passionately in PvE for over 3 years now with various digress of success. If you do so too you know that tanking does not mean turtle-ing. Survivability as a tank is something you even only take into consideration after you get your DMG output and aggro generation straight. Such stuff happens in a game full of broken stuff.

    I've been tanking in mmos for 11 years now, in WoW, SWTOR, and STO being my main ones. Pretty much to me if I can be a tank in a game that's my goal. I say that not to toot my own horn but simply to give some of my experience. I've seen alot of tank builds and theories both good and bad in that time. I'm sure you've seen a fair number as well. The big gripe I have with the version you've put out here is that it puts too much emphasis on DPS. Assuming your typical MMO a tank has 2 jobs. First, draw threat and make sure foes are attacking you and not the group. Second, survive the damage. It's much easier for the healer(s) to keep one person healed up vs constantly having to heal all 5 members of the group. A tank does this by making sure they are generating enough threat to keep the foe's attention, while also using various damage reducing and healing abilities they may have at their disposal to stay alive. Increasing damage output is an easy way for a tank to generate more threat, but there are other sources a tank can draw on to increase their threat generation. In traditional MMOs, if the tank's damage is the difference between passing a fight or failing, then you're doing it wrong to be blunt. Once a tank has threat and is surviving, their job is done. From there it falls to the damage dealers and the healers.

    In STO we have a unique situation where the normal "holy trinity" is not present. If STO were to have defined roles then with what we have no STO could be split into DPS and Tanks being the majority, with dedicated healers being a rarity. In STO there's plenty of ways to generate threat and items that help with it. Assuming the goal is to avoid using dedicated pieces of equipment, then there's a few things that can be used. Threatening Stance with the skill tree modifier is 300% threat, cruiser commands 100%, History Will Remember 300%, 3 copies of Adak'ukan for your AP Delta being 300%, and then an on demand 50% additional threat for 10 seconds from Diversionary Tactics as well as AoE taunt. In total you're looking at minimum of 700% threat just between cruiser commands, Threatening Stance, and History Will Remember. Since AP Delta will be up regularly that's another 300% threat from the 3 Adak'ukan, bringing our total to 1000% threat generation. That's just with things that can be maintained easily before we ever get to gear. If we assume a ship running just 2 sci consoles from the embassy that's an additional 300% threat bringing our total to 1300% threat, or 1750% threat assuming 5 sci consoles and a goal of pure threat generation. To put that into perspective if we assume 1 point of damage is equal to 1 point of threat generation, then someone who is doing 100k DPS would be doing 100k points of threat. If you have a tank pulling 100k that's got just the basic 1000% boost, then that tank is putting out 100k DPS, but 1m points of threat. Assuming maximum boost, 1.75m points of threat at the 1750% boost. Even if our hypothetical tank is using a budget build doing only 20k, with the 1000% boost that would mean someone would have to bust over 200k DPS to out threat them. This also doesn't take into account other factors such as zero distance powers and the like. Those numbers will also increase as the damage of the tank improves, which will happen naturally as gear is upgraded and piloting improves. So unless someone is fresh out the academy new, then they shouldn't be having any issues generating threat as far as on paper goes.

    From there it really is all about staying alive. Ideally a tank wants to have a balance of both types of powers, threat gen, and survival type. If a tank is lacking in either area they're going to have a bad day. The turtle scenario you've described is what happens when someone shifts too far to the survival side of the tanking spectrum and is not a reflection on tanking overall.
    Even as a tank that version of the assault cruiser does not break any ground. Anybody who checks his resources in consideration of getting this cruiser to play as “tank” should be close to Discoprise-level resources. That ship on the other hand happens to be a state of the bad-TRIBBLE-art PvE tank (full MW ship, 2 hangers).

    Look, I do not want to discourage anybody who fell in love with this ship from getting it but claiming the command seat version of that ship to be a potent tank is as misleading as claiming the intel version to be a DPS machine.

    I won’t certainly have all out of the box builds ideas players like Pottsey are good at in mind but for mainstream stuff, let it be DPSing or TANKing , this ship is not anything special and making anybody think it is is wrong.

    Considering its price that ship is an impertinence and TERIBAD in STO! ;)

    Going to address these last bits at once. I will agree with you the price is too much far as the full price goes. I will also agree with you on the fact the ship is not the second coming of the Juggernaut or the Scimitars from back in the t5 era. However simply because it's not your ideal setup does not make it a bad ship or mean it can't be made into a great tank. Simply put when it comes to tanking, there is no bad ship, there are simply those that have an easier time than others. Again there is more to tanking than simply damage output.

    On these notes, I made a tank out of a t5u Aquarius that rarely ever dies and has the lowest base hull of any ship in game. I also have multiple videos out there to demonstrate this and would be happy to make another one using more modern equipment than my earlier video to prove this point further. No one is claiming the Vizier to be the "best" tank ship, as no such thing exists anymore than there is a "best" DPS ship in game. There are simply ships that lend more advantages to certain types of builds than others. If the Aquarius can be made into a tank there is no argument you can give me to prove the Vizier can't tank either. Simply because you think it can't be done does not make it so. I will not presume to speak for others on this point, but I have never said it's the "best" tank ship. What I have said is that if someone is considering buying the ship and wants to know some of it's possible uses, tanking is one that ranks high on the list. While they certainly help, you don't need specialist abilities to do great damage or tank in today's game.

    If someone likes tanking and they like Sovereigns, the Vizier is a great choice. It may not be my first go-to choice for being a tank, but it's still a viable choice. Simply because you don't like a particular ship or its setup does not make it a bad ship, that it can't be used effectively, or that someone else can't use it better than you. This ultimately strikes me as another case of folks not being able to see the game for the DPS charts in front of them.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,762 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    “You know ultimately I hear this type of claim quite a bit, and while you may not mean it to come off this way, or maybe you do for all I know, it strikes me as the classic "DPS is everything……
    What peterconnorfirst means I believe are two things. The first is when talking about group work the mechanics of the game are setup that you have to do DPS to tank. A tank without DPS cannot tank in groups. That’s just a fact of how the game mechanics work. Tanking involves doing high DPS.

    The other is that full tanks have not been useful or needed in years. Those tank ships you are talking about in those DPS runs are not real tank ships for the most part. Those DPS ships wouldn’t get cut down to tissue paper without the tank player there as those DPS ships are the tank. They are tanking via the bare minimum of every day tanking gear combined with healing via DPS.


    “If you prefer to go towards the pure glass cannon side of the DPS/tank spectrum then by all means. I prefer however to be more towards the middle but leaning towards the tank side of things. Personally I despise the "DPS is everything" mentality as it takes away your ability to see the rest of the game for the charts in front of you. Not saying you specifically on that but simply making the point.”
    I think you might be misunderstanding what is being said. Those pure DPS class cannons ships are not class cannons anymore. They are very strong tanks with the bare minimum of tanking equipment and easy to get equipment at that. Due to that, real tanks in the group are normally not useful or really needed. I cannot think of any area of the game left that requires or benefits from a real full tank ship. The thing is you don’t need to go middle of the road anymore. You can stay right up there in near max DPS builds and still have enough tank for pretty much everything.

    When just about anyone can fly around with enough tank for everything even Elite with as little as 1 doff and 2 prices of equipment what use is a tank player?

    In a lot of Elite TFO’s I run, a tank near me is going to do nothing. To give an example in HSE even with 1.75m points of threat at that 1750% boost you mention you are not going to as a tank pull the threat away from me at the start of Hive Elite. Not only are you not going to pull the threat away from me but I don’t need you to as I can tank absolutely fine with zero tanking consoles. The same goes for a large amount of TFO's being a tank near me isn't doing anything useful :(

    Don’t get me wrong I like the idea of Tanks and support builds but the devs all but killed off the need for them in recent years. I don’t even use my support build anymore as it just means I will get hit by the AFK penalty even if I massively boost the damage of the group.

    Back when tanking mattered before the devs killed it off I did have a lot of fun tanking with the Vizier and some of the command powers like Rally Point Marker and to a less extent Subspace Interception where really good. But as the game has evolved in recent years I found other peoples tanks are just not useful and neither is my own tanking gear :(

  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    STO doesn't have a "holy trinity," because nothing in the game is hard enough to need it. Tanking or any other kind of support is simply not needed. This is a fact, nothing to do with "DPS charts." Death comes rarely and when it does, it means nothing. Missions are impossible to lose. All you actually need to do is kill the rubber ducks and/or press 'F' at something, and even that only if the mission isn't timed to auto-win itself regardless of player action. So even trying to avoid death comes down to personal preference. I myself am perfectly content to just respawn if I happen to die.

    For that matter, DPS is only needed like half the time, and then not very much of it either. Simply put, STO just plain doesn't require much.

    So while I have no idea if it's a good ship or not (didn't buy it, since they refused to sell it to romulans), I do know to a 100% certainty it will be more than adequate for all content your average player cares to play and can be made hilariously overpowered by a player who knows what they're doing. All endgame-tier ships can.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 4,410 Arc User
    Sometimes you do need tankier ships for builds that tend to annoy a lot of enemy units at once. For instance I have a Nukara tetryon FAW build that grabs a lot of attention no matter how much DPS others are putting out since it directly touches so many enemy units in a short span of time, so it needs to be able to take the inevitable return fire even if it does not keep their attention for long.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,960 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    STO doesn't have a "holy trinity," because nothing in the game is hard enough to need it. Tanking or any other kind of support is simply not needed. This is a fact, nothing to do with "DPS charts." Death comes rarely and when it does, it means nothing. Missions are impossible to lose. All you actually need to do is kill the rubber ducks and/or press 'F' at something, and even that only if the mission isn't timed to auto-win itself regardless of player action. So even trying to avoid death comes down to personal preference. I myself am perfectly content to just respawn if I happen to die.

    For that matter, DPS is only needed like half the time, and then not very much of it either. Simply put, STO just plain doesn't require much.

    So while I have no idea if it's a good ship or not (didn't buy it, since they refused to sell it to romulans), I do know to a 100% certainty it will be more than adequate for all content your average player cares to play and can be made hilariously overpowered by a player who knows what they're doing. All endgame-tier ships can.

    The difficulty is not as important as you think. Even back in the ancient days of the game, before all the power creep, where you could struggle fighting one of those Widrab Cruisers in an Exploration Cluser mission that annoyingly got an invulnerability effect just as you thought you might beat him, it simply didn't have that trinity. It was just not designed with that in mind.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,351 Community Moderator
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    I will say this again...literally ANYTHING is a viable choice. My friend's 12 year old kid can do normal content in a SHUTTLE with my help in building it. T1 elite maps is a thing. So saying that the advice from mechanics monkies of X is good or bad is not valid because ANYTHING can be made viable isn't being genuine. We KNOW THAT ALREADY. Our advice is for people who don't know all the ins and out of the game to get a general idea of what is better mechanically or not. You like the sovvy and want to do something with it? Great we can help you with that too. But we aren't gonna gaslight you into thinking it's a good ship choice if there isn't something there that is tickling your fancy to begin with. It is in general NOT A GOOD SHIP. If you like it for some reason however, it is a GOOD SHIP FOR YOU because anything is viable.

    Saying "it is in general not a good ship" is purely your own opinion despite what you want to believe, nothing more, nothing less. If someone doesn't like it, then that's on them, as it is with folks who do like it. However I cannot stand this stigma that people have today that if a ship isn't the second coming of the Juggernaut or the Scimitars from way back, that a ship is somehow poo. I seriously despise that kind of elitist thinking in every form it takes. A ship does not have to top the DPS charts to make it a good ship or a good choice. I just really wish this stigma would die and burn in the fires of Gre'thor already. Saying a ship is not a good choice simply because it's not a chart topper is no better than the gaslighting you accuse me of.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    What peterconnorfirst means I believe are two things. The first is when talking about group work the mechanics of the game are setup that you have to do DPS to tank. A tank without DPS cannot tank in groups. That’s just a fact of how the game mechanics work. Tanking involves doing high DPS.

    Once again this just reinforces my point, some folks can't see the rest of the game for their DPS charts. If someone prefers to do high numbers more power to them. Being a tank is far more than just DPS. Increasing damage is an easy way to increase threat most certainly, that has never been in debate. What is in debate is how important it is. You do not need to do 50 zillion DPS as a tank, nor is stupid high DPS required to tank. That is 100% a myth. Again DPS is not everything and there is a whole game out there if folks would bother to look up from their charts once in awhile. Far as I'm concerned the "DPS is everything" attitude is everything that's wrong with this game today.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    The other is that full tanks have not been useful or needed in years. Those tank ships you are talking about in those DPS runs are not real tank ships for the most part. Those DPS ships wouldn’t get cut down to tissue paper without the tank player there as those DPS ships are the tank. They are tanking via the bare minimum of every day tanking gear combined with healing via DPS.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    I think you might be misunderstanding what is being said. Those pure DPS class cannons ships are not class cannons anymore. They are very strong tanks with the bare minimum of tanking equipment and easy to get equipment at that. Due to that, real tanks in the group are normally not useful or really needed. I cannot think of any area of the game left that requires or benefits from a real full tank ship. The thing is you don’t need to go middle of the road anymore. You can stay right up there in near max DPS builds and still have enough tank for pretty much everything.

    In the first bit above you state they're not real tank ships, then go on in the next bit to say they are. Which is it? Are they real tanks or not? You don't get to have it both ways. Again you and I have access to the same parse data and I still stand by my statement that those record runs would be impossible without a tank in there.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    When just about anyone can fly around with enough tank for everything even Elite with as little as 1 doff and 2 prices of equipment what use is a tank player?

    THIS right here is exactly the type of attitude I'm talking about. "DPS is everything so what use is anything else" type of mentality. Simply because you can't see a use for a tank does not make the playstyle useless. You may prefer to run without a tank which is on you guys. Your statement is no different than if I were to say science control builds are useless.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    In a lot of Elite TFO’s I run, a tank near me is going to do nothing. To give an example in HSE even with 1.75m points of threat at that 1750% boost you mention you are not going to as a tank pull the threat away from me at the start of Hive Elite. Not only are you not going to pull the threat away from me but I don’t need you to as I can tank absolutely fine with zero tanking consoles. The same goes for a large amount of TFO's being a tank near me isn't doing anything useful :(

    I'm sorry but this actually made me laugh out loud at my keyboard for real. There is a key point you're missing in the calculations above, that number is sustained threat output. Assuming a 1/1 ration of damage to threat, a tank can get up to 1000% threat before touching any kind of equipment, that 1750% assumes 5 threat boosters from the embassy. So assuming the tank is pulling 100k, which is very much possible, you would need to pull and sustain between 1m-1.75m dps in a run. So unless you're telling me you can pull and sustain 1.75m DPS, then the only way you're pulling off of a tank cranking that amount of threat is by directly taunting. And if you are telling me you can pull and sustain 1.75m DPS then I want to see the logs of that because I'm calling shenanigans.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    Don’t get me wrong I like the idea of Tanks and support builds but the devs all but killed off the need for them in recent years. I don’t even use my support build anymore as it just means I will get hit by the AFK penalty even if I massively boost the damage of the group.

    Back when tanking mattered before the devs killed it off I did have a lot of fun tanking with the Vizier and some of the command powers like Rally Point Marker and to a less extent Subspace Interception where really good. But as the game has evolved in recent years I found other peoples tanks are just not useful and neither is my own tanking gear :(

    Killed off? That's news to me and every other dedicated tank in game. Again simply because you can't see a use for a tank does not make the art of tanking and tank builds useless.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • foxman00foxman00 Member Posts: 1,334 Arc User
    "Gets popcorn"
    kXx65VK.jpg
  • echattyechatty Member Posts: 5,725 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    I gotta go with DBJK here. Just because some people don't see a need for a tank does not mean they've been 'killed off'.

    I too, severely dislike the "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" mentality I see here and ingame.

    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.
    Now a LTS and loving it.

    Just because you spend money on this game, it does not entitle you to be a jerk if things don't go your way.

    xp8s7wd.jpg
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,485 Arc User
    I put that Threat Clicky on Row 5 of my Tray, never to be seen or used. If I buy Embassy Consoles they are always minus Threat. I don't want or need to encourage anyone to shoot at me. :)
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    l don't know.
    l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
    That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • gaevsmangaevsman Member Posts: 3,183 Arc User
    I have a Soujourney that is a tank, with, get this... protonic polaron build, at level XV, with the entire Dyson Rep set, i melt my enemies, and i have a ton of tank consoles, and spire consoles, and even the chevron separtion and the aquarius console, thou i dont play elite, in all queues in advanced have must blown up twice this year?, and mostly my fault, as not been fast enough to trigger the heals... tanks are fun, i'm not a dps king, but make my kills in no time
    The forces of darkness are upon us!
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 7,816 Community Moderator
    echatty wrote: »
    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.

    :lol:
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
    ----> Contact Customer Support <----
    Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
    Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
    Want the latest information on Star Trek Online? Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,468 Arc User
    echatty wrote: »
    I gotta go with DBJK here. Just because some people don't see a need for a tank does not mean they've been 'killed off'.

    I too, severely dislike the "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" mentality I see here and ingame.

    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.

    d1Bhlgl.jpg
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,913 Arc User
    edited November 2019

    Saying "it is in general not a good ship" is purely your own opinion despite what you want to believe, nothing more, nothing less. If someone doesn't like it, then that's on them, as it is with folks who do like it. However I cannot stand this stigma that people have today that if a ship isn't the second coming of the Juggernaut or the Scimitars from way back, that a ship is somehow poo. I seriously despise that kind of elitist thinking in every form it takes. A ship does not have to top the DPS charts to make it a good ship or a good choice. I just really wish this stigma would die and burn in the fires of Gre'thor already. Saying a ship is not a good choice simply because it's not a chart topper is no better than the gaslighting you accuse me of.

    Man, your agenda is so transparent it's really just sick.

    This is just about you reading a post from a 'DPS'er,' totally misunderstanding it.. and then posting 12 pages of argument against something that no one ever said.

    I'll try this again, but I know it will be a waste of time...

    Most people in this game do energy weapon builds.. not everyone, but most people. We have already conceded that any T5U or T6 ship is viable and perfectly capable of handling any game content. This point was never disputed, so stop arguing it.. you're arguing something we already agree on and enough is enough. No one said it's a bad ship because it doesn't do top end DPS, this is an argument you're fabricating out of your own bias just so you can rally against it. Stop it.

    The argument is comparing the ship and the features it offers at it's price point.. against other ships at the same or lesser price point. The fact that this ship is 3500 Zen on Sale and a staggering 14,000 Zen ($140 USD) not on sale has to be considered.

    It's a Sovereign Class.. that gives it natural appeal. The problem is, there is another Sovereign already that is better for standard energy weapon builds, gives the same awesome cannon look.. and is 500 Zen cheaper at full price. Right now, during the current sale it's what? 2200 Zen? You look at the ship and it's features for it's price against other options out there.. that is what we're doing.. we're not just saying 'oh, it's not the best DPS ship, it's garbage,' that is just what you're choosing to hear.

    Now, as far as alternate builds like a Kinetic Build.. @pottsey5g says it's a good ship for that. Well, I have flown with him many times, I have seen what he can do with Kinetic Builds.. if he says it's good for that.. it's good. So yes, in a specialized build.. the Vizier is better then the Archon.

    Now, right now, other T6 ships are on sale for 2200 Zen.. so the question is, is it the best ship for this type of build? You have to remember, it's still 3500 Zen compared to 2200 for everything else, so unless it's head and shoulders the best for Kinetic Builds.. it's still not a great buy. Lets remember, the OP is asking for advice on a good ship to buy, we're considering ALL factors in our decision. Price, looks, performance.. all of it. I'll let pottsey answer this question because frankly.. he's the man with this stuff, but I would suspect that there are better ships in the C-Store that all cost less. The one area this ship excels is if you want a Kinetic Boat and you have to have the Sovereign look. Then yes.. this is your ship. That's a very small niche.

    The last point is going to be about 'tanking.' It's been explained before, but I'll say it again.. rather you like it or not, 'tanking' in STO requires high DPS. A ship that cannot deal damage is not a good tank. Period..

    It's not my opinion, it's not my bias.. it's simple game mechanics. Due to the way threat mechanics currently work in this game if you're not angering the baddies, they ignore you.. period. You can put on threatening stance, you can attract fire.. if you hit like a wet paper towel, the enemies will ignore you. If you're building a ship that's just nothing but heals and calling yourself 'a tank,' congratulations.. you're a paper weight and you're killing your team. The argument against 'tanking' in this ship is that it has a hard time generating the damage necessary to take advantage of it's tanking ability. Can it be done? Of course it can.. is the best ship for that role? No.. it's just the most expensive.

    Some of you need to get out of your 'anti DPS' agenda and start reading what people are actually saying. When you consider the price of this ship with the features it offers.. for the general player, the Vizier is not a good buy. It's specialty is a very small nice market, but it does have a place. The original post was inquiring about the value of the ship when being considered for a purchase. No one said the ship isn't viable, no one said the ship won't work or can't be good.. it's a T6 ship.. of course it's good!

    The problem is, they're all good.. and all the other C-Store ships offer more for less. Push your agenda aside, look at the problem objectively and understand that we're making a legitimate effort to help the OP select a proper ship for their style. If the OP wants a Kinetic build and loves the Sovereign look.. then heck yes.. this is your ship, otherwise your money is better spent elsewhere.

    echatty wrote: »
    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.

    This was disappointing to read from you. Especially since it was in response to people that are just offering opinions and trying to help.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited November 2019

    Saying "it is in general not a good ship" is purely your own opinion despite what you want to believe, nothing more, nothing less. If someone doesn't like it, then that's on them, as it is with folks who do like it. However I cannot stand this stigma that people have today that if a ship isn't the second coming of the Juggernaut or the Scimitars from way back, that a ship is somehow poo. I seriously despise that kind of elitist thinking in every form it takes. A ship does not have to top the DPS charts to make it a good ship or a good choice. I just really wish this stigma would die and burn in the fires of Gre'thor already. Saying a ship is not a good choice simply because it's not a chart topper is no better than the gaslighting you accuse me of.

    Man, your agenda is so transparent it's really just sick.

    This is just about you reading a post from a 'DPS'er,' totally misunderstanding it.. and then posting 12 pages of argument against something that no one ever said.

    I'll try this again, but I know it will be a waste of time...

    Most people in this game do energy weapon builds.. not everyone, but most people. We have already conceded that any T5U or T6 ship is viable and perfectly capable of handling any game content. This point was never disputed, so stop arguing it.. you're arguing something we already agree on and enough is enough. No one said it's a bad ship because it doesn't do top end DPS, this is an argument you're fabricating out of your own bias just so you can rally against it. Stop it.

    The argument is comparing the ship and the features it offers at it's price point.. against other ships at the same or lesser price point. The fact that this ship is 3500 Zen on Sale and a staggering 14,000 Zen ($140 USD) not on sale has to be considered.

    It's a Sovereign Class.. that gives it natural appeal. The problem is, there is another Sovereign already that is better for standard energy weapon builds, gives the same awesome cannon look.. and is 500 Zen cheaper at full price. Right now, during the current sale it's what? 2200 Zen? You look at the ship and it's features for it's price against other options out there.. that is what we're doing.. we're not just saying 'oh, it's not the best DPS ship, it's garbage,' that is just what you're choosing to hear.

    Now, as far as alternate builds like a Kinetic Build.. @pottsey5g says it's a good ship for that. Well, I have flown with him many times, I have seen what he can do with Kinetic Builds.. if he says it's good for that.. it's good. So yes, in a specialized build.. the Vizier is better then the Archon.

    Now, right now, other T6 ships are on sale for 2200 Zen.. so the question is, is it the best ship for this type of build? You have to remember, it's still 3500 Zen compared to 2200 for everything else, so unless it's head and shoulders the best for Kinetic Builds.. it's still not a great buy. Lets remember, the OP is asking for advice on a good ship to buy, we're considering ALL factors in our decision. Price, looks, performance.. all of it. I'll let pottsey answer this question because frankly.. he's the man with this stuff, but I would suspect that there are better ships in the C-Store that all cost less. The one area this ship excels is if you want a Kinetic Boat and you have to have the Sovereign look. Then yes.. this is your ship. That's a very small niche.

    The last point is going to be about 'tanking.' It's been explained before, but I'll say it again.. rather you like it or not, 'tanking' in STO requires high DPS. A ship that cannot deal damage is not a good tank. Period..

    It's not my opinion, it's not my bias.. it's simple game mechanics. Due to the way threat mechanics currently work in this game if you're not angering the baddies, they ignore you.. period. You can put on threatening stance, you can attract fire.. if you hit like a wet paper towel, the enemies will ignore you. If you're building a ship that's just nothing but heals and calling yourself 'a tank,' congratulations.. you're a paper weight and you're killing your team. The argument against 'tanking' in this ship is that it has a hard time generating the damage necessary to take advantage of it's tanking ability. Can it be done? Of course it can.. is the best ship for that role? No.. it's just the most expensive.

    Some of you need to get out of your 'anti DPS' agenda and start reading what people are actually saying. When you consider the price of this ship with the features it offers.. for the general player, the Vizier is not a good buy. It's specialty is a very small nice market, but it does have a place. The original post was inquiring about the value of the ship when being considered for a purchase. No one said the ship isn't viable, no one said the ship won't work or can't be good.. it's a T6 ship.. of course it's good!

    The problem is, they're all good.. and all the other C-Store ships offer more for less. Push your agenda aside, look at the problem objectively and understand that we're making a legitimate effort to help the OP select a proper ship for their style. If the OP wants a Kinetic build and loves the Sovereign look.. then heck yes.. this is your ship, otherwise your money is better spent elsewhere.

    echatty wrote: »
    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.

    This was disappointing to read from you. Especially since it was in response to people that are just offering opinions and trying to help.

    It’s fascinating hu?

    The moment one puts the banner on the moment one has the crosshair of prejudice towards DPSer or performance minded players on the forehead.

    It’s really hard to keep on being nice, to ignore, to try to stay productive. It’s so hard not to give up though it would make things easier towards others who will pull the “elitist” joker anyway in the end when they run out of arguments. When it comes to discussing you are doing an outstanding job Sea and I have met few in STO with such character strength you have.

    Lucky me is that I played it all you know. After almost 8 years I tried all kinds of builds, pushed them to the limit and see what can be done. I’m not the best PvE player in game but I know there are only very few better than me left around. That’s why it always gets so funny when peeps start an approach with “not everything is about DPS or there are other things to consider too”. When it comes to PvE in STO I know all those things, excelled at all those things and can put them into perspective towards performance/DPS just fine. You can do that too Sea! Don’t let anybody fool you. Lol, yea… the command seat is nice or good for kinetic builds but that’s as far as it gets. My verdict here was more a “diplomatic” expression towards Pottsey whom I respect a lot in mind. To be frank there are countless ships good for kinetic builds around and no reason why this one is particularly special. The way I see it, it does not even come close to the best ships around we have for kinetic builds but that’s just me. ;)
    Post edited by peterconnorfirst on
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    echatty wrote: »
    I gotta go with DBJK here. Just because some people don't see a need for a tank does not mean they've been 'killed off'.

    I too, severely dislike the "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" mentality I see here and ingame.

    Some people really do need to get their heads out of their parsers and see the game.

    Some people buy cars for the looks, other for performance. There is no right or wrong here just bright, non-prejudice people understanding that and respecting other's opinion.

    The vizier may be a truly beautiful, hero and canon ship. It will surely get you competently to Walmart to get your shopping done but for anything extreme… any performance you like to excel on, no matter what it is (DPS, tanking, healing, Kinetics) the ship is average at best and in light of the price they are asking it is the very definition of BAD as far as performance is concerned.

    I never ever told you how to play this game, what to do. I always respected you for what you wrote here alone but must tell you that the post of yours I’m quoting now is not exactly you at your best. :/
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,351 Community Moderator
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Umm...yeah no. Mechanically...there is good and bad. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of efficiency in getting the challenge of the game done. Does that mean you need the best...or can't make do with the worst? No. That is why fly what you like is the number one advice that I, Sea and Peter give. Than we will give you what is the most efficient way to go about building said ship. You wanna do something different from that? Great, we can worth with you on that too. I make tact/sci or sci/tact hybrids all the time. If you think I am chasing DPS with that concept...yeah news flash I am failing pretty hard by going so far off meta to be not even in the same universe. I like what I do...it's great fun. I would however NEVER suggest that as a way to build a ship if somebody just asked me how to make a good ship. If somebody wants to do it...great. I am more than happy to help with that. What the problem is you are saying the ship isn't on the poor side mechanically because you can make it work. Great. I can make a SHUTTLE work. Doesn't mean that the shuttle is not utter trash compared to a T6 juggy from a mechanical stand point. This is NOT AN OPINION. Mechanically, some ships are better than others. Yes, there is the caveat of depending on what you want to do with the ship as well. I don't care how much damage the juggy dishes out...I don't wanna fly a space whale. But from a general mechanical stand point...the ship does kinda suck. If you like it and can make it work...great for you...but stop gaslighting players into thinking a subpar ship is good. Remember, rule 1 is fly what you like. That does not mean what you like to fly is good however.

    Once again 99% of that is purely your own opinion. In regards to ships, there is no such thing as a "best" ship or anything of the such, simply ships that lend more advantages and tools to certain types of builds than others. One could make a sci build using only 2 sci powers on a ship, but wouldn't be nearly as effective as a dedicated sci ship if the goal is pure sci damage. One could make a drain build using Antiproton, but you will get far more mileage out of it by using Polaron or Tetryon. If one wishes to tank, command will give you more survival centric powers than intel. If one wishes to crank nothing but damage, then intel has more damage centric powers than command. Aside from examples like this, that's where what is "best" ends. In regards to DPS chasing, one does not need a "meta" ship to do great damage. In today's game you have your choice of Paths A B C D E F if you wish to get to G. It does not matter which path you take as all of them will get you to G. The only difference is in how those paths get you to G, be it by boat, air, walking, or so on. Your analogy of comparing a shuttle to t6 ship is a flawed analogy as shuttles simply are not designed to do what a full starship can. It's like comparing an electric circular saw to that of a scalpel. If the goal is just pure cutting power the circular saw will always win out on every day of the week ending in y and twice on sundays. The scalpel can cut but is designed to be much more precise and smaller than the circular saw. The circular saw and scalpel are not designed for the same types of job anymore than a full on starship and shuttle are designed for the same thing. Honestly I'm surprised someone of your caliber would even pose such a flawed analogy as it borders on intellectual dishonesty. As for the Vizier for someone like me who is a tank, it's a good ship. For someone like yourself who is not a tank, there are better choices out there.

    Finally on this point, the only "gaslighting" going on here is by certain people acting like they are the sole authority on what is a good ship and what isn't. You are NOT the sole authority on what is a good ship and what is a bad one like you and certain others seem to think you are. Simply because you have decided you don't like a ship or the ship isn't the second coming of the Scimitars or the Juggernaut, does not make something a bad ship. For you and what you do it may be a bad ship, but for what someone else does it may be a godsend.
    Man, your agenda is so transparent it's really just sick.

    This is just about you reading a post from a 'DPS'er,' totally misunderstanding it.. and then posting 12 pages of argument against something that no one ever said.

    I'll try this again, but I know it will be a waste of time...

    If you want to call it an agenda then more power to you. I simply have no patience for the "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" type of mentality. If people want to chase numbers, by all means do it if that's what they're into. If someone wants to say "I don't like this ship because it can't do X amount of damage and I don't recommend it" that's one thing. But to come on here and say a ship is bad purely because you don't like it, you think it doesn't do enough damage, and then try to assert it as
    objective fact based on those reasons, while essentially accusing folks who think otherwise of "gaslightning" and saying they're wrong is a little thing we call Elitism and Gatekeeping, and those things are not going to fly here. You're allowed to chase numbers. You're allowed to think a ship is good or bad. You're also allowed to voice those opinions provided they're done in a civil manor. What's not cool and not going to fly is asserting those opinions as objective fact and then lampooning folks who disagree. Having debate about why you feel a ship is good or bad is one thing, elitism and gatekeeping are something else.
    Most people in this game do energy weapon builds.. not everyone, but most people. We have already conceded that any T5U or T6 ship is viable and perfectly capable of handling any game content. This point was never disputed, so stop arguing it.. you're arguing something we already agree on and enough is enough. No one said it's a bad ship because it doesn't do top end DPS, this is an argument you're fabricating out of your own bias just so you can rally against it. Stop it.

    Saying it's viable is one thing, asserting it as objectively bad purely because it's not the next chart topper and/or you don't like it it is something else. So none are saying it's a bad ship eh?
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    But from a general mechanical stand point...the ship does kinda suck. If you like it and can make it work...great for you...but stop gaslighting players into thinking a subpar ship is good. Remember, rule 1 is fly what you like. That does not mean what you like to fly is good however.

    The quote just above this statement would like to have a word with you on that "no one said it's a bad ship" thing.
    The argument is comparing the ship and the features it offers at it's price point.. against other ships at the same or lesser price point. The fact that this ship is 3500 Zen on Sale and a staggering 14,000 Zen ($140 USD) not on sale has to be considered.

    It's a Sovereign Class.. that gives it natural appeal. The problem is, there is another Sovereign already that is better for standard energy weapon builds, gives the same awesome cannon look.. and is 500 Zen cheaper at full price. Right now, during the current sale it's what? 2200 Zen? You look at the ship and it's features for it's price against other options out there.. that is what we're doing.. we're not just saying 'oh, it's not the best DPS ship, it's garbage,' that is just what you're choosing to hear.

    Now, as far as alternate builds like a Kinetic Build.. @pottsey5g says it's a good ship for that. Well, I have flown with him many times, I have seen what he can do with Kinetic Builds.. if he says it's good for that.. it's good. So yes, in a specialized build.. the Vizier is better then the Archon.

    Now, right now, other T6 ships are on sale for 2200 Zen.. so the question is, is it the best ship for this type of build? You have to remember, it's still 3500 Zen compared to 2200 for everything else, so unless it's head and shoulders the best for Kinetic Builds.. it's still not a great buy. Lets remember, the OP is asking for advice on a good ship to buy, we're considering ALL factors in our decision. Price, looks, performance.. all of it. I'll let pottsey answer this question because frankly.. he's the man with this stuff, but I would suspect that there are better ships in the C-Store that all cost less. The one area this ship excels is if you want a Kinetic Boat and you have to have the Sovereign look. Then yes.. this is your ship. That's a very small niche.

    I've made my feelings known that the ship is way overpriced at it's regular price. At 3500 zen I don't see an extra $5 being that big of a deal since it was original a promotional type ship, but that's me. I've also made clear I think some of these new rotating sales type models and such are going to be more trouble than they're worth, but ultimately that's a completely different can of worms and a side tangent. Cost is going to factor into any ship purchase however whether it's worth the purchase or not is generally up to each individual player to determine if it's worth that price to them or not. I'm sure you would agree that it would be a very bad move for someone to drop $140 on just the one ship when they could pay $10 more and get a full on expansion bundle, or just wait for it to go on sale again.

    Agreed that it being a Sovereign variant gives it some appeal. In terms of just pure cash and cost again I agree the Archon is cheaper and you will spend less going for the Archon vs the Vizier, that much is not in debate. However when someone says "command is borderline useless" since it isn't as damage focused as Intel and asserts that as established fact as to why the Archon is supposedly superior, I'm sorry but that falls under the "DPS is everything and anything else is useless" type of banner. If the goal is pure damage, then yes Intel has more tools for that sort of thing. If the goal is tanking, just wanting a bit more survival, or in fact to roll a torp build, then command will give you more tools for that. Thus going back to my original point, there is no set in stone "best" ship, only ships that lend more tools and advantages to certain builds than others. I've seen other folks run torp boats off the Vizier so I believe pottsey5g when he says it can be done. again I'm not debating that. However suggesting that's the only area the Vizier is good in, is again purely opinion.
    The last point is going to be about 'tanking.' It's been explained before, but I'll say it again.. rather you like it or not, 'tanking' in STO requires high DPS. A ship that cannot deal damage is not a good tank. Period..

    It's not my opinion, it's not my bias.. it's simple game mechanics. Due to the way threat mechanics currently work in this game if you're not angering the baddies, they ignore you.. period. You can put on threatening stance, you can attract fire.. if you hit like a wet paper towel, the enemies will ignore you. If you're building a ship that's just nothing but heals and calling yourself 'a tank,' congratulations.. you're a paper weight and you're killing your team. The argument against 'tanking' in this ship is that it has a hard time generating the damage necessary to take advantage of it's tanking ability. Can it be done? Of course it can.. is the best ship for that role? No.. it's just the most expensive.

    Some of you need to get out of your 'anti DPS' agenda and start reading what people are actually saying. When you consider the price of this ship with the features it offers.. for the general player, the Vizier is not a good buy. It's specialty is a very small nice market, but it does have a place. The original post was inquiring about the value of the ship when being considered for a purchase. No one said the ship isn't viable, no one said the ship won't work or can't be good.. it's a T6 ship.. of course it's good!

    The problem is, they're all good.. and all the other C-Store ships offer more for less. Push your agenda aside, look at the problem objectively and understand that we're making a legitimate effort to help the OP select a proper ship for their style. If the OP wants a Kinetic build and loves the Sovereign look.. then heck yes.. this is your ship, otherwise your money is better spent elsewhere.

    Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not you simply do not need the mega DPS you're trying to make it seem like people need. Yes you need some bit of damage going out, that's not in debate. What is in debate is the quantity of that damage. You do not need the 100k myself and other tanks are capable of pulling to draw threat, you simply don't. Here are the numbers to prove it.

    Assuming a 1/1 ratio of threat generated to damage dealt and the 1000% threat multiplier, a budget level tank doing 30k dps is cranking the same amount of threat generation as someone sustaining 300k dps. If that same tank is running the 1750% multiplier that number increases to 525k. So to pull from our 30k tank would mean our hypothetical damage dealer would need to pull and sustain 300k-525k DPS just to pull from our tank without directly taunting foes. 30k is something any ship in game is capable of doing with just mk xii very rare gear from missions. By and large our hypothetical tank is not going to run into someone who can pull and sustain that 300k-525k DPS. If he does, then it would be the exception and not the rule. If we say our hypothetical tank is doing 50k DPS, then someone would need to pull and sustain 500k-875k DPS just to pull from our tank without directly taunting foes. Increasing damage is simply an easy way to increase threat generation but is not the only way to do it. You simply do not need the kind of mega numbers you're hinting at to tank in this game. As you said, it's simple game mechanics. In regards to the "paperweight tank" what you're describing is one of the far extreme ends of the spectrum which is not reflective of all tanks. It's the same thing as making a glass cannon that can crank 50 zillion DPS, but explodes if enemies so much as sneeze in its direction, even if the enemies didn't sneeze on it. A ship that can deal 50 zillion dps but is always dead is just as much a drain on the team as the paperweight tank. In fact the always dead glass cannon is even more of a drain because at least the paperweight is throwing out a few shots while the glass cannon is throwing out a grand total of zero.

    As i said previously, I don't care if folks like to chase numbers as that's their choice. If folks don't like a ship purely because it's not a chart topper, or isn't tailored towards their particular playstyle, they're entitled to that opinion. What they are NOT entitled to do is come on here and assert a ship is bad purely because of those reasons as though it's objectively established fact, and then lampoon people who disagree. That's called gatekeeping and elitism, neither of which are allowed. If someone wants to say "I think it's subpar because of damage output and I don't care for the layout," that's a fair point and debate. If someone says "it's useless and trash because of X and is an objectively bad ship," that's not okay. Simply because one person can't see a reason for a particular build or how a particular build could use an item does not mean that ship or item is bad.

    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,351 Community Moderator
    It’s fascinating hu?

    The moment one puts the banner on the moment one has the crosshair of prejudice towards DPSer or performance minded players on the forehead.

    It’s really hard to keep on being nice, to ignore, to try to stay productive. It’s so hard not to give up though it would make things easier towards others who will pull the “elitist” joker anyway in the end when they run out of arguments. When it comes to discussing you are doing an outstanding job Sea and I have met few in STO with such character strength you have.

    Lucky me is that I played it all you know. After almost 8 years I tried all kinds of builds, pushed them to the limit and see what can be done. I’m not the best PvE player in game but I know there are only very few better than me left around. That’s why it always gets so funny when peeps start an approach with “not everything is about DPS or there are other things to consider too”. When it comes to PvE in STO I know all those things, excelled at all those things and can put them into perspective towards performance/DPS just fine. You can do that too Sea! Don’t let anybody fool you. Lol, yea… the command seat is nice or good for kinetic builds but that’s as far as it gets. My verdict here was more a “diplomatic” expression towards Pottsey whom I respect a lot in mind. To be frank there are countless ships good for kinetic builds around and no reason why this one is particularly special. The way I see it, it does not even come close to the best ships around we have for kinetic builds but that’s just me. ;)

    Prejudice implies a judgement before the fact and anything can be known. I make my statements based on words and actions of individuals they've demonstrated themselves.

    I don't care if folks like to chase numbers and DPS. If that's how they prefer to play then more power to them. I DO however have an issue when people operate under a "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" mentality. I also have an extreme issue when folks assert something is objectively bad purely because it's not a DPS chart topper, or it doesn't fit their particular playstyle so it must be bad, then lampooning anyone who says otherwise. Not everything in this game revolves around DPS and there is more than one way to get DPS than one particular person or group's brand of doing things. Simply because certain individuals may not see a "need" for a particular kind of build does not mean it's been "killed off" or somehow objectively bad. Simply because you can't see a use for anything beyond kinetic builds does NOT mean that's all Command is good for. You're welcome to hold that opinion but that does not make it a reality simply because you hold that opinion. I do however find it funny that I didn't name anyone specific initially but certain individuals took offense to it without me naming them.

    You're welcome to you opinion that a ship is good or bad for whatever reason. You're welcome to voice that opinion you think it's bad because X Y Z. What you and anyone else are NOT welcome to do is come on here, assert a ship or item etc is objectively bad and assert it as established fact purely because of your opinion and lampoon people who call shenanigans, as that is gatekeeping and elitism which are not allowed here. "I think this ship is a bad buy because x y z, and generally don't care for it. I believe there are better choices out there." "This ship is bad because X Y Z and anyone who thinks otherwise is gaslighting." The first example is okay and permitted, the second is not.

    In regards to the "elitist joker" I'll give you credit, that one made me laugh. I also find it extremely narrow minded to suggest the only reason a ship is bad is purely because it's not a chart topper. When it becomes outright elitist is suggesting that it's objectively bad purely because it doesn't fit one's particular playstyle or another, and folks are somehow wrong if they dare question that assertion. If pure DPS is the only reason for it being "bad" I find that to be a purely weak argument without much weight.

    My issue is not with folks who like to chase numbers. My issue is when people try to assert that number chasing is all the matters and keep people from seeing the rest of the game because of the charts in their way. When someone starts asserting their way of doing things is the only thing that matters in game and the only way of doing things, THAT is when I call shenanigans and what I have an issue with. Certain people have taken it upon themselves to behave as though they are the sole authority on what makes a ship good or bad and I have extreme issues with that. I have nothing against people who chase DPS. What I have absolutely zero patience for is the "DPS is everything and nothing else matters" crowd and mentality as it is a cancer to this game that deserves to burn in the fires of Gre'thor.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • cerritourugcerritourug Member Posts: 1,376 Arc User
    The real problem of this ship, is that if you buy the mudd store one, the fleet version does not apply the fleet modules discount! I have reported this with support but only got an automatic response.

    So, cryptic is missling with this ship, there are two versions, Z Store and fleet, but it does not apply the discount!

    Sorry for bad english.
    __________________________________________________

    Division Hispana
    www.divisionhispana.com
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    I think my point was totally lost in there somewhere. Regardless of whether tank v dps is one sided as far as potential, the issue I see is that the reality of the game is that the overwhelming majority of people do not fly high performance builds that can handle the aggro they get. These are the folks that need or at least benefit from a tank type in randoms, and that, simply is why tanking is valuable.

    No, those people pushing their DPS in ISA run 879259 don't need a tank. You don't always get that group though, and if you're not part of that tiny group of people pushing their DPS as high as possible, you may find it quite viable to be a tank type for a random group's cohesion.

    Personally, I have all my ships built differently, as much as that can be done. Some are more fragile than others, and definitely benefit from someone tanking or at least healing. Some are much sturdier. Some do well on DPS charts, apparently. I think, however, it is easier to build and fly a tanky ship with competent DPS than a high performance DPS ship that tanks for itself.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited November 2019
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Umm...yeah no. Mechanically...there is good and bad. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of efficiency in getting the challenge of the game done. Does that mean you need the best...or can't make do with the worst? No. That is why fly what you like is the number one advice that I, Sea and Peter give. Than we will give you what is the most efficient way to go about building said ship. You wanna do something different from that? Great, we can worth with you on that too. I make tact/sci or sci/tact hybrids all the time. If you think I am chasing DPS with that concept...yeah news flash I am failing pretty hard by going so far off meta to be not even in the same universe. I like what I do...it's great fun. I would however NEVER suggest that as a way to build a ship if somebody just asked me how to make a good ship. If somebody wants to do it...great. I am more than happy to help with that. What the problem is you are saying the ship isn't on the poor side mechanically because you can make it work. Great. I can make a SHUTTLE work. Doesn't mean that the shuttle is not utter trash compared to a T6 juggy from a mechanical stand point. This is NOT AN OPINION. Mechanically, some ships are better than others. Yes, there is the caveat of depending on what you want to do with the ship as well. I don't care how much damage the juggy dishes out...I don't wanna fly a space whale. But from a general mechanical stand point...the ship does kinda suck. If you like it and can make it work...great for you...but stop gaslighting players into thinking a subpar ship is good. Remember, rule 1 is fly what you like. That does not mean what you like to fly is good however.

    Once again 99% of that is purely your own opinion. In regards to ships, there is no such thing as a "best" ship or anything of the such, simply ships that lend more advantages and tools to certain types of builds than others. One could make a sci build using only 2 sci powers on a ship, but wouldn't be nearly as effective as a dedicated sci ship if the goal is pure sci damage. One could make a drain build using Antiproton, but you will get far more mileage out of it by using Polaron or Tetryon. If one wishes to tank, command will give you more survival centric powers than intel. If one wishes to crank nothing but damage, then intel has more damage centric powers than command. Aside from examples like this, that's where what is "best" ends. In regards to DPS chasing, one does not need a "meta" ship to do great damage. In today's game you have your choice of Paths A B C D E F if you wish to get to G. It does not matter which path you take as all of them will get you to G. The only difference is in how those paths get you to G, be it by boat, air, walking, or so on. Your analogy of comparing a shuttle to t6 ship is a flawed analogy as shuttles simply are not designed to do what a full starship can. It's like comparing an electric circular saw to that of a scalpel. If the goal is just pure cutting power the circular saw will always win out on every day of the week ending in y and twice on sundays. The scalpel can cut but is designed to be much more precise and smaller than the circular saw. The circular saw and scalpel are not designed for the same types of job anymore than a full on starship and shuttle are designed for the same thing. Honestly I'm surprised someone of your caliber would even pose such a flawed analogy as it borders on intellectual dishonesty. As for the Vizier for someone like me who is a tank, it's a good ship. For someone like yourself who is not a tank, there are better choices out there.

    Finally on this point, the only "gaslighting" going on here is by certain people acting like they are the sole authority on what is a good ship and what isn't. You are NOT the sole authority on what is a good ship and what is a bad one like you and certain others seem to think you are. Simply because you have decided you don't like a ship or the ship isn't the second coming of the Scimitars or the Juggernaut, does not make something a bad ship. For you and what you do it may be a bad ship, but for what someone else does it may be a godsend.
    Man, your agenda is so transparent it's really just sick.

    This is just about you reading a post from a 'DPS'er,' totally misunderstanding it.. and then posting 12 pages of argument against something that no one ever said.

    I'll try this again, but I know it will be a waste of time...

    If you want to call it an agenda then more power to you. I simply have no patience for the "DPS is everything and everything else is useless" type of mentality. If people want to chase numbers, by all means do it if that's what they're into. If someone wants to say "I don't like this ship because it can't do X amount of damage and I don't recommend it" that's one thing. But to come on here and say a ship is bad purely because you don't like it, you think it doesn't do enough damage, and then try to assert it as
    objective fact based on those reasons, while essentially accusing folks who think otherwise of "gaslightning" and saying they're wrong is a little thing we call Elitism and Gatekeeping, and those things are not going to fly here. You're allowed to chase numbers. You're allowed to think a ship is good or bad. You're also allowed to voice those opinions provided they're done in a civil manor. What's not cool and not going to fly is asserting those opinions as objective fact and then lampooning folks who disagree. Having debate about why you feel a ship is good or bad is one thing, elitism and gatekeeping are something else.
    Most people in this game do energy weapon builds.. not everyone, but most people. We have already conceded that any T5U or T6 ship is viable and perfectly capable of handling any game content. This point was never disputed, so stop arguing it.. you're arguing something we already agree on and enough is enough. No one said it's a bad ship because it doesn't do top end DPS, this is an argument you're fabricating out of your own bias just so you can rally against it. Stop it.

    Saying it's viable is one thing, asserting it as objectively bad purely because it's not the next chart topper and/or you don't like it it is something else. So none are saying it's a bad ship eh?
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    But from a general mechanical stand point...the ship does kinda suck. If you like it and can make it work...great for you...but stop gaslighting players into thinking a subpar ship is good. Remember, rule 1 is fly what you like. That does not mean what you like to fly is good however.

    The quote just above this statement would like to have a word with you on that "no one said it's a bad ship" thing.
    The argument is comparing the ship and the features it offers at it's price point.. against other ships at the same or lesser price point. The fact that this ship is 3500 Zen on Sale and a staggering 14,000 Zen ($140 USD) not on sale has to be considered.

    It's a Sovereign Class.. that gives it natural appeal. The problem is, there is another Sovereign already that is better for standard energy weapon builds, gives the same awesome cannon look.. and is 500 Zen cheaper at full price. Right now, during the current sale it's what? 2200 Zen? You look at the ship and it's features for it's price against other options out there.. that is what we're doing.. we're not just saying 'oh, it's not the best DPS ship, it's garbage,' that is just what you're choosing to hear.

    Now, as far as alternate builds like a Kinetic Build.. @pottsey5g says it's a good ship for that. Well, I have flown with him many times, I have seen what he can do with Kinetic Builds.. if he says it's good for that.. it's good. So yes, in a specialized build.. the Vizier is better then the Archon.

    Now, right now, other T6 ships are on sale for 2200 Zen.. so the question is, is it the best ship for this type of build? You have to remember, it's still 3500 Zen compared to 2200 for everything else, so unless it's head and shoulders the best for Kinetic Builds.. it's still not a great buy. Lets remember, the OP is asking for advice on a good ship to buy, we're considering ALL factors in our decision. Price, looks, performance.. all of it. I'll let pottsey answer this question because frankly.. he's the man with this stuff, but I would suspect that there are better ships in the C-Store that all cost less. The one area this ship excels is if you want a Kinetic Boat and you have to have the Sovereign look. Then yes.. this is your ship. That's a very small niche.

    I've made my feelings known that the ship is way overpriced at it's regular price. At 3500 zen I don't see an extra $5 being that big of a deal since it was original a promotional type ship, but that's me. I've also made clear I think some of these new rotating sales type models and such are going to be more trouble than they're worth, but ultimately that's a completely different can of worms and a side tangent. Cost is going to factor into any ship purchase however whether it's worth the purchase or not is generally up to each individual player to determine if it's worth that price to them or not. I'm sure you would agree that it would be a very bad move for someone to drop $140 on just the one ship when they could pay $10 more and get a full on expansion bundle, or just wait for it to go on sale again.

    Agreed that it being a Sovereign variant gives it some appeal. In terms of just pure cash and cost again I agree the Archon is cheaper and you will spend less going for the Archon vs the Vizier, that much is not in debate. However when someone says "command is borderline useless" since it isn't as damage focused as Intel and asserts that as established fact as to why the Archon is supposedly superior, I'm sorry but that falls under the "DPS is everything and anything else is useless" type of banner. If the goal is pure damage, then yes Intel has more tools for that sort of thing. If the goal is tanking, just wanting a bit more survival, or in fact to roll a torp build, then command will give you more tools for that. Thus going back to my original point, there is no set in stone "best" ship, only ships that lend more tools and advantages to certain builds than others. I've seen other folks run torp boats off the Vizier so I believe pottsey5g when he says it can be done. again I'm not debating that. However suggesting that's the only area the Vizier is good in, is again purely opinion.
    The last point is going to be about 'tanking.' It's been explained before, but I'll say it again.. rather you like it or not, 'tanking' in STO requires high DPS. A ship that cannot deal damage is not a good tank. Period..

    It's not my opinion, it's not my bias.. it's simple game mechanics. Due to the way threat mechanics currently work in this game if you're not angering the baddies, they ignore you.. period. You can put on threatening stance, you can attract fire.. if you hit like a wet paper towel, the enemies will ignore you. If you're building a ship that's just nothing but heals and calling yourself 'a tank,' congratulations.. you're a paper weight and you're killing your team. The argument against 'tanking' in this ship is that it has a hard time generating the damage necessary to take advantage of it's tanking ability. Can it be done? Of course it can.. is the best ship for that role? No.. it's just the most expensive.

    Some of you need to get out of your 'anti DPS' agenda and start reading what people are actually saying. When you consider the price of this ship with the features it offers.. for the general player, the Vizier is not a good buy. It's specialty is a very small nice market, but it does have a place. The original post was inquiring about the value of the ship when being considered for a purchase. No one said the ship isn't viable, no one said the ship won't work or can't be good.. it's a T6 ship.. of course it's good!

    The problem is, they're all good.. and all the other C-Store ships offer more for less. Push your agenda aside, look at the problem objectively and understand that we're making a legitimate effort to help the OP select a proper ship for their style. If the OP wants a Kinetic build and loves the Sovereign look.. then heck yes.. this is your ship, otherwise your money is better spent elsewhere.

    Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not you simply do not need the mega DPS you're trying to make it seem like people need. Yes you need some bit of damage going out, that's not in debate. What is in debate is the quantity of that damage. You do not need the 100k myself and other tanks are capable of pulling to draw threat, you simply don't. Here are the numbers to prove it.

    Assuming a 1/1 ratio of threat generated to damage dealt and the 1000% threat multiplier, a budget level tank doing 30k dps is cranking the same amount of threat generation as someone sustaining 300k dps. If that same tank is running the 1750% multiplier that number increases to 525k. So to pull from our 30k tank would mean our hypothetical damage dealer would need to pull and sustain 300k-525k DPS just to pull from our tank without directly taunting foes. 30k is something any ship in game is capable of doing with just mk xii very rare gear from missions. By and large our hypothetical tank is not going to run into someone who can pull and sustain that 300k-525k DPS. If he does, then it would be the exception and not the rule. If we say our hypothetical tank is doing 50k DPS, then someone would need to pull and sustain 500k-875k DPS just to pull from our tank without directly taunting foes. Increasing damage is simply an easy way to increase threat generation but is not the only way to do it. You simply do not need the kind of mega numbers you're hinting at to tank in this game. As you said, it's simple game mechanics. In regards to the "paperweight tank" what you're describing is one of the far extreme ends of the spectrum which is not reflective of all tanks. It's the same thing as making a glass cannon that can crank 50 zillion DPS, but explodes if enemies so much as sneeze in its direction, even if the enemies didn't sneeze on it. A ship that can deal 50 zillion dps but is always dead is just as much a drain on the team as the paperweight tank. In fact the always dead glass cannon is even more of a drain because at least the paperweight is throwing out a few shots while the glass cannon is throwing out a grand total of zero.

    As i said previously, I don't care if folks like to chase numbers as that's their choice. If folks don't like a ship purely because it's not a chart topper, or isn't tailored towards their particular playstyle, they're entitled to that opinion. What they are NOT entitled to do is come on here and assert a ship is bad purely because of those reasons as though it's objectively established fact, and then lampoon people who disagree. That's called gatekeeping and elitism, neither of which are allowed. If someone wants to say "I think it's subpar because of damage output and I don't care for the layout," that's a fair point and debate. If someone says "it's useless and trash because of X and is an objectively bad ship," that's not okay. Simply because one person can't see a reason for a particular build or how a particular build could use an item does not mean that ship or item is bad.

    With all respect to your elaboratness towards tanking what part of it highlights that ship to be particulary good for that role? :)

    I also feel you overstress the aggro element just a lil bit. If your dmg output is right a tank does not even need to bother with it in the avarage STO team while only a fraction of it is needed when you tank it for the league admin team. You can also be assured that way that you contribute towards the reasonable conclusion of a map in any constellation you find yourself in.

    In ISA we never use(ed) tanks for single player records. Yea, in HSE I happen to use it to influence sigle player records but it sadly does not change the fact that 3 power tzunamis ago even there I began to wonder if that makes sense in light of that map if you see it as a team effort. A team is surely faster through without one.

    The ship can be used to DPS, the ship can be used to tank. Unfortunatly there are coutless ships around which can do both better.

    Thats why its not favorable performance wise and BAD if you take the price for it into account. ;)

    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
This discussion has been closed.