> @pottsey5g said:
> Frigates are great they can outperform fighters and do not die as much either. I have 90% moved away from fighters for Frigates.
>
> As for zero gameplay reason that's not right and something I keep seeing time and time again. As a carrier pilot I don't normally go near FDC's as they are not as good as full carriers for pet builds. Many of my full carriers outperform with pet builds or do different gameplay options then what I can get out of any FDC. I have effectively stopped using FDC's and switched back to full carriers. Out of the 4 carriers I swap between FDC's are not one of them.
But there is essentially nothing you can do with a carrier that you can't with a FDC, they even have similar ship experience advantages, (the FDC arguably slightly better). With the case of the Donnie add the 5/3 weapon configuration, MW specialisation and far greater manoeuvrability. What can any carrier do that tops that? As I said, I love pure carriers but the only reason to fly one is for that exact reason, because you love them. Ie for fun!
Some full carriers can have have access to better pets, better pet buffs or unique gameplay functions that FDC's just do not have. For example my Xindi Carrier has 20% firing haste for its pets, my Vorgon Carrier has +20 Flight Speed for your Mines and Targetable Torpedoes which allows some unique builds that are superior over the same build on an FDC. The Jupiter carrier can boosts its pet damage beyond what FDCs can do. Then we have Wingman on the some full carriers or the Ra'Nodaire full carrier who's pets are better then anything FDC's can take. There are lots you can do on full carriers that FDC's just cannot do as well.
> @nixie50 said:
> Carriers were hinted at in DS9 during the larger battles scenes, and were made canon is Disco with the enterprise laucnhing all of those drones.
I love the tactical flyers. Virtually no information (canon wise) about them available online unfortunately. I presumed they were drones too but I think they are in fact manned fighters.
Are you talking about the Perigrine fighters? The ones in the battle to retake DS9 were about as long as runabouts and at least twice as wide and are probably meant as the Star Trek equivalent of WWII PT boats (also known as "Motor Torpedo Boat" or MTB). The carriers would probably be the Star Trek equivalent of ships such as the British MTB carrier Vulcan from the late 1800s or the proposal for the US to build MTB carriers in WWII. In case anyone is interested, the proposal is reprinted on this site: https://usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1942/november/torpedo-boat-carriers
In at least one DS9 episode they have shown the bridge of those little space-MTBs, it is pretty much the same as a runabout bridge with two seats and a bulkhead or partition blocking off what would be the main area of a runabout. One of the tech manuals states that they have a crew of four to six (presumably the others would be on the other side of that bulkhead), though of course the manuals are not canon so that must be taken with a grain of salt.
Of course, confusing the issue is that they use the same "peregrine" hull at several different sizes to represent other ship classes, from a little single-seat fighter shuttle with a bubble canopy all the way up to Chakotay's Val Jean with its crew of at the very least the 30 or so shown in VOY, and probably closer to 40 if you include the "heavy casualties" they mention from getting yanked to the Delta quadrant.
They even used that same shooting model as a freighter (seen for all of a second or two) that was even larger than Chakotay's ship (which was definitely larger than the typical "Maquis Raider" shown in DS9 according to onscreen size comparisons), which is probably what is used in the canon Yeager class ships as a secondary hull.
> @phoenixc#0738 said: > Are you talking about the Perigrine fighters? The ones in the battle to retake DS9 were about as long as runabouts and at least twice as wide and are probably meant as the Star Trek equivalent of WWII PT boats (also known as "Motor Torpedo Boat" or MTB). The carriers would probably be the Star Trek equivalent of ships such as the British MTB carrier Vulcan from the late 1800s or the proposal for the US to build MTB carriers in WWII. In case anyone is interested, the proposal is reprinted on this site: > https://usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1942/november/torpedo-boat-carriers > > In at least one DS9 episode they have shown the bridge of those little space-MTBs, it is pretty much the same as a runabout bridge with two seats and a bulkhead or partition blocking off what would be the main area of a runabout. One of the tech manuals states that they have a crew of four to six (presumably the others would be on the other side of that bulkhead), though of course the manuals are not canon so that must be taken with a grain of salt. > > Of course, confusing the issue is that they use the same "peregrine" hull at several different sizes to represent other ship classes, from a little single-seat fighter shuttle with a bubble canopy all the way up to Chakotay's Val Jean with its crew of at the very least the 30 or so shown in VOY, and probably closer to 40 if you include the "heavy casualties" they mention from getting yanked to the Delta quadrant. > > They even used that same shooting model as a freighter (seen for all of a second or two) that was even larger than Chakotay's ship (which was definitely larger than the typical "Maquis Raider" shown in DS9 according to onscreen size comparisons), which is probably what is used in the canon Yeager class ships as a secondary hull.
That was a great post and very interesting. But I was talking about the tactical flyers from S2 Discovery (when it was still just about watchable). Launched from Pike's Enterprise. There are very few sharp images due to shoddy cgi but they look a bit like tron cycles. Potential two manned small fighters. As I said, virtually no info from canon or non canon sources on what they actually are.
> @pottsey5g said: > Some full carriers can have have access to better pets, better pet buffs or unique gameplay functions that FDC's just do not have. For example my Xindi Carrier has 20% firing haste for its pets, my Vorgon Carrier has +20 Flight Speed for your Mines and Targetable Torpedoes which allows some unique builds that are superior over the same build on an FDC. The Jupiter carrier can boosts its pet damage beyond what FDCs can do. Then we have Wingman on the some full carriers or the Ra'Nodaire full carrier who's pets are better then anything FDC's can take. There are lots you can do on full carriers that FDC's just cannot do as well.
All of those things are cool. But none of those things make the slightest bit of difference compared to the actual ship itself. A specific ship can hold specific frigate. That's limiting, as a carrier cannot equip a frigate from another carrier that is not compatible. If they can, guess what? So can a FDC!
The tiny bonuses you mention are nothing compared to the main ships manoeuvrability alone (never mind 8 weapons over 6). I want you to win this discussion, I really do. I LOVE carriers. But please, you ended by saying there are lots of things you can do on carriers that you cannot on FDC's. Can you please tell me what they are without listing specific classes?
> @pottsey5g said:
> Some full carriers can have have access to better pets, better pet buffs or unique gameplay functions that FDC's just do not have. For example my Xindi Carrier has 20% firing haste for its pets, my Vorgon Carrier has +20 Flight Speed for your Mines and Targetable Torpedoes which allows some unique builds that are superior over the same build on an FDC. The Jupiter carrier can boosts its pet damage beyond what FDCs can do. Then we have Wingman on the some full carriers or the Ra'Nodaire full carrier who's pets are better then anything FDC's can take. There are lots you can do on full carriers that FDC's just cannot do as well.
All of those things are cool. But none of those things make the slightest bit of difference compared to the actual ship itself. A specific ship can hold specific frigate. That's limiting, as a carrier cannot equip a frigate from another carrier that is not compatible. If they can, guess what? So can a FDC!
The tiny bonuses you mention are nothing compared to the main ships manoeuvrability alone (never mind 8 weapons over 6). I want you to win this discussion, I really do. I LOVE carriers. But please, you ended by saying there are lots of things you can do on carriers that you cannot on FDC's. Can you please tell me what they are without listing specific classes?
If you take my Vorgon Carrier build and place it alongside a FDC near the end of the row in the Swarm TFO Elite. The Vorgon Carrier should 100% of the time wipe out the entire volley of NPC ships before a typical FDC build even gets to fire yet alone hits the target. The +20 Flight Speed to the weapons can make that big a difference.
More relevant to carrier talk a Frigate build on my Ra'Nodaire full carrier without the SAD trait will do such high pet DPS that it will beat most if not all FDC's pet DPS even if the FDC has the SAD trait with fighters.
I do agree that Carriers need some love and polish. I just disagree that Frigates are poor and that FDC's are flat out superior. I cannot get any FDC carrier builds to get pet DPS to match my personal records that I see on my best full carriers.
EDIT: Well most Frigates are poor. But the best ones are better then fighters.
Pure carriers have no benefit over flight deck carriers ever since Cryptic brought the FDCs up to two bays. Carriers themselves just REALLY need some love, something of a buff or a category benefit like how Tac gets experiment weapons, science gets a secondary deflector etc.
Devs! Here my plea!
Carriers can have Frigate pets, which nothing else has.
Some of the best dps pets are fighters...plus there are plenty of frigates that don't need a science carrier to be equipped
The presence of hangar bays (and in some cases, subsystem targeting too) is already significant. Carriers don't need to be made more powerful.
Personally I'd prefer it if they focussed on other carrier-related changes.
Like making playable ships of all pets (I'd love to see a playable Mobulai for example).
Removing restrictions on pet use (keep the requirement to own the related carrier if necessary from a sales perspective).
Improve the targeting mechanism (make it possible for our pets to assist someone else for example, without having to keep selecting that player).
Subsystem targeting is pretty niche unless you build your carrier specifically to drain...over all pretty worthless, especially if you want to do some damage with your weapons
Science carriers have 6 weapons
Tactical carriers have 7 weapons and the trait that boosts energy and projectile damage by 10%
Engineering carriers have 8 weapons and shield resistance cruiser command
Why play a Sci carrier unless you really want a specific frigate that can only be equipped on that specific ship? (not to mention most of the better frigates are bound to only a certain few ships)
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
I don't think carriers need a polish. I went, 'All In' on a carrier build. Got the Traits and Consoles to fully support the hangar pets. When a choice had to be made, the pets always got the benefit of the doubt. My pets became my primary weapon system and I micromanage them to ensure they are viable. Below is a list of what I did. I don't claim it is all inclusive or "The" list. It is just what I could put together after doing some research on STOWiki.
None of the above was either easy to get nor cheap. Due to some ships not being broadly available or other things being in such limited supply they are very expensive on the Exchange or only purchasable with Zen. Bought the Scramble Fighters Mastery Trait for one of my chars. Horrendously high-priced and even more overrated than it is expensive. Doesn't do anything I cannot do for myself by focusing on managing my fighters rather than on my ship.
I've been reading this thread with curiosity. Started looking at carriers (of all classes) as a way to re-ignite my interest in STO after twelve years of being here.
A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,579Community Moderator
So far my experience with carriers (mostly DSC D7/Connie FDCs but applies to other carriers as well) has been pretty decent. My main issues come up when I'm in a battlezone with deployed pets (fighter flavor). However managing my Carrier Commands has allowed me to keep them around. Leaving them on default does not guarantee they'll do much.
For long distance travel I set them to Intercept, which does tend to get them to keep pace with me.
Recall is not guaranteed to keep them as a couple times in the past I've used Recall and then flew across the map... and my hanger pets that were DOCKED IN MY SHIP decided to despawn as if I went out of range. Right now Recall for me is mostly just an RP recovery move at the end of a mission.
I switch to attack to get my fighters to go on Offense against my selected target.
Only one I never use in combat is Escort. Mostly just use that in social systems for a minor bit of trolling by having them fly to other player ships. Kinda entertaining to see a bunch of squadron pets just hugging another ship. Especially if someone else is doing it too.
> @pottsey5g said: > If you take my Vorgon Carrier build and place it alongside a FDC near the end of the row in the Swarm TFO Elite. The Vorgon Carrier should 100% of the time wipe out the entire volley of NPC ships before a typical FDC build even gets to fire yet alone hits the target. The +20 Flight Speed to the weapons can make that big a difference. > > More relevant to carrier talk a Frigate build on my Ra'Nodaire full carrier without the SAD trait will do such high pet DPS that it will beat most if not all FDC's pet DPS even if the FDC has the SAD trait with fighters. > > I do agree that Carriers need some love and polish. I just disagree that Frigates are poor and that FDC's are flat out superior. I cannot get any FDC carrier builds to get pet DPS to match my personal records that I see on my best full carriers. > > EDIT: Well most Frigates are poor. But the best ones are better then fighters.
Sorry but I ain't buying that claim. My Constitution FDC uses a beam overload set up so I tend to use consoles, traits etc that speed up my weapons anyway. +20 is negligible. I guarantee it will be one hit killing as fast if not faster than Vorgon carrier. As for the Vorgon Frigates, they pale in comparison with to alliance fighters with SAD.
Looking at the ships themselves. The Constitution has a better shield modifier, a much better turn rate, two extra forward weapon slots and an extra console slot. There literally is no comparison.
The Vorggon set is nice, but I wouldn't equip it even if I could. There are side many better options out there.
I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,579Community Moderator
Admittedly the Vorgon Carrier is a different animal from a Connie FDC. If we could compare it to something like the Jupiter or T6 Atrox it might be more fair. Hell... the Sarco might be a closer match to the Vorgon Carrier.
> @pottsey5g said:
> If you take my Vorgon Carrier build and place it alongside a FDC near the end of the row in the Swarm TFO Elite. The Vorgon Carrier should 100% of the time wipe out the entire volley of NPC ships before a typical FDC build even gets to fire yet alone hits the target. The +20 Flight Speed to the weapons can make that big a difference.
>
> More relevant to carrier talk a Frigate build on my Ra'Nodaire full carrier without the SAD trait will do such high pet DPS that it will beat most if not all FDC's pet DPS even if the FDC has the SAD trait with fighters.
>
> I do agree that Carriers need some love and polish. I just disagree that Frigates are poor and that FDC's are flat out superior. I cannot get any FDC carrier builds to get pet DPS to match my personal records that I see on my best full carriers.
>
> EDIT: Well most Frigates are poor. But the best ones are better then fighters.
Sorry but I ain't buying that claim. My Constitution FDC uses a beam overload set up so I tend to use consoles, traits etc that speed up my weapons anyway. +20 is negligible. I guarantee it will be one hit killing as fast if not faster than Vorgon carrier. As for the Vorgon Frigates, they pale in comparison with to alliance fighters with SAD.
Looking at the ships themselves. The Constitution has a better shield modifier, a much better turn rate, two extra forward weapon slots and an extra console slot. There literally is no comparison.
The Vorggon set is nice, but I wouldn't equip it even if I could. There are side many better options out there.
I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison.
That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build, killing slower in the situation I described.
Vorgon Frigates might pale in comparison to Alliance Fighters with SAD but the best Frigates like the Ra'Nodaire has without SAD can beat Alliance Fighters with SAD. Which is why if I am going for a full carrier build I don't go near the Constitution.
"I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison."
If you take a Vorgon Beam Overload build V Constitution Beam Overload build then the Constitution is superior. If you take a Vorgon mine layer build v Constitution mine layer build or a targetable torp build then the Vorgon is vastly Superior and that mine layer build can kill many types of waves much faster then the minelayer Constitution or the Beam Over Load Constitution due to the weapon speed boost the Vorgon has access to.
You can't go ito this discussion with BUT THIS build.. Look at it from the new player perspective. the FDC has 7-8 weapons AND 2 hangars? the Atrox only has 6 weapons and 2 hangars? FDC please. until/unless that player REALLY gets into carrier play, Cryptic has next to no chance of selling a full carrier out of the C store.
The simple fact of the matter is, that a full carrier is ALWAYS handicapped compared to the other classes. Si ships have a better console layout and the sec deflector. Tactical Carriers lack good console sets (see the theme here?) and the experimental weapon, though there is at least one escort without the experimental weapon as well)
I just looked. Most of the tier 6 Sci ships have 5 sci consoles and the secondary deflector. None of the carriers do. and some of the sci ships have a HANGAR. so tell me which carrier is going to be the better crowd control ship over a legendary Intrepid?
the additional power of 7 Sci consoles and the secondary deflector far outweigh the extra hangar and carrier traits as far as crowd control goes and does pretty darn well against bosses as well
> @pottsey5g said: > That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build, killing slower in the situation I described. > > Vorgon Frigates might pale in comparison to Alliance Fighters with SAD but the best Frigates like the Ra'Nodaire has without SAD can beat Alliance Fighters with SAD. Which is why if I am going for a full carrier build I don't go near the Constitution. > > "I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison." > If you take a Vorgon Beam Overload build V Constitution Beam Overload build then the Constitution is superior. If you take a Vorgon mine layer build v Constitution mine layer build or a targetable torp build then the Vorgon is vastly Superior and that mine layer build can kill many types of waves much faster then the minelayer Constitution or the Beam Over Load Constitution due to the weapon speed boost the Vorgon has access to.
I'd be interested In seeing a DPS run or PvP between an optimised Vorgon Carrier and an optimised Constitution class flight deck cruiser. Of all the advantages I have mentioned, literally the only thing you have is +20 projectile/mine speed? You would take that over having a virtually identical build but with a ship that has two extra fore weapons, a 33% turn rate advantage and an extra console slot? I'm sure your build is great fun, and effective, but competitive? Not so sure.
> @pottsey5g said: > That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build,
I'd be very interested in seeing a DPS run or indeed PvP between an optimised Vorgon Carrier and an optimised Constitution class flight deck carrier.
Essentially your build focuses on the +20 speed for mine deployment. The Connie could run an identical build but with two extra fore weapons, a 33% better turn rate and an extra console. Dude, that's like a featherweight against a heavyweight.
Your build sounds fun and effective though if not really competitive, I'm just about to built one in fact!
“You can't go ito this discussion with BUT THIS build..”
Sure I can that’s the entire point. People are saying FDC’s are better at everything and there is no point to the so called “Full Carriers”. All I have done it point out some areas that FDC’s are not better. If I want to make the best Carrier pet build I can then FDC’s are not a good choice as they are weaker for pet builds. If I want to make the best mine layer build I can with 2 carriers bays FDC’s fall behind as two examples.
If I take my core builds that work on full carrier and transfer those builds over to FDC's I end up with a weaker build then I have on the full carrier. Which is why I do not use FDC's. Right now I am into fully themed Carriers trying to maximise pet DPS and for that FDC's are a poor choice as they are not as good at being carriers.
> @pottsey5g said:
> That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build,
I'd be very interested in seeing a DPS run or indeed PvP between an optimised Vorgon Carrier and an optimised Constitution class flight deck carrier. I think my old DPS runs are still up and my pet DPS without SAD is double or triple what the Constitution pulls off with SAD.
Essentially your build focuses on the +20 speed for mine deployment. The Connie could run an identical build but with two extra fore weapons, a 33% better turn rate and an extra console. Dude, that's like a featherweight against a heavyweight.
Your build sounds fun and effective though if not really competitive, I'm just about to built one in fact!
Its very competitive in some PvE. I used to run groups with a lot of top end DPSers and very often I would kill entire waves of ships before they could even target and shoot with there beam weapons in many TFO’s on Elite. In HSE I have spiked DPSed well over 5 million weapon damage in the first area.
Its not going be that great in ISE runs. I find ISE is a little overrated as what is best for ISE is not best or competitive in other TFO’s. It all depends on the TFO being played in something like The Swarm Elite or Gauntlet runs Elite its very competitive.
As I said before if you place a Connie and Vorgon in the same spot in The Swarm Elite then the Vorgon will kill the waves of NPC’s faster. But in an ISE run the Connie comes out better.
Mines and Carrier pets do not work competitively in PvP. For PvP a Connie would perform massively better. For ISE record runs go with a Connie. For other Elite TFO's there are times I prefer the Vorgon.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,579Community Moderator
Also... I want to point out something here...
What's really the core issue?
The fact that one is statistically superior to the other? Or is it that some one else prefers something different?
Again we're comparing apples to oranges as FDCs are different animals from standard/dreadnaught carriers. Builds are going to be different on them to maximize potential based on their capabilities.
Also... I want to point out something here...
What's really the core issue?
The fact that one is statistically superior to the other? Or is it that some one else prefers something different?
Again we're comparing apples to oranges as FDCs are different animals from standard/dreadnaught carriers. Builds are going to be different on them to maximize potential based on their capabilities.
What I am trying to get across is there are some builds that are better on FDC's and some builds that are better on full carriers. FDC's are not always statistically superior within a build theme/build type. As a carrier pilot, personally I am not keen on FDC's as I find they do not function as well for my type of builds. So I am not on board with the idea that FDC's are superior at everything.
I don't think carriers need a polish. I went, 'All In' on a carrier build. Got the Traits and Consoles to fully support the hangar pets. When a choice had to be made, the pets always got the benefit of the doubt. My pets became my primary weapon system and I micromanage them to ensure they are viable. Below is a list of what I did. I don't claim it is all inclusive or "The" list. It is just what I could put together after doing some research on STOWiki.
None of the above was either easy to get nor cheap. Due to some ships not being broadly available or other things being in such limited supply they are very expensive on the Exchange or only purchasable with Zen. Bought the Scramble Fighters Mastery Trait for one of my chars. Horrendously high-priced and even more overrated than it is expensive. Doesn't do anything I cannot do for myself by focusing on managing my fighters rather than on my ship.
I've been reading this thread with curiosity. Started looking at carriers (of all classes) as a way to re-ignite my interest in STO after twelve years of being here.
You might find this interesting.
Another combo that works well for themed carriers is Fleet Support + Superior Command Frequency + It’s Another Enterprise + Advanced Rapid Support + Friends in Unusual Places + Feel the Weight of Our Presence. With some captain cooldown. This allows you to summon multiple extra Battleships and Frigates along side your Hangar Pets. Then use the trait interference Drones to boost the damage of all these summons and pets.
I am mixing starship and personal traits in this post. Wingmate + Advanced Rapid Support + Friends in Unusual Places + Feel the Weight of Our Presence are personal traits.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,579Community Moderator
What I am trying to get across is there are some builds that are better on FDC's and some builds that are better on full carriers. FDC's are not always statistically superior within a build theme/build type. As a carrier pilot, personally I am not keen on FDC's as I find they do not function as well for my type of builds. So I am not on board with the idea that FDC's are superior at everything.
And I agree. Both types have their strengths and weaknesses. And depending on the build, both can be good at what they do best.
While normal carriers could use something to help them compete... they're by no means useless. I'd say they're a bit more strategic in their combat.
And IMO if you can get a Carrier with COMMAND spec seating... that's deadly. I use Suppression Barrage combined with FAW on my Sarco when I fly her and its a blast to slow down enemies while my Slavers go to town on 'em. ANd since I got Superior Area Denial... more beams and a resist debuff ON TOP of the reduced speed debuff from Suppression Barrage.
I always felt Command synergized better with Carrier gameplay than Intel.
I love full carriers and FDCs. I don't have any problems killing things with either. I like having pets out when I'm on a 'Destroy X number of Y ships'. They help me get that one rather quickly, especially when it's in a BZ and there's other competition for kills.
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.
I have come to the conclusion that I have a memory like Etch-A-Sketch. I shake my head and forget everything.
Carriers can be quite useful, but compared to builds on other ship classes (even something like an EPG or control build on a science vessel) it takes a considerable effort.
Combined with a drain build carriers can do well, but again it takes a lot of effort.
Overall i am of the opinion that carriers need a minor boost to make their use viable at lower investment.
If that boost does not occur few people will be motivated to learn the ropes for a carrier build.
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
Carriers can be quite useful, but compared to builds on other ship classes (even something like an EPG or control build on a science vessel) it takes a considerable effort.
Combined with a drain build carriers can do well, but again it takes a lot of effort.
Overall i am of the opinion that carriers need a minor boost to make their use viable at lower investment.
If that boost does not occur few people will be motivated to learn the ropes for a carrier build.
I always thought one or two of the traits on sci carriers could be changed, to buff the offense and maybe defense of hangars
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
B.t.w. i like and use full carriers, but i am not blind to the fact that they need a lot more effort.
When it comes to full carriers thematic builds come to mind.
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
Comments
Are you talking about the Perigrine fighters? The ones in the battle to retake DS9 were about as long as runabouts and at least twice as wide and are probably meant as the Star Trek equivalent of WWII PT boats (also known as "Motor Torpedo Boat" or MTB). The carriers would probably be the Star Trek equivalent of ships such as the British MTB carrier Vulcan from the late 1800s or the proposal for the US to build MTB carriers in WWII. In case anyone is interested, the proposal is reprinted on this site:
https://usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1942/november/torpedo-boat-carriers
In at least one DS9 episode they have shown the bridge of those little space-MTBs, it is pretty much the same as a runabout bridge with two seats and a bulkhead or partition blocking off what would be the main area of a runabout. One of the tech manuals states that they have a crew of four to six (presumably the others would be on the other side of that bulkhead), though of course the manuals are not canon so that must be taken with a grain of salt.
Of course, confusing the issue is that they use the same "peregrine" hull at several different sizes to represent other ship classes, from a little single-seat fighter shuttle with a bubble canopy all the way up to Chakotay's Val Jean with its crew of at the very least the 30 or so shown in VOY, and probably closer to 40 if you include the "heavy casualties" they mention from getting yanked to the Delta quadrant.
They even used that same shooting model as a freighter (seen for all of a second or two) that was even larger than Chakotay's ship (which was definitely larger than the typical "Maquis Raider" shown in DS9 according to onscreen size comparisons), which is probably what is used in the canon Yeager class ships as a secondary hull.
> Are you talking about the Perigrine fighters? The ones in the battle to retake DS9 were about as long as runabouts and at least twice as wide and are probably meant as the Star Trek equivalent of WWII PT boats (also known as "Motor Torpedo Boat" or MTB). The carriers would probably be the Star Trek equivalent of ships such as the British MTB carrier Vulcan from the late 1800s or the proposal for the US to build MTB carriers in WWII. In case anyone is interested, the proposal is reprinted on this site:
> https://usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1942/november/torpedo-boat-carriers
>
> In at least one DS9 episode they have shown the bridge of those little space-MTBs, it is pretty much the same as a runabout bridge with two seats and a bulkhead or partition blocking off what would be the main area of a runabout. One of the tech manuals states that they have a crew of four to six (presumably the others would be on the other side of that bulkhead), though of course the manuals are not canon so that must be taken with a grain of salt.
>
> Of course, confusing the issue is that they use the same "peregrine" hull at several different sizes to represent other ship classes, from a little single-seat fighter shuttle with a bubble canopy all the way up to Chakotay's Val Jean with its crew of at the very least the 30 or so shown in VOY, and probably closer to 40 if you include the "heavy casualties" they mention from getting yanked to the Delta quadrant.
>
> They even used that same shooting model as a freighter (seen for all of a second or two) that was even larger than Chakotay's ship (which was definitely larger than the typical "Maquis Raider" shown in DS9 according to onscreen size comparisons), which is probably what is used in the canon Yeager class ships as a secondary hull.
That was a great post and very interesting. But I was talking about the tactical flyers from S2 Discovery (when it was still just about watchable). Launched from Pike's Enterprise. There are very few sharp images due to shoddy cgi but they look a bit like tron cycles. Potential two manned small fighters. As I said, virtually no info from canon or non canon sources on what they actually are.
> Some full carriers can have have access to better pets, better pet buffs or unique gameplay functions that FDC's just do not have. For example my Xindi Carrier has 20% firing haste for its pets, my Vorgon Carrier has +20 Flight Speed for your Mines and Targetable Torpedoes which allows some unique builds that are superior over the same build on an FDC. The Jupiter carrier can boosts its pet damage beyond what FDCs can do. Then we have Wingman on the some full carriers or the Ra'Nodaire full carrier who's pets are better then anything FDC's can take. There are lots you can do on full carriers that FDC's just cannot do as well.
All of those things are cool. But none of those things make the slightest bit of difference compared to the actual ship itself. A specific ship can hold specific frigate. That's limiting, as a carrier cannot equip a frigate from another carrier that is not compatible. If they can, guess what? So can a FDC!
The tiny bonuses you mention are nothing compared to the main ships manoeuvrability alone (never mind 8 weapons over 6). I want you to win this discussion, I really do. I LOVE carriers. But please, you ended by saying there are lots of things you can do on carriers that you cannot on FDC's. Can you please tell me what they are without listing specific classes?
More relevant to carrier talk a Frigate build on my Ra'Nodaire full carrier without the SAD trait will do such high pet DPS that it will beat most if not all FDC's pet DPS even if the FDC has the SAD trait with fighters.
I do agree that Carriers need some love and polish. I just disagree that Frigates are poor and that FDC's are flat out superior. I cannot get any FDC carrier builds to get pet DPS to match my personal records that I see on my best full carriers.
EDIT: Well most Frigates are poor. But the best ones are better then fighters.
Some of the best dps pets are fighters...plus there are plenty of frigates that don't need a science carrier to be equipped
Subsystem targeting is pretty niche unless you build your carrier specifically to drain...over all pretty worthless, especially if you want to do some damage with your weapons
Science carriers have 6 weapons
Tactical carriers have 7 weapons and the trait that boosts energy and projectile damage by 10%
Engineering carriers have 8 weapons and shield resistance cruiser command
Why play a Sci carrier unless you really want a specific frigate that can only be equipped on that specific ship? (not to mention most of the better frigates are bound to only a certain few ships)
Consoles
- Console - Universal - Swarmer Matrix
- Console - Universal - Sensor Suspension Burst
- Console - Universal - High Speed Communications Network
Duty Officer
- A Blue Flight Deck Officer who reduces recharge time for hangar bays
Personal Space Traits
- Independent Wingman
- Wing Commander
Starship Mastery Traits
- Coordinated Assault
- Relaunch and Repair
- Withering Barrage
None of the above was either easy to get nor cheap. Due to some ships not being broadly available or other things being in such limited supply they are very expensive on the Exchange or only purchasable with Zen. Bought the Scramble Fighters Mastery Trait for one of my chars. Horrendously high-priced and even more overrated than it is expensive. Doesn't do anything I cannot do for myself by focusing on managing my fighters rather than on my ship.
I've been reading this thread with curiosity. Started looking at carriers (of all classes) as a way to re-ignite my interest in STO after twelve years of being here.
For long distance travel I set them to Intercept, which does tend to get them to keep pace with me.
Recall is not guaranteed to keep them as a couple times in the past I've used Recall and then flew across the map... and my hanger pets that were DOCKED IN MY SHIP decided to despawn as if I went out of range. Right now Recall for me is mostly just an RP recovery move at the end of a mission.
I switch to attack to get my fighters to go on Offense against my selected target.
Only one I never use in combat is Escort. Mostly just use that in social systems for a minor bit of trolling by having them fly to other player ships. Kinda entertaining to see a bunch of squadron pets just hugging another ship. Especially if someone else is doing it too.
> If you take my Vorgon Carrier build and place it alongside a FDC near the end of the row in the Swarm TFO Elite. The Vorgon Carrier should 100% of the time wipe out the entire volley of NPC ships before a typical FDC build even gets to fire yet alone hits the target. The +20 Flight Speed to the weapons can make that big a difference.
>
> More relevant to carrier talk a Frigate build on my Ra'Nodaire full carrier without the SAD trait will do such high pet DPS that it will beat most if not all FDC's pet DPS even if the FDC has the SAD trait with fighters.
>
> I do agree that Carriers need some love and polish. I just disagree that Frigates are poor and that FDC's are flat out superior. I cannot get any FDC carrier builds to get pet DPS to match my personal records that I see on my best full carriers.
>
> EDIT: Well most Frigates are poor. But the best ones are better then fighters.
Sorry but I ain't buying that claim. My Constitution FDC uses a beam overload set up so I tend to use consoles, traits etc that speed up my weapons anyway. +20 is negligible. I guarantee it will be one hit killing as fast if not faster than Vorgon carrier. As for the Vorgon Frigates, they pale in comparison with to alliance fighters with SAD.
Looking at the ships themselves. The Constitution has a better shield modifier, a much better turn rate, two extra forward weapon slots and an extra console slot. There literally is no comparison.
The Vorggon set is nice, but I wouldn't equip it even if I could. There are side many better options out there.
I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison.
That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build, killing slower in the situation I described.
Vorgon Frigates might pale in comparison to Alliance Fighters with SAD but the best Frigates like the Ra'Nodaire has without SAD can beat Alliance Fighters with SAD. Which is why if I am going for a full carrier build I don't go near the Constitution.
"I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison."
If you take a Vorgon Beam Overload build V Constitution Beam Overload build then the Constitution is superior. If you take a Vorgon mine layer build v Constitution mine layer build or a targetable torp build then the Vorgon is vastly Superior and that mine layer build can kill many types of waves much faster then the minelayer Constitution or the Beam Over Load Constitution due to the weapon speed boost the Vorgon has access to.
The simple fact of the matter is, that a full carrier is ALWAYS handicapped compared to the other classes. Si ships have a better console layout and the sec deflector. Tactical Carriers lack good console sets (see the theme here?) and the experimental weapon, though there is at least one escort without the experimental weapon as well)
I just looked. Most of the tier 6 Sci ships have 5 sci consoles and the secondary deflector. None of the carriers do. and some of the sci ships have a HANGAR. so tell me which carrier is going to be the better crowd control ship over a legendary Intrepid?
the additional power of 7 Sci consoles and the secondary deflector far outweigh the extra hangar and carrier traits as far as crowd control goes and does pretty darn well against bosses as well
> That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build, killing slower in the situation I described.
>
> Vorgon Frigates might pale in comparison to Alliance Fighters with SAD but the best Frigates like the Ra'Nodaire has without SAD can beat Alliance Fighters with SAD. Which is why if I am going for a full carrier build I don't go near the Constitution.
>
> "I don't want turn turn this into a 'my dad's better than your dad' conversation but I've just tried the Vorgon Carrier with an albeit more restricted version of my build and there is no comparison."
> If you take a Vorgon Beam Overload build V Constitution Beam Overload build then the Constitution is superior. If you take a Vorgon mine layer build v Constitution mine layer build or a targetable torp build then the Vorgon is vastly Superior and that mine layer build can kill many types of waves much faster then the minelayer Constitution or the Beam Over Load Constitution due to the weapon speed boost the Vorgon has access to.
I'd be interested In seeing a DPS run or PvP between an optimised Vorgon Carrier and an optimised Constitution class flight deck cruiser. Of all the advantages I have mentioned, literally the only thing you have is +20 projectile/mine speed? You would take that over having a virtually identical build but with a ship that has two extra fore weapons, a 33% turn rate advantage and an extra console slot? I'm sure your build is great fun, and effective, but competitive? Not so sure.
> That's a guarantee you would lose as I did extensive testing. +20 is not negligible it means the Vorgons mines will often destroy the target before the beams can even get chance to target and fire. The Constitution is flat out inferior for that type of build,
I'd be very interested in seeing a DPS run or indeed PvP between an optimised Vorgon Carrier and an optimised Constitution class flight deck carrier.
Essentially your build focuses on the +20 speed for mine deployment. The Connie could run an identical build but with two extra fore weapons, a 33% better turn rate and an extra console. Dude, that's like a featherweight against a heavyweight.
Your build sounds fun and effective though if not really competitive, I'm just about to built one in fact!
If I take my core builds that work on full carrier and transfer those builds over to FDC's I end up with a weaker build then I have on the full carrier. Which is why I do not use FDC's. Right now I am into fully themed Carriers trying to maximise pet DPS and for that FDC's are a poor choice as they are not as good at being carriers.
Its not going be that great in ISE runs. I find ISE is a little overrated as what is best for ISE is not best or competitive in other TFO’s. It all depends on the TFO being played in something like The Swarm Elite or Gauntlet runs Elite its very competitive.
As I said before if you place a Connie and Vorgon in the same spot in The Swarm Elite then the Vorgon will kill the waves of NPC’s faster. But in an ISE run the Connie comes out better.
Mines and Carrier pets do not work competitively in PvP. For PvP a Connie would perform massively better. For ISE record runs go with a Connie. For other Elite TFO's there are times I prefer the Vorgon.
What's really the core issue?
The fact that one is statistically superior to the other? Or is it that some one else prefers something different?
Again we're comparing apples to oranges as FDCs are different animals from standard/dreadnaught carriers. Builds are going to be different on them to maximize potential based on their capabilities.
Another combo that works well for themed carriers is Fleet Support + Superior Command Frequency + It’s Another Enterprise + Advanced Rapid Support + Friends in Unusual Places + Feel the Weight of Our Presence. With some captain cooldown. This allows you to summon multiple extra Battleships and Frigates along side your Hangar Pets. Then use the trait interference Drones to boost the damage of all these summons and pets.
I am mixing starship and personal traits in this post. Wingmate + Advanced Rapid Support + Friends in Unusual Places + Feel the Weight of Our Presence are personal traits.
And I agree. Both types have their strengths and weaknesses. And depending on the build, both can be good at what they do best.
While normal carriers could use something to help them compete... they're by no means useless. I'd say they're a bit more strategic in their combat.
And IMO if you can get a Carrier with COMMAND spec seating... that's deadly. I use Suppression Barrage combined with FAW on my Sarco when I fly her and its a blast to slow down enemies while my Slavers go to town on 'em. ANd since I got Superior Area Denial... more beams and a resist debuff ON TOP of the reduced speed debuff from Suppression Barrage.
I always felt Command synergized better with Carrier gameplay than Intel.
Combined with a drain build carriers can do well, but again it takes a lot of effort.
Overall i am of the opinion that carriers need a minor boost to make their use viable at lower investment.
If that boost does not occur few people will be motivated to learn the ropes for a carrier build.
I always thought one or two of the traits on sci carriers could be changed, to buff the offense and maybe defense of hangars
When it comes to full carriers thematic builds come to mind.