Yet another Rylana debate thread, but this one is based on a personal mission I took up in game some months back.
The following statements are relevant.
"You can only contribute to PvP as an engineer in space if you are a dedicated healer"
"Science skills are worthless in PvE, youre better off flying in a tactical ship"
"The only good setup for an escort is 3 DHCs, 3 Turrets, and a torpedo or DBB, using that AP360 beam is just stupid for your beam overloads"
"Antiproton is garbage because it doesnt come with ACCx3"
"You cant make the tactical scimitar more tankier (sic) in an STF enough to be useful, use the engineering one"
"The forums are full of bad advice, no one there knows a thing about how the game really works"
"No ship is any good or has any value if it has less than LtComm tactical boff seating and 3 tactical consoles"
"The only profession worth flying in space is Tactical, whether PvE or PvP, it doesnt matter, everything else is just gimping yourself"
"Universal consoles are just toys, you will get better results by putting another fleet console there"
"Aux to bat is the only way to make a cruiser do damage, and is also the only way to PvP"
"diminishing returns are a myth, I can tell by watching my damage floaters"
And it goes on and on, the point is that over the year I have played I have gotten some really really bad advice or suggestions. I am the kind of person that actually tries something before I write it off. Every single statement above has been proven wrong by either me or someone I associate with, numerous times.
Perhaps it is the reason I am so cynical or even trollish about posts on the forums nowadays, so many people jump to a conclusion because one person said "x is crap, dont use" that I just wallow in apathy. The fact is, folks, that if you want to make something work, you can. You really can. There are VERY VERY few things in this game that are truly "worthless" or "useless"
I could show you an avenger build with an engineering captain that not only can hold its own in a fight, but can actually outdo many of its peers. Its probably my crowning achievement in regards to making something that shouldnt work, work.
I could also show you a Galaxy class ship that can hit five digit DPS figures in a PUG. (and a level 30 one that can hit 8k)
I could show you a science captain in an escort that will rip most players faces off in PvP, and does about as much damage as a counterpart Tactical captain in an escort.
I could show you gravity wells that will do over 3000 damage per tick in PvP, and over 4000 in PvE. Perhaps not as much of a damage dealer as say a specced cannon volley (which the same ship can do, actually), or a BFAW shenanigans, but that is not modest damage by any means. On top of that, they will pull you so hard that youll HAVE to burn a power to counter them.
I could show you a basic Obelisk carrier that can anchor a premade PvP fight as a dedicated healer, almost on the level of the Recluse on the same captain that just replaced it.
I could show you a Dyson Science Destroyer (the free one) that can drain someone nearly dry in about six seconds, with an engineering captain no less. (build currently slated to go onto one of my scis later, just a test build for now)
Those examples are my no means exhaustive. They are also not meant to stroke my ego or make me seem like I am better than anyone else. They are meant to illustrate the mind of a tinkerer, the mind of someone that absolutely refuses to be pushed into cookie cutter mediocrity or refusing to test limits or just to prove some old theory wrong.
I do it because I am frankly tired of hearing the phrase "X is bad use Y because Z"
Discuss as you will.
Everything is OP, plz nerf Fleet Admiral Rylana - U.S.S. DNT Omega X === Vice Squad/House of Tlhap-Jen ===
Disruptor Induction Coils are bad; use Antiproton Mag Regulators, because you have AP weapons and no Disruptor weapons!
But ~0.01% of the X-Y-Z arguments are like that...heh.
X is some vague and subjective thing where Y is some personal preference and Z almost never supports X vs. Y outside of the whole subjective/vague nature of the argument while ignoring everything else that might go into the build, how the person flies, if they're flying alone or with a team, and what the person is flying against.
I tend to cop out on the whole recommendation thing whenever I can...because it basically depends.
X might be bad, so maybe use Y, because everything that goes into Z might favor X over Y...
Yeah, much easier just to discuss the mechanics of X, Y, and Z...leave the person to figure out what works best for them...cause it depends.
Outside of the obvious things like not using Mag Regs when you're sporting Disruptors or using Induction Coils when you're loaded out with AP...etc, etc, etc.
I'm just another poster on the forums with my own ideas and opinions.
In fairness to sci/scorts in pvp, they are probably more dangerous than any tac/scort ever could be, afterall, they get the maximum benefit of escort firepower without having to overcome buffed defences because they just remove them first.
As for the Galaxy, I think the best thing I've done in the game is to develop a galaxy retro build that can operate with no Tac team, I've yet to lean that build into a proper dps ship but the concept works so it's only a matter of time. (And lets face it, it's definitely a better 'fix' than making an existing ensign tac an ensign uni, which we all know means tac because of the other boffs lol)
Ultimately though, it doesn't matter what is better than what in this game, when was the last time you NEEDED anything more than EPtS and EPtW cycling in pve? (with either TT now and then or Aux2SIF cycling)
A lot of the time though, its a question for simplification for helping someone out, just getting going. When a truly new player is having trouble at CSN and asks about turning their Star Cruiser into a Torp Boat, yes there are ways to make that work, but it would go on for pages and pages and take the guy a month to assemble, and with the not just wall but giant monolith of text, he'd just glaze over. Or you can say 'x is bad use y because z' because at that level of play, its accurate enough, and the guy can just take the simple lessons, make some adjustments, and get back in the game.
In high school science classes they generally teach basic Newtonian physics despite that, at the macro and micro scales, aren't entirely accurate. However the high school level they're just playing with air tracks and maybe doing projectile motion with a slingshot, and so its close enough to learn with and get to the next level. Einsteinian physics and newer can wait till college if they even ever pursue to that level.
Nothing wrong with keeping it simple if, for most people, that IS all they'll ever need, even if it isn't correct 100% of the time.
During the last 4 years of being on the forum i often see.
X is not true, because I have Y and it does Z.
Eg. The nebula is a bad dmg focused ship because its a science ship, with a bend towards eng, not tac in terms of consoles and boff stations.
HI noob L2P,
i could show you my eng nebula and it has come out first place in Sb 24 many times. In pvp i outdamage most tac/scorts. Hence eng/nebbie are wonderful damage dealers, and tac/scorts are really bad damage dealers. Saying eng/nebbie are bad damage dealers compared to tac/scorts isn't true.
Have to chuckle about the complaints on the Gal-X Ens Tac...as if folks didn't notice that's the Fleet Negh'Var BOFF layout that's been around forever - where were all the complaints there, eh?
Because the Neghvar is the Klink counterpart of the FAILAXY, not the Gal-X. If they had given the Gal-R, or even just Fleet Gal-R, Uni Ens, people would be mostly happy about it. Neghvar went from Superfluous Third Engi Ensign to Uni Ensign. It would be fair. After all, the Neghvar has it...
But doing that with the Gal-X is pretty much just trolling, since that was never what was wrong with the ship.