Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Shipyards
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
Yes, it's time to start another one of THOSE threads. Namely, this time for one of the least used science vessels in the game, the Nebula.

Ironically, it wouldn't be such a bad ship, if it wasn't for the fact that it tries to be a cruiser and a science ship, and doesn't play to the strengths of either.

It will carry a secondary deflector, and has a shield modifier best described as 'excessive' even before the fleet version is even considered, cmdr science boff, and a better turn rate than almost any cruiser.

Except: it has a lower turn rate than any science vessel so using point science abilities is out of the question, it has more engineering consoles than needed over a third tac console, it has 3/3 weapons instead of a cruiser's 4/4, and the hull strength is that of a science ship instead of a cruiser. The worst of both worlds.

So, how do we fix this?
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,451
# 2
03-11-2014, 10:03 AM
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/sh....php?t=1039231



I dunno, the Nebula is like a cross between the "Science" and "Cruiser" ships. I consider it a niche ship that is neither awesome nor junk and is best used by players that can make it work well.
Kathryn S. Beringer - The Dawn Patrol

Solaris build - Veritatum Liquido Cernene
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 260
# 3
03-11-2014, 10:08 AM
The Nebula really isn't for sci captains, they can pilot it if they want to but the ship is meant for eng captains who want to fly a sci ship. It's a great support ship similar the the Ambassador class.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,103
# 4
03-11-2014, 10:14 AM
Nebula's the odd ball of the bunch and it's because of it's layout: It has a Lt. Universal, which means it can lean towards Tac, Sci and Eng, but it doesn't have the Console power to lean towards a Tac setting, it has a ton of armor, but nowhere near Cruiser level and it has good Sci capability yet it's just... there.

Then again, its description DOES call it the "workhorse" of the Federation, so it's supposed to be a jack of all trades ship.

...

You think we can slap on Dual Cannons and call it a day?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
# 5
03-11-2014, 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmdrscarlet View Post
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/sh....php?t=1039231



I dunno, the Nebula is like a cross between the "Science" and "Cruiser" ships. I consider it a niche ship that is neither awesome nor junk and is best used by players that can make it work well.
I agree. As said, the boff layout is fine. A meaner support cruiser in terms of boff abilities (grav well 3, TBR 3, etc)

It's the kinetics that let it down the most. It doesn't have the weapons slots to go cruiserish, and its speed and turn rate prevent it from going full science vessel.

Change one or the other, and it would become a rather potent and wanted ship. No console changes or boff changes needed (unlike the galaxies)
Captain
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,263
# 6
03-11-2014, 10:58 AM
Wow. So like, the Nebula is the reason I still have my own beef with Geko. There was a huge lobby of players, myself included, who felt it should have been a cruiser. But at the time there were just way too many cruisers, so it ended up being a science ship. But a cruiser-y science ship. It just came out all wrong. The very first version of it on Tribble was even more horrendous than what was released. It's probably the low point of Geko's career with the game. At least in my opinion. It demonstrated how painted into a corner the layout system was, and how they were quickly running out of ways to design the ships.

Also keep in mind that back then the science powers had a much more narrow arc of fire. Making the slow turn rate on a ship that could equip all of these narrow arc science powers infuriating. It couldn't properly harness the science aspect of its layout because it was too much of a cruiser.

It should have always been a cruiser.

I think if any ship deserves a complete scrap and reboot from the ground up, it's the Nebula. Simply because when it was created there were no such things as 3-pack bundles, tactical-engi-sci "versions" or different "modes." (Well I guess the Garumba had a mode switch, but I'm trying to remember if it was before or after the Nebula).

Thing is, I doubt they can do it. Or would do it. Because it's an old ship. And already you know entrenched into what it is. And a lot of people already spent resources on it.

So it seems like a dead horse topic.

And it's taking all my willpower not to succumb to the ire and vitriol I still have for how the Nebula came to being in STO. The only thing that angers me more is the way the Excelsior was released as superior to the Sovereign. Which I later found out was heavily influenced by a certain someone's own fan bias and taste (They liked the Excelsior best, so it had to be better than the current assault cruiser! ARGH!)

A NEW Nebula might be cool, but since it already has a fleet version, it'd probably be more like a modern ship inspired by the Nebula and look kind of like the Avenger. I don't know. Maybe.

But actually rebooting the Nebula? I don't see it happening. And thinking about how they handled the Nebula in the first place just makes me mad.

I'll give some credit though, with the 180 degree arcs now it's a much better experience flying it.

But it is old and there are better science ships to do science stuff. And better cruisers to do cruiser stuff.

I still love its look. But ...

Ugh.

Just ugh.
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,451
# 7
03-11-2014, 11:10 AM
So ... uh, tell us how you really feel
Kathryn S. Beringer - The Dawn Patrol

Solaris build - Veritatum Liquido Cernene
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 128
# 8
03-11-2014, 11:28 AM
Hence my suggestion of 'give it a cruiser's weapon's load, boost the hull a teensy bit'.

The idea of the Nebula in the show was 'slightly cut down Galaxy that turned into the new Miranda'. Its biggest letdown is the weaponry. And as cryptic at least once was willing to put more weapons slots on (galaxy dread), why not ask for it? Best solution to the ship that I can see.

Beck, even 4/3 or 4/2 would make it a far scarier ship, as it would make A Dual Beam Bank build possible.

Making it the jack of all trades ship it COULD be would do wonders for it.
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 372
# 9
03-11-2014, 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptrichardson12 View Post
Yes, it's time to start another one of THOSE threads. Namely, this time for one of the least used science vessels in the game, the Nebula.

Ironically, it wouldn't be such a bad ship, if it wasn't for the fact that it tries to be a cruiser and a science ship, and doesn't play to the strengths of either.

It will carry a secondary deflector, and has a shield modifier best described as 'excessive' even before the fleet version is even considered, cmdr science boff, and a better turn rate than almost any cruiser.

Except: it has a lower turn rate than any science vessel so using point science abilities is out of the question, it has more engineering consoles than needed over a third tac console, it has 3/3 weapons instead of a cruiser's 4/4, and the hull strength is that of a science ship instead of a cruiser. The worst of both worlds.

So, how do we fix this?
The ship its kitbashed from is a dog and you want to know why it is a dog too? really?
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,371
# 10
03-11-2014, 11:53 AM
You might be happier with the Odyssey Science Cruiser, an 8-gun cruiser with sensor analysis and scienc-y bridge layout. Nebbie is the step down from that. Unfrotunately science ships are weak-by-design on firepower and hit-points, so its a really big step down. The could buff the hull and cut the turn-rate a little bit, but they won't do it, since they don't change ships people have already bought. Odyssey or deal with it.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 AM.