It is a 'Big' deal in a way, that any ship that has one or two Sci-Console space alone. That wishes to retain said bonus (of 35% or some), will have to fill those slots twice with Shield Gen.

Any ship that has Three, like my Big O Tact (as an example), that has one reserved space for Ship's special console use dedicated, with 2 left-Slot #2--Borg Modifier for crit. dmg, and the third has 1 Shield Gen.

What must be given up here?

Any Ship that 4 or more Sci-Console slots--they are fine.

Simply, it comes down what ship you are using that can gain that benefit without needlessly sacrificing the more prudent pieces that helps give any ship an edge.

At this point is more than obvious what the concensus is on this proposed change. The overwhelming majority of players are against it. Now its time to see if the devs value our feedback as much as they say they do:

They debating in their work offices...therefore no link
:p

Thus taking away a balanced game.

Several points.

1. The console, as previously used was SOP. This modification disrupts the current damage/survival balance. Excluding any unbalanced items, eg. FAW, the core damage output of high Dpv units demands the highest possible shield points. This is the reason higher regen shields were ignored in favor of high cap shields.
This change shifts the favor to sci console heavy ships to create a tank ship. The disadvantage of that shift is the sci heavy ships lose out on their core abilities to favor survivability. This hurts the intended purpose of science heavy ships. In the same vein, science light ships lose out. Dps ships, favored in this game currently, are not hurt exceedingly. The current main targets, cruisers and escorts, are going to suffer from either a reduction in survivability or a reduction in console space.

2.@soph
Many of these posts are well thought out. The primary thought concerning sci ships is disabling/cc. This change makes the sci fall more so under the role of the cruiser. The boffs that should be used for its conventional purpose are being weakened because of this change. Modifying the trifecta by a single change is a good reason for alarm. Some people may be panincing, or raging incoherently, but the basic idea is the same, this is not a good idea.

3.@chakitty.
The t5 sci ships (recon, Vulcan, advret, the otherone) 3 front same back. All t5 fed cruiser 8 guns total. Easy way to tell the difference is cruisers have a com. Eng slot, the sci has a com sci slot. If you do not believe the stowiki go to the shipyard and only select one of the 3 main ship classes and restrict it to t5 only (ra and va)

For PvE this change allows ships that have the slots to tank better, and if they have high NPC aggro draw all the better. Since those ships have the aggro, escorts/dps ships should then focus on boosting their dps w/the sci slots (flow caps&tet gliders) which they shoulda been doing all along.

For PvP it's a drop in cap, but if a Sci ship wants to be selfish and run 4 of these things fine. Most people will quickly figure it out and just ignore the thing. For dps ships using sci slots on this will lower your dps potential/or use damp consoles to better resist slows/holds and save SP for better DPSing. For cruiser/heal boats it'll lower heal potentials. In other words people who stack these things will be hurting their team.

The main issue is people were given an OP carry over item from the old skill tree and refuse to acknowledge that.

Check the release notes.. they are going to publish this to holo as it is on tribble.

Why the ^&% do they ask for our feedback in the first place?? Once again they have intentionally and completely ignored this issue!

You're forgetting that the consoles you mentioned (flow capacitors) only affect science powers like tachyon beam. And unless you're using tachyon beam, there's no point to having the consoles that buff it.

Same token: if you don't put skill points into flow capacitors then the console for it won't buff it at all. 0x24=0.

Now there's no argument that says we have to put up with lower cap shields. In PvE you need your shields 9but in STF's they will be drained anyway) to tank mobs. in PvP, shield capacity is what separates you from staying alive another CRF volley and being popped quickly. Cruisers suffer in particular due to low turn rates. Science ships aren't so bad off with their higher maneuverability and larger innate shield capacity. But escorts don't get much benefit from the FG.

This is even worse for the KDF which have weaker shields in general, especially for the super squishy BoP classes. in every situation you have the same problem. Less shields = being killed faster. You won't be fighting so aggressively in a PvP if your shields can't absorb a CSV blast. People would start flying escorts and science ships more for their higher agility.

For the most part messing with one console messes with an entire build. Especially if you've got a build that works for you and a nerf to a power or console burns your build to the ground. Nothing is more of a p-off than having to create a completely new build because of said nerf.

The problem, the coding of the patch takes time to do as once stated by a Dev. The notification by a few others and me about this coming change. Was about 2 days ago. Nothing can be changed that quick 48 hours+ back.

Second--they want to see what results become of this, what rearrangements by players will do on their builds.

Me...I am not changing it. Cannot not afford to lessen my current build.

Thirdly...this 'Reduction' will also hamper the next Upgraded verison of the Shield Gen, that is on the Exchange for several EC mil. that gives a 40% increase on shield facing. Or done by in the Doff mission of 'Children Toys'

Lastily, what other console will recieve this as well...there are a few others that have a decent 'high' bonus. What will become of them?

They want you to think they care what you think. But that smoke and mirror trick is starting to fail more and more.