Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,025
# 31
09-23-2013, 02:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurialo View Post
Another good ship is the vesta, but I do not use it and if I remember is not a pure science vessel but a carrier hybrid.
This is worth exploring. What makes a true science ship? The ability to do science. What kind of science?

Science abilities include three fantastic defensive buffs, transfer shield strength, hazard emitters and polarize hull. But a true support ship should have auxiliary power to structural integrity field 3 or extend shields 3, this requires a commander engineer so we can put dedicated healing on the shoulders of the sci-cruiser captains. Not the science ships.

Science ships are best utilized for offensive science.

Most offensive science abilities are heavily pre-nerfed and require substantial investment to get reasonable levels of performance. So our pure science ships need lots of science consoles. Auxiliary power bonuses are nice, but ultimately un-important, there are plenty of ways to boost your aux in any ship.

How many science ability slots do we need? All top tear ships have 12 bridge officer abilities.

Science ships still need to keep themselves alive so lets deduct two slots for tactical team, two slots for emergency power to shields and auxilery power to structural, and two slots for polarize hull and hazard emitters. We might also want emergency power to engines or aux, if so we could give up the emergency power to shields and take a transfer shield strength from science, or our ship might have a Lt.Com engineering slot in which case we wouldn't need to. Either way we have either 5 or 6 slots left for offensive science.

So lets define a True science ship as any ship with 4 or 5 science consoles and space for 5 or 6 offensive science abilities. Which Ships fill this profile? Hear is the science ship ranking, rated by the ships realistic ability to do offensive science.

Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit: 5 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer (vesta Sci): 5 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Wells Temporal Science Ship: 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities.
Tholian Orb Weaver: 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Tholian Recluse Carrier: 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Multi-Mission Reconnaissance Explorer (vesta tac): 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Multi-Mission Strategic Explorer (vesta Eng): 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit: 4 Consoles, 6 Abilities
Fleet Deep Space Science Vessel: 5 Consoles, 5 Abilites.
Fleet Science Vessel Retrofit (nova): 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Fleet Reconnaissance Science Vessel: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Fleet Research Science Vessel Retrofit: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Fleet Advanced Research Vessel: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Atrox: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Advanced Research Vessel: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
D'Kyr: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Reconnaissance Science Vessel: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Deep Space Science Vessel: 4 Consoles, 5 Abilities
Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser: 3 Consoles, 6 Abilities

So there you have it. All these ships have the potential to do horrible things to you with science. Cirtainly some of them can fill other roles thanks to universal slots, and certainly many will perform better if not dedicated to science.

However if you are dedicated to science, your best choices are the Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer (vesta) and the Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit.

Surgested use for 5 consoles and 6 abilities:
Flow capacitor consolesx5
Tractor beam(with drain doff)x2
Tachyon beamx2
Energy Syphonx2

That's a lot of science. I love the wells, I realy do. I fly it a lot. But if I am rating it as a dedicated science ship I simply can not put it above the vesta without a 5th science console.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 619
# 32
09-23-2013, 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwstolemyname View Post
This is worth exploring. What makes a true science ship? The ability to do science. What kind of science?
I wrote the vesta is not a pure science ship because of the hangar, but I didn't said the hangar make the vesta a non good sci ship. I said "non pure" as opposite to a ship without hangars. Ex. comparing vesta and wells, the vesta has one hangar but also a lower turn rate (20% less) ad a less flexible boffs layout.

Quote:
Science abilities include three fantastic defensive buffs, transfer shield strength, hazard emitters and polarize hull. But a true support ship should have auxiliary power to structural integrity field 3 or extend shields 3, this requires a commander engineer so we can put dedicated healing on the shoulders of the sci-cruiser captains. Not the science ships.
that depend how you play your sci ships... when I fly my temporal science ship I only have one lt. tactical and one ensign eng because I choose to focus only on debuffing abilities. If you want to be (also) a healer of course you need a different build.

all depend on your role in a team or how you like to play.

Quote:
Science ships are best utilized for offensive science.
true...


Quote:
Most offensive science abilities are heavily pre-nerfed and require substantial investment to get reasonable levels of performance. So our pure science ships need lots of science consoles. Auxiliary power bonuses are nice, but ultimately un-important, there are plenty of ways to boost your aux in any ship.

How many science ability slots do we need? All top tear ships have 12 bridge officer abilities.

Science ships still need to keep themselves alive so lets deduct two slots for tactical team, two slots for emergency power to shields and auxilery power to structural, and two slots for polarize hull and hazard emitters. We might also want emergency power to engines or aux, if so we could give up the emergency power to shields and take a transfer shield strength from science, or our ship might have a Lt.Com engineering slot in which case we wouldn't need to. Either way we have either 5 or 6 slots left for offensive science.
your choice, mine is very different... for what/how I play, I do not care about any dps, I only use one lt tactical station and one ensign eng station...


Quote:
So lets define a True science ship as any ship with 4 or 5 science consoles and space for 5 or 6 offensive science abilities.
why? that is just your choise, not the only one. I am not telling your choise is wrong/bad I am just telling the way you build a science ship is not the only one.

Quote:
However if you are dedicated to science, your best choices are the Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer (vesta) and the Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit.
your respectable opinion, I never flyed the vesta but I flyed the LRSV and my opinion is the wells is the better choice for what/how I play.

Last edited by eurialo; 09-23-2013 at 04:17 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,531
# 33
09-23-2013, 11:05 AM
This thread is just what you'd expect, when asking "what is the best ship?" everyone posts their favorite and pretty much everyone has a point.

Quote:
what? no mention of the D'Kyr or Nebula? those are my personal favorites.
Personally I'd go for the D'Kyr as well. This one is definately a notch worse than other Sci ships performance-wise, simply because it's missing a Fleet/10-console variant, but I still love mine.

Pleasant design, the Tal'Kyr (pretty much a useless, in-combat vanity pet, but at least it doesn't eat a console slot), all-Vulcan boffs, captain and doffs and my first big purchase on the c-store.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,539
# 34
09-23-2013, 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goku5030 View Post
Hi i just raised a sci fed almost 50.. i want the vesta class .. Any body got tips whats nice sci ship thanks
Wells-class Temporal Science Vessel
Vesta
Fleet Nova Science Vessel
Fleet Olympic Research Science Vessel
Fleet Nebula Adv. Res. Science Vessel
Fleet Luna Recon Science Vessel

The rest are either only for very specific and advanced builds, or worthless.

stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
My Useful List of STO Forum Threads, Ship Builds & More!
It's about time. DEVS NEED ACCOUNTABILITY.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,187
# 35
09-23-2013, 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurialo View Post
I do not agree.
Most of player when playing sto think only about their dps... but all in all when you play in a team everything changes. A specialized scientist can multiply the dps of every teammate debuffing/controlling the opponent or healing teammates and also managing the agro (using the great shield and good hul regen rate and the threat scaling consoles... other sci abilities can help a lot).

Think about what escorts can do (how devasting can be an alpha strike) if your scentist at the same time debuff your opponent and get the agro.
and how exactly isn't an engi in a sci vessel superior in doing this than a sci in a sci vessel...
or how is a sci captain not capable of doing his tricks in an escort or cruiser?

the things you mentioned can be done with any class in a sci vessel, or with a sci in an escort or cruiser to even greater effect.

fact is, the captain science abilities like subnuke, or scatter field or any other, you just name it, are not emplified by a science skill, while on the other hand an engi in theory adds a hell of a lot survivability (a great shieldheal), more energy, instant hull/shield heal.
already there anybody can see that this synergy works great.
Now a tac in a sci vessel may not be good if you build it as a CC vessel, because his dmg amplifiers do not work with those sci powers, but they do work with sci powers that deal dmg, and actually they work very, very well...actually too well.

the synergy a sci brings to a sci vessel is rather scarse...sensor scan, combined with TR or GW, but those work also without sensor scan good enough.

so basically a sci captain exists for his subnuke and his sensor scan and both don't need him to be in a sci vessel, not even by a long shot.
Go pro or go home
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,060
# 36
09-23-2013, 01:37 PM
I will echo the suggestion for the Vesta, plus if you have a Tactical and an Engineer character, they'll be able to use it if you buy the bundle, which is an awesome investment, in my opinion.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,025
# 37
09-23-2013, 06:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurialo View Post
I wrote the vesta is not a pure science ship because of the hangar, but I didn't said the hangar make the vesta a non good sci ship. I said "non pure" as opposite to a ship without hangars. Ex. comparing vesta and wells, the vesta has one hangar but also a lower turn rate (20% less) ad a less flexible boffs layout.
I wasn't criticising your comment. I quoted you because you provoked the question of how we define a science ship. If we don't define what a science ship is how can we judge which is best?

As you say the temporal science vessel has a more flexible boff layout and the vesta has a hanger. There are other differences too, the shield modifiers, the hull points and turn modifiers. The extra bonus that the wells get with a temporal warfair set, the advantages the Vesta gets from aux cannons etc.

My science ships include the fleet nova, the intrepid, the nebula, the Vesta the wells(with full temporal set and mobius console)and the atrox. I also have the maximum number of Boffs (54) so that I can fly these ships and my cruisers and escorts in many different configurations. I enjoy flying all these ships so how am I to judge which is the best science ship?

Now we could judge the ships based simply on their efficiency when tackling different kinds of content. But if we do that we will be judging the science ships largely upon how easy it is to configure them for DPS. What is the point of making such an assessment given that higher DPS can be achieved with both cruisers and escorts?

I also chose to rule out judging the ships in a healing role, because no matter how much you spec a ship with a commander science boff and lieutenant commander engineering boff. You will never be able to match the effectiveness of a dedicated healing ship with a commander engineering boff and a lieutenant commander science boff.

Now I'm not saying you cant support your team with healing in a science ship. You can, and you can do it very well. But you cant do it as well as you could with extend shields 3.

So that leaves offensive science abilities (which includes controls, de-buffs, disables and exotic damage) as our area of focus when judging science ships simply because if our area of interest is healing, tanking or damage we would be more efficient in something else. Offensive science is what science ships do better then others.

That said the game should be about having fun, not necessarily efficiency. But fun is entirely subjective and will be different for every one. We can judge the ships by how fun they are, but there is a grate deal of room for disagreement on the subject of fun.

Now many ships have a grate deal of versatility. Which is fantastic. The Wells has some of the best versatility of all, as does the Vesta. Many other ships have no versatility, with no universal officer slots. So how do we judge the value of that versatility? Certainly its worth far more to some one with only one or two ships then it is to some one with many.

Now the choice to judge the ships upon their ability to inflict science upon things helps us. We can take all those universal slots and pretend that they are science and add up the abilities to see which can do the most science.

Hurrah, the Wells wins. But wait, it only wins in theory because we have to be alive to do the inflicting of science and most of the time most people don't fly with a team they can rely upon to keep them that way. Whats more the more science abilities we use the less powerful we can make each one as we have to spread our consoles and skill points further.

So I made some arbitrarily decisions.

Every ship should deduct two science slots for polarize hull (tractor beam immunity and damage resistance) and hazard emitters (hull heal and DoT removal).

Shield rebalancing is stupidly over powered as it helps you get the most from your heals and regeneration (destributes shield damage to minimize healing points lost on an already full facing) and multiplies the total number of points your enemy must blast through to touch your hull by Four.

So I deducted two slots for tactical team. The buff could be maintained for the same amount of time by using one ability slot and sacrificing two doff slots, but doff slots can be very beneficial to many science abilities so I chose against this. You may decide differantly when making your ranking.

Now with the abilities so far there is no shield heal so I deducted another slot that could be either engineering or science for this (emergency to shields or transfer shield strength) and Finally most people are going to want to use another slot on something else, either a tactical ability like high yield, an attack pattern, or an engineering ability like emergency power to engines or another emergency power to shields. So I deducted a final slot.

The total number of ability slots I therefore deducted was six. Which If you look at a range of the most competitive PVP and PVE builds, is quite representative of the norm. Though the abilities chosen are often different from my selection, (what matters is that they arn't offensive science).

Now we can judge ships with a large number of universal boff slots fairly along side those with a more ridged selection.

Certainly there is a degree of bias in my ranking. But I think I have at least presented my opinion faily among every other opinion in this thread by making my rational completely transparent.

Last edited by pwstolemyname; 09-23-2013 at 06:14 PM.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 619
# 38
09-24-2013, 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baudl View Post
and how exactly isn't an engi in a sci vessel superior in doing this than a sci in a sci vessel...
or how is a sci captain not capable of doing his tricks in an escort or cruiser?


the things you mentioned can be done with any class in a sci vessel, or with a sci in an escort or cruiser to even greater effect.

fact is, the captain science abilities like subnuke, or scatter field or any other, you just name it, are not emplified by a science skill,
some career specific abilities are amplified by skills... ex attack pattern alpha or sensor scan... some ships/career are better then others depending the role you want to play.
you can do hybrid , but also trade off: an eng. cpt flying escorts can survive longer than a tac captain flying escorts, but will never have the same dps of a tactical captain.... on the opposite the tactical captain will never have the healing abilities of a eng. captain.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,489
# 39
09-24-2013, 12:53 AM
I'll throw a vote out there for carriers, because I don't see many people mentioning carriers. The biggest problem with "proper" science ships is that they are forced to compromise between killing stuff (weapon power) and science (aux power) constantly. People try and get creative with batteries or torpedo boats, and the Vesta takes a stab at solving that by giving you an aux-powered weapon... But they're all still compromises. Carriers solve the problem in a much more definitive way by giving you autonomous and self contained firepower so you can kill things and do science simultaneously. The Atrox certainly works well, but the Recluse is substantially better and more flexible. Highly recommended for science captains with a lot of EC to throw around.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,997
# 40
09-24-2013, 02:01 AM
Vesta Aventine
Fleet Recon

These I have found to be the Best STF science ships in the game
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
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 06:03 AM.