Should I try out Star Trek Online?

[Lord Revan]

So, New Kentaur. I wonder if the STO writers are going for allegory here, especially with the Kentauri versions of MSNBC and Fox News that you can access as you wander their filthy polluted ghetto full of people dying from the toxins in the air.

You mean the bad guy, being so obvious parody of Donald Trump that only thing missing was that he didn't have an orange tribble on his head.

Honestly part before the govermental building was decent enough as it wasn't really specific to USA and "could be anywhere" so to speak, but the minister of defense being a) irredeemble xenophobic jerk that made you wonder if the Tzenkethi bombed the wrong target b) clearly meant to repesent Trump was big minus point for me, had they employd even a tiny speck of sudtlety I probably would been ok with the mission nothing ground breaking but decent enough. Trump is not a nice person I get that but what fuck am I suppose to do about, it's not like the finnish defense force could invade Washington DC even if they wanted to (and obviously they don't want to).

in many ways I consider New Kentar and that Kentari was big wasted opportunity, they could have made a semi-decent story of the kentari being trapped in traditions and too afraid of change (kind of like ST6) that they were slowly killing themselves, instead we got a mission that combinied all the worst aspects of trek trying to do "Message shows" with a cartoony bad guy and childlishly simple moral.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

And it came as a surprise to no-one that minister douchebag was behind all the bad shit that the player had to wade through in the newest mission.

[Lord Revan]

When you compare minister pussygrabber to General Chang from TUC the difference is staggering, Chang was never needlessly antagonistic towards Kirk and co (sure during the diplomatic visit he was somewhat antagonistic but no more then you'd expect from a high ranking klingon) the way he spoke and acted you could understand why Chang did what he did even if you didn't agree with him.

With the Kentari minister from square one he is hell bent to make sure that you got 0 sympathy for his point of view and only reason you want to learn anything about the kentari is that you can kick said minister in the balls(or equilevant) several times in a row.

That's why Chang succeeded and the Kentari failed even if their basic character type is essentially the same, aka a traditionalist so scared of change that they're willing to commit high treason rather then allow the status que to change. Hell Gen. Chang and his forces were even a repesentation of the Soviet Union traditionalists that tried to depose Gorbachev because of the changes he made.

[houser2112]

That's why Chang succeeded

Succeeded at what? Chang's plot failed, spectacularly. His cloak wasn't sufficient to stop the heroes from vaporizing his ship with half a dozen torpedoes, allowing them to beam down in time to thwart the assassination attempt.

[Lord Revan]

That's why Chang succeeded

Succeeded at what? Chang's plot failed, spectacularly. His cloak wasn't sufficient to stop the heroes from vaporizing his ship with half a dozen torpedoes, allowing them to beam down in time to thwart the assassination attempt.

he succeeded as a character. It's like this in-universe Chang failed, but out-of-universe the character called "general Chang" in the fictional work called "Star Trek VI:the Undiscovered Country" played his role within that story successfully. That was my point to begin with Chang succeeded as a character as he likeble enough that you almosted wanted him to win even if you knew it wasn't possible, where as minister pussygrabber is a obvious parody of a not very liked right wing president whose only purpose in to preach the political ideology of the designers and as such is slallow as a puddle and extremely unlikeble even as a fictional character and not just within the story and thus fails miserbly.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

That's why Chang succeeded

Succeeded at what? Chang's plot failed, spectacularly. His cloak wasn't sufficient to stop the heroes from vaporizing his ship with half a dozen torpedoes, allowing them to beam down in time to thwart the assassination attempt.

he succeeded as a character. It's like this in-universe Chang failed, but out-of-universe the character called "general Chang" in the fictional work called "Star Trek VI:the Undiscovered Country" played his role within that story successfully. That was my point to begin with Chang succeeded as a character as he likeble enough that you almosted wanted him to win even if you knew it wasn't possible, where as minister pussygrabber is a obvious parody of a not very liked right wing president whose only purpose in to preach the political ideology of the designers and as such is slallow as a puddle and extremely unlikeble even as a fictional character and not just within the story and thus fails miserbly.

3 things that bothered me about Chang:

• He was incredibly smooth-headed for a Klingon.
  His eyepatch was crudely nailed/riveted on.
  He quoted Shakespeare at inappropriate moments.

Klingon Academy was very good at exploring his backstory, including how he lost his eye to begin with.

[FaxModem1]

For me, it'll really depend on where they go with the Kentari. The Lukari have been a lens for us in game materials and extra materials. I wonder if we're going to get more on the Kentari as well.

[Lord Revan]

Obviously no character is without flaws, however with Kentari Cryptic isn't starting off with a strong note.

3 things that bothered me about Chang:

He was incredibly smooth-headed for a Klingon.
His eyepatch was crudely nailed/riveted on.
He quoted Shakespeare at inappropriate moments.
Klingon Academy was very good at exploring his backstory, including how he lost his eye to begin with.

here's a question though did those 3 things ruin the character for you, or was it just "I wish they had done this differently" as for most people those are 2 very different things. With the Kentari minister, the flaws in the character ruined the character for me.

[Elheru Aran]

Chang's eyepatch being nailed on wasn't an issue for me. It fits the Klingon aesthetic, I thought. As for the smooth-headedness... the TOS movie Klingons were never as bumpy as TNG-and-after Klingons. Chang was just pretty smooth, but then Aztebur isn't particularly bumpy either. IIRC Christopher Plummer influenced that decision, he wanted a simpler makeup that wouldn't take a long time to apply, so they just did a bald cap with a few corrugations for him.

The Shakespeare... well. OF COURSE he quotes it at inappropriate moments, he's geeking out on his Earth knowledge and throwing out his favorite quotes. Sort of like if you had a friend who mostly talked in Doctor Who quotes.

[Lord Revan]

honestly all of the major TUC klingons have smaller ridges then the ones in TNG or earlier movies had compare Worf from TUC to his grandson (aka Worf from TNG) for a good example.

From what I've read the main story for Mirrors and Smoke was written before before Trump was elected so we probably rule out that as direct reference however that doesn't excuse the design used for the minister of defense.

[Highlord Laan]

honestly all of the major TUC klingons have smaller ridges then the ones in TNG or earlier movies had compare Worf from TUC to his grandson (aka Worf from TNG) for a good example.

From what I've read the main story for Mirrors and Smoke was written before before Trump was elected so we probably rule out that as direct reference however that doesn't excuse the design used for the minister of defense.

The Kentari still fit the far-right desire for a libertarian paradise to a T though. Blatant misinformation from new sources? Check. Completely unrestrained capitalism? Check. The poor and uneducated dying in droves on filthy streets in a toxic atmosphere while the obviously better Wealthy Elite and Captains of Industry dwell in pristine high rises? Check. The military used as attack dogs at the behest of the Executive Chosen Ones? Check.

All it would have taken is some color commentary from human captains and/or crew members.

[mr friendly guy]

The latest reputation bonuses don't seem that useful for the style I play. The tractor beam ability might be useful especially combined with one of the traits which leaves a bomb after tractor beaming and another captain's trait which boosts auxilliary of myself and decrease of the opponent when I use a control ability such as tractor beam. Might work as a good shield drainer combined with the quantum phase set, in a ship which is built like a tank.

But otherwise, nothing that I particularly must grind for.

[mr friendly guy]

Anyone know of a good ship with high hull points and 5 tactical consoles and 8 weapon slots? I am thinking of using a ship with 5 polaron boosters, using universal console piezo set for a further 37.5% boost to polaron and a dynamic redistribution module for 17.8% boost to direct energy damage. I want to make a ship that will simply "out slug" others.

[Lord Revan]

I'm pretty sure no such ship exists, IIRC even "tactical" cruisers have only 4 Tac console mods and Escort generally have piss poor hull and even those that don't have only about average HP, also I think most escorts have only 7 weapons (5 front, 2 aft).

Granted I could be wrong but honest I'd consider which one you'd want to drop. if you don't mind only 4 Tac consoles there's decent amount of "tactical" cruisers that have decent to great HP and 8 weapons (4 front,4 aft).

[mr friendly guy]

I can drop the fifth tactical console I guess. Once I get full skills in the competitive reputation, I can use a tractor beam ability to help with one on one battles. Draw the enemy ship closer while tractor beam weakens their shields, then fire away with my superior firepower.

[mr friendly guy]

Got the 26th century Enterprise J ship, which I have called USS Bazinga J. Because. Its gravitic lance (at least on paper) is pretty wanktastic doing up to 57000 damage and 10097 radiation damage each second, both of which has 50% shield penetration. This is of course after I activated all boosters. But boy, this is a great ship for slugging out against opposition. High hull strength, 2 carrier bays, and I got enough polaron boosters to give 187.5% to polaron + another 37.8% to directed energy damage (includes polaron, gravitic lance and the kinetic cutting beam). These are all passive. It normally moves like a whale, but I got enough boosters that it turns reasonably well. I got shield draining abilities as well.

Looking forward to testing this, especially once I get the tractor beam ability from the competitive reputation.

The question is, what's the best carrier pets? I am not sure whether I should get the elite Cestus fighters that come with this. I normally use elite delta flyers and elite Jem Hadar ships on my carriers. I think the Jem Hadar will ram enemy vessels.

[houser2112]

Anyone know of a good ship with high hull points and 5 tactical consoles and 8 weapon slots? I am thinking of using a ship with 5 polaron boosters, using universal console piezo set for a further 37.5% boost to polaron and a dynamic redistribution module for 17.8% boost to direct energy damage. I want to make a ship that will simply "out slug" others.

I think the Arbiter (Fleet Battlecruiser (T6)) will be the best compromise. It has good hull, 8 weapon slots, though only 4 tac consoles. It also has decent maneuverability for a cruiser.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Anyone know of a good ship with high hull points and 5 tactical consoles and 8 weapon slots? I am thinking of using a ship with 5 polaron boosters, using universal console piezo set for a further 37.5% boost to polaron and a dynamic redistribution module for 17.8% boost to direct energy damage. I want to make a ship that will simply "out slug" others.

I think the Arbiter (Fleet Battlecruiser (T6)) will be the best compromise. It has good hull, 8 weapon slots, though only 4 tac consoles. It also has decent maneuverability for a cruiser.

Does it have to be a Federation ship that has that combination? Because for the Feds, none of the cruisers have any more than 4 tacs meaning your best bet if you absolutely have to have 5 is the pilot escort bundle. If you can deal with the slightly weaker hull and one fewer aft gun the pilot escorts (any faction) are what you want. The KDF also has the Mat'Ha raptor, the fleet version of which has stronger shields and hull while retaining the 5/5 guns and consoles of the aforementioned pilot escorts.

Of course, if it doesn't have to be a Fed ship then what you're after is the Romulan T6 Scimitar Bundle, specifically the Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird. All the hull you could wish for, 5 tac consoles and 5 forward weapons. If you can live with or compensate for the turn rate it's ideal.

There are others, but they're either lockbox or lobi vessels.

[mr friendly guy]

Of course, if it doesn't have to be a Fed ship then what you're after is the Romulan T6 Scimitar Bundle, specifically the Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird. All the hull you could wish for, 5 tac consoles and 5 forward weapons. If you can live with or compensate for the turn rate it's ideal.

There are others, but they're either lockbox or lobi vessels.

I am trying to avoid using an escort for the style of play want to try out. Basically its a big beamboat which is will outlast the opposition. I am also using a tractor beam so I can have a situation where I go toe to toe on a ship by tractor beaming it in (once I get full ranks in the competitive wargame reputation I will also have a forced tractor ability) and just hitting it from close range. This tractor beam tactic would favour my style of play because I will have a high hull and shield, but also lots of draining abilities so my beams will continue to hit them at high weapons power plus abilities to make my tractor beam do damage or drain shields.

A few posts above I have already mentioned the consoles I am using for my 26 th century ship to boost polarons and direct damage in general to high proportions. Only problem is the 26th century ship only has 4 tac consoles.

Since I only play Fed, I can only use lockbox or lobi ships and not Romulan or Klingons. Which lockbox or lobi ships did you have in mind with the 5 tac consoles?

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Of course, if it doesn't have to be a Fed ship then what you're after is the Romulan T6 Scimitar Bundle, specifically the Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird. All the hull you could wish for, 5 tac consoles and 5 forward weapons. If you can live with or compensate for the turn rate it's ideal.

There are others, but they're either lockbox or lobi vessels.

I am trying to avoid using an escort for the style of play want to try out. Basically its a big beamboat which is will outlast the opposition. I am also using a tractor beam so I can have a situation where I go toe to toe on a ship by tractor beaming it in (once I get full ranks in the competitive wargame reputation I will also have a forced tractor ability) and just hitting it from close range. This tractor beam tactic would favour my style of play because I will have a high hull and shield, but also lots of draining abilities so my beams will continue to hit them at high weapons power plus abilities to make my tractor beam do damage or drain shields.

A few posts above I have already mentioned the consoles I am using for my 26 th century ship to boost polarons and direct damage in general to high proportions. Only problem is the 26th century ship only has 4 tac consoles.

Since I only play Fed, I can only use lockbox or lobi ships and not Romulan or Klingons. Which lockbox or lobi ships did you have in mind with the 5 tac consoles?

According to the STO wiki, of the cross-faction ships that have 5 tac consoles, only four of them have 8 weapon slots:

Undine Nicor
Krenim Imperium
Ferengi Nandi
Husnock

Of those four, the Undine ship is only T5-U, both it and the Ferengi offerings are 4/4 instead of 5/3. This leaves the Krenim and Husnock designs, the Husnock has the strongest hull but I don't think it can mount cannons. Which is strange as its starship trait boosts the damage output of both Cannon Rapid Fire and Beam Overload. As you say you're using beams that of course won't be a problem.

The only weakness is that those ships only get +10 bonus weapon power instead of the +15 that most of the other tac-heavy ships enjoy.

[mr friendly guy]

Thanks. The Husnock ship looks like the best fit for what I have in mind. Its higher hull strength looks like a good it. Its directed energy flux is another great starship trait to have. Now just have to patiently save up the lobi crystals.

[mr friendly guy]

Interestingly, the wiki has this to say about the Husnock.

Though the Husnock were eradicated as a species in 2366, their home planet and star system remained – along with everything in it, even starships. Alliance engineers have taken recovered Husnock Warships and restored them to operational capacity. These massive vessels are well-armed, and can withstand a great deal of punishment in combat engagements.

These disappeared species which appeared in Trek have always struck me as an unused plot device which only fan fiction writers would want to manipulate. Consider these 3 disappeared races.

1. Husnock - wiped out by the immortal Douwd in TNG. Their infrastructure is still there, and so could be used by any faction once you get around compatibility issues. They were a race dedicated to war, so we could churn out ships from their shipyards. Heck the Feds could theoretically staff it with photonics, and since there are no civilians with civilian needs..

2. Zalkonians - "John Doe's" race from Transfiguration. They were ascending evolving into a race which presumably didn't need matter starships anymore since he could change into energy. I imagine by the time of STO, they may very well have ascended leaving their former territories empty, like how the Vorlons did in B5.

3. The "Minosians". Or at least the race that is now extinct on Minos from the episode "Arsenal of freedom." They left behind factories churning out weapons for customers. Some of their ground drones seem pretty good for ground combat. If the computer AI objects to takeover (hey, the citizens are dead, may as well use their war machines which wiped them out), use a Breen energy dampening weapon, nullify its power and then gradually take over and reprogram it.

Lots of potential for the Federation to make use of. I will give STO credit though, for using the most epic "disappeared" race, the Iconians.

[Elheru Aran]

IIRC they did introduce a Minosian drone pet?

[Lord Revan]

IIRC they did introduce a Minosian drone pet?

2 versions of it too IIRC, one for space and 1 for ground.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Tier 5, Tier 5-U and Tier 6 Raiders and all Tier 5, Tier 5-U and Tier 6 starships with a Tactical Commander seat, 7 weapons, and 1 or fewer Hangar Bays will receive a Heavy Weapons Slot and access to a basic upgradeable Heavy Weapon.

Players already in possession of one of these starships may claim a Heavy Weapon from the Reclaim tab of the Dilithium Store (for 0 Dilithium).

I must be doing something wrong as I have ships that have a Heavy Weapon slot but I cannot find any heavy weapons in the dil. store. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong section.