galaxy x improvment or fleet galaxy x variant

neo1nx

hi everyone, dreadnought cruiser pilot or not and devs...


i am opening this news thread on the galaxy dreadnought cruiser to submit to the devs and players somes ideas on how to enhanced the galaxy x to make it on part with the new cstore, lockbox and fleet ship that are out lately and correct some ( i think ) design flaw.

but first, as to cut short any polemic, i will answers one of the first question that some non exprerience player or troll might ask by reading my introduction like:
what?!! why do you think the dreadnought cruiser is not at the level of the other ship of it tiers? he got a lance, more hull than the assault cruiser for example and a cloack, seem perfectly balanced to me! leave it as it is!!

well...no, it is NOT! especially since the news ship that are out there lately ( bug, dkora, regent and fleet ship just to name a fews) that have widen the gap even further.
i will not entering into too much detail about this, because it have been cover already by the best pvper in the game like mavairo and lately ghostyandfrosty in their cruiser thread, but to sum it up the turn rate and inertia is what make this ship miserable, reducing his TOT ( time on target ) to use the expression of ghostyandfrosty, who also reduce is tanking abilitie and it capaciti to fire some narrow arc weapons to the enemy.
that why most of the serious pvper avoid it and that you rarely see one in pvp matches ( i am part of the few dissident that dare do so when i have time in between my grinds;) )
you might argue that hakaishin claimed on his thread that if your a good pilot and use the galaxy x correctly you can do great things with it.
i will tend to agree, this ship can do great things, sometimes, but if you use haikishin build you will rapidly discovered that it is a relativly narrow type of gameplay.
beside haikishin said that he like the inertia of the ship due to a real life injurie that prevent him from using other more agile ship efficiently.
so it is an indication to me that this ship, considering it apparently design purpose have too much limitations.
on top of that the dreadnought BO layout is clearly outdatted for the purpose of the ship.
because yes, this is a tactical ship, he has tanking capability like any cruiser but it design purpose is to do damage and i don't think hakaishin will contradict me on this point.
having only 1 lt tact slot is really a limitation, even with the current doff system.
the problem is that we don't have the possiblilitie to change the bo layout to make it more tactical like we can do on the dkora, regent or odyssey for example with their universal BO.


so... now the big question, how can we improve it WITHOUT make him OVERPOWERED or ( and that is more likely ) make him took the role of an already existing federation cruiser.
that tricky i think, but i have some suggestion for achieving this.
but depending on how cryptic will resolve the fleet dreadnought version problem ( to clarify, either they succeded to give us a fleet version... or not )
i have 2 " build" to show you what, i think, will improve the ship in the right direction.


so here it is, first the " not a fleet version enhancement";)

_first the turn rate and inertia, currently, is at 6 base turn rate and 25 inertia.
NO!.... i will not ask for unrealistic enhancement!!like the same turnrate as the exelsior for example, but just a little would be enought in my opinion.
i want a turn rate in between the actual galaxy x and the assault cruiser, i don't known if the engine of cryptic is capable of that, because it's not make round number ( 6.5 turn rate and 27.5 inertia ).
but i think that all we can realistically ask for a non fleet overhaul and i am also convince that just that will make a great change.

_then the bo layout; that the tricky part, and this is how i think it should be done
remove the lt science spot and transfert him to tactical
in that way we will have 2 lt tact slot, notice that it is not a configuration that already exist in other ship in fed faction as far as i known and that he don't step on exelsior's toes ( lt commander slot )
it is i think more in the design purpose of the ship, meaning more tactical and less tanking
it also open new configuration like more powerfull combos for beam build or, and that the best part, a real canon build with 2 canon fire rapid power ( even if it is just version 1) without special doff that, to the best, never get closed to a real global cooldown reduction time.

_ and last, to continue on the tactical direction, redistribuate the power level
right now the ship as +5 to all subsystem
i propose +10 to weapon
+5 to shield
+5 to engine
0 to aux

so you see, it is i think, a more intelligent redistribution of his power regarding it tactical purpose, and not an "i want more power without paying the price for it".



so i have finish with the simple overhaul of the galaxy x, now let get to an hypothetical fleet version, here it is:

_here, the turnrate will be the same as the " free" assault cruiser, meaning 7 base turn rate and 30 inertia
but to justify that ( even if we are speaking of a fleet version here ) the shield and hull enhancement usually granted to fleet version will be reduced.
for example if, let said, the assault cruiser fleet version have a +3000 shield capacity and +4000 to hull ( number are completely arbitrary ) then the dreadnought fleet version will "only" have +1500 or 1000 to shields and +2000 to hull

_for the bo layout, the same proposal as above
_for the power level same distribution as above too
_and finally a 4th tact console slot

and that concluded my fleet version proposal.

so now i wait for your opinions,the dev ( if they ever read this ) the top pvper, if you have to suggest a realistic improvment to this ship that will change you way of looking at it and not tag it as a noob ship, what would it be?

baudl

fresh week, fresh galaxy x thread...atleast not always from the same circle of persons.

i wonder if the devs will take it into consideration...probabaly not.

PS: yes for me the week starts on saturday evening...it's part of my religious believe, Pastafarianism. Deal with it!

veraticus

With the way the system is now, it won't matter much what they do.
Universal will be seen as OP even on the regular Galaxy ships.

Increasing the turn rate to a more realistic 7 or the ideal 8 would have people crying all over the place. Even if in the long run it wouldn't change a whole lot in the way of making it OP.
But perception would be of turning it into an OP ship because it wouldn't be free lunch anymore.

Boosting its system power distribution to your proposed +10 +5 +5 +0 setup wouldn't mean a whole lot to end game. Seeing as most already run a maxed layout anyways.

Increase the angle of which the lance can target, and let it track its targets within that angle.
Or even leave its angle where it is, but again let it track its target for both shots.

Restrict the cap on power levels.
Only allow the large Cruisers to have more than 1 power level at a time above 100.

All sorts of ideas. But the guys running the show don't care unless they can put in the C-Store and make a grundle off of something that should be free considering you already earned/purchased it in the first place.

buddha1369

They are adding saucer separation to the gal-x, mabye they will change some other things when they do. At the very least separation will improve the turn rate

caio492

buddha1369 wrote: »

They are adding saucer separation to the gal-x, mabye they will change some other things when they do. At the very least separation will improve the turn rate

They said the they will be adding the saucer sep. since february 2012.

mrsupertrekguy

Even saucer sep wouldn't make the Gal-X useful because of its high price. For $25, there's the Armitage, and the Cat Carrier, which are far better than the current Gal-X. So unless Saucer Sep include a MAJOR boost to trunrate of the stardrive and has the Saucer using its lance or firing its DHC's, most players would rather spend the $25 on the other ships.

centersolace

As a Gal-X Pilot and enthusiast, I'm okay with the dreadnoughts stats. What I do want though, is a 10th console, and a Lt. Commander Tac slot. (Attack-Pattern-Omega would be Boss!)

neo1nx

Ok centersolace, thank for your answer but, how do you want to implement that?
You don't want a free lt commander slot do you?
For the 10th console slot i am ok, same as my proposal, so we are speaking about a fleet version here.

veraticus

neo1nx wrote: »

Ok centersolace, thank for your answer but, how do you want to implement that?
You don't want a free lt commander slot do you?
For the 10th console slot i am ok, same as my proposal, so we are speaking about a fleet version here.

How about, put in that slot and lt commander slot for... free!
Get rid of the stupid pay 2 win system and let the players actually enjoy playing without the need to empty ones pocketbook.

hereticknight085

veraticus wrote: »

How about, put in that slot and lt commander slot for... free!
Get rid of the stupid pay 2 win system and let the players actually enjoy playing without the need to empty ones pocketbook.

Yeah, and also give us all ships for free and make it so we can fly ANY ship in the star trek universe. Yeah... sorry bro, not gonna happen.

veraticus

hereticknight085 wrote: »

Yeah, and also give us all ships for free and make it so we can fly ANY ship in the star trek universe. Yeah... sorry bro, not gonna happen.

Actually that's a great idea:rolleyes:
If its a new ship it should be free. You don't buy levels in any other mmo do you?
Nor do you have to use real world cash to get new gear in any other legitimate mmo do you?
And no, a monthly fee is not the same thing.

I get that this is a game and that they need a source of cash flow, I'm fine with that.
But there are other proven models out there that work perfectly well. Just because PWE isn't using it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or is feasible.

Offer ship "parts" packages for example. Various costume elements for the ships and your crew. Exp boosts, diplomacy boosts, bags, different color schemes, quirky group items like a bot that buys and sells stuff to help you clear your inventory, pets etc. The capability is there. Why make those of us who don't want to spend 25 BUCKS PER SHIP suffer a disadvantages game play?

centersolace

neo1nx wrote: »

Ok centersolace, thank for your answer but, how do you want to implement that?
You don't want a free lt commander slot do you?
For the 10th console slot i am ok, same as my proposal, so we are speaking about a fleet version here.

Well it would be nice wouldn't it..... but I wouldn't mind the fleet version having those stats. In fact, I already have myself a Fleet Module for it.

insanerandomnes

Working as intended...

Time on target? I only need about five seconds too kill an enemy, thats half the amount of time my tractor beam lasts...

teleon22

@ OP:

Excellent changes. It won't happen, but they are non-the less nice!

doomicile

Definitely add another Tac or Science console slot.

I think giving the Dreadnaught a LtC. Tac Boff would only truly benefit Tac Captains so I'm not so sure about that idea.

Perhaps make the Cloaking Console a dual-function multiphasic cloaking device so that it functions the same out of combat as a straight cloak but also can be used in combat as a temporary damage reduction by say 90% over 10 seconds with a 2min cooldown.

teleon22

So what if the Fleet Dreadnaught would have these statistics then:

Bridge Officer Stations:
-Lieutenant Tactical Officer Station
-Lieutenant Tactical Officer Station
-Commander Engineering Officer Station
-Lieutenant Commander Engineering Officer Station
-Ensign Science Officer Station

Consoles:
-4 Engineering
-2 Science
-4 Tactical

Base Stats:
Hull: 40,000
Shield Modifier: 1.05
Turn Rate: 6
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Inertia Rating: 25
Device Slots: 4

Bonus Power:
+5 all power levels

neo1nx

Yeah, doomicile, once i have dream of lt commander tact BO for this ship, to put a BO3 or attack pattern in it, but now with almost 1,5 years flying this ship, i think it might not be the best choice, after all.
Not saying that it a bad choice, just not the best...maybe

As for your cloak console, i think this would be higly unlikely, i am not saying i wouldn't like it, but you speak about cryptic designing a new special console, just for a fleet ship!?
No, the only change we may be able to make them do are easy one, adjusting power, move a BO, put 1more console slot ect, but nothing that would required them to create a new power.

neo1nx

Well, teleon, i would said that your version have better chances than mine to be done by cryptic, because your is more simple, it remove the tricky things that i propose.
Basicly your version is a standard fleet ship improvement:
Better shield and hull, an other console slot, you retain my bo proposal, but that it.

But your missing the point....
If this ship get the sames changes as any other fleet ship, we wouldn't have made any progress, we will still be in the same situation as today with the non fleet ship!
This ship need to be rethink with tactical in mind, meaning more power and more agile, YES, i insist, TACTICAL, if some want to build a tank or a healer just fly the odyssey, it is better for this role.
Someone said that having +5 to weapons power is negligible to the best, he is also missing the big picture, it not that +5 that will change this ship alone.
It is this and all the other small improvement that will enhanced the ship WITHOUT make him completely overpowered.
He will be on part with the other ship and it potential, but not imbalanced.
But like i said, i think that in the end, if any fleet dreadnought ever appear, i am afraid that your proposal will be the one that cryptic will go for... Unfortunatly.

teleon22

neo1nx wrote: »

Well, teleon, i would said that your version have better chances than mine to be done by cryptic, because your is more simple, it remove the tricky things that i propose.
Basicly your version is a standard fleet ship improvement:
Better shield and hull, an other console slot, you retain my bo proposal, but that it.

But your missing the point....
If this ship get the sames changes as any other fleet ship, we wouldn't have made any progress, we will still be in the same situation as today with the non fleet ship!
This ship need to be rethink with tactical in mind, meaning more power and more agile, YES, i insist, TACTICAL, if some want to build a tank or a healer just fly the odyssey, it is better for this role.
Someone said that having +5 to weapons power is negligible to the best, he is also missing the big picture, it not that +5 that will change this ship alone.
It is this and all the other small improvement that will enhanced the ship WITHOUT make him completely overpowered.
He will be on part with the other ship and it potential, but not imbalanced.
But like i said, i think that in the end, if any fleet dreadnought ever appear, i am afraid that your proposal will be the one that cryptic will go for... Unfortunatly.

I don't currently have any serious trouble in my Dreadnaught as it is now. Another tactical LT BO and a Tactical Console Slot on the Fleet Dreadnaught I propose above will make her very scarry. Think about this build for a moment:

Science Captain: For Sensor Scan, Shield tanking and the Sub-Nuke

Bridge Officers plan:
T-BO: TT-I | APD-I
T-BO: TT-I | Beam Target Engines
E-BO: EPTA-I | EPTS-II | ES-II | DEM-III
E-BO: EPTA-I | EPTS-II | AUX-SIF-II
S: BO: HE-I

Duty Officers:
Two Brace for impact Duty Officers and three Warp Core Engineers.

Consoles:
E: Borg | 2x Armor | Jump Console
S: 2x Field Generator
T: 4x Phaser Relays

Weapons:
Fore: 4x Phaser Beams [ACC] x3
Aft: 4x Phaser Turrets [ACC] x3

With this build, you will melt the hull of just about any escort or science vessel and be able shield tank moderately well using a 3 piece borg and MACO shield. The Beam Target Engines is there to help against Escorts big defense advantage and to somewhat compinsate for the lack of a tractor beam.

Not the best build in the world and it sure does fit a small nitch, but it is alright.

whamhammer1

I think the biggest change (to all cruiser hulls) should be that the hull be balanced with the ships maneuverability, the more cumbersome, the tougher it should be.

The one thing the Gal-X really needs is to have the Lance energy type reflect the energy weapon tactical consoles the ship is equipped with.

neo1nx

Well, teleon, it not that i have serious problems with it either.
For most fight i do fine, but it when you fall against the best pvp player, that where you see the current design limitation of the ship.
There is noob, average players, good players, very good players and then what i call elite players.
It again that last categorie that i clearly feel the limitation, not in my skillpoint layout, my BO layout or my piloting skill, but in the general design of the ship.
You realize that whatever you would have done in your strategy, there is nothing that you would have done better, that would allow you to beat the guy.
Note that i don't speak about team play because here it is just not your build, strategy or piloting skill that enter in the balance, but those of an entire team so it difficult to be sure that there is something wrong with your build or whatever in these kind of fight.
And it not about absolutly win either, i don't pretend to be the best pvper in the game, it just that i feel that against those players, my performance could have been better than what ultimatly the ship force me to delivers.

here is one of the build that i would use with the fleet versio.
I have one for beam and one for canon

Bridge officer plan:
TT1/ BO2
BO1/ APD
EPTS1/ AUXTO DAMP/ EPTS3/ AUXTO SIF3
ENGI TEAM1/ RSP1/ WARP PLASMA1
TSS1

2 con officer for the 15sec reduction timer of tact team
2 brace for impact
1 warp core engi

Consoles
Borg/point system defense/cloack/ manifoldmk12 or grapplin
2 field generator
4 mk12 phaser console

Weapons
1 DBB phaser acc3/ 2 beam acc3/ 1harpeng
4 beam array acc3

This combine to my tact captain power allow me to delivers relativly good dps for a beam build.
1 BO and TACT TEAM every 15 sec, APD to enhance damage and resistance.
Put in maco deflector and shield with borg engine to have the hull proc ( yes i have realize that the borgs shield proc have been directly and indirectly nerfed too much with S5).
I will make an other post for the canon build that i would love to test with the fleet version.

neo1nx

for the canon build it pretty straight foward
just the tact BO power change:

TT1/ CRF1
TT1/ CRF1
the rest same as previous build

duty officer:
2 brace for impact and 3 warp core

weapons:
3 single canon acc3 and 1 harpeng
4 turret acc3

that is the kind of build i would like to fully test and see if it daes more damage than the beam build for this particular ship

neo1nx

ok, sorry to bump this tread but i will not create an other and explain everything again.
i just wanted to post here a new idea that came up for a redesign of dreadnought setup according to it tactical orientation.

this only concern the BO change, indeed the previous idea was good but not the best ( in my opinion ) to adress the firepwer option and was also reducing too much the healing capabilities.i will not touch the other aspect of my previous build as they still stand correct.

so remember the old proposal who was, a second lieutenant tactical bo ( to get a real canon build ) and the removal of the lieutenant science BO slot wich leave us with only 1 ensign science.

as i said that was a compromise, and indeed it was...but just too much.

so here my new idea

a lt commander tactical bo ( only 1 tactical bo slot )
and 2 science ensign bo slot ( 2 science bo slot )

so the dreadnought will at last get it lt commander slot to have more firepower both in beam build or canon build, and will not loose too much healing capabiitie and option in science department

so to resume the BO setup:

1 lt commander tatical
1 commander engeneer
1 lt commander engeneer
1 ensign science
1 ensign science

and that it, here i am sastisfy ( i can now keep my tractor beam and use 1 shield heal in science, even if it loose efficiency on it ).
and beam build will have acces to BO3, and canon build will have a chance to deal more damage than rapidfire 1.

ascaladar

I think the ship suffers from two things, it is too engineering heavy and has a low base turn rate.

So I propose downgrading the Lt. Cmd. Engineering down to Ensign but then upgrade the ships Lt. Slots of tactical and science to Lt. Cmd. Making it:

Lt. Cmd: Tactical
Ensign: Tactical
Cmd. Engineering
Ensign: Engineering
Lt. Cmd. Science

Power level bonuses could remain the same, same could go for inertia, I think the inertia issue would resolve itself when a saucer separation comes available.

The Galaxy X would still remain somewhat slow but at the same time powerful and versatile.

nikephorus

Nothing significant will be changed...it will have it's shield modifier and hull increased by 10% and that's it.

haravikk

Personally my main gripe with the Dreadnought Cruiser is that it's so ugly; if anything the venture class looks even worse than the Galaxy class. Okay, so the Galaxy class is an iconic design, but it doesn't look so great next to the sleeker, more modern looking cruisers.
I think it's okay spec-wise, but I won't get one for the appearance alone.


That said, it could do with some way of bringing forward weapons to bear more easily. Personally I think a turn rate buff wouldn't fit, but one alternative could be to give it +10 degrees to all firing arcs; this would very slightly widen the arcs for all weapons, allowing it to fire forward weapons that bit more easily, though the lance should probably remain at a fixed 45 degrees.


I'd also like to see a version with a unique console; personally I'm not sure of the value of the cloaking device on this ship, something that could boost power levels under fire could be interesting, like a capacitor that absorbs a tiny portion of weapons fire and dump it into your power system. Could even boost the lance somehow? I dunno.

I do think the lack of a Commander console for tactical is a bit strange, personally I'd downgrade the lt. commander officer so the tactical can be boosted to commander.

Another interesting fix could be to give the Dreadnought an extra forward weapon slot. This would allow it to be a true beam power-house, or allow you to justify taking advantage of the ability to mount cannons while still maintaining a solid broadside.

neo1nx

Nothing significant will be changed...it will have it's shield modifier and hull increased by 10% and that's it.

yes, there is a high propability that it happen like this, and there is an even higher probalility that no fleet galaxy x version come out too.

nikephorus

neo1nx wrote: »

yes, there is a high propability that it happen like this, and there is an even higher probalility that no fleet galaxy x version come out too.

I'm fairly certain they will put out a fleet version since its a chance for Cryptic to earn more money by selling those fleet ship modules. They will get to charge 5 since it has the lance build in, just like the fleet excelsior with its built in transwarp. I just don't see them doing any changes to the ship.

Don't get me wrong...I wish they would "fix" this ship. It's suppose to be a dreadnought, a pillar of firepower, yet has a gimped bridge officer layout that doesn't allow for much in the way of tactical skills. It can mount dual heavy cannons, but doesn't have the turn rate or tac layout to support them, making the ability pointless. As it is right now it's not a very good ship, it's got a couple fun toys in the lance and cloak, but other then that there are many better choices if you want to fly a cruiser.

neo1nx

Don't get me wrong...I wish they would "fix" this ship. It's suppose to be a dreadnought, a pillar of firepower, yet has a gimped bridge officer layout that doesn't allow for much in the way of tactical skills. It can mount dual heavy cannons, but doesn't have the turn rate or tac layout to support them, making the ability pointless. As it is right now it's not a very good ship, it's got a couple fun toys in the lance and cloak, but other then that there are many better choices if you want to fly a cruiser.

i COMPLETELY agree with you on that, hence my proposal for new bo layout/power level and turn rate, because i don't want to make it a breen ship who turn like an escort and....wait, WHO IS AN ESCORT with a cruiser hull and shield.
i really bielieve that the changes i propose would change this ship enought to change the gameplay experience with it.
it don't need +15 to turn rate, it don't need 3 lt commander tact slot, 16 weapons slot in front like some would like too, no... just a little and calculated buff in all of these will make it more coherent.
i don't need a breen clone with lance, because i don't want to loose the tanking abilitie of the engi BO ( any of them ).
and there really no need, i like the fact that it is a slow ship, it give majesty to it, but just not THAT slow, damnit;).
at the origin this ship was not made for war,the base ship was a galaxy class who have been afterward refit for war.
so you just can't transform it in a warship like the breen ship, it must remain closer to a cruiser than to a warship.
i think the changes i propose do just that, it will be more tactical oriented but still not what we can call a warship.

i known that my attemp to bring this to the devs eyes is somehow pointless, because they are other variant than just balancing this ship, that many player have already buy, working on this and gain no money for it? not in the best interest of the game developers.

but i have to, because even if the changes never happened i could not blame myself for not trying.
and the best way to convinced them to change the way i wanted them to change is to have a constructive, logical, coherent and justify build.
when the ship is rebuild you can said that it will have a reason to exist other than just be a icon ship, in pve AND pvp.
you will be able to clearly dicerned it role, to resume, i want a balanced ship gear toward tactical i would get the regent, if i wanted a tactical one more focused on tanking i will choose the odyssey, but if i want to make the most damage at the expense of survivabiliti i will choose the galaxy x ( hehe and even if that sound just like what it is right now...bielieve me it is not;) ).
by doing this, i hope the dev will realize that giving the dreadnought a real purpose could raise the selling of this ship and and changes the overall gameplay experience of pve and pvp, because there will be a "new" ship in the game, not a ship that most of us buy and then let it gather dust in the garage.

but in the end even if they made us paid 5 fleet ship module to have a fleet version it will be better than nothing, and i will buy them for sure.

bluegeek

Just a reminder... bumping threads is spamming under the forum rules, and it's especially frowned on when a thread has been inactive for 30 days or more.

If you want to continue a "dead" topic, you should start a new thread and you can link back to specific posts in older threads if you want to reference something said previously.

Please remember to check the dates of threads; and if you find an old thread which violates the PWE Community Rules and Policies just report it and avoid posting in it per the Temporal Prime Directive.

Please bear in mind that re-posting in "necro'd" threads is considered a form of spamming.

Note that you're more than welcome to start a new thread (unless there is an existing thread on the topic that has received a post within the last 30 days, in which case you can just continue to post in that thread)!

Live Long and Prosper,
Bluegeek