i am, finally, completely sure they will not change the bo layout of this ship.
Look at this thread, this one want this layout, i want this layout, an other one want an other type of layout....
There is probably more chance for cryptic to do more unsatisfy customer by listening to any of us, they won't risk it.
The safer way to do it for them would be to release a pack similar to the odyssey.
3 ship, 1 with the same layout as the one we have now, one tact oriented, one sci oriented.
I am all for the console pack nthertheless.
i am, finally, completely sure they will not change the bo layout of this ship.
Look at this thread, this one want this layout, i want this layout, an other one want an other type of layout....
There is probably more chance for cryptic to do more unsatisfy customer by listening to any of us, they won't risk it.
The safer way to do it for them would be to release a pack similar to the odyssey.
3 ship, 1 with the same layout as the one we have now, one tact oriented, one sci oriented.
I am all for the console pack nthertheless.
I think the one concensus that can be generally agreed upon that the problem with the Galaxy is mostly tied up with the problem with Cruisers in general. When they change Engineering to be as important as Tactical and Science abilities for completing end-game content, the Galaxy will shine.
i am, finally, completely sure they will not change the bo layout of this ship.
Look at this thread, this one want this layout, i want this layout, an other one want an other type of layout....
There is probably more chance for cryptic to do more unsatisfy customer by listening to any of us, they won't risk it.
The safer way to do it for them would be to release a pack similar to the odyssey.
3 ship, 1 with the same layout as the one we have now, one tact oriented, one sci oriented.
I am all for the console pack nthertheless.
The layout would be fine if they'd add (or buff) some abilities to Engineering. Perhaps they could add one or two more Weapons-boosting abilities, like "Man Weapons Relays" or something, that has a scaling x% damage boost to your weapons based on your ship's crew. The more crew you have, the better this ability does, with diminishing returns after 1,000 (so the Odyssey and Atrox don't get severely overpowered on this ability).
i am, finally, completely sure they will not change the bo layout of this ship.
Look at this thread, this one want this layout, i want this layout, an other one want an other type of layout....
There is probably more chance for cryptic to do more unsatisfy customer by listening to any of us, they won't risk it.
The safer way to do it for them would be to release a pack similar to the odyssey.
3 ship, 1 with the same layout as the one we have now, one tact oriented, one sci oriented.
I am all for the console pack nthertheless.
See, and this is the problem; we rarely get any comments from the Devs, BranFlakes, or anyone in the Cryptic team about these ideas, whether they're being implemented, or whether they're not being implemented. Feedback is crucial; something that is obviously lacking in these forums.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
See, and this is the problem; we rarely get any comments from the Devs, BranFlakes, or anyone in the Cryptic team about these ideas, whether they're being implemented, or whether they're not being implemented. Feedback is crucial; something that is obviously lacking in these forums.
There is a running joke in my fleet that the devs put up the Forums during lunch hour and get a laugh at all the guys screaming about cruisers (esp the Galaxy) being weak and escorts being overpowered.
I also heard a rumor that cruisers are soon going to be almost completely phased out of the game (at least as updating to keep up with current trends in game), and be replaced in role and surpassed in ability by destroyer class ships (a preview of this was the Chel'gret, it took the high hull and shield mod AND 8 weapons of a cruiser, and put them on a ship that could turn well and had huge tactical ability with added utility). Not confirmed of course, but seeing how a lot of the recent updates/upgrades were to escorts (look at patch notes for the past few months, NO upgrades/updates to ANY cruiser class ships, while there were quite a few updates/upgrades to escort class ships, and I am not counting that recent fleet ship update), and there seems to be nothing being done about the dps-centric play of the game, you can probably expect cruisers to become completely obsolete by the time S8 comes out, and borderline useless by S9.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
it was all these things that led to the development of the akira, sovereign, saber, steam runner, intrepid, and norway. it got pretty clear they couldn't protect the federation with a few hundred ambassador class, and 10000 laughably tactically outdated excelsiors and mirandas. those new ship classes just happened to be mass produced in time for the second borg attack and dominion war.
also note that wile there had been war for decades between the federation and cardiasians, once the nebula and galaxy class were introduced, soon after there was a treaty signed to end the conflict. suddenly the federation was swinging a very big stick, in 'the wounded' you could see just how effective a single nebula class was wile being attacked from all sides. even when it lost shields a cardasian cruiser was no match for a nebula. the galaxy is at least as dangerous, or even more so then a nebula too.
There is a running joke in my fleet that the devs put up the Forums during lunch hour and get a laugh at all the guys screaming about cruisers (esp the Galaxy) being weak and escorts being overpowered.
I also heard a rumor that cruisers are soon going to be almost completely phased out of the game (at least as updating to keep up with current trends in game), and be replaced in role and surpassed in ability by destroyer class ships (a preview of this was the Chel'gret, it took the high hull and shield mod AND 8 weapons of a cruiser, and put them on a ship that could turn well and had huge tactical ability with added utility). Not confirmed of course, but seeing how a lot of the recent updates/upgrades were to escorts (look at patch notes for the past few months, NO upgrades/updates to ANY cruiser class ships, while there were quite a few updates/upgrades to escort class ships, and I am not counting that recent fleet ship update), and there seems to be nothing being done about the dps-centric play of the game, you can probably expect cruisers to become completely obsolete by the time S8 comes out, and borderline useless by S9.
I wonder why they don't make Cruisers just a bit more Destroyer like in terms of firepower and tankyness.
That's what i would have done right from the beginning.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
it was all these things that led to the development of the akira, sovereign, saber, steam runner, intrepid, and norway. it got pretty clear they couldn't protect the federation with a few hundred ambassador class, and 10000 laughably tactically outdated excelsiors and mirandas. those new ship classes just happened to be mass produced in time for the second borg attack and dominion war.
also note that wile there had been war for decades between the federation and cardiasians, once the nebula and galaxy class were introduced, soon after there was a treaty signed to end the conflict. suddenly the federation was swinging a very big stick, in 'the wounded' you could see just how effective a single nebula class was wile being attacked from all sides. even when it lost shields a cardasian cruiser was no match for a nebula. the galaxy is at least as dangerous, or even more so then a nebula too.
the nebula was said to be half a galaxy either set up with a tactical pod to have the fire power of a galaxy or a sensor/laboratory pod to have the scientific abilities of a galaxy the thing of the galaxy is it could do both.
the phoenix in the wounded was fitted with a tactical pod with extra torpedo launchers and extra phaser arrays to bring it up to where a galaxy was
the nebula was said to be half a galaxy either set up with a tactical pod to have the fire power of a galaxy or a sensor/laboratory pod to have the scientific abilities of a galaxy the thing of the galaxy is it could do both.
the phoenix in the wounded was fitted with a tactical pod with extra torpedo launchers and extra phaser arrays to bring it up to where a galaxy was
at the very least they have the exact same large arrays on the saucer. the ship in the wounded had an AWACS style sensor array anyway, not the triangle that looked to be its replacement, armed with the torp launcher. the wounded nebula's dish had no extra weapons. even if it did, they wouldn't mean much next to the large array's power.
the nebula was said to be half a galaxy either set up with a tactical pod to have the fire power of a galaxy or a sensor/laboratory pod to have the scientific abilities of a galaxy the thing of the galaxy is it could do both.
the phoenix in the wounded was fitted with a tactical pod with extra torpedo launchers and extra phaser arrays to bring it up to where a galaxy was
That last sentence is incorrect. Although the true purpose of the "standard triangular", "Phoenix-only disc", or "extra warp nacelle" swappable pods isn't made clear, it's generally accepted that the triangular mission pod seen in 99% of all Nebula-class starships is designed with extra sensor abilities, but also features two torpedo launchers only - no phaser strips. The disc shaped pod from the USS Phoenix in "The Wounded" was a sensor pod only.
EDIT: Dontshootimdrunk, looks like you beat me to it.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
There was a fix too the Galaxy. It's called the ambassador.
Also, the devs aren't fans of TNG, they're DS9 fans. Hence all the defiants and escorts in the game.
I'm sorry, but you cannot justify ANY comparisons between the Galaxy and the Ambassador. Ambassador = fugly and tiny and just plain pitiful. Galaxy = majestic, large, and impressive.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
There was a fix too the Galaxy. It's called the ambassador.
Also, the devs aren't fans of TNG, they're DS9 fans. Hence all the defiants and escorts in the game.
Really, some great fix for people who bought the galaxy...to buy another ship briliant.
"Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Also, the devs aren't fans of TNG, they're DS9 fans. Hence all the defiants and escorts in the game.
Althrough i sometimes have the same suspicion, i think it would he highly unprofessional if not to say childish.
But i still think you got a point here, STO is way to escort focussed.
I am not a fan of the original stone/paper/scissor mechanic anyway, i think Cryptic should have made cruisers firepower equal to escorts. The main difference (game mechanic wise) between Escorts and Cruisers should have been in their maneuverability and their method of healing themselves and HOW they do damage.
Similar to now, Escorts should do more focussed fire, directed to one single enemy.
While Cruisers should be focused to do rather AOE damage, but there shouldn't be any big difference in the amount of damage IMHO.
Escortd get their defense in moving fast, thats alright, but other ships should get some kind of equal defense too, just with other means.
I think the devs finally found out that only a small number of players actually want to play the "healer" role, but a BIG amount of players do fly the iconic Star Trek ships.
That typical Stone/Paper/Scissor MMO mechanic is just unapplicable in a Star trek game, plain and simple.
With the introduction of the Chimera, the Moebius and the Breen ship, the Devs showed they have understood now, that there is a much bigger demand for relatively big and sturdy featuring way more firepower than their impotent cruisers.
Now they are trying to make that damage good in introducing a different type of ship. That would be ok, in a generic Sci Fi game, but this is Star Trek and Cruisers should be much more like their "destroyer" ships in the first place.
Maybeyou are right, and they look at the Ambassadot as a substitution for the Galaxy class, but if that would be the case, they where even more incompetent than i thought and haven't understood a thing about Star Trek...
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
There was a fix too the Galaxy. It's called the ambassador.
Also, the devs aren't fans of TNG, they're DS9 fans. Hence all the defiants and escorts in the game.
The Ambassador cannot replace the Galaxy-class. The Galaxy-class is a replacement to the Ambassador, not the other way around. (Otherwise, Picard would have been flying around the Enterprise-C)
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
This game was Cruisers Online for almost two and a half years, before they finally started adding more Escorts and Science ships.
I'm not saying that cruisers don't need some attention again now, but sweeping statements like yours are absolutely false.
Maybe if you count the numbers of ships released, but Escorts always have been the most powerful ships in this game.
But thats completely off topic, this isn't a Escort vs. Everyone else thread.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
If you look at the numerous times Cryptic advertises STO with a big Galaxy Class in the foreground, while they keep it the worst (IMO) ship in the game.
I just hate double moral standarts like that, it just wakes wrong expectations and is just unfair to all Galaxy Class (and TNG) fans.
I think that (some) devs should reconsider their attitude and fix what they did wrong by releaseing a reworked Galaxy Class or at least a console Bundle that resembles the abilities of that ship.
This ship is so popular, iconic and had such a big impact to the Star Trek universe, it is just a shame to see it being that wrong in this game. It's almost like they made it thad bad on purpose.
What i don't understand is, sometimes they try to make almost all other ships being similar to their original counterparts, but the Galaxy Class is noting like that.
I that because of their personal preference or can't they just do it any better?
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
If you look at the numerous times Cryptic advertises STO with a big Galaxy Class in the foreground, while they keep it the worst (IMO) ship in the game.
I just hate double moral standarts like that, it just wakes wrong expectations and is just unfair to all Galaxy Class (and TNG) fans.
I think that (some) devs should reconsider their attitude and fix what they did wrong by releaseing a reworked Galaxy Class or at least a console Bundle that resembles the abilities of that ship.
This ship is so popular, iconic and had such a big impact to the Star Trek universe, it is just a shame to see it being that wrong in this game. It's almost like they made it thad bad on purpose.
What i don't understand is, sometimes they try to make almost all other ships being similar to their original counterparts, but the Galaxy Class is noting like that.
I that because of their personal preference or can't they just do it any better?
I think it was stated earlier that if they made the Galaxy as powerful as it appeared to be in show, there wouldn't be any other ships out there. You would just see Galaxy-Class ships all day long everywhere. Admit it, if they made a Galaxy with the tactical ability of a Galor or Regent you wouldn't fly anything else.
And you aren't the only one. So I think one possible reason is so that other ships actually get used. If they made all ships like they were in the show, we would only see Defiant-Class and Galaxy-Class ships with a few Intrepid-Class staggered here and there. Instead, we see a whole plethora of ships, ranging from Steamrunners to Nebulas to Odysseys to Defiants to Armitages to Comets to Novas to Excelsiors to Promethueae to a whole bunch of Alien craft (including but not limited to Orb Weavers, Chel'Grets, Galors).
The variety alone semi-makes up for the blatant fail of the Galaxy. However the sheer level of fail is still a mite too high considering how iconic that ship is. But what I stated above is just a possible reason.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I think it was stated earlier that if they made the Galaxy as powerful as it appeared to be in show, there wouldn't be any other ships out there. You would just see Galaxy-Class ships all day long everywhere. Admit it, if they made a Galaxy with the tactical ability of a Galor or Regent you wouldn't fly anything else.
And you aren't the only one. So I think one possible reason is so that other ships actually get used. If they made all ships like they were in the show, we would only see Defiant-Class and Galaxy-Class ships with a few Intrepid-Class staggered here and there. Instead, we see a whole plethora of ships, ranging from Steamrunners to Nebulas to Odysseys to Defiants to Armitages to Comets to Novas to Excelsiors to Promethueae to a whole bunch of Alien craft (including but not limited to Orb Weavers, Chel'Grets, Galors).
I understand that there had to be some compromises but the Galaxy Class is the most passive and boring ship by far. It has almost no offensive capabilities at all and with all due respect that's not even close to the ship that was shown in TNG, the DS9 space Battles or the TNG technical Manual.
Why do they even bother to make a Star Trek game at all, if they are not willing to make the ships as they are supposed to be?
The variety alone semi-makes up for the blatant fail of the Galaxy. However the sheer level of fail is still a mite too high considering how iconic that ship is. But what I stated above is just a possible reason.
Very true, the differences between original Ship and the one we got in STO are much bigger than at the Defiant or Intrepid compared to their originals for example.
I don't demand a perfect copy of the "real" Galaxy class but that ship we got is completely different and has almost nothing to do with how the Galaxy class performed anywhere outside STO.
They made such a good job with the Vesta + Variants, i am sure they could make a similar Galaxy Class Pack if they wanted to. I just refuse to believe they would deliberately make a bad ship of it just to sell more other ships.
I hope they aren't that evil, they should release a new Galaxy Class or remake the existing one, just because i believe if they keep their customers displeased for too long they will go away sooner or later. So they wouldn't make any money at all anymore, just because of one ship...
On the other hand i think it would be a nice sign to all Star Trek fans if they would rework or release a new Galaxy Class, i am sure it would sell like hot cakes and i am very sure if they release other ships later they will sell just as good a they do now. Because most people will jump on the new ship just as they do now with the new andorian ship. I don't think most people will still fly them in 3 or 6 months, the same thing will apply to a potential Galaxy Class pack.
But for TNG and Galaxy Class fans and everyone who has grown up with that ship, it will be a invaluable service, believe me.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I have come to the conclusion that Cryptic are not fans of The Next Generation because at every turn they have basically placated the Galaxy Class, even the Fleet Version is appalling compared to the ludicrous upgrades that the Defiant gets (5 Tactical Console Slots... Really!?)...
I am trying to get to the bottom as to why Cryptic continually hate on the Galaxy Class. It seems as if they only put it in the game to give a "Star Trek Feeling" but have put no effort into the Galaxies design or set up.
First off, why on Earth does an Excelsior and Fleet Excelsior (4 Tactical Console Slots btw and 1 Lieutenant Commander Console) complete outpower a Galaxy when the Galaxy is a newer and more tactically powerful ship!
The Galaxy Class in the game is COMPLETELY disappointing compared to its on screen counter part. Thats all well and good but you had a chance to change that and what do you do... PUT ANOTHER ENGINEERING CONSOLE ON IT!
It doesn't need that! What it needs is Tactical Power and not to be completely useless next to the Odyssey, a ship which you try to force most cruiser captains to use... I want more love for the Galaxy Class and less biased towards the Odyssey... Make the Galaxy Class a viable ship!
I have come to the conclusion that Cryptic know absolutely nothing about Star Trek and we'd be better off with the actual Star Trek fans producing this game because at least they could get the ships actually right to begin with.
I'm in 100% agreement with you. They could have done better with the fleet Galaxy and they missed an opportunity there too. I'm praying that someday when their profits are low enough they will come up with an idea for a Galaxy 3-pack deal where they will actually fix all the mistakes with the original.
However, in the end what needs to happen is one of the following:
1). Bridge Officer Powers - More additional engineering bridge officer abilities that actual do something in combat. This really helps everyone, but more so if your flying a cruiser with both commander and lieutenant commander bridge officer skills.
2). Fix Turn Rate - Increase or fix the turn rate, inertial rate and flight speed. One of the greatest problems for the Galaxy class is that its so slow and turns even slower. The Odyssey gets a turn rate bonus as part of a set. Galaxy class fans want more speed.
3). Universal Ensign - I would call for a universal ensign; however, a good case can be made for either a science ensign (since its an exploration cruiser) or a tactical ensign (it was the former flagship of the fleet, it was a beast in its day). Either one would be better than another useless engineering ensign.
4). 2-Set Bonus - If you are a die heart Galaxy class fan like me, you've got both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles. Currently its hard to equip both on a Fleet Galaxy without losing something for it. I took the time to buy both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles now I feel that I should get something out of it when I equip them to my Fleet Galaxy. Now I'm calling for a two-set bonus. The Devs can figure out the details on that.
This game was Cruisers Online for almost two and a half years, before they finally started adding more Escorts and Science ships.
I'm not saying that cruisers don't need some attention again now, but sweeping statements like yours are absolutely false.
Since the Cruiser that made it Cruisers Online was the Excelsior, and it was continually pointed out that an episode of DS9 was the justification for making the Excelsior into the ship that turned the game into Cruisers Online, I think the person's statement that the dev team (or maybe just Rivera) are DS9 fans still carries weight.
Since the Cruiser that made it Cruisers Online was the Excelsior, and it was continually pointed out that an episode of DS9 was the justification for making the Excelsior into the ship that turned the game into Cruisers Online, I think the person's statement that the dev team (or maybe just Rivera) are DS9 fans still carries weight.
Lol.
What about the numerous ocassions where a Galaxy Class showed it's superior firepower compared to other ships?
Of course things like that get usually ignored, i think thats called selective memory, lol.
EDIT:
to prevent any missunderstandings, my statement was not aimed against you, but to the person who did that stupid decision.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
However, in the end what needs to happen is one of the following:
1). Bridge Officer Powers - More additional engineering bridge officer abilities that actual do something in combat. This really helps everyone, but more so if your flying a cruiser with both commander and lieutenant commander bridge officer skills.
2). Fix Turn Rate - Increase or fix the turn rate, inertial rate and flight speed. One of the greatest problems for the Galaxy class is that its so slow and turns even slower. The Odyssey gets a turn rate bonus as part of a set. Galaxy class fans want more speed.
3). Universal Ensign - I would call for a universal ensign; however, a good case can be made for either a science ensign (since its an exploration cruiser) or a tactical ensign (it was the former flagship of the fleet, it was a beast in its day). Either one would be better than another useless engineering ensign.
4). 2-Set Bonus - If you are a die heart Galaxy class fan like me, you've got both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles. Currently its hard to equip both on a Fleet Galaxy without losing something for it. I took the time to buy both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles now I feel that I should get something out of it when I equip them to my Fleet Galaxy. Now I'm calling for a two-set bonus. The Devs can figure out the details on that.
I think 3 is a must, the more science leaning Venture variant reinforces the idea that the Galaxy class should have some variety in the higher tiers, and really like the idea of a two-set bonus from using these consoles, perhaps resulting in the turn rate buff and maybe a bit of a boost to defense? Seems the type of trade-off the devs might, just might, go for. 1 is important of course, but a matter for more than just the Galaxy-class
What about the numerous ocassions where a Galaxy Class showed it's superior firepower compared to other ships?
Of course things like that get usually ignored, i think thats called selective memory, lol.
EDIT:
to prevent any missunderstandings, my statement was not aimed against you, but to the person who did that stupid decision.
You mean the Galaxy Class under Captain Picard that was CONSTANTLY having its shields offline, or taking damage and casualties before even returning fire. <--- Those was the most numerous examples of 'Galaxy Class firepower' in TNG. Under Riker it kasted two minutes against 3 old Birds of Prey (commanded by Ferengi) and was then boarded and captured by 6 of them.
You need to make up your mind whether or not you want canon to influence the capabilities of the Galaxy Class, because on screen its performance in combat has usualluy been less then impressive.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
You mean the Galaxy Class under Captain Picard that was CONSTANTLY having its shields offline, or taking damage and casualties before even returning fire. <--- Those was the most numerous examples of 'Galaxy Class firepower' in TNG. Under Riker it kasted two minutes against 3 old Birds of Prey (commanded by Ferengi) and was then boarded and captured by 6 of them.
You need to make up your mind whether or not you want canon to influence the capabilities of the Galaxy Class, because on screen its performance in combat has usualluy been less then impressive.
Yeah, when it comes to the Galaxy class everyone suddenly remebers those scences where it didn't shine.
Yes at those times it wasn't impressive, but other ships didn't shine at all and they are much more powerfull in STO than the Galaxy. (think about the D'Kora, or the Galor)
What about the first contact with the Borg ship?
What about the fight against the Husnok ship?
DS9 Battles?
The galaxy Class could be very powerful, when a situation requires it.
Everything YOU list are just caused by the stupidness of it's crew (at least it's tactical/security officer ) or situation made up by authors to avoid big expensive battle scenes.
People like you always seem to forget that TNG wasn't a series about war or action, they tried to solve problems in a diplomatic manner. Believe it or not, before there was Jean-Luc "McLane" Picard you know from the movies, that man actually was a diplomat.
Most of the time they easily could solve their problems with their phasers, but the point is they didn't want to!
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Yeah, when it comes to the Galaxy class everyone suddenly remebers those scences where it didn't shine.
Yes at those times it wasn't impressive, but other ships didn't shine at all and they are much more powerfull in STO than the Galaxy. (think about the D'Kora, or the Galor)
What about the first contact with the Borg ship?
You mean the Borg ship that:
- Cut a hole in the hull, extracting 4 decks and killing 18 crewmembers.
- Drained the 1701-Ds shields to zero in seconds
- Locked a Tractor beam on to the Ent-D
All before Picard FINALLY gave an oder to return fire and 'terminate that beam (and Mr. Worf and the Ent-D's targeting system was so accurate that with BOTH ships at a complete standstill - it took Worf FOUR shots to finally hit the beam Picard ordered terminated?
^^
You sure you still want this included as a "Galaxy's finest moment"?
What about the fight against the Husnok ship?
Well, when the Daud was trying to Drive the Ent-D off - we saw spread after spread of torpedoes and phasers just bounce off it's shields - and even Picard's assessment of gthat encounter in trying to get 'the survivors' to leave was "we lost."
In the other two encounters - the first was just trying to get Picard to chase the ship from the planet (and afterwards hopefully leave 'the survivors' be); and the final encounter was just to allow them to easily destry the ship after the hip had killed the survivors (and after the previous enounter which had them launching full salvos with no damage to the enemy, sorry, Rikers and the crew's sudden lake of reaction to taking the same ship out witn ONE photon torpedo was just plain bad/lazy writing, but that's another issue.)
^^
Still given what was shown, I wouldn't consider it a glowing display of Galaxy Class firepower or combat effectiveness.
DS9 Battles?
The galaxy Class could be very powerful, when a situation requires it.
They had one scene where it took TWO Galaxy class ships to damage ONE Cardassian Galor - hardly an impressive display - and DS9 did showcase the ultimate result of the U.S.S. Odyssey vs the Jem Hadar (which I've linked before)
Everything YOU list are just caused by the stupidness of it's crew (at least it's tactical/security officer ) or situation made up by authors to avoid big expensive battle scenes.
People like you always seem to forget that TNG wasn't a series about war or action, they tried to solve problems in a diplomatic manner. Believe it or not, before there was Jean-Luc "McLane" Picard you know from the movies, that man actually was a diplomat.
Most of the time they easily could solve their problems with their phasers, but the point is they didn't want to!
Well, again, what I described was all in Star Trek canon. That's what the developers of STO are trying to make use of when adding ships to the game. Why shoul the Galaxy Class be exempted from what was shown on the TV screen? If anything, you're admitting that the Galaxy Class WASN'T designed as a front line combat battleship - yet that's what you want it to be in STO.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
- Cut a hole in the hull, extracting 4 decks and killing 18 crewmembers.
- Drained the 1701-Ds shields to zero in seconds
- Locked a Tractor beam on to the Ent-D
All before Picard FINALLY gave an oder to return fire and 'terminate that beam (and Mr. Worf and the Ent-D's targeting system was so accurate that with BOTH ships at a complete standstill - it took Worf FOUR shots to finally hit the beam Picard ordered terminated?
^^
You sure you still want this included as a "Galaxy's finest moment"?
Well if you think that such a ship destroyed 36 Starfleet ships a year later, the i would say that the Enterprise D wasn't bad at all.
Do you seriously think a Ambassador or Excelsior would have performed much better, lol?
Well, when the Daud was trying to Drive the Ent-D off - we saw spread after spread of torpedoes and phasers just bounce off it's shields - and even Picard's assessment of gthat encounter in trying to get 'the survivors' to leave was "we lost."
In the other two encounters - the first was just trying to get Picard to chase the ship from the planet (and afterwards hopefully leave 'the survivors' be); and the final encounter was just to allow them to easily destry the ship after the hip had killed the survivors (and after the previous enounter which had them launching full salvos with no damage to the enemy, sorry, Rikers and the crew's sudden lake of reaction to taking the same ship out witn ONE photon torpedo was just plain bad/lazy writing, but that's another issue.)
^^
Still given what was shown, I wouldn't consider it a glowing display of Galaxy Class firepower or combat effectiveness.
That ship wasn't real but it showed that the Galaxy class was capable to create a considerable amount of firepower, at least much more than any other Starfleet ship in Star Trek before.
I doubt that the Sovereign (first contact version) could have been much better.
they had one scene where it took TWO Galaxy class ships to damage ONE Cardassian Galor - hardly an impressive display - and DS9 did showcase the ultimate result of the U.S.S. Odyssey vs teh Jem Hadar (which I've linked before)
With a tactic like this they could have destroyed DS9 or even Earth space dock (not to speak of smaller less powerful ships), it's a miracle the Odyssey could stay alive that long.
Well, again, what I described was all in Star Trek canon. That's what the developers of STO are trying to make use of when adding ships to the game. Why shoul the Galaxy Class be exempted from what was shown on the TV screen?
10 torpedoes in a row?
Biggest (longest ) Beam array ever, plain said.
Highly versatile, modular configurable interior.
ect, ect.
Of course you can make it the weakest and most boring ship ever, if you only count it's weak performances.
If so i would want to see other ships instead in the same situations and THEN cryptics designers can judge a ships combat capabilitiy.
But to take some scenes where it under performs and judge them completely out of context is really bad game design.
At least it shows the lack of common sense IMO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Comments
Look at this thread, this one want this layout, i want this layout, an other one want an other type of layout....
There is probably more chance for cryptic to do more unsatisfy customer by listening to any of us, they won't risk it.
The safer way to do it for them would be to release a pack similar to the odyssey.
3 ship, 1 with the same layout as the one we have now, one tact oriented, one sci oriented.
I am all for the console pack nthertheless.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I think the one concensus that can be generally agreed upon that the problem with the Galaxy is mostly tied up with the problem with Cruisers in general. When they change Engineering to be as important as Tactical and Science abilities for completing end-game content, the Galaxy will shine.
Could be wrong, though.
The layout would be fine if they'd add (or buff) some abilities to Engineering. Perhaps they could add one or two more Weapons-boosting abilities, like "Man Weapons Relays" or something, that has a scaling x% damage boost to your weapons based on your ship's crew. The more crew you have, the better this ability does, with diminishing returns after 1,000 (so the Odyssey and Atrox don't get severely overpowered on this ability).
See, and this is the problem; we rarely get any comments from the Devs, BranFlakes, or anyone in the Cryptic team about these ideas, whether they're being implemented, or whether they're not being implemented. Feedback is crucial; something that is obviously lacking in these forums.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
There is a running joke in my fleet that the devs put up the Forums during lunch hour and get a laugh at all the guys screaming about cruisers (esp the Galaxy) being weak and escorts being overpowered.
I also heard a rumor that cruisers are soon going to be almost completely phased out of the game (at least as updating to keep up with current trends in game), and be replaced in role and surpassed in ability by destroyer class ships (a preview of this was the Chel'gret, it took the high hull and shield mod AND 8 weapons of a cruiser, and put them on a ship that could turn well and had huge tactical ability with added utility). Not confirmed of course, but seeing how a lot of the recent updates/upgrades were to escorts (look at patch notes for the past few months, NO upgrades/updates to ANY cruiser class ships, while there were quite a few updates/upgrades to escort class ships, and I am not counting that recent fleet ship update), and there seems to be nothing being done about the dps-centric play of the game, you can probably expect cruisers to become completely obsolete by the time S8 comes out, and borderline useless by S9.
here's some more evidence of open warfare during the galaxy class development.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Tzenkethi
it was all these things that led to the development of the akira, sovereign, saber, steam runner, intrepid, and norway. it got pretty clear they couldn't protect the federation with a few hundred ambassador class, and 10000 laughably tactically outdated excelsiors and mirandas. those new ship classes just happened to be mass produced in time for the second borg attack and dominion war.
also note that wile there had been war for decades between the federation and cardiasians, once the nebula and galaxy class were introduced, soon after there was a treaty signed to end the conflict. suddenly the federation was swinging a very big stick, in 'the wounded' you could see just how effective a single nebula class was wile being attacked from all sides. even when it lost shields a cardasian cruiser was no match for a nebula. the galaxy is at least as dangerous, or even more so then a nebula too.
That's what i would have done right from the beginning.
the nebula was said to be half a galaxy either set up with a tactical pod to have the fire power of a galaxy or a sensor/laboratory pod to have the scientific abilities of a galaxy the thing of the galaxy is it could do both.
the phoenix in the wounded was fitted with a tactical pod with extra torpedo launchers and extra phaser arrays to bring it up to where a galaxy was
at the very least they have the exact same large arrays on the saucer. the ship in the wounded had an AWACS style sensor array anyway, not the triangle that looked to be its replacement, armed with the torp launcher. the wounded nebula's dish had no extra weapons. even if it did, they wouldn't mean much next to the large array's power.
That last sentence is incorrect. Although the true purpose of the "standard triangular", "Phoenix-only disc", or "extra warp nacelle" swappable pods isn't made clear, it's generally accepted that the triangular mission pod seen in 99% of all Nebula-class starships is designed with extra sensor abilities, but also features two torpedo launchers only - no phaser strips. The disc shaped pod from the USS Phoenix in "The Wounded" was a sensor pod only.
EDIT: Dontshootimdrunk, looks like you beat me to it.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
and it's been a wile sense i saw the wounded so just assumed
Also, the devs aren't fans of TNG, they're DS9 fans. Hence all the defiants and escorts in the game.
I AM THE SWORD OF THE RIGHTOUS!
I'm sorry, but you cannot justify ANY comparisons between the Galaxy and the Ambassador. Ambassador = fugly and tiny and just plain pitiful. Galaxy = majestic, large, and impressive.
Really, some great fix for people who bought the galaxy...to buy another ship
Althrough i sometimes have the same suspicion, i think it would he highly unprofessional if not to say childish.
But i still think you got a point here, STO is way to escort focussed.
I am not a fan of the original stone/paper/scissor mechanic anyway, i think Cryptic should have made cruisers firepower equal to escorts. The main difference (game mechanic wise) between Escorts and Cruisers should have been in their maneuverability and their method of healing themselves and HOW they do damage.
Similar to now, Escorts should do more focussed fire, directed to one single enemy.
While Cruisers should be focused to do rather AOE damage, but there shouldn't be any big difference in the amount of damage IMHO.
Escortd get their defense in moving fast, thats alright, but other ships should get some kind of equal defense too, just with other means.
I think the devs finally found out that only a small number of players actually want to play the "healer" role, but a BIG amount of players do fly the iconic Star Trek ships.
That typical Stone/Paper/Scissor MMO mechanic is just unapplicable in a Star trek game, plain and simple.
With the introduction of the Chimera, the Moebius and the Breen ship, the Devs showed they have understood now, that there is a much bigger demand for relatively big and sturdy featuring way more firepower than their impotent cruisers.
Now they are trying to make that damage good in introducing a different type of ship. That would be ok, in a generic Sci Fi game, but this is Star Trek and Cruisers should be much more like their "destroyer" ships in the first place.
Maybeyou are right, and they look at the Ambassadot as a substitution for the Galaxy class, but if that would be the case, they where even more incompetent than i thought and haven't understood a thing about Star Trek...
The Ambassador cannot replace the Galaxy-class. The Galaxy-class is a replacement to the Ambassador, not the other way around. (Otherwise, Picard would have been flying around the Enterprise-C)
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
This game was Cruisers Online for almost two and a half years, before they finally started adding more Escorts and Science ships.
I'm not saying that cruisers don't need some attention again now, but sweeping statements like yours are absolutely false.
Maybe if you count the numbers of ships released, but Escorts always have been the most powerful ships in this game.
But thats completely off topic, this isn't a Escort vs. Everyone else thread.
I just hate double moral standarts like that, it just wakes wrong expectations and is just unfair to all Galaxy Class (and TNG) fans.
I think that (some) devs should reconsider their attitude and fix what they did wrong by releaseing a reworked Galaxy Class or at least a console Bundle that resembles the abilities of that ship.
This ship is so popular, iconic and had such a big impact to the Star Trek universe, it is just a shame to see it being that wrong in this game. It's almost like they made it thad bad on purpose.
What i don't understand is, sometimes they try to make almost all other ships being similar to their original counterparts, but the Galaxy Class is noting like that.
I that because of their personal preference or can't they just do it any better?
I think it was stated earlier that if they made the Galaxy as powerful as it appeared to be in show, there wouldn't be any other ships out there. You would just see Galaxy-Class ships all day long everywhere. Admit it, if they made a Galaxy with the tactical ability of a Galor or Regent you wouldn't fly anything else.
And you aren't the only one. So I think one possible reason is so that other ships actually get used. If they made all ships like they were in the show, we would only see Defiant-Class and Galaxy-Class ships with a few Intrepid-Class staggered here and there. Instead, we see a whole plethora of ships, ranging from Steamrunners to Nebulas to Odysseys to Defiants to Armitages to Comets to Novas to Excelsiors to Promethueae to a whole bunch of Alien craft (including but not limited to Orb Weavers, Chel'Grets, Galors).
The variety alone semi-makes up for the blatant fail of the Galaxy. However the sheer level of fail is still a mite too high considering how iconic that ship is. But what I stated above is just a possible reason.
Why do they even bother to make a Star Trek game at all, if they are not willing to make the ships as they are supposed to be?
Very true, the differences between original Ship and the one we got in STO are much bigger than at the Defiant or Intrepid compared to their originals for example.
I don't demand a perfect copy of the "real" Galaxy class but that ship we got is completely different and has almost nothing to do with how the Galaxy class performed anywhere outside STO.
They made such a good job with the Vesta + Variants, i am sure they could make a similar Galaxy Class Pack if they wanted to. I just refuse to believe they would deliberately make a bad ship of it just to sell more other ships.
I hope they aren't that evil, they should release a new Galaxy Class or remake the existing one, just because i believe if they keep their customers displeased for too long they will go away sooner or later. So they wouldn't make any money at all anymore, just because of one ship...
On the other hand i think it would be a nice sign to all Star Trek fans if they would rework or release a new Galaxy Class, i am sure it would sell like hot cakes and i am very sure if they release other ships later they will sell just as good a they do now. Because most people will jump on the new ship just as they do now with the new andorian ship. I don't think most people will still fly them in 3 or 6 months, the same thing will apply to a potential Galaxy Class pack.
But for TNG and Galaxy Class fans and everyone who has grown up with that ship, it will be a invaluable service, believe me.
I'm in 100% agreement with you. They could have done better with the fleet Galaxy and they missed an opportunity there too. I'm praying that someday when their profits are low enough they will come up with an idea for a Galaxy 3-pack deal where they will actually fix all the mistakes with the original.
However, in the end what needs to happen is one of the following:
1). Bridge Officer Powers - More additional engineering bridge officer abilities that actual do something in combat. This really helps everyone, but more so if your flying a cruiser with both commander and lieutenant commander bridge officer skills.
2). Fix Turn Rate - Increase or fix the turn rate, inertial rate and flight speed. One of the greatest problems for the Galaxy class is that its so slow and turns even slower. The Odyssey gets a turn rate bonus as part of a set. Galaxy class fans want more speed.
3). Universal Ensign - I would call for a universal ensign; however, a good case can be made for either a science ensign (since its an exploration cruiser) or a tactical ensign (it was the former flagship of the fleet, it was a beast in its day). Either one would be better than another useless engineering ensign.
4). 2-Set Bonus - If you are a die heart Galaxy class fan like me, you've got both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles. Currently its hard to equip both on a Fleet Galaxy without losing something for it. I took the time to buy both Saucer Separation and Antimatter Spread consoles now I feel that I should get something out of it when I equip them to my Fleet Galaxy. Now I'm calling for a two-set bonus. The Devs can figure out the details on that.
Since the Cruiser that made it Cruisers Online was the Excelsior, and it was continually pointed out that an episode of DS9 was the justification for making the Excelsior into the ship that turned the game into Cruisers Online, I think the person's statement that the dev team (or maybe just Rivera) are DS9 fans still carries weight.
What about the numerous ocassions where a Galaxy Class showed it's superior firepower compared to other ships?
Of course things like that get usually ignored, i think thats called selective memory, lol.
EDIT:
to prevent any missunderstandings, my statement was not aimed against you, but to the person who did that stupid decision.
I think 3 is a must, the more science leaning Venture variant reinforces the idea that the Galaxy class should have some variety in the higher tiers, and really like the idea of a two-set bonus from using these consoles, perhaps resulting in the turn rate buff and maybe a bit of a boost to defense? Seems the type of trade-off the devs might, just might, go for. 1 is important of course, but a matter for more than just the Galaxy-class
You mean the Galaxy Class under Captain Picard that was CONSTANTLY having its shields offline, or taking damage and casualties before even returning fire. <--- Those was the most numerous examples of 'Galaxy Class firepower' in TNG. Under Riker it kasted two minutes against 3 old Birds of Prey (commanded by Ferengi) and was then boarded and captured by 6 of them.
You need to make up your mind whether or not you want canon to influence the capabilities of the Galaxy Class, because on screen its performance in combat has usualluy been less then impressive.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Yeah, when it comes to the Galaxy class everyone suddenly remebers those scences where it didn't shine.
Yes at those times it wasn't impressive, but other ships didn't shine at all and they are much more powerfull in STO than the Galaxy. (think about the D'Kora, or the Galor)
What about the first contact with the Borg ship?
What about the fight against the Husnok ship?
DS9 Battles?
The galaxy Class could be very powerful, when a situation requires it.
Everything YOU list are just caused by the stupidness of it's crew (at least it's tactical/security officer
People like you always seem to forget that TNG wasn't a series about war or action, they tried to solve problems in a diplomatic manner. Believe it or not, before there was Jean-Luc "McLane" Picard you know from the movies, that man actually was a diplomat.
Most of the time they easily could solve their problems with their phasers, but the point is they didn't want to!
You mean the Borg ship that:
- Cut a hole in the hull, extracting 4 decks and killing 18 crewmembers.
- Drained the 1701-Ds shields to zero in seconds
- Locked a Tractor beam on to the Ent-D
All before Picard FINALLY gave an oder to return fire and 'terminate that beam (and Mr. Worf and the Ent-D's targeting system was so accurate that with BOTH ships at a complete standstill - it took Worf FOUR shots to finally hit the beam Picard ordered terminated?
^^
You sure you still want this included as a "Galaxy's finest moment"?
Well, when the Daud was trying to Drive the Ent-D off - we saw spread after spread of torpedoes and phasers just bounce off it's shields - and even Picard's assessment of gthat encounter in trying to get 'the survivors' to leave was "we lost."
In the other two encounters - the first was just trying to get Picard to chase the ship from the planet (and afterwards hopefully leave 'the survivors' be); and the final encounter was just to allow them to easily destry the ship after the hip had killed the survivors (and after the previous enounter which had them launching full salvos with no damage to the enemy, sorry, Rikers and the crew's sudden lake of reaction to taking the same ship out witn ONE photon torpedo was just plain bad/lazy writing, but that's another issue.)
^^
Still given what was shown, I wouldn't consider it a glowing display of Galaxy Class firepower or combat effectiveness.
They had one scene where it took TWO Galaxy class ships to damage ONE Cardassian Galor - hardly an impressive display - and DS9 did showcase the ultimate result of the U.S.S. Odyssey vs the Jem Hadar (which I've linked before)
Well, again, what I described was all in Star Trek canon. That's what the developers of STO are trying to make use of when adding ships to the game. Why shoul the Galaxy Class be exempted from what was shown on the TV screen? If anything, you're admitting that the Galaxy Class WASN'T designed as a front line combat battleship - yet that's what you want it to be in STO.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Do you seriously think a Ambassador or Excelsior would have performed much better, lol?
That ship wasn't real but it showed that the Galaxy class was capable to create a considerable amount of firepower, at least much more than any other Starfleet ship in Star Trek before.
I doubt that the Sovereign (first contact version) could have been much better.
With a tactic like this they could have destroyed DS9 or even Earth space dock (not to speak of smaller less powerful ships), it's a miracle the Odyssey could stay alive that long.
10 torpedoes in a row?
Biggest (longest
Highly versatile, modular configurable interior.
ect, ect.
Of course you can make it the weakest and most boring ship ever, if you only count it's weak performances.
If so i would want to see other ships instead in the same situations and THEN cryptics designers can judge a ships combat capabilitiy.
But to take some scenes where it under performs and judge them completely out of context is really bad game design.
At least it shows the lack of common sense IMO.