Unless they do something totally out of the ball park that having a extra Engineer Power would be a big advantage Galaxy Class would be behind other Cruisers.
and I do not support a revamped Galaxy-class Exploration Cruiser!
Just joking, but it's hilarious how three people in a row have the same signature...
I just want to throw this out there.
People are noticing.
Keep it up folks.
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!
Those types of changes to cruisers in general will still not put the galaxy on par with the others. There would be no reason to change out of your existing cruiser.
I fail to see how this wouldn't bring it up to par. The Fleet Galaxy could have all ten consoles buffing its damage, just like any other ship. Engineering Team gains greater utility as a tanking tool and Tactical Team becomes unnecessary, allowing you to run Fire at Will I and Attack Pattern Beta I. That third Ensign Engineering station is suddenly less of a burden. Basically, it just becomes a less nimble Excelsior with Eject Warp Plasma instead of Attack Pattern Omega, which has its uses.
Bc it raises the bar on all cruisers leaving the galaxy class still at the bottom of the pack.
For tanking / healing you're still better off in the ambassador or Odyssey other Star Cruiser.
For dps the excelsior or Sovereign.
Galaxy class is still the choice if you don't mind nerfing yourself and just RP.
So unless the Exploration cruiser displaces one of the other cruiser types, its not good enough? That's the way to sell a win-win that everyone can get on board with!
the galaxy is the worst at everything in game. according to canon, its not the worst at everything. at all. not good enough? well, in a well run game you dont have a ship that is worst in every measurable performance category. you can have below average ships, thats fine, you dont have mister dead last in every way.
i really have not the slightest sympathy for any toes a fixed galaxy would step on, they should have been in her large shadow from the start. all the same, my temporal ship style setup puts the galaxy in a unique position of being potentially the best sci cruiser, a decent but ponderous middle of the road balanced cruiser like the ambassador, or a below the top 3 or so tac cruiser.
we arent steeping on the real important toes here, no ones delicate world view is getting effected with the galaxy suddenly being the best tac cruiser, and it can quietly be an amazing sci cruiser in the background, safe from you dps junkies getting offended.
I hope we all agree, that STO isn't even nearly as canon as most of us would like it to be. (in fact i have never even heard of a Star Trek game as un-canon as STO)
All the background material and canon Trek knowledge should help completing adapting the GCS to fit into STO. (as long as this background material doesn't contradict to common sense or anything seen on TV an as long as it is from the creators of the ship or TV show, like Michael Okuda and Rick Sternbach)
With help of that knowledge the devs should be able to create a better ship than this miserable thing we have to use ATM.
This doesn't mean the GCS should be made strictly according to canon or the background material, i think it should only help to catch the spirit of the ship to make it more like it should be in STO.
The devs made the Akira and the Vesta similar to this, i don't see a reason why the GCS should be made more like "it shoulde be".
"...'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
Actually, why not make the Galaxy and Ambassador skins available for each other? So you can "customize" both ships for "Exploration" and "Support" duty. The devs don't have to change a single thing Uh, the seperation. Well, make the Ambassador seperateable. Lol.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Actually, why not make the Galaxy and Ambassador skins available for each other? So you can "customize" both ships for "Exploration" and "Support" duty. The devs don't have to change a single thing Uh, the seperation. Well, make the Ambassador seperateable. Lol.
Personally i wouldn't like to see that.
Galaxy Class and ambassador Class are clearly two different ships, if we begin to throw them together, i would recommend to make all cruiser Ship models availlable to all cruisers of a according faction.
(the same for escorts and science ships of course)
Maybe that wouldn't be so silly as it sounds.
Cryptic could un-bind BOFF/console Layout from the ship model and let the player decide which ship model to be used. PWE could sell more and more ships and increase the power creep, but ppl could still fly the ship they like.
"...'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
Actually, why not make the Galaxy and Ambassador skins available for each other? So you can "customize" both ships for "Exploration" and "Support" duty. The devs don't have to change a single thing Uh, the seperation. Well, make the Ambassador seperateable. Lol.
This was an idea I had a long time ago.
The whole thing about ships is scrapped and instead of buying a new ship every level, the ship levels with us and we make the ship orientated to what we want it to be. Console slots are allotted as well as weapon slots, same going with bridge officer abilities. Course we'd need to have rules on the minimum. Like one of each type of console on a ship, at least one weapon aft and one weapon fore. With at least ensign of each group (tac, sci, eng).
It's a good idea, but too many things are flawed about it because... well people are flawed and would TRIBBLE this up and TRIBBLE STO.
It's a good idea, if only tactical abilities and consoles weren't so heavily regarded by a majority of the players (and the game). We'd first need to see a better balance between abilities and consoles before this idea would even lift off of the ground... or the ocean floor for that matter.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "Look at me I'm a target!" "Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK! "How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?" My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
This is a great idea yaisuke15, albeit one for a different game. STO is fully centered around buying new ships that get better with each release (power creep). Another (good) game would probably be centered around experiencing adventures in your ship, getting to know and love your vessel and crew instead of just buying new ships and swap them on demand.
The whole game feels like it was something completely different in it's design phase. You "buy" new ships (as a Starfleet Captain) and swap them like a renegade starfighter pilot, you have miniguns and fancy bodyarmour - nobody can tell me that THIS was the best thing they came up with when they designed "Star Trek Online" I bet it was some space-opera like setting as in Wing Commander and you were supposed to be a freelance pilot, buying different fighters and corvettes and doing mercenary work or something like that.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Actually, why not make the Galaxy and Ambassador skins available for each other? So you can "customize" both ships for "Exploration" and "Support" duty. The devs don't have to change a single thing Uh, the seperation. Well, make the Ambassador seperateable. Lol.
Um, No... The Galaxy and the Ambassador are not the same Class of ship, even in TNG u can clearly see the difference despite the similar design. asking for this is like asking for the Sabre and the Defiant have skins for each other or a Interpid and Vesta...
Like i said b4, i think that any change to the Galaxy should involve to the Galaxy-X as well (Being a Tac version of Galaxy) but only to the Consoles and Boff Stations as in my view the Hull, Turn Rate, Shield Mod, Speed should be left as it is.
these are the changes i want Cryptic to consider doing
Exploration Cruiser Retrofit
Engineering Consoles: x4 (x5 Fleet Version)
Science Consoles: x2 (-1 Change from Current)
Tactical Consoles: x3 (+1 Change from Current)
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Engineering Ensign Station or Engineering Lt. Commander Station
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Tactical Ensign Station or the Engineering Lt. Commander Station
-
I post those stats changes that Cryptic should consider a while back ago but just gonna post this again so it will have more of a chance to seen by dev's (that's if they read this post)
Though i don't own a Galaxy, i do want to fight a very good Galaxy type vessel which i have never seen in PvP since the only common types of Fed Cruisers i seen is the Oddy, Excelsior and the Sovereign
This is a great idea yaisuke15, albeit one for a different game. STO is fully centered around buying new ships that get better with each release (power creep). Another (good) game would probably be centered around experiencing adventures in your ship, getting to know and love your vessel and crew instead of just buying new ships and swap them on demand.
The whole game feels like it was something completely different in it's design phase. You "buy" new ships (as a Starfleet Captain) and swap them like a renegade starfighter pilot, you have miniguns and fancy bodyarmour - nobody can tell me that THIS was the best thing they came up with when they designed "Star Trek Online" I bet it was some space-opera like setting as in Wing Commander and you were supposed to be a freelance pilot, buying different fighters and corvettes and doing mercenary work or something like that.
That's one of the things that makes me think STOs devs rather should have made some generic Sci Fi game of their own, instead of a Star Trek based game.
For me it's obvious they just use the name "star trek", but essentially they just do what they think is cool, without caring if it fits to Star Trek or not.
Several years ago when i heard a Star Trek MMO is in the making i was afraid its developers would make like a generic MMO at that time, but in reality STO has become much worse. It's only centered around making money (in game) and spending money (real money). Ships have to be bought, and being treated as something like a article of daily use instead of being the silent Heros of the show.
Design wise Cryptic couldn't have made a worse interpretation of the Star Trek universe.
(not to speak about how terrible wrong the have made ALL ships)
In my opinion, if STO where a horse the most human thing to do would be to shoot it, lol.
My conclusion: Cryptic should be honest enough to drop the "Star Trek" name from their game and with a few tweaks they easily could start their own Sci Fi universe.
In fact i would like to play a game like this, but as a Star Trek game it is just terrible wrong on all ends.
"...'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
the galaxy is the worst at everything in game. according to canon, its not the worst at everything. at all. not good enough? well, in a well run game you dont have a ship that is worst in every measurable performance category. you can have below average ships, thats fine, you dont have mister dead last in every way.
i really have not the slightest sympathy for any toes a fixed galaxy would step on, they should have been in her large shadow from the start. all the same, my temporal ship style setup puts the galaxy in a unique position of being potentially the best sci cruiser, a decent but ponderous middle of the road balanced cruiser like the ambassador, or a below the top 3 or so tac cruiser.
we arent steeping on the real important toes here, no ones delicate world view is getting effected with the galaxy suddenly being the best tac cruiser, and it can quietly be an amazing sci cruiser in the background, safe from you dps junkies getting offended.
as a reminder, the setup im talking about is this
COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
4/3/3
Good luck getting buy-in for you idea after you step on toes. You will need it.
Um, No... The Galaxy and the Ambassador are not the same Class of ship, even in TNG u can clearly see the difference despite the similar design. asking for this is like asking for the Sabre and the Defiant have skins for each other or a Interpid and Vesta...
Like i said b4, i think that any change to the Galaxy should involve to the Galaxy-X as well (Being a Tac version of Galaxy) but only to the Consoles and Boff Stations as in my view the Hull, Turn Rate, Shield Mod, Speed should be left as it is.
Sorry deviating but the Galaxy -X is NOT the Tactical version of the Galaxy Class (in "real" Star Trek) it was just a fantasy Q made up. It's almost the same as with the "tactical" version of the Intrepid. In Star Treks reality (any reality) those ships never existed. If you want to see a closer version to how a tactical Galaxy Class would look like you should watch "yesterdays enterprise".
So i think, if cryptic would make a 3 Pack with the Galaxy-X as the tactical version i seriously hope they unlock all other ship parts too. I would HATE to see the ugly third nacelle all the time i look at my ship.
This would not be so bad, one could even create a science version of the GCS.
To be honest i am not so sure about your proposed Console Layout, too much focussed on tactial and engineering for my taste.
I would rather see a console Layout like the 2xD has: 3 (fleet: 4), 3, 3
So the ship wouldn't need a special tactical, engineering or science version at all. The only greater thing the dves had to do would be to make the third nacelle and phaser lance model possible on the standard GCS ship model.
TBH, i would love to get a tactical version, similar to the ship we saw at Yesterdays Enterprise. I just hate the infantile looks of the Gal -X.
I post those stats changes that Cryptic should consider a while back ago but just gonna post this again so it will have more of a chance to seen by dev's (that's if they read this post)
I like that one, it's always good for a laugh.
"...'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
Um, No... The Galaxy and the Ambassador are not the same Class of ship, even in TNG u can clearly see the difference despite the similar design. asking for this is like asking for the Sabre and the Defiant have skins for each other or a Interpid and Vesta...
Like i said b4, i think that any change to the Galaxy should involve to the Galaxy-X as well (Being a Tac version of Galaxy) but only to the Consoles and Boff Stations as in my view the Hull, Turn Rate, Shield Mod, Speed should be left as it is.
these are the changes i want Cryptic to consider doing
Exploration Cruiser Retrofit
Engineering Consoles: x4 (x5 Fleet Version)
Science Consoles: x2 (-1 Change from Current)
Tactical Consoles: x3 (+1 Change from Current)
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Engineering Ensign Station or Engineering Lt. Commander Station
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Tactical Ensign Station or the Engineering Lt. Commander Station
-
I post those stats changes that Cryptic should consider a while back ago but just gonna post this again so it will have more of a chance to seen by dev's (that's if they read this post)
Though i don't own a Galaxy, i do want to fight a very good Galaxy type vessel which i have never seen in PvP since the only common types of Fed Cruisers i seen is the Oddy, Excelsior and the Sovereign
The reason why the poster said this was that probably because some people keep suggesting that the Explorer should have the layout of the Support cruiser. Honestly, game-structure-wise (not canon-wise), it would make for more sense to do that than to flip the two or to do anything else if the goal is just to tweak the Explorer.
I still am on the side of fixing the problem with all cruisers to improve every cruiser in the game though.
Good luck getting buy-in for you idea after you step on toes. You will need it.
It's not really a new proposed BOFF/Console layout. To be honest, it's just as legimate as any other BOFF layout. All other proposed Layouts are just variations of the same one. If someone wants to make the unis into tacs (which is what you seem to "fear"), then so be it.
Seriously, do you really fear everyone will suddenly fly Galaxy Classes in STO, despite it is still one of the slowest cruisers?
If that where the case i am asking myself why don't we see still other ships than regent classes in STO?
A Lt.Cmdr universal wouldn't be the end of the world, even combined with a uni Ensign. Surely it wouldn't be my first choice but it's not as terrible and game breaking as you may belive.
Cryptic certainly will release a more tactical focussed Lockbox ship with the next Lockbox for sure.
My favourite BOFF Layout would be this btw:
(since everyone seems to post his/her favs )
This BOFF Layout would make the Galaxy Class more science focussed, but still be able to pack a punch. Combined with the [aux] phaser arrays i have proposed some posts back, that ship would be a excellent Science Cruiser, without stepping on the Regents (or any other ships) toes.
PLUS it would be much more like a Engineering focussed sister ship of the Nebula.
"...'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
Sorry deviating but the Galaxy -X is NOT the Tactical version of the Galaxy Class (in "real" Star Trek) it was just a fantasy Q made up. It's almost the same as with the "tactical" version of the Intrepid. In Star Treks reality (any reality) those ships never existed. If you want to see a closer version to how a tactical Galaxy Class would look like you should watch "yesterdays enterprise".
To be technical, while did Q alter some things in that episode, the Galaxy-X wasn't fantasy, but the future of the Enterprise- D in an alternate timeline (since we know the "D" comes to an earlier and less glamour end in Generations).
It's not really a new proposed BOFF/Console layout. To be honest, it's just as legimate as any other BOFF layout. All other proposed Layouts are just variations of the same one. If someone wants to make the unis into tacs (which is what you seem to "fear"), then so be it.
Seriously, do you really fear everyone will suddenly fly Galaxy Classes in STO, despite it is still one of the slowest cruisers?
If that where the case i am asking myself why don't we see still other ships than regent classes in STO?
A Lt.Cmdr universal wouldn't be the end of the world, even combined with a uni Ensign. Surely it wouldn't be my first choice but it's not as terrible and game breaking as you may belive.
Cryptic certainly will release a more tactical focussed Lockbox ship with the next Lockbox for sure.
My favourite BOFF Layout would be this btw:
(since everyone seems to post his/her favs )
This BOFF Layout would make the Galaxy Class more science focussed, but still be able to pack a punch. Combined with the [aux] phaser arrays i have proposed some posts back, that ship would be a excellent Science Cruiser, without stepping on the Regents (or any other ships) toes.
PLUS it would be much more like a Engineering focussed sister ship of the Nebula.
I believe you miss my who point of the comment. DDIS's statement shows that he doesn't care about any other ship, even to the point of displacing other cruisers tactically, and just about every other way that he sees benefit. Other people that aren't fanatically loyal to the cause, aren't going to easily buy-in to that approach.
His calls are an extreme change to just the one cruiser, and in the end, wont make much of a difference. Unless all cruisers are improved, instead of the fabulous Galaxy (Exploration Cruiser) all cruisers, including the Exploration Cruiser, will still just be targets. All the Uni' boffs in the world aren't going to fix the problem all the cruisers exhibit.
You can push to be a big fish in the little cruiser pond, and still shark bait once you visit the big pond ,or you can be a one of the many medium sized fishes (community of fixed cruisers) in the big pond, and be able to fight the sharks.
I hope we all agree, that STO isn't even nearly as canon as most of us would like it to be. (in fact i have never even heard of a Star Trek game as un-canon as STO)
Nope.
All the background material and canon Trek knowledge should help completing adapting the GCS to fit into STO. (as long as this background material doesn't contradict to common sense or anything seen on TV an as long as it is from the creators of the ship or TV show, like Michael Okuda and Rick Sternbach)
Translation: "The Galaxy Class should STRICTLY adhere to any 'canon' material that shows it easily blasting away any other ship it meets. The 'canon' where the writers showed it as beatable (strictly for story purposes, ignoring how its 'real' designers would have constructed the ship as it IS the pinnacle of Star Trek 'hero ships'..."
Yep. You have a completely unbiased view of the Galaxy Class cruiser.
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..."
To be technical, while did Q alter some things in that episode, the Galaxy-X wasn't fantasy, but the future of the Enterprise- D in an alternate timeline (since we know the "D" comes to an earlier and less glamour end in Generations).
How do you know that the Gal -X would have become reality?
Because Q said so? :rolleyes:
For all we know the whole "all good things" episode could have been made up by Q, to test humanity.
I believe you miss my who point of the comment. DDIS's statement shows that he doesn't care about any other ship, even to the point of displacing other cruisers tactically, and just about every other way that he sees benefit. Other people that aren't fanatically loyal to the cause, aren't going to easily buy-in to that approach.
His calls are an extreme change to just the one cruiser, and in the end, wont make much of a difference. Unless all cruisers are improved, instead of the fabulous Galaxy (Exploration Cruiser) all cruisers, including the Exploration Cruiser, will still just be targets. All the Uni' boffs in the world aren't going to fix the problem all the cruisers exhibit.
You can push to be a big fish in the little cruiser pond, and still shark bait once you visit the big pond ,or you can be a one of the many medium sized fishes (community of fixed cruisers) in the big pond, and be able to fight the sharks.
As i have tried to explain earlier, this thread isn't supposed to fix any problem STO has, it is just about the Galaxy in the current state of the game.
I am all with you changing the Game mechanics to make it more like a typical Star Trek game, but this is not what this thread is about.
Dontdrunks point was that the GCS in "real" trek was much more powerful than acknowledged by cryptic and thus deserves a better place in STO.
Originally Posted by dontdrunkimshoot
we arent steeping on the real important toes here, no ones delicate world view is getting effected with the galaxy suddenly being the best tac cruiser, and it can quietly be an amazing sci cruiser in the background, safe from you dps junkies getting offended.
He just pleads for a much more versatile ship, which is able to become a powerful tactical ship as weall as a powerful science Cruiser.
All this is a good idea, but i think it could be archived by other means as well. (without scaring escort jockeys and sov followers off)
Instead of giving it a Lt.Cmdr universal (which offends most escort jockeys and most of Cryptics devs IMO) the GCS should have a more versatile fixed BOFF layout.
Maybe something like the 2xD's BOFF layout just with an engineering Lt. instead of a tactical+uni ensign for example.
So the problem of a Lt+ Lt.Cmdr tactical some ppl are afraid of would be solved IMO and we would have a very versatile and powerful GCS, without it being able to directly outgun a regent. (i know this is wrong according to canon, but still better than that totally lame ship ship we have now.)
I can understand Dontdrunks motives, but i think Cryptic won't make the GCS the be(a)st cruiser it is supposed to be according to canon. Instead we should aim for a useful, realistic and aceptable interpretation of the GCS in STO.
"...'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
Sorry deviating but the Galaxy -X is NOT the Tactical version of the Galaxy Class (in "real" Star Trek) it was just a fantasy Q made up. It's almost the same as with the "tactical" version of the Intrepid. In Star Treks reality (any reality) those ships never existed. If you want to see a closer version to how a tactical Galaxy Class would look like you should watch "yesterdays enterprise".
The Anomaly thing that Q put Picard through is a fantasy, but Q himself have the capability to go back and forth in time, and showed Picard what the future would be like, though we know the Enterprise get destroyed later (ST:Generation) does not mean the Galaxy-X type would not exsited.
that so-called Tactical Galaxy u speak of is a byproduct of a 20 years war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire (Which the Feds is Losing like in STO) in that Alternate timeline, so it does not effect this time line.
as for the Tactical intrepid... Q has credibility with the Galaxy-X because of his natural time travel ability than a stupid Alien species that can't even tell events that happen hundreds of years ago about Voyager...
The reason why the poster said this was that probably because some people keep suggesting that the Explorer should have the layout of the Support cruiser. Honestly, game-structure-wise (not canon-wise), it would make for more sense to do that than to flip the two or to do anything else if the goal is just to tweak the Explorer.
I still am on the side of fixing the problem with all cruisers to improve every cruiser in the game though.
That's the funny and bizarre thing about some of these guys on this thread. They insult the devs and fans of other ships, and then inexplicably appear to be totally surprised when they can't get ANY support from those same devs and fans of other ships.
They really appear to believe that the "righteousness" of their "cause" supersedes their horrible, insulting, hypocritical presentations. Even when some of them say some out of line, wacky things, they refuse to correct each other.
At times, they are truly their own worst "advocates".
I believe you miss my who point of the comment. DDIS's statement shows that he doesn't care about any other ship, even to the point of displacing other cruisers tactically, and just about every other way that he sees benefit. Other people that aren't fanatically loyal to the cause, aren't going to easily buy-in to that approach.
His calls are an extreme change to just the one cruiser, and in the end, wont make much of a difference. Unless all cruisers are improved, instead of the fabulous Galaxy (Exploration Cruiser) all cruisers, including the Exploration Cruiser, will still just be targets. All the Uni' boffs in the world aren't going to fix the problem all the cruisers exhibit.
You can push to be a big fish in the little cruiser pond, and still shark bait once you visit the big pond ,or you can be a one of the many medium sized fishes (community of fixed cruisers) in the big pond, and be able to fight the sharks.
actually you are currently the king of missing the point. i use nearly all the other cruisers, i care about them, but i would not feel bad if my favorite ship from the IP gave them more competition.
in spite of that feeling, that station setup all but does NOT step on any toes. im not sure how a 6 turn galaxy with 2 or 3 tac consoles that can have a LTC tac if you really want it to will out do beam boat excelsior, regent, galor, adapted, jem carrier, or monbosh tactically. please dont try to tell me that it being able to have a LTC and LT tac would make it to good of a tac cruisers, i'll injure myself laughing at you.
this setup is for people like you who seem to want it to remain a sucky ship. well fine, i'll make a station setup that is extreamly flexible, but wont let it be the best or even top 5 tac cruiser, but will allow it to have unmatchable sci potential, because thats what no one seems to value in this discussion. as an added bonus, the station setup range of flexibility fits with canon extreamly well, and even makes it look weaker then the sovereign tactically. i couldn't be more gracious about this, coming up with a setup id like, and the galaxy haters shouldn't mind. its not what stations are universal, its whats the end result of what you can build out of those universal stations that maters.
if they were to buff all cruisers, guess what would still be at the bottom. any concealable change to eng skills would still help other cruisers more, becase those changes would be magnified through more tac consoles and more tac powers. having to much eng is only part of the problem, not having enough tac or sci is just as big a problem, which is why it needs its station setup overhauled.
you should take another reading on the state of cruisers, i cant even tell where your coming from anymore. they are the dps kings, they annihilate stfs the fastest, a team of 5 tac cruisers will FAW everything to death, even in pvp. thanks to the AtB builds i turned everyone on to, and FAW having correct accuracy, the cruiser options with high end tac stations are basically fine, and the cruisers that are sci heavy make for awesome healers and tanks. the galaxy remains the good for nothing anomaly that needs correcting.
So i think, if cryptic would make a 3 Pack with the Galaxy-X as the tactical version i seriously hope they unlock all other ship parts too. I would HATE to see the ugly third nacelle all the time i look at my ship.
This would not be so bad, one could even create a science version of the GCS.
To be honest i am not so sure about your proposed Console Layout, too much focussed on tactial and engineering for my taste.
I would rather see a console Layout like the 2xD has: 3 (fleet: 4), 3, 3
So the ship wouldn't need a special tactical, engineering or science version at all. The only greater thing the dves had to do would be to make the third nacelle and phaser lance model possible on the standard GCS ship model.
No i was not referring to obsolete Tier 4 or it's ''Refit'' version ship which no one will play at Tier 5, i was talking about the Exploration Retrofit and it's Fleet version.
I suggested the Universal Boff Station to raplace either Eng Ensign or Lt. Com station so the Tier 5 version will be as adaptive as the newer C-store/ Romulan / Lock Box Ships which is clearly is superior to both the Older Tier 5 C-store Fed and KDF ships.
Cryptic will NOT make a Galaxy 3-pack ships like the Vesta, Kumari, Oddy, Bortas, etc. is simply because they already have Tier 5 versions Exploration Cruiser Retrofit/Fleet and Dreadnought Cruiser... only thing they can make is just a Galaxy class Bundle with the Exploration Refit, Retrofit and Dreadnought Cruiser... which also i don't see them doing.
How do you know that the Gal -X would have become reality?
Because Q said so? :rolleyes:
For all we know the whole "all good things" episode could have been made up by Q, to test humanity.
First off, you don't need the "rolls eyes" emoticon, it's snarky and uncalled for. I don't act that way to you, why do it to me?
Secondly, Q didn't say anything about the Galaxy-X, period. Picard was dealing with an alternate timeline(s), another possibility. To say that the events of that episode were directly statements of Q and not reactions of a possible future makes no sense. The fact is we don't know either way if the Galaxy-X would become reality, some Galaxy class ships may indeed be converted to that type of upgrade between the end of Nemisis and the start of STO, as per the game (and my Hallmark Christmas decoration ), it did happen. In the game, it is a more tactical version of the Exploration cruiser, which it should.
For all we know, "All Good Things" could have been written as a script and played by actors filming the last episode of TNG. But neither your belief or my belief truly preclude the possibilities of alternate timelines of Star Trek.
As i have tried to explain earlier, this thread isn't supposed to fix any problem STO has, it is just about the Galaxy in the current state of the game.
I am all with you changing the Game mechanics to make it more like a typical Star Trek game
Then please join those of us who are making fixing the cruiser line of ships a priority before you push for just a change to the Explorer Cruiser. By fixing the entirety of cruisers, you may find the Explorer to be much more useful than it does now. Beside, if you get "your" changes first and they change cruisers to where "your" changes aren't as beneficial, how much credibility do you think "you" are going to have when you ask for another change?
Dontdrunks point was that the GCS in "real" trek was much more powerful than acknowledged by cryptic and thus deserves a better place in STO.
He just pleads for a much more versatile ship, which is able to become a powerful tactical ship as weall as a powerful science Cruiser.
All this is a good idea, but i think it could be archived by other means as well. (without scaring escort jockeys and sov followers off)
He pleads for a ship that will be, in effect, more powerful than the other cruisers offered. Not because there aren't cruisers out there than can do what he wants to do, but because he doesn't like that his favorite looking ship isn't one of those, other cruisers be darned.
Instead of giving it a Lt.Cmdr universal (which offends most escort jockeys and most of Cryptics devs IMO) the GCS should have a more versatile fixed BOFF layout.
Maybe something like the 2xD's BOFF layout just with an engineering Lt. instead of a tactical+uni ensign for example.
So the problem of a Lt+ Lt.Cmdr tactical some ppl are afraid of would be solved IMO and we would have a very versatile and powerful GCS, without it being able to directly outgun a regent. (i know this is wrong according to canon, but still better than that totally lame ship ship we have now.)
To use a phrase the McCoy might use, "You have the cart before the horse" on this one. If you want to fix the Exploration Cruiser, first fix the problems that afflict ALL cruisers, then talk about independent ships.
I can understand Dontdrunks motives, but i think Cryptic won't make the GCS the be(a)st cruiser it is supposed to be according to canon. Instead we should aim for a useful, realistic and acceptable interpretation of the GCS in STO.
I do too, he wants his favorite toy be the best toy in the toy-box. I can understand it, but it neglects the other cruisers in this game for his fancy.
Comments
I just want to throw this out there.
People are noticing.
Keep it up folks.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
just look for my post dead bottom of the page
I fail to see how this wouldn't bring it up to par. The Fleet Galaxy could have all ten consoles buffing its damage, just like any other ship. Engineering Team gains greater utility as a tanking tool and Tactical Team becomes unnecessary, allowing you to run Fire at Will I and Attack Pattern Beta I. That third Ensign Engineering station is suddenly less of a burden. Basically, it just becomes a less nimble Excelsior with Eject Warp Plasma instead of Attack Pattern Omega, which has its uses.
So unless the Exploration cruiser displaces one of the other cruiser types, its not good enough? That's the way to sell a win-win that everyone can get on board with!
i really have not the slightest sympathy for any toes a fixed galaxy would step on, they should have been in her large shadow from the start. all the same, my temporal ship style setup puts the galaxy in a unique position of being potentially the best sci cruiser, a decent but ponderous middle of the road balanced cruiser like the ambassador, or a below the top 3 or so tac cruiser.
we arent steeping on the real important toes here, no ones delicate world view is getting effected with the galaxy suddenly being the best tac cruiser, and it can quietly be an amazing sci cruiser in the background, safe from you dps junkies getting offended.
as a reminder, the setup im talking about is this
COM eng
LTC uni
LT uni
LT sci
ENS sci
4/3/3
I hope we all agree, that STO isn't even nearly as canon as most of us would like it to be. (in fact i have never even heard of a Star Trek game as un-canon as STO)
All the background material and canon Trek knowledge should help completing adapting the GCS to fit into STO. (as long as this background material doesn't contradict to common sense or anything seen on TV an as long as it is from the creators of the ship or TV show, like Michael Okuda and Rick Sternbach)
With help of that knowledge the devs should be able to create a better ship than this miserable thing we have to use ATM.
This doesn't mean the GCS should be made strictly according to canon or the background material, i think it should only help to catch the spirit of the ship to make it more like it should be in STO.
The devs made the Akira and the Vesta similar to this, i don't see a reason why the GCS should be made more like "it shoulde be".
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Galaxy Class and ambassador Class are clearly two different ships, if we begin to throw them together, i would recommend to make all cruiser Ship models availlable to all cruisers of a according faction.
(the same for escorts and science ships of course)
Maybe that wouldn't be so silly as it sounds.
Cryptic could un-bind BOFF/console Layout from the ship model and let the player decide which ship model to be used. PWE could sell more and more ships and increase the power creep, but ppl could still fly the ship they like.
This was an idea I had a long time ago.
The whole thing about ships is scrapped and instead of buying a new ship every level, the ship levels with us and we make the ship orientated to what we want it to be. Console slots are allotted as well as weapon slots, same going with bridge officer abilities. Course we'd need to have rules on the minimum. Like one of each type of console on a ship, at least one weapon aft and one weapon fore. With at least ensign of each group (tac, sci, eng).
It's a good idea, but too many things are flawed about it because... well people are flawed and would TRIBBLE this up and TRIBBLE STO.
It's a good idea, if only tactical abilities and consoles weren't so heavily regarded by a majority of the players (and the game). We'd first need to see a better balance between abilities and consoles before this idea would even lift off of the ground... or the ocean floor for that matter.
"Look at me I'm a target!"
"Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK!
"How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?"
My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
The whole game feels like it was something completely different in it's design phase. You "buy" new ships (as a Starfleet Captain) and swap them like a renegade starfighter pilot, you have miniguns and fancy bodyarmour - nobody can tell me that THIS was the best thing they came up with when they designed "Star Trek Online"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Um, No... The Galaxy and the Ambassador are not the same Class of ship, even in TNG u can clearly see the difference despite the similar design. asking for this is like asking for the Sabre and the Defiant have skins for each other or a Interpid and Vesta...
Like i said b4, i think that any change to the Galaxy should involve to the Galaxy-X as well (Being a Tac version of Galaxy) but only to the Consoles and Boff Stations as in my view the Hull, Turn Rate, Shield Mod, Speed should be left as it is.
these are the changes i want Cryptic to consider doing
Exploration Cruiser Retrofit
Engineering Consoles: x4 (x5 Fleet Version)
Science Consoles: x2 (-1 Change from Current)
Tactical Consoles: x3 (+1 Change from Current)
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Engineering Ensign Station or Engineering Lt. Commander Station
Dreadnought Cruiser (aka Tactical Galaxy)
Engineering Consoles: x4 (x5 Future Fleet Version)
Science Consoles: x1 (- Change from Current)
Tactical Consoles: x4 (+ Change from Current)
Universal Boff Station - Replacing the Tactical Ensign Station or the Engineering Lt. Commander Station
-
I post those stats changes that Cryptic should consider a while back ago but just gonna post this again so it will have more of a chance to seen by dev's (that's if they read this post)
Though i don't own a Galaxy, i do want to fight a very good Galaxy type vessel which i have never seen in PvP since the only common types of Fed Cruisers i seen is the Oddy, Excelsior and the Sovereign
That's one of the things that makes me think STOs devs rather should have made some generic Sci Fi game of their own, instead of a Star Trek based game.
For me it's obvious they just use the name "star trek", but essentially they just do what they think is cool, without caring if it fits to Star Trek or not.
Several years ago when i heard a Star Trek MMO is in the making i was afraid its developers would make like a generic MMO at that time, but in reality STO has become much worse. It's only centered around making money (in game) and spending money (real money). Ships have to be bought, and being treated as something like a article of daily use instead of being the silent Heros of the show.
Design wise Cryptic couldn't have made a worse interpretation of the Star Trek universe.
(not to speak about how terrible wrong the have made ALL ships)
In my opinion, if STO where a horse the most human thing to do would be to shoot it, lol.
My conclusion: Cryptic should be honest enough to drop the "Star Trek" name from their game and with a few tweaks they easily could start their own Sci Fi universe.
In fact i would like to play a game like this, but as a Star Trek game it is just terrible wrong on all ends.
Good luck getting buy-in for you idea after you step on toes. You will need it.
So i think, if cryptic would make a 3 Pack with the Galaxy-X as the tactical version i seriously hope they unlock all other ship parts too. I would HATE to see the ugly third nacelle all the time i look at my ship.
So you want on of those:
Version 1
Tac: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr., Lt. Cmdr.
Science: Lt.
Universal: Ensign
Version 2
Tac: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr., Ensign
Science: Lt.
Universal: Lt. Cmdr.
This would not be so bad, one could even create a science version of the GCS.
To be honest i am not so sure about your proposed Console Layout, too much focussed on tactial and engineering for my taste.
I would rather see a console Layout like the 2xD has: 3 (fleet: 4), 3, 3
So the ship wouldn't need a special tactical, engineering or science version at all. The only greater thing the dves had to do would be to make the third nacelle and phaser lance model possible on the standard GCS ship model.
TBH, i would love to get a tactical version, similar to the ship we saw at Yesterdays Enterprise. I just hate the infantile looks of the Gal -X.
I like that one, it's always good for a laugh.
The reason why the poster said this was that probably because some people keep suggesting that the Explorer should have the layout of the Support cruiser. Honestly, game-structure-wise (not canon-wise), it would make for more sense to do that than to flip the two or to do anything else if the goal is just to tweak the Explorer.
I still am on the side of fixing the problem with all cruisers to improve every cruiser in the game though.
It's not really a new proposed BOFF/Console layout. To be honest, it's just as legimate as any other BOFF layout. All other proposed Layouts are just variations of the same one. If someone wants to make the unis into tacs (which is what you seem to "fear"), then so be it.
Seriously, do you really fear everyone will suddenly fly Galaxy Classes in STO, despite it is still one of the slowest cruisers?
If that where the case i am asking myself why don't we see still other ships than regent classes in STO?
A Lt.Cmdr universal wouldn't be the end of the world, even combined with a uni Ensign. Surely it wouldn't be my first choice but it's not as terrible and game breaking as you may belive.
Cryptic certainly will release a more tactical focussed Lockbox ship with the next Lockbox for sure.
My favourite BOFF Layout would be this btw:
(since everyone seems to post his/her favs
Tac: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr.
Scince: Lt. Cmdr.
Universal: Lt., Ensign.
Consoles: 3 (fleet: 4), 3, 3
This BOFF Layout would make the Galaxy Class more science focussed, but still be able to pack a punch. Combined with the [aux] phaser arrays i have proposed some posts back, that ship would be a excellent Science Cruiser, without stepping on the Regents (or any other ships) toes.
PLUS it would be much more like a Engineering focussed sister ship of the Nebula.
To be technical, while did Q alter some things in that episode, the Galaxy-X wasn't fantasy, but the future of the Enterprise- D in an alternate timeline (since we know the "D" comes to an earlier and less glamour end in Generations).
I believe you miss my who point of the comment. DDIS's statement shows that he doesn't care about any other ship, even to the point of displacing other cruisers tactically, and just about every other way that he sees benefit. Other people that aren't fanatically loyal to the cause, aren't going to easily buy-in to that approach.
His calls are an extreme change to just the one cruiser, and in the end, wont make much of a difference. Unless all cruisers are improved, instead of the fabulous Galaxy (Exploration Cruiser) all cruisers, including the Exploration Cruiser, will still just be targets. All the Uni' boffs in the world aren't going to fix the problem all the cruisers exhibit.
You can push to be a big fish in the little cruiser pond, and still shark bait once you visit the big pond ,or you can be a one of the many medium sized fishes (community of fixed cruisers) in the big pond, and be able to fight the sharks.
Nope.
Translation: "The Galaxy Class should STRICTLY adhere to any 'canon' material that shows it easily blasting away any other ship it meets. The 'canon' where the writers showed it as beatable (strictly for story purposes, ignoring how its 'real' designers would have constructed the ship as it IS the pinnacle of Star Trek 'hero ships'..."
Yep. You have a completely unbiased view of the Galaxy Class cruiser.
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..."
Because Q said so? :rolleyes:
For all we know the whole "all good things" episode could have been made up by Q, to test humanity.
As i have tried to explain earlier, this thread isn't supposed to fix any problem STO has, it is just about the Galaxy in the current state of the game.
I am all with you changing the Game mechanics to make it more like a typical Star Trek game, but this is not what this thread is about.
Dontdrunks point was that the GCS in "real" trek was much more powerful than acknowledged by cryptic and thus deserves a better place in STO.
He just pleads for a much more versatile ship, which is able to become a powerful tactical ship as weall as a powerful science Cruiser.
All this is a good idea, but i think it could be archived by other means as well. (without scaring escort jockeys and sov followers off)
Instead of giving it a Lt.Cmdr universal (which offends most escort jockeys and most of Cryptics devs IMO) the GCS should have a more versatile fixed BOFF layout.
Maybe something like the 2xD's BOFF layout just with an engineering Lt. instead of a tactical+uni ensign for example.
So the problem of a Lt+ Lt.Cmdr tactical some ppl are afraid of would be solved IMO and we would have a very versatile and powerful GCS, without it being able to directly outgun a regent. (i know this is wrong according to canon, but still better than that totally lame ship ship we have now.)
I can understand Dontdrunks motives, but i think Cryptic won't make the GCS the be(a)st cruiser it is supposed to be according to canon. Instead we should aim for a useful, realistic and aceptable interpretation of the GCS in STO.
The Anomaly thing that Q put Picard through is a fantasy, but Q himself have the capability to go back and forth in time, and showed Picard what the future would be like, though we know the Enterprise get destroyed later (ST:Generation) does not mean the Galaxy-X type would not exsited.
that so-called Tactical Galaxy u speak of is a byproduct of a 20 years war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire (Which the Feds is Losing like in STO) in that Alternate timeline, so it does not effect this time line.
That's the funny and bizarre thing about some of these guys on this thread. They insult the devs and fans of other ships, and then inexplicably appear to be totally surprised when they can't get ANY support from those same devs and fans of other ships.
They really appear to believe that the "righteousness" of their "cause" supersedes their horrible, insulting, hypocritical presentations. Even when some of them say some out of line, wacky things, they refuse to correct each other.
At times, they are truly their own worst "advocates".
actually you are currently the king of missing the point. i use nearly all the other cruisers, i care about them, but i would not feel bad if my favorite ship from the IP gave them more competition.
in spite of that feeling, that station setup all but does NOT step on any toes. im not sure how a 6 turn galaxy with 2 or 3 tac consoles that can have a LTC tac if you really want it to will out do beam boat excelsior, regent, galor, adapted, jem carrier, or monbosh tactically. please dont try to tell me that it being able to have a LTC and LT tac would make it to good of a tac cruisers, i'll injure myself laughing at you.
this setup is for people like you who seem to want it to remain a sucky ship. well fine, i'll make a station setup that is extreamly flexible, but wont let it be the best or even top 5 tac cruiser, but will allow it to have unmatchable sci potential, because thats what no one seems to value in this discussion. as an added bonus, the station setup range of flexibility fits with canon extreamly well, and even makes it look weaker then the sovereign tactically. i couldn't be more gracious about this, coming up with a setup id like, and the galaxy haters shouldn't mind. its not what stations are universal, its whats the end result of what you can build out of those universal stations that maters.
if they were to buff all cruisers, guess what would still be at the bottom. any concealable change to eng skills would still help other cruisers more, becase those changes would be magnified through more tac consoles and more tac powers. having to much eng is only part of the problem, not having enough tac or sci is just as big a problem, which is why it needs its station setup overhauled.
you should take another reading on the state of cruisers, i cant even tell where your coming from anymore. they are the dps kings, they annihilate stfs the fastest, a team of 5 tac cruisers will FAW everything to death, even in pvp. thanks to the AtB builds i turned everyone on to, and FAW having correct accuracy, the cruiser options with high end tac stations are basically fine, and the cruisers that are sci heavy make for awesome healers and tanks. the galaxy remains the good for nothing anomaly that needs correcting.
No i was not referring to obsolete Tier 4 or it's ''Refit'' version ship which no one will play at Tier 5, i was talking about the Exploration Retrofit and it's Fleet version.
I suggested the Universal Boff Station to raplace either Eng Ensign or Lt. Com station so the Tier 5 version will be as adaptive as the newer C-store/ Romulan / Lock Box Ships which is clearly is superior to both the Older Tier 5 C-store Fed and KDF ships.
Cryptic will NOT make a Galaxy 3-pack ships like the Vesta, Kumari, Oddy, Bortas, etc. is simply because they already have Tier 5 versions Exploration Cruiser Retrofit/Fleet and Dreadnought Cruiser... only thing they can make is just a Galaxy class Bundle with the Exploration Refit, Retrofit and Dreadnought Cruiser... which also i don't see them doing.
First off, you don't need the "rolls eyes" emoticon, it's snarky and uncalled for. I don't act that way to you, why do it to me?
Secondly, Q didn't say anything about the Galaxy-X, period. Picard was dealing with an alternate timeline(s), another possibility. To say that the events of that episode were directly statements of Q and not reactions of a possible future makes no sense. The fact is we don't know either way if the Galaxy-X would become reality, some Galaxy class ships may indeed be converted to that type of upgrade between the end of Nemisis and the start of STO, as per the game (and my Hallmark Christmas decoration
For all we know, "All Good Things" could have been written as a script and played by actors filming the last episode of TNG. But neither your belief or my belief truly preclude the possibilities of alternate timelines of Star Trek.
Then please join those of us who are making fixing the cruiser line of ships a priority before you push for just a change to the Explorer Cruiser. By fixing the entirety of cruisers, you may find the Explorer to be much more useful than it does now. Beside, if you get "your" changes first and they change cruisers to where "your" changes aren't as beneficial, how much credibility do you think "you" are going to have when you ask for another change?
Yes, it is about placing a band-aid to fix a sucking chest wound where surgery should be done to heal the whole body.
He pleads for a ship that will be, in effect, more powerful than the other cruisers offered. Not because there aren't cruisers out there than can do what he wants to do, but because he doesn't like that his favorite looking ship isn't one of those, other cruisers be darned.
To use a phrase the McCoy might use, "You have the cart before the horse" on this one. If you want to fix the Exploration Cruiser, first fix the problems that afflict ALL cruisers, then talk about independent ships.
I do too, he wants his favorite toy be the best toy in the toy-box. I can understand it, but it neglects the other cruisers in this game for his fancy.