test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

What is your beef with the Galaxy Cryptic?

1115116118120121232

Comments

  • marshalericdavidmarshalericdavid Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    While a correction of engineering offensive skills might not have the direct offensive damage as a BO or CRF, as those are tied directly with their weapons, they should be potent in their own right, especially of generic weapon type consoles are changed to engineering. The ship would be able to hold its own against other cruisers.

    Tactical consoles biggest DPS increase potential and easy to get.

    Engineering consoles second biggest DPS increase potential easy to get.

    Science consoles worst DPS increase potential and hardest to get as only ones are from Embassy.

    All ships would potentially have more DPS increase but the Galaxy would still have the worst bridge officer layout for doing DPS. I just don't see any changes to Engineering powers that would help to keep the Galaxy from still being obsolete and a bad ship choice compared to other Cruisers. Only a change to Bridge officer layout can truly help a Galaxy IMO. Every ship needs a min of 3 total tactical bridge officer power slots.
  • dnaangel9dnaangel9 Member Posts: 115 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Dumb question, but what exactly are you wanting re-vamped? There is already more versions of the Galaxy in STO then any other ship/class. I don't know how exactly how it could be made better without being classified as a Tier 6 ship..

    Its an older class which has already been retrofitted 3 times now in STO. To ST lore, It cannot be better then the Sovvy or Oddy since they are newer and more powerful ships/classes. There is also a Fleet version of the Galaxy, which is 10% better then the Zen Store Version..

    What exactly are you wanting re-vamped?
  • marshalericdavidmarshalericdavid Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    Dumb question, but what exactly are you wanting re-vamped? There is already more versions of the Galaxy in STO then any other ship/class. I don't know how exactly how it could be made better without being classified as a Tier 6 ship..

    Its an older class which has already been retrofitted 3 times now in STO. To ST lore, It cannot be better then the Sovvy or Oddy since they are newer and more powerful ships/classes. There is also a Fleet version of the Galaxy, which is 10% better then the Zen Store Version..

    What exactly are you wanting re-vamped?

    Excelsior and Ambassador are better then the Galaxy in this game and that is not right. Not to mention so many other ships. Galaxy is a terrible ship in this game a improvement is needed.

    Galaxy Class should have
    Commander Engineer
    Lt. Commander Science
    Lieutenant Tactical
    Lieutenant Universal
    Ensign Engineer

    That layout would make the ship useful instead of a obsolete piece of junk we have now. The Galaxy would not be OP it would not make other Cruisers obsolete all it would do is give someone a reason to use a Galaxy other then because of its looks and being a actual STAR TREK ship.
  • stardestroyer001stardestroyer001 Member Posts: 2,615 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    Dumb question, but what exactly are you wanting re-vamped? There is already more versions of the Galaxy in STO then any other ship/class. I don't know how exactly how it could be made better without being classified as a Tier 6 ship..

    Its an older class which has already been retrofitted 3 times now in STO. To ST lore, It cannot be better then the Sovvy or Oddy since they are newer and more powerful ships/classes. There is also a Fleet version of the Galaxy, which is 10% better then the Zen Store Version..

    What exactly are you wanting re-vamped?

    The term "revamped" was meant to be ambiguous. The "I support a Revamped Galaxy-class Exploration Cruiser" signature initiative is designed to promote positive changes to the existing Galaxy-class in STO. Those of us in this thread have different ideas what it should be changed to; however, most of us agree that the ship needs some kind of improvement, in one form or another. (Also, if you want your own, just say so and I'll have it done soon)

    Define "better". Offense, defense? Team support, tanking? PvE, PvP?

    As for the Fleet Galaxy compared to the Galaxy, the 10% increase doesn't do anything but make the ship tankier (I'm happy with that, but most people don't want to sit there tanking all day). It's like offering a 10% discount on a cheap dollar store item. The discount amounts to very little.
    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!
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Tactical consoles biggest DPS increase potential and easy to get.

    Engineering consoles second biggest DPS increase potential easy to get.

    Science consoles worst DPS increase potential and hardest to get as only ones are from Embassy.

    All ships would potentially have more DPS increase but the Galaxy would still have the worst bridge officer layout for doing DPS. I just don't see any changes to Engineering powers that would help to keep the Galaxy from still being obsolete and a bad ship choice compared to other Cruisers. Only a change to Bridge officer layout can truly help a Galaxy IMO.

    I don't see Cryptic making any changes period that will make cruisers competitive, much less the Exploration cruiser, in these scheme of things. But I could envision improving Engineer BoFFs skills to where they are capable of being formidable, I flip a coin when I lay odds. Even if you gave it whatever BoFF setup you want, it will still be a target in PvP land, as all of the cruisers are.

    Every ship needs a min of 3 total tactical bridge officer power slots.

    Do you mean tactical console slots? If so should every ship have a minimum of three Engie and Sci' too?
  • oakland4lifeoakland4life Member Posts: 545 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I think the best way to update the Tier 5 Galaxy Retrofit and Galaxy-X is to replace the Engineering Lt. Commander Boff Station with a Universal Lt. Commander Boff Station, even with the current consoles setup it should give people the ability to give their galaxies more flexibility to do slight more damage, use Sci heals or powers or keep their old engineering abilities if they want.

    Right now with the current setup the galaxies are just flying bricks getting killed, in PvP the galaxies on the Tank role is totally useless while other Cruisers like the Galor, Oddy, Bortas, Monbosh are generations ahead of the Galaxies because due to the fact they have Universal Boff Stations to give them the ability to change and adapt in PvP.

    I fought in over what feels like over thousand matches over the years to know i can respect the Oddy as a Tank/Heal ship because it can adapt, But i can never respect the Galaxy in the same way because it can never adapt, not to mention how fast it can be destroyed when trapped by a tractor beams and warp plasma which cannot escape from most of the time, and it's lack of firepower to put enemy ships in check as a counter.

    In the TV series, the Galaxy is a muti purpose ship... but in this game, it's anything but...

    Note: i don't own a Galaxy nor do i ever used a tier 5 galaxy in this game, but from my observation in PvP it is one of the most terrible and inferior ship i ever saw there... second to the TOS Enterprise which i saw a few times and killed it with my Fleet B'rel ^_^


    - General Yanin Vismitananda, Daugther of General Klag
  • kintishokintisho Member Posts: 1,040 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I think the best way to update the Tier 5 Galaxy Retrofit and Galaxy-X is to replace the Engineering Lt. Commander Boff Station with a Universal Lt. Commander Boff Station, even with the current consoles setup it should give people the ability to give their galaxies more flexibility to do slight more damage, use Sci heals or powers or keep their old engineering abilities if they want.

    Right now with the current setup the galaxies are just flying bricks getting killed, in PvP the galaxies on the Tank role is totally useless while other Cruisers like the Galor, Oddy, Bortas, Monbosh are generations ahead of the Galaxies because due to the fact they have Universal Boff Stations to give them the ability to change and adapt in PvP.

    I fought in over what feels like over thousand matches over the years to know i can respect the Oddy as a Tank/Heal ship because it can adapt, But i can never respect the Galaxy in the same way because it can never adapt, not to mention how fast it can be destroyed when trapped by a tractor beams and warp plasma which cannot escape from most of the time, and it's lack of firepower to put enemy ships in check as a counter.

    In the TV series, the Galaxy is a muti purpose ship... but in this game, it's anything but...

    Note: i don't own a Galaxy nor do i ever used a tier 5 galaxy in this game, but from my observation in PvP it is one of the most terrible and inferior ship i ever saw there... second to the TOS Enterprise which i saw a few times and killed it with my Fleet B'rel ^_^


    - General Yanin Vismitananda, Daugther of General Klag

    +1 I couldnt put it better myself.. galx X has failed me too many times...
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    i cant support any galaxy build that makes it so if you use the LT for engineering you have 3 ENS level eng powers, again. the point of this thread is undoing that very thing. giving it a static LTC sci marginalizes the ambassador as well, stepping on its toes far more then any other galaxy change could step on the toes of tac cruisers.

    i think ive made it clear what my biased opinion of the best station setup for it would be ;)
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    Dumb question, but what exactly are you wanting re-vamped? There is already more versions of the Galaxy in STO then any other ship/class. I don't know how exactly how it could be made better without being classified as a Tier 6 ship..

    Its an older class which has already been retrofitted 3 times now in STO. To ST lore, It cannot be better then the Sovvy or Oddy since they are newer and more powerful ships/classes. There is also a Fleet version of the Galaxy, which is 10% better then the Zen Store Version..

    What exactly are you wanting re-vamped?
    Yes there are already three versions of it in the C-Store.
    (Galaxy -R, Fleet Galaxy -R, Galaxy -X)
    But the funny (or rather sad) thing is, Cryptic managed to give each one of them the lamest BOFF/console Layout possible.


    The Galaxy -R and fleet Galaxy -R are too much dependent on engineering, having three ensign level engineerign stations and just two tactical consoles. This makes it the least offensive Starfleet Cruiser in the game.
    Instead of correcting this, by making the ensign Engineering a universal of by giving that ship a complete different BOFF layout, they just gave the Fleet Galaxy -R ANOTHER engineering console slot (which was the last thing that ship needed).

    The Galaxy -X althrough called "Dreadnought" and being able to use DHCs has only a Lt. and ensign tactical, and a turnrate that makes DHCs pretty useless.
    Alltogether, that ship seems like a bad joke made by some Galaxy hating Dev, lol.


    If only one of those ships where made bad i would agree that cryptics maybe just made a mistake, but since ALL THREE are pretty crappy i tend to think that either Cryptic has absolutely no idea about the Galaxy Class or they just hate it.

    To make this issue even worse they made the Excelsior, Ambassador, Galor, D'Kora and even the fleet Nova tactical superior. No one can convince me that all this is just a coincident.

    I'm not saying that the Galaxy -R should become a "i win" ship or the strongest ship in the game, but Cryptic should at least put some care in reworking it.
    (as they did with the Vesta or ANY OTHER SHIP)
    I mean it's not like there where no information about that ship, we have 7 seasons TNG and various DS9 Dominion war Battles.
    For me it seems they deliberately picked every occasion the GCS performed bad and used that as basic for that ship we have 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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • dnaangel9dnaangel9 Member Posts: 115 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    As for the Fleet Galaxy compared to the Galaxy, the 10% increase doesn't do anything but make the ship tankier (I'm happy with that, but most people don't want to sit there tanking all day). It's like offering a 10% discount on a cheap dollar store item. The discount amounts to very little.

    That is what the newer classes are for...

    Basically you are wanting a Galaxy Class Sovereign?


    You want more firepower and not sit and tank all day? Try a different type of ship??
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Tactical consoles biggest DPS increase potential and easy to get.

    Engineering consoles second biggest DPS increase potential easy to get.

    Science consoles worst DPS increase potential and hardest to get as only ones are from Embassy.

    All ships would potentially have more DPS increase but the Galaxy would still have the worst bridge officer layout for doing DPS. I just don't see any changes to Engineering powers that would help to keep the Galaxy from still being obsolete and a bad ship choice compared to other Cruisers. Only a change to Bridge officer layout can truly help a Galaxy IMO. Every ship needs a min of 3 total tactical bridge officer power slots.

    Very true.
    A buff for engineering powers wouldn't help making the GCS a better ship compared to all other ships.
    It would just amplify its "tankyness".
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • dnaangel9dnaangel9 Member Posts: 115 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I can fully understand the need/want for a Fleet Atrox mind you, just not the older and already tuned Galaxy..

    Of course everyone has their preference in ships. I understand that people love the Galaxy for what it is and it's staple in the ST Universe. But you cannot have your cake and eat it to. Its an older class, much older in comparison to the Sovvy and Oddy. There's only so much you can do with it before it outclasses its successors. Cryptic has already made it better then it needs to be. I am just as much of a ST fan as anyone, but I think you have to be realistic and stick to the lore, instead of living in a fantasy land.

    There is an old saying that says you cannot please a Trekkie. This thread definitely shows it off...come on ppl!

    So no, I do not support yet ANOTHER Galaxy, we already have 5...



    Edit: I have read most of these posts on this thread. It's just people wanting a Galaxy Classed Sovereign basically. They want more firepower and/or altered Tact stations. That is why the federation built the Sovereign classes.... It is a simple thing called evolution. Not to mention there is a Fleet version of the Assault Cruiser (Sovereign). I do however, respect everyone's wishes.
  • edited September 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    I can fully understand the need/want for a Fleet Atrox mind you, just not the older and already tuned Galaxy..

    Of course everyone has their preference in ships. I understand that people love the Galaxy for what it is and it's staple in the ST Universe. But you cannot have your cake and eat it to. Its an older class, much older in comparison to the Sovvy and Oddy. There's only so much you can do with it before it outclasses its successors. Cryptic has already made it better then it needs to be. I am just as much of a ST fan as anyone, but I think you have to be realistic and stick to the lore, instead of living in a fantasy land.

    "Much older"?
    The sovereign is just 10 years younger than the GCS, and it's got an update called Regent class, i don't see any reason why this can't be made for the GCS. (If not, the Sovereign should be just as obsolete, since it is more than 30 years old.)

    Please explain me how is it possible to have a Excelsior, Ambassador and Galor Class outgun and outperform a Galaxy Class. This has nothing to do with "living in a Fantasy Land", this is just bad gamge design made by Cryptic and this has to be corrected.


    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    ...Cryptic has already made it better then it needs to be.
    ...
    What game are you playing? lol

    Cryptic made the GCS all about being passive and defensive, "giving" it the LEAST firepower of all Cruisers in the Game.
    The GCS was (in it's time) the most powerful ship ever created by Starfleet. Heck it's almost double the size of a Sovereign.
    If Starfleet can keep the Sovereign up to date they can do the same with the GCS (which was especially designed to be as modular as possible). Cryptics Galaxy -R just doesn't make any sense.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • oakland4lifeoakland4life Member Posts: 545 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    I can fully understand the need/want for a Fleet Atrox mind you, just not the older and already tuned Galaxy..

    Of course everyone has their preference in ships. I understand that people love the Galaxy for what it is and it's staple in the ST Universe. But you cannot have your cake and eat it to. Its an older class, much older in comparison to the Sovvy and Oddy. There's only so much you can do with it before it outclasses its successors. Cryptic has already made it better then it needs to be. I am just as much of a ST fan as anyone, but I think you have to be realistic and stick to the lore, instead of living in a fantasy land.

    There is an old saying that says you cannot please a Trekkie. This thread definitely shows it off...come on ppl!

    So no, I do not support yet ANOTHER Galaxy, we already have 5...



    Edit: I have read most of these posts on this thread. It's just people wanting a Galaxy Classed Sovereign basically. They want more firepower and/or altered Tact stations. That is why the federation built the Sovereign classes.... It is a simple thing called evolution. Not to mention there is a Fleet version of the Assault Cruiser (Sovereign). I do however, respect everyone's wishes.

    Your statement have no logic to it... well let's see the other classes we have seen in TNG

    The Excelsior class is a 100 year old design, yet it outclassed the Galaxy (a very much younger design) by a huge margin and have more firepower 4 tac consoles vs 2 tac consoles of Galaxy.

    The B'rel is also a 100 year old design, yet it classed the Galaxy in firepower

    The K't'inga is a far much more older design, yet it outclassed the Galaxy

    The Galor class is as old but inferior to the Galaxy, yet in this game it far outclassed the Galaxy.

    The Marauder class is also as old and have equal armaments compare to the Galaxy in TNG, yet it too in this game outclassed the Galaxy by a long shot.

    If u think the Galaxy is ''Better'' as you said it is... then take it to PvP and we'll see how long u last there, testing a ship in PvE will not prove anything since even Tier 3 & 4 ships can also beat an STF Elite with no problems against inferior preprogramed AI's... the REAL battle is to fight someone that can think and adapt!

    I personally think the Tier 5 Galaxy needs a change with atleast 3 tactical consoles slot at most and a Universal Boff Station so atleast the Fleet version can be on par with the Lock Box ships or if they keep the console setup as it atleast give it 1 Universal Boff Stations or 2 so it can atleast compete in the level of those other Fleet/Lock Box ships.

    I too also reject of another new Galaxy type unless it's a Elite Fleet Galaxy of Tier 6 thats when and if Cryptic decides to expand the level cap to level 60 in STO.

    the Galaxy do need a update (in my opinion only one of the Eng boff's station (LtC) if not two (LtC, En) needs to convert to universal) so it can match other higher end tier 5 ships in adaptibility. Cryptic proves they can and will change any ship they see fit, primary example being Ar'Kif Tactical Warbird into a Tactical Carrier when it did not make sells.

    Next time think realistically and stop believing in lore which makes no sense, instead of living in your own fantasy land...
  • jellico1jellico1 Member Posts: 2,719
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »
    Dumb question, but what exactly are you wanting re-vamped? There is already more versions of the Galaxy in STO then any other ship/class. I don't know how exactly how it could be made better without being classified as a Tier 6 ship..

    Its an older class which has already been retrofitted 3 times now in STO. To ST lore, It cannot be better then the Sovvy or Oddy since they are newer and more powerful ships/classes. There is also a Fleet version of the Galaxy, which is 10% better then the Zen Store Version..

    What exactly are you wanting re-vamped?


    In PvE the ultra low DPS of the Galaxy class ships make them failures

    PvE is a DPS game

    Compare a JHD carrier to a galaxy to see my meaning here

    both are large slow ships but one the JHDC can be a great member of the stf team the Galaxy as a worthless member of the team in comparsion

    just look at the sheer power a Scimatar brings to the game compared to a Galaxy

    its patethic...........The imbalence
    Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
    Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
    Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

    JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
  • edited September 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    skollulfr wrote: »
    venture class.
    monarch class.
    then there are the ugly envoy and celestial that just look rushed.

    These are just ship Parts/Models, nothing that would change its awfuly BOFF/console Layout. What does it do any good to release more and more (some good, some rather bad looking) ship parts, if the ship itself is STILL the worst/most boring ship in the game?
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • edited September 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • marshalericdavidmarshalericdavid Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Do you mean tactical console slots? If so should every ship have a minimum of three Engie and Sci' too?

    No I mean tactical powers so a Cruiser can have a tactical team a beam power and a attack pattern.
  • stardestroyer001stardestroyer001 Member Posts: 2,615 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    dnaangel9 wrote: »

    Edit: I have read most of these posts on this thread. It's just people wanting a Galaxy Classed Sovereign basically. They want more firepower and/or altered Tact stations. That is why the federation built the Sovereign classes.... It is a simple thing called evolution. Not to mention there is a Fleet version of the Assault Cruiser (Sovereign). I do however, respect everyone's wishes.

    Nope. I recognize the ship ingame as a tank. The problem is, there is only one way to turn the ship into an effective tank (aka Zombie), but still, it's not as effective as a Recluse at tanking. Not to mention that the Galaxy has no other contributing aspects to other roles of play.
    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!
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Nope. I recognize the ship ingame as a tank. The problem is, there is only one way to turn the ship into an effective tank (aka Zombie), but still, it's not as effective as a Recluse at tanking. Not to mention that the Galaxy has no other contributing aspects to other roles of play.

    if built to be a thank, its one of the poorer tanks. or at least one of the most vulnerable to subnukes. with 3 ENS level eng skills, you cant take EPtS3, that right there pretty much disqualifies it as being anything close to the best tank. with all the eng, you might as well have 2 RSP, and those are just asking to get nuked. HE is the best hull heal, and TSS the best shield heal, something like the odyssey and recluse can have 2 copies of each, and thus have a MUCH higher volume of potential healing. those are also much more useful heals for allies. the galaxy is so good for nothing.


    nevermind that all of that is an inferior form of tanking to begin with. high defense scores and speed allowing you to simply avoid damage is a far more effective way to tank anyway.
  • edited September 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • assimilatedktarassimilatedktar Member Posts: 1,708 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Meh, I think every ship could be made awesome if they would allow us to have the bridge officer slots from the series. In the case of the Galaxy that would be:

    Commander: Tactical (Riker)
    Lt.-Cmdr.: Science (Data, I know, I know officially he was OPS, but he did the job of a science officer).
    Lt.Cmdr.: Engineering (LaForge)
    Lieutenant: Tactical (Worf)

    Now that ship would be freaking awesome, in spite of the hellish turn rate.
    FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
    Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Nope. I recognize the ship ingame as a tank. The problem is, there is only one way to turn the ship into an effective tank (aka Zombie), but still, it's not as effective as a Recluse at tanking. Not to mention that the Galaxy has no other contributing aspects to other roles of play.
    Lol.

    I know it's Off Topic, but i never understood the "fun" people claimed to have by being limited to one role in a MMO.
    (especially one that makes you get battered by the enemy all the time without any chance to strike back.)
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    i cant support any galaxy build that makes it so if you use the LT for engineering you have 3 ENS level eng powers, again. the point of this thread is undoing that very thing. giving it a static LTC sci marginalizes the ambassador as well, stepping on its toes far more then any other galaxy change could step on the toes of tac cruisers.

    i think ive made it clear what my biased opinion of the best station setup for it would be ;)

    So let me get this right, is it that you don't wan't three engineer ensign powers? The Exploration Cruiser isn't the only cruiser with three ensign powers. I know I load up my ensigns with EPTX or multiple types to make use of whichever one I may need at the time.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    Meh, I think every ship could be made awesome if they would allow us to have the bridge officer slots from the series. In the case of the Galaxy that would be:

    Commander: Tactical (Riker)

    Only problem is that as first officer, he really isn't doing much tactical while on-board, thats the tactical officer of the seasons tasks (Yar/Worf)
    Lt.-Cmdr.: Science (Data, I know, I know officially he was OPS, but he did the job of a science officer).

    He's the TNG version of WATSON, he was doing the job of anything and everything. He would be nearly impossible to replicate
    Lt.Cmdr.: Engineering (LaForge)
    Lieutenant: Tactical (Worf)

    Now that ship would be freaking awesome, in spite of the hellish turn rate.

    Don't forget an acting Ensign helmsman (does that make it half a power?) the has the penchant to getting told to shut up or nearly kill half of the crew :P
  • capnshadow27capnshadow27 Member Posts: 1,731 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I think th ebiggest problems is too many Enng powers share CD's, So you are better off using something else.

    Example.

    Sci, TSS and HE, both good ensign powers.
    Tac, HY, TS, BO or BFAW
    Eng, mostly junk. RSP pretty useful but massive CD. EPtX abilities pretty good 4 shared CD's. DEM same thing, Great power huge CD.

    Maybe removing the shared CD between the Teams, I.E. TT, ST and ET.

    Anything good in Eng has a big CD. Sure you can run an Aux2Batt build but you have to have 3 purple tech doffs to get that Eng to be competetive.

    They need to revisit the ENTIRE space engineerins setup. Not just the cruiser but the Boff powers too.

    I love the GCS, as funny looking as she is, always loved her...
    Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
    I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    if built to be a thank, its one of the poorer tanks. or at least one of the most vulnerable to subnukes. with 3 ENS level eng skills, you cant take EPtS3, that right there pretty much disqualifies it as being anything close to the best tank.

    Come again? How does having 3 ensign abilities preclude the Exploration Cruiser from being able to take EPTS3? It's a LTCMDR ability, which the Exploration Cruiser has two slots for? You could take two if you so desired.

    with all the eng, you might as well have 2 RSP, and those are just asking to get nuked. HE is the best hull heal, and TSS the best shield heal, something like the odyssey and recluse can have 2 copies of each, and thus have a MUCH higher volume of potential healing. those are also much more useful heals for allies. the galaxy is so good for nothing.

    I rotate AuxSIF, ET1&2 and Miracle Worker and I don't have too many complaints on my healing, all of these can be used on the Exploration Cruiser.

    nevermind that all of that is an inferior form of tanking to begin with. high defense scores and speed allowing you to simply avoid damage is a far more effective way to tank anyway.

    I can agree with that, to hades with what Jem Hadar equate to life, speed is life. Don't forget to pack a polarize hull, especially for STF's.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    So let me get this right, is it that you don't wan't three engineer ensign powers? The Exploration Cruiser isn't the only cruiser with three ensign powers. I know I load up my ensigns with EPTX or multiple types to make use of whichever one I may need at the time.

    if you use a tech doff build, 3 ENS level eng prevents the use of higher level EPt skills, and ET3. you got 3 LTC and up level eng powers left to fill, and 2 of the 5 skills worth useing at that level you cant without leaving some ENS slots empty. if you find yourself doing that you have forfeited viability. you got REP, DEM and EWP left, and EWP does not do that thing much good, at the LTC level any tac or sci skill is far more useful.

    something liek an excelsior doesn't have it so bad, because wile it has the low level EPt and ET1, its got 2 spaces for the only 2 high end eng skills worth using, and LTC level tac abilities. and on the reverse the ambassador has LTC level sci abilities, without even the issue of 3 ENS eng.


    if your trying for a non tac build and use damage control doffs you basically have the same issue, forced ET1 is the worst possible heal or defensive skill available at that level, at least you can use AtS

    with neither doffs your still blowing 4 stations to double up 2 types of EPtX skills were every other cruiser with those doffs is only useing 2. and they have more tac and or more sci to work with too. even if you ran EPtS3 on it, you couldn't do it with more then 1 copy without again leaving ENS slots blank, and you would only have half up time with version 3.

    there isnt a situation were your not running into plain disadvantages, situations were you are forced to pay an unfavorable opportunity cost to use the ship.


    Come again? How does having 3 ensign abilities preclude the Exploration Cruiser from being able to take EPTS3? It's a LTCMDR ability, which the Exploration Cruiser has two slots for? You could take two if you so desired.

    thats not actually possible without leaving up to 2 ENS level slots empty, like i mentioned already.

    I rotate AuxSIF, ET1&2 and Miracle Worker and I don't have too many complaints on my healing, all of these can be used on the Exploration Cruiser.

    you could do that on anything, your still missing out on the hugly superior doubled up HE and TSS wile still having room for ST to clear nukes off your team. they arent complaining to be polite.

    I can agree with that, to hades with what Jem Hadar equate to life, speed is life. Don't forget to pack a polarize hull, especially for STF's.
This discussion has been closed.