Okay, I know I'm risking life and limb by saying this...
What if they introduce a ship similar in design to the dreadnought from Into Darkness?
Shaddup about JJTrek for a bit, and lets think about the ship design itself.
Maybe modernize it a little, Iono, I never saw much of that ship, damn JJ never let it have any good camera angles.
Seriously, the ship design, not derailing this into another dumbass "I HAET TTRAK" thread.
hehehe, great minds think alike;)
altrought i wasn't thinking of a galaxy x, this ship however also come to my mind.
but bigger than the one in jj movie, indeed if that one is much bigger than a constitution, it is still a "baby galaxy".
anyway, i like the design of this pre-galaxy ship, i just find it a little too agressive, just like i found the regular galaxy to not be agressive enought, there must exist a balance between the 2.
I hope that's not that ugly Sovereign/Galaxy fan made ship that circulates the net.
ho yeah, these ships are really ugly, and proove the lack of imagination and anderstanding of what the design of these ships ( galaxy, sovereign, intrepid...) really mean in the first place.
to resume, they took the saucer of the sovereign and stick it in a galaxy class hull with ambassador pylons ( more or less but you got the idea )
the galaxy large size, was to show what the federation have become, big, powerfull and impressive.
the sovereign show the more "combat" oriented, sliker, faster and more advanced direction the federation was going in that time ( after the galaxy )
these fanmade should have been build with percise view of what the look of the ship should inspire us instead of doing these ugly kitbatching.
sorry, no intended to offense anyone who might love these ship design.
whats nice about the yesterdays enterprise galaxy was that its just a galaxy configured for a full scale war, its not loaded with science labs and luxury apartments. it shows the other extreme of possible configurations. thats the point of the class, at its most basic its an incredibly durable, large space frame with a ton of usable space. its size allows for weapons to be mounted that are more then twice as large as anything any previous class could fit. only a larger ship with larger weapons could exceed a galaxy's potential firepower. even set up as a ship purely for exploration, with its power grid fairly unoptimized for offensive action, 1 d'deridex, thats more then twice its size, wouldn't dare pick a fight with the enterprise alone.
the galaxy is not a support ship. its not a science ship. its not a battle ship. its the sum of whatever parts it was configured with. if that ends up making it a science ship, or a battleship, so be it. based on the configuration that single galaxy class has, you refer to it as what fits it best.
same is proboly true for the sovereign too. the enterprise E was set up more as a battlecruiser then an explorer, by the looks of it, thats the common consensus im sure. it could no doubt have a significant % of its interior configured for it to better serve other roles.
the point is its a mistake to pass judgment that something is this or that based on only 1 example that we have seen in depth. especially when there is also so much evidence that is counter to popular opinion.
All true.
But in STO there have to be made compromises between canon and whats possible in this game.
(not to speak about convincing ppl and the devs)
So i think making it just "one ship to rule them all" would be too much to accept by most players, no matter how canon and how accurate it would be.
Instead i think there are two possible sollutions for that problem:
First, split it up and make a 3-Pack of it.
(Like your proposed 3 pack)
Second, find it a niche (like making it a sci heavy Crusier for example) and give it as much GCS typical gimmics as possible.
(similar to what they have done with the Vesta.)
"...'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
But in STO there have to be made compromises between canon and whats possible in this game.
(not to speak about convincing ppl and the devs)
So i think making it just "one ship to rule them all" would be too much to accept by most players, no matter how canon and how accurate it would be.
Instead i think there are two possible sollutions for that problem:
First, split it up and make a 3-Pack of it.
(Like your proposed 3 pack)
Second, find it a niche (like making it a sci heavy Crusier for example) and give it as much GCS typical gimmics as possible.
(similar to what they have done with the Vesta.)
the 3 pack would be nice for sure, but short of that the temporal ship style TLC and LT uni configuration i proposed covers the full scope of the galaxy's observed capability. you cant beat the potential sci heaviness it could have, and it can have pretty nice tac instead. its not that outrageous a station setup for any new ship release these days.
I really just want the Galaxy herself to be Eng/Sci heavy. And the Galaxy-X to be Tac/Eng heavy. That is what i would be happy with. I dont want an overly redundant Tac/Eng Galaxy and keep the Gal-X redundant and useless.
Everyone seems to want so muc more tac all the time...
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I really just want the Galaxy herself to be Eng/Sci heavy. And the Galaxy-X to be Tac/Eng heavy. That is what i would be happy with. I dont want an overly redundant Tac/Eng Galaxy and keep the Gal-X redundant and useless.
Everyone seems to want so muc more tac all the time...
this is the other reason why i hate the galaxy X, other then its obsurd in its every tacked on detail. because it exists, the normal galaxy HAS to suck and be worse, because the X must be superior.
the galaxy should be fixed, ignoring the tac heavy X exists at all. compared to a normal galaxy, it should be more set in its tactical ways, then being dynamic. something like this
COM eng LTC tac LT uni LT sci ENS uni
wile the normal galaxy has COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
I would agree here. The standard Galaxy does need to be the more flexible ship, whereas the X needs to sacrifice that flexibility for tactical ability, since it was geared more towards an engine of war.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
this is the other reason why i hate the galaxy X, other then its obsurd in its every tacked on detail. because it exists, the normal galaxy HAS to suck and be worse, because the X must be superior.
the galaxy should be fixed, ignoring the tac heavy X exists at all. compared to a normal galaxy, it should be more set in its tactical ways, then being dynamic. something like this
COM eng LTC tac LT uni LT sci ENS uni
wile the normal galaxy has COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
I would agree here. The standard Galaxy does need to be the more flexible ship, whereas the X needs to sacrifice that flexibility for tactical ability, since it was geared more towards an engine of war.
That makes quite a lot of sense, and kind of what i was implying. we dont need two heavily tac oriented galaxies.
Gal-x tactical
with the actual Galaxy being a flexible ship, like it should be....
But seriously the only reason people think the galaxy has to be waeker as everyone says is because this game has no need for a tank. and no real need for healers.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
this is the other reason why i hate the galaxy X, other then its obsurd in its every tacked on detail. because it exists, the normal galaxy HAS to suck and be worse, because the X must be superior.
the galaxy should be fixed, ignoring the tac heavy X exists at all. compared to a normal galaxy, it should be more set in its tactical ways, then being dynamic. something like this
COM eng LTC tac LT uni LT sci ENS uni
wile the normal galaxy has COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
that make sense, it show that the galaxy x and regular galaxy are basically the same ship, it just that the X ( due to the war with the klingons ) is set for tactical first.
and the things that make him potentially more powerfull is what we known to be added to the ship, namely, the cloack, lance and canon on the saucer.
that also perfectly work with the game engine.
this, however will never come to life, this setup is too good for an overhaul galaxy, it is of a lockbox ship level.
it also render useless the need of a 3 pack, so that mean less money for cryptic
Other than angrytarg, i am ok with the GCS getting more firepower. But just as he, i think it is important to get all that under the right premise though.
(...)
I'd like to point out that I am fine with "more firepower" as in 3 tac consoles to bring the ship en par with all the other cruisers, especially the far older designs.
The thing I am opposed against is making the Galaxy Class a tac heavy battleship because it could be or making her the end of all things by giving her one or even more LTC uni slots. Because we have to follow "gameplay sense" while arguing for that ship and the existence of the Odyssey outright forbids the Galaxy Class to have more than a LT uni boff because otherwise it would become a competitor for the Odyssey Class - which is meant to be better in every concievable way. It is the Galaxies evolution (and while I don't like her looks, I actually like that one decision Cryptic made - make the "new enterprise" be a "Explorer" type ship again). And such a "Explorer" type ship should and is able to fight, we discussed that a lot. It is meant to operate completely on it's own hence it packs enough firepower to be a serious opponent and can be refitted to be a heavy weapons platform, yet still tactical specialists will outperform the ship in that particular way. Two big problems remain: The Gal in STO with 2 tac consoles does not deliver adequate firepower AND people seem to be personally "ashamed" when the ship they use is classified as a "Explorer" because that does not sound bad-TRIBBLE or anything. I don't know. You tell me XD I like Starfleet's prmise as it was established in TNG.
Like I said, I understand why the Gal is the way she is in this game. I don't like it because I know she should be something else. But I don't feel embarassed either like other people. I'm making 1st and 2nd places in the Gal-R (not even fleet) in CC because I laugh at all the flak the angry snowflake spits at us while escorts pop left and right. If the damage level of the Gal would be raised to "average" and the support function would be enhanced I would feeling like a "command cruiser" indeed
^ 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
that make sense, it show that the galaxy x and regular galaxy are basically the same ship, it just that the X ( due to the war with the klingons ) is set for tactical first.
and the things that make him potentially more powerfull is what we known to be added to the ship, namely, the cloack, lance and canon on the saucer.
that also perfectly work with the game engine.
this, however will never come to life, this setup is too good for an overhaul galaxy, it is of a lockbox ship level.
it also render useless the need of a 3 pack, so that mean less money for cryptic
what could make more money then an extremely iconic ship being released with a perfect for it station setup that required 0 new art developed? best part is that it would still not seriously upset the current cruiser balance of whats best at what.
i think 3 packs turn a lot of people off too. i also fear a 3 pack released of a current model ship would have the average player QQing about it being a rip off and not all new, even though us galaxy fans would love it.
they could just release a 'refit fleet exploration cruiser retrofit' for 5 fleet mods and require a level 5 yard, if they dont feel another c store galaxy is justifiable. id be more then willing to pony up for that. the fleet store is seriously underused as a way to release different versions of the same ships with slightly different station setups
what could make more money then an extremely iconic ship being released with a perfect for it station setup that required 0 new art developed? best part is that it would still not seriously upset the current cruiser balance of whats best at what.
i think 3 packs turn a lot of people off too. i also fear a 3 pack released of a current model ship would have the average player QQing about it being a rip off and not all new, even though us galaxy fans would love it.
they could just release a 'refit fleet exploration cruiser retrofit' for 5 fleet mods and require a level 5 yard, if they dont feel another c store galaxy is justifiable. id be more then willing to pony up for that. the fleet store is seriously underused as a way to release different versions of the same ships with slightly different station setups
The biggest problem with 3 packs is that you really want to use only one of the variants whiel the other are clearly only there for the gimmick console. I just reviewed the oddy 3-pack. The only useful ship IS the tactical one because they are all the same - except for the tactical one has 3 tactical consoles (which is "default" in the state of the game). The other ones are sub-par.
I would however prefer a store version over a fleet version. Simply because I'm not in a fleet and I believe there are still other people like me. I'd like to be able to have a decent ship and decent gear without having to succumb to the fleet system. I'm doing my personal fleet grinding all the time anyway, why do I have to do it a second time? I'd like to craft at least Mk XII phaser/disruptor gear for myself (make hybrid weapons fleet exclusive or something), I'd like usable ship and personal equipment that does not look like TRIBBLE without joining a fleet. Make fleet stuff still 2% superior or something. I don't know. But I don't want to be treated like a 2nd rate player anymore
^ 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
what could make more money then an extremely iconic ship being released with a perfect for it station setup that required 0 new art developed? best part is that it would still not seriously upset the current cruiser balance of whats best at what.
i think 3 packs turn a lot of people off too. i also fear a 3 pack released of a current model ship would have the average player QQing about it being a rip off and not all new, even though us galaxy fans would love it.
they could just release a 'refit fleet exploration cruiser retrofit' for 5 fleet mods and require a level 5 yard, if they dont feel another c store galaxy is justifiable. id be more then willing to pony up for that. the fleet store is seriously underused as a way to release different versions of the same ships with slightly different station setups
Being a fan of the Galaxy and already owning all of the purchasables, I.E. the Refit, Retrofit, Fleet Retrofit and Gal-X, it would be a hell of a Rip-off if those that owned all those werent given at least some discount. Especially if they just released a 3-pack with the same models and some 3-piece cheese set that would behave about as well as a 5 year old in a candy store....
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
What's the current state of play? Is there any news of a Fleet Gal-X or a new Galaxy Variant, I've seen nothing myself but been very busy IRL recently.
The DEVs had stated something along the lines of a revamp, since then the rumor mill has taken off running like someone on an episode of cops.
Though a Fleet Atrox, Battle Carrier and Fleet Kar'Fi appear to have been added to some descriptors on tribble, mainly seeable AFAIK on the fer'jai toolotip, stalker tooltip and cloak console tooltip. But thats just tooltip in tribble.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
What's the current state of play? Is there any news of a Fleet Gal-X or a new Galaxy Variant, I've seen nothing myself but been very busy IRL recently.
There's really nothing. A cloaking device console on tribble revealed that feds will get a "Battle Cruiser" and "Fleet Battle Cruiser" at one point which I suspect to be a Galaxy ('X') variant because they are planning on bringing the X to fleet levels for a long time now; yet we actually don't know anything. It's pure speculation because of some bits the devs wrote down somewhere. Geko for example stated that they also "look into" reworking cruiser and science vessel gameplay and take a look at BOFF powers. Whatever you make out of 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
There's really nothing. A cloaking device console on tribble revealed that feds will get a "Battle Cruiser" and "Fleet Battle Cruiser" at one point which I suspect to be a Galaxy ('X') variant because they are planning on bringing the X to fleet levels for a long time now; yet we actually don't know anything. It's pure speculation because of some bits the devs wrote down somewhere. Geko for example stated that they also "look into" reworking cruiser and science vessel gameplay and take a look at BOFF powers. Whatever you make out of that
I take those as generally empty promises like the ones politicians make so they dont get lynched.
But as usuall i hunker down and hope for the best.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
this is the other reason why i hate the galaxy X, other then its obsurd in its every tacked on detail. because it exists, the normal galaxy HAS to suck and be worse, because the X must be superior.
the galaxy should be fixed, ignoring the tac heavy X exists at all. compared to a normal galaxy, it should be more set in its tactical ways, then being dynamic. something like this
COM eng LTC tac LT uni LT sci ENS uni
wile the normal galaxy has COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
I fully agree with what you said about the G -X.
I like your proposed G-X and G -R layouts.
You could even "amplify" their differences by giving them different Console Layouts.
Like
G -X: 3, 2, 4 (Fleet 5)
G -R: 3 (Fleet 4), 3, 3
I'd like to point out that I am fine with "more firepower" as in 3 tac consoles to bring the ship en par with all the other cruisers, especially the far older designs.
The thing I am opposed against is making the Galaxy Class a tac heavy battleship because it could be or making her the end of all things by giving her one or even more LTC uni slots. Because we have to follow "gameplay sense" while arguing for that ship and the existence of the Odyssey outright forbids the Galaxy Class to have more than a LT uni boff because otherwise it would become a competitor for the Odyssey Class - which is meant to be better in every concievable way. It is the Galaxies evolution (and while I don't like her looks, I actually like that one decision Cryptic made - make the "new enterprise" be a "Explorer" type ship again). And such a "Explorer" type ship should and is able to fight, we discussed that a lot. It is meant to operate completely on it's own hence it packs enough firepower to be a serious opponent and can be refitted to be a heavy weapons platform, yet still tactical specialists will outperform the ship in that particular way. Two big problems remain: The Gal in STO with 2 tac consoles does not deliver adequate firepower AND people seem to be personally "ashamed" when the ship they use is classified as a "Explorer" because that does not sound bad-TRIBBLE or anything. I don't know. You tell me XD I like Starfleet's prmise as it was established in TNG.
I feel exactly like you . (especially about the Odyssey.)
One of the (many) reasons i am engaged here so much is that the GCS stands for the Exploration part of Star Trek.
The Federation does not consist of some militaristic morons blasting everything into pieces and they do not build ships for war (on a regular basis) IMO. Starfleet ships are more than that.
Cryptic completely ignores that part of Trek, because it's not cool enough or for whatever reason i personally don't care anymore.
The point is that the GCS in STO is a "relic" of a better Federation, but just because they preferred peace over war doesn't mean they where stupid and made the biggest ship into a target practice. We all have seen that the GCS was heavily armed and more than capable to defend itself and to attack if necessary.
I agree the Odyssey was a try to continue that tradition, but seriously i can't stand her looks. It literary combines EVERYTHING i hate about bad Starfleet ship design. It's a pumped up excelsior (shudder).
As it happens, just yesterday i tried to use it (the free version that was still in drydock), but i just can't stand that looks.
I regularily start trying to reach the devs by opening threads at the "art of Star Trek" section about the Odyssey, but so far no answer ever... LINK
(The only thing i would want are some more pylons that make the nacelles face in more directions, like the other Star Cruisers can)
Like I said, I understand why the Gal is the way she is in this game. I don't like it because I know she should be something else. But I don't feel embarassed either like other people. I'm making 1st and 2nd places in the Gal-R (not even fleet) in CC because I laugh at all the flak the angry snowflake spits at us while escorts pop left and right. If the damage level of the Gal would be raised to "average" and the support function would be enhanced I would feeling like a "command cruiser" indeed
Surely i can put all the good gear i have on my Gal -R but still it feels like driving with the handbrake on.
I am ok with the GCS being not the top of the line ship in STO (i mean 50 years have passed) but Cryptic making it the ship with the LEAST firepower, even being outgunned by the Galor, Ambassador or Excelsior (which i passionately hate) and not to speak of the Nova Class is just embarrasing.
For me that's not a coincidence anymore....
"...'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
What's the current state of play? Is there any news of a Fleet Gal-X or a new Galaxy Variant, I've seen nothing myself but been very busy IRL recently.
[Q] Are there any plans to upgrade older ships (Nebula, Galaxy, even the Odyssey and Bortasqu) to be on par with the power/synergy level of the newer ships you have released. And if so, how high of a priority is that?
[CaptainGeko] We are strongly considering giving older ships a second look to see if any of them need some love. We have a couple in mind, but I don't want to share which ones yet in case the list changes. But, to be clear, I'm talking about older ships, not the Odyssey or Bortasqu. We are happy with those, although we may consider new set bonuses for them.
[Q] Continuing along the same lines, would it be feasible to implement the tech (both in game, and for the C-Store) to make 3 ship packs that include the older ships? The Galaxy and Galaxy-X, and a potential 3rd Galaxy would be awesome as a ship pack, and would be cool if you could implement all the various abilities as consoles and set bonuses like the Scimitar; The Lance could be the 3 set power, and either shows up as the phaser lance or the Deflector beam from Best of Both Worlds part 2 opener, depending on how you've got the ship costume set up.
[CaptainGeko] We could sell a 3-ship Galaxy pack that would include the T4 Galaxy Refit, the T5 Galaxy Retrofit and the Galaxy Dreadnought, or even possibly the T5 Galaxy Retrofit, the Galaxy Dreadnought and a new variant ? though, there is no plan for either at this moment in time. We have considered bundling retrofits and refits. Perhaps as we introduce set bonuses.
[Q] In PvE ? the science abilities are useless and the tanking role is obsolete. A team of 5 escorts(or similar ships of the tactical breed) can do end-game PvE, STFs with optionals far better, faster and more effective than any other combination. Regardless if I personally agree with this statement or not, this is one of the most popular beliefs stated continuously on the STO forum. What is your take on this as a Lead Content Designer for STO?
[CaptainGeko] I don't personally agree with this statement and feel it is hyperbole to say "science abilities are useless and the tanking role is obsolete". At the same time, I completely acknowledge that many players prefer DPS builds over control or tanking builds ? that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. But I feel this is usually the opinion of hard core and dedicated players. Hard core players will always find the most optimal build.
There are few ways to address this: make everything else better; nerf Escorts (oh the horror!); offer gameplay objectives that only certain classes can achieve; offer new gameplay mechanics to other classes to make them tactically interesting, or change the entire game to satisfy more traditional Tank/Support/DPS MMO gameplay. Any change will either have no significant effect on the perceived value of Escorts, or it could possibly just shift the ?flavor of the week. ?
My take as Lead Designer is that the problem is not significant. Stop off at any social hub or sector space and there are plenty of cruisers, carriers and science vessels that players fly. Now, that all being said, I don't deny the effectiveness of Escorts, and I'm not saying we are not interested in offering new options. As mentioned above, we are currently looking into a possible new mechanic for Cruisers and Science Vessels, as well as new Bridge Officer power options for all professions. Also, some of the new Content in Season 8 has objectives that are better completed by different ship classes. But I don't believe any of these changes will significantly change ship roles in STO ? our goal is to just keep things fresh and fun.
very interesting interview, and some responses are directly adresses to us.
cryptic will never responded directly in thread like this, but they do give us a response here, that we like it or not.
[CaptainGeko] We could sell a 3-ship Galaxy pack that would include the T4 Galaxy Refit, the T5 Galaxy Retrofit and the Galaxy Dreadnought, or even possibly the T5 Galaxy Retrofit, the Galaxy Dreadnought and a new variant ? though, there is no plan for either at this moment in time. We have considered bundling retrofits and refits. Perhaps as we introduce set bonuses.
This sounds like they would just put all three ships together in one pack, without reworking them or include one new ship. But nothing indicating a complete overhaul of the existing ships.
[CaptainGeko] I don't personally agree with this statement and feel it is hyperbole to say "science abilities are useless and the tanking role is obsolete". At the same time, I completely acknowledge that many players prefer DPS builds over control or tanking builds ? that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. But I feel this is usually the opinion of hard core and dedicated players. Hard core players will always find the most optimal build.
Lol, it shouldn't be surprising for those people actually designing the game towards DPS.
There are few ways to address this: make everything else better; nerf Escorts (oh the horror!); offer gameplay objectives that only certain classes can achieve; offer new gameplay mechanics to other classes to make them tactically interesting, or change the entire game to satisfy more traditional Tank/Support/DPS MMO gameplay. Any change will either have no significant effect on the perceived value of Escorts, or it could possibly just shift the ?flavor of the week. ?
What they should do is to make ships more versatile, ESPECIALY starfleet ships.
My take as Lead Designer is that the problem is not significant. Stop off at any social hub or sector space and there are plenty of cruisers, carriers and science vessels that players fly. Now, that all being said, I don't deny the effectiveness of Escorts, and I'm not saying we are not interested in offering new options. As mentioned above, we are currently looking into a possible new mechanic for Cruisers and Science Vessels, as well as new Bridge Officer power options for all professions. Also, some of the new Content in Season 8 has objectives that are better completed by different ship classes. But I don't believe any of these changes will significantly change ship roles in STO ? our goal is to just keep things fresh and fun.
I said it before, it is not like people flying cruisers because those ships would perform as they should. It is more like they fly those ships ALTHOUGH they do not perform as they should. People want to fly cruisers, because they are the iconic Star Trek ships. Cryptics politics just contradicts trek lore by making Cruisers the least fun to fly ships by design.
CaptainGeko should be surprised that there are so many ppl using Cruisers indeed. Because they (cryptics devs) did absolutely NOTHING to make cruisers worth playing, if STO wouldn't be a Star Trek game i bet no one would bother flying cruisers at all.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I don't think this was previously posted here, but I visited a forum I helped run but haven't been on for a while, and remembered I had posted this there.
Tell me, Yreodred, would you want this if it turned out to be the Mystery Third Galaxy Variant?
I don't think this was previously posted here, but I visited a forum I helped run but haven't been on for a while, and remembered I had posted this there.
Tell me, Yreodred, would you want this if it turned out to be the Mystery Third Galaxy Variant?
You're very welcome, friend!
That is awesome. That same guy built a model flying Back To The Future Delorean, too. The Delorean is my dream car, loved it before I knew about BTTF. Anyway, back on topic, I guess.
I wanna know how Yreodred responds to that vid I posted, when he can see it. pretty sure he's one of the biggest Galaxy fans here.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
I don't think this was previously posted here, but I visited a forum I helped run but haven't been on for a while, and remembered I had posted this there.
Tell me, Yreodred, would you want this if it turned out to be the Mystery Third Galaxy Variant?
As "mystery third Galaxy Variant"?
You mean this as a non combat ground pet?
Is the GCS model significantly different to the one we got in STO?
Or do you mean this as a joke?
I don't understand what your point is...
Witout doubt, the model builder did a AWESOME job in making a RCS GCS model. :cool:
EDIT
I just watched the whole vid.
Really cool, especially the 2nd part.
Seeing this ship fly in reality is just awesome.
They should have removed the motor sound and replaced it with some Galaxy flyby sound to make the illusion perfect, lol.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
It was meant as a joke. Although, thinking about it, a miniature Galaxy flying around you as a non-combat pet might be amusing.
Or, if we want a way I'd love, have it as both. You summon it, and it follows along, just being cute, and then when combat happens, it's little shields flare up and it starts zapping the enemies for light phaser damage with miniature phaser effects. Maybe give it the same strength as a hand phaser or something. If it gets shot, shield effects.
As to the vid, I'm glad you liked it. The guy has more model building skills than he does video editing, but at least he tried with the background music.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
It was meant as a joke. Although, thinking about it, a miniature Galaxy flying around you as a non-combat pet might be amusing.
Or, if we want a way I'd love, have it as both. You summon it, and it follows along, just being cute, and then when combat happens, it's little shields flare up and it starts zapping the enemies for light phaser damage with miniature phaser effects. Maybe give it the same strength as a hand phaser or something. If it gets shot, shield effects.
As to the vid, I'm glad you liked it. The guy has more model building skills than he does video editing, but at least he tried with the background music.
OMG this has so much win!
Reminiscient of an episode of DS9 maybe? Little runabout zipping about doing stuff.
I would buy that Combat pet though. just to sit on ESD and watch them all flit about.....
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Comments
hehehe, great minds think alike;)
altrought i wasn't thinking of a galaxy x, this ship however also come to my mind.
but bigger than the one in jj movie, indeed if that one is much bigger than a constitution, it is still a "baby galaxy".
anyway, i like the design of this pre-galaxy ship, i just find it a little too agressive, just like i found the regular galaxy to not be agressive enought, there must exist a balance between the 2.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
ho yeah, these ships are really ugly, and proove the lack of imagination and anderstanding of what the design of these ships ( galaxy, sovereign, intrepid...) really mean in the first place.
to resume, they took the saucer of the sovereign and stick it in a galaxy class hull with ambassador pylons ( more or less but you got the idea )
the galaxy large size, was to show what the federation have become, big, powerfull and impressive.
the sovereign show the more "combat" oriented, sliker, faster and more advanced direction the federation was going in that time ( after the galaxy )
these fanmade should have been build with percise view of what the look of the ship should inspire us instead of doing these ugly kitbatching.
sorry, no intended to offense anyone who might love these ship design.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
But in STO there have to be made compromises between canon and whats possible in this game.
(not to speak about convincing ppl and the devs)
So i think making it just "one ship to rule them all" would be too much to accept by most players, no matter how canon and how accurate it would be.
Instead i think there are two possible sollutions for that problem:
First, split it up and make a 3-Pack of it.
(Like your proposed 3 pack)
Second, find it a niche (like making it a sci heavy Crusier for example) and give it as much GCS typical gimmics as possible.
(similar to what they have done with the Vesta.)
the 3 pack would be nice for sure, but short of that the temporal ship style TLC and LT uni configuration i proposed covers the full scope of the galaxy's observed capability. you cant beat the potential sci heaviness it could have, and it can have pretty nice tac instead. its not that outrageous a station setup for any new ship release these days.
Everyone seems to want so muc more tac all the time...
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
this is the other reason why i hate the galaxy X, other then its obsurd in its every tacked on detail. because it exists, the normal galaxy HAS to suck and be worse, because the X must be superior.
the galaxy should be fixed, ignoring the tac heavy X exists at all. compared to a normal galaxy, it should be more set in its tactical ways, then being dynamic. something like this
COM eng
LTC tac
LT uni
LT sci
ENS uni
wile the normal galaxy has
COM eng
LTC uni
LT uni
LT sci
ENS sci
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
That makes quite a lot of sense, and kind of what i was implying. we dont need two heavily tac oriented galaxies.
Gal-x tactical
with the actual Galaxy being a flexible ship, like it should be....
But seriously the only reason people think the galaxy has to be waeker as everyone says is because this game has no need for a tank. and no real need for healers.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
that make sense, it show that the galaxy x and regular galaxy are basically the same ship, it just that the X ( due to the war with the klingons ) is set for tactical first.
and the things that make him potentially more powerfull is what we known to be added to the ship, namely, the cloack, lance and canon on the saucer.
that also perfectly work with the game engine.
this, however will never come to life, this setup is too good for an overhaul galaxy, it is of a lockbox ship level.
it also render useless the need of a 3 pack, so that mean less money for cryptic
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I'd like to point out that I am fine with "more firepower" as in 3 tac consoles to bring the ship en par with all the other cruisers, especially the far older designs.
The thing I am opposed against is making the Galaxy Class a tac heavy battleship because it could be or making her the end of all things by giving her one or even more LTC uni slots. Because we have to follow "gameplay sense" while arguing for that ship and the existence of the Odyssey outright forbids the Galaxy Class to have more than a LT uni boff because otherwise it would become a competitor for the Odyssey Class - which is meant to be better in every concievable way. It is the Galaxies evolution (and while I don't like her looks, I actually like that one decision Cryptic made - make the "new enterprise" be a "Explorer" type ship again). And such a "Explorer" type ship should and is able to fight, we discussed that a lot. It is meant to operate completely on it's own hence it packs enough firepower to be a serious opponent and can be refitted to be a heavy weapons platform, yet still tactical specialists will outperform the ship in that particular way. Two big problems remain: The Gal in STO with 2 tac consoles does not deliver adequate firepower AND people seem to be personally "ashamed" when the ship they use is classified as a "Explorer" because that does not sound bad-TRIBBLE or anything. I don't know. You tell me XD I like Starfleet's prmise as it was established in TNG.
Like I said, I understand why the Gal is the way she is in this game. I don't like it because I know she should be something else. But I don't feel embarassed either like other people. I'm making 1st and 2nd places in the Gal-R (not even fleet) in CC because I laugh at all the flak the angry snowflake spits at us while escorts pop left and right. If the damage level of the Gal would be raised to "average" and the support function would be enhanced I would feeling like a "command cruiser" indeed
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
what could make more money then an extremely iconic ship being released with a perfect for it station setup that required 0 new art developed? best part is that it would still not seriously upset the current cruiser balance of whats best at what.
i think 3 packs turn a lot of people off too. i also fear a 3 pack released of a current model ship would have the average player QQing about it being a rip off and not all new, even though us galaxy fans would love it.
they could just release a 'refit fleet exploration cruiser retrofit' for 5 fleet mods and require a level 5 yard, if they dont feel another c store galaxy is justifiable. id be more then willing to pony up for that. the fleet store is seriously underused as a way to release different versions of the same ships with slightly different station setups
The biggest problem with 3 packs is that you really want to use only one of the variants whiel the other are clearly only there for the gimmick console. I just reviewed the oddy 3-pack. The only useful ship IS the tactical one because they are all the same - except for the tactical one has 3 tactical consoles (which is "default" in the state of the game). The other ones are sub-par.
I would however prefer a store version over a fleet version. Simply because I'm not in a fleet and I believe there are still other people like me. I'd like to be able to have a decent ship and decent gear without having to succumb to the fleet system. I'm doing my personal fleet grinding all the time anyway, why do I have to do it a second time? I'd like to craft at least Mk XII phaser/disruptor gear for myself (make hybrid weapons fleet exclusive or something), I'd like usable ship and personal equipment that does not look like TRIBBLE without joining a fleet. Make fleet stuff still 2% superior or something. I don't know. But I don't want to be treated like a 2nd rate player anymore
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Being a fan of the Galaxy and already owning all of the purchasables, I.E. the Refit, Retrofit, Fleet Retrofit and Gal-X, it would be a hell of a Rip-off if those that owned all those werent given at least some discount. Especially if they just released a 3-pack with the same models and some 3-piece cheese set that would behave about as well as a 5 year old in a candy store....
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
The DEVs had stated something along the lines of a revamp, since then the rumor mill has taken off running like someone on an episode of cops.
Though a Fleet Atrox, Battle Carrier and Fleet Kar'Fi appear to have been added to some descriptors on tribble, mainly seeable AFAIK on the fer'jai toolotip, stalker tooltip and cloak console tooltip. But thats just tooltip in tribble.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
There's really nothing. A cloaking device console on tribble revealed that feds will get a "Battle Cruiser" and "Fleet Battle Cruiser" at one point which I suspect to be a Galaxy ('X') variant because they are planning on bringing the X to fleet levels for a long time now; yet we actually don't know anything. It's pure speculation because of some bits the devs wrote down somewhere. Geko for example stated that they also "look into" reworking cruiser and science vessel gameplay and take a look at BOFF powers. Whatever you make out of that
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I take those as generally empty promises like the ones politicians make so they dont get lynched.
But as usuall i hunker down and hope for the best.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I like your proposed G-X and G -R layouts.
You could even "amplify" their differences by giving them different Console Layouts.
Like
G -X: 3, 2, 4 (Fleet 5)
G -R: 3 (Fleet 4), 3, 3
I think we all agree.
I feel exactly like you . (especially about the Odyssey.)
One of the (many) reasons i am engaged here so much is that the GCS stands for the Exploration part of Star Trek.
The Federation does not consist of some militaristic morons blasting everything into pieces and they do not build ships for war (on a regular basis) IMO. Starfleet ships are more than that.
Cryptic completely ignores that part of Trek, because it's not cool enough or for whatever reason i personally don't care anymore.
The point is that the GCS in STO is a "relic" of a better Federation, but just because they preferred peace over war doesn't mean they where stupid and made the biggest ship into a target practice. We all have seen that the GCS was heavily armed and more than capable to defend itself and to attack if necessary.
I agree the Odyssey was a try to continue that tradition, but seriously i can't stand her looks. It literary combines EVERYTHING i hate about bad Starfleet ship design. It's a pumped up excelsior (shudder).
As it happens, just yesterday i tried to use it (the free version that was still in drydock), but i just can't stand that looks.
I regularily start trying to reach the devs by opening threads at the "art of Star Trek" section about the Odyssey, but so far no answer ever... LINK
(The only thing i would want are some more pylons that make the nacelles face in more directions, like the other Star Cruisers can)
Surely i can put all the good gear i have on my Gal -R but still it feels like driving with the handbrake on.
I am ok with the GCS being not the top of the line ship in STO (i mean 50 years have passed) but Cryptic making it the ship with the LEAST firepower, even being outgunned by the Galor, Ambassador or Excelsior (which i passionately hate) and not to speak of the Nova Class is just embarrasing.
For me that's not a coincidence anymore....
very interesting interview, and some responses are directly adresses to us.
cryptic will never responded directly in thread like this, but they do give us a response here, that we like it or not.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Lol, it shouldn't be surprising for those people actually designing the game towards DPS.
What they should do is to make ships more versatile, ESPECIALY starfleet ships.
I said it before, it is not like people flying cruisers because those ships would perform as they should. It is more like they fly those ships ALTHOUGH they do not perform as they should. People want to fly cruisers, because they are the iconic Star Trek ships. Cryptics politics just contradicts trek lore by making Cruisers the least fun to fly ships by design.
CaptainGeko should be surprised that there are so many ppl using Cruisers indeed. Because they (cryptics devs) did absolutely NOTHING to make cruisers worth playing, if STO wouldn't be a Star Trek game i bet no one would bother flying cruisers at all.
Tell me, Yreodred, would you want this if it turned out to be the Mystery Third Galaxy Variant?
Intriguging Galaxy Concept...
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
I want to seriously thank you for posting that because of you i found this little GEM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QFHFXcIMuA&list=UUAFXepm8d2vAbRdFneLa7jw
And thats just EPIC to me....
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
That is awesome. That same guy built a model flying Back To The Future Delorean, too. The Delorean is my dream car, loved it before I knew about BTTF. Anyway, back on topic, I guess.
I wanna know how Yreodred responds to that vid I posted, when he can see it. pretty sure he's one of the biggest Galaxy fans here.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
You mean this as a non combat ground pet?
Is the GCS model significantly different to the one we got in STO?
Or do you mean this as a joke?
I don't understand what your point is...
Witout doubt, the model builder did a AWESOME job in making a RCS GCS model. :cool:
EDIT
I just watched the whole vid.
Really cool, especially the 2nd part.
Seeing this ship fly in reality is just awesome.
They should have removed the motor sound and replaced it with some Galaxy flyby sound to make the illusion perfect, lol.
Or, if we want a way I'd love, have it as both. You summon it, and it follows along, just being cute, and then when combat happens, it's little shields flare up and it starts zapping the enemies for light phaser damage with miniature phaser effects. Maybe give it the same strength as a hand phaser or something. If it gets shot, shield effects.
As to the vid, I'm glad you liked it. The guy has more model building skills than he does video editing, but at least he tried with the background music.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
OMG this has so much win!
Reminiscient of an episode of DS9 maybe? Little runabout zipping about doing stuff.
I would buy that Combat pet though. just to sit on ESD and watch them all flit about.....
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.
Support the "Armored Unicorn" vehicle initiative today!
Thanks for Harajuku. Now let's get a real "Magical Girl" costume!