Lol at some of you.
UR THREAD IS TOO LONG STFU AN QUIT BITHCING THE FALEXY JST SUX!!111
Moving along. I had an idea that would help keep the Galaxy-R and -X fairly equal but distinct and useful.
The -R would have 4 engie consoles, 4 science, 3 tac.
Lt. Tac
Cmdr. Engie
Lt. Cdr. Engie (Or a same rank Universal)
Cmdr. Sci
The -X would have 4 Engie consoles, 2 Sci, 4 Tac.
Cmdr Tac
Lt Tac
Commander Engie
Lt. Sci
That gives both ships a sensible leaning. The -R has a heavier Engie/Sci leaning, providing for healing and help, as well as helpful buff/debuff abilites. The unviersal can help give it more leaning in whatever specific direction the captain wants, adding flexibility.
The -X has a more rigid, tactical leaning, while still offering enough engie prowess to make it tough, as it should be, or a little more agile, however the Captain wants to take it, all at the expense of Sci power, and some Eng power.
How does that sound?
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
if you ever got a chance to be a part of a true premade pvp team, you would have a moment of clarity
I dunno, even TT and the attack patterns are pretty good stuff, even if they don't shoot things especially TT for shield heals on allies (tied in with a TSS).
By making the Galaxy Class the most passive ship, Cryptic deliberatley condemned every TNG fan to fly the most boring ship in the game. Just because one dev just doesn't find it "cool" enough.
Yes, I am sure that when they even pitched the game to their superiors they said
"The time is nigh to punish those fools who worship Star Trek: The Next Generation. Let them see their Captain level ship as the Albatross around their neck for things to come! Pain and suffering will be will of the starship gods! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfUM5xHUY4M "
What is your biggest problem with this ship as i don't seem to have that much with it?please no long winded posts.
- worst turn rate
- worst damage dealing
- worst station setup, id have to get long winded to explain
- for the purpose of being an unkillable tank, its station setup is sub par for just that
- pos ugly galaxy X exists, so a galaxy that doesn't look terrible and riced out will always have to suck more then the galaxy X
- no mater what you want to do with the cruiser, deal damage, heal, support, control, theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better, MUCH better
-absolutely, positively good for nothing, has no niche, other then being the worst at everything.
The -R would have 4 engie consoles, 4 science, 3 tac.
Lt. Tac
Cmdr. Engie
Lt. Cdr. Engie (Or a same rank Universal)
Cmdr. Sci
The -X would have 4 Engie consoles, 2 Sci, 4 Tac.
Cmdr Tac
Lt Tac
Commander Engie
Lt. Sci
That gives both ships a sensible leaning. The -R has a heavier Engie/Sci leaning, providing for healing and help, as well as helpful buff/debuff abilites. The unviersal can help give it more leaning in whatever specific direction the captain wants, adding flexibility.
The -X has a more rigid, tactical leaning, while still offering enough engie prowess to make it tough, as it should be, or a little more agile, however the Captain wants to take it, all at the expense of Sci power, and some Eng power.
How does that sound?
proposing 2 COM stations on the ship. this post is a joke right?
I dunno, even TT and the attack patterns are pretty good stuff, even if they don't shoot things especially TT for shield heals on allies (tied in with a TSS).
if your an escort on a real team, its your responsibility to issue TT like healers issue heals. it takes a very different mindset to play mid to high level pvp then it does to pug. in a real premade everything complements and covers each other.
you say this, but then you cant help yourself and weigh in too
You completely misread my intention with that. I was spoofing some of the people who wandered in, complaining that we were complaining. thought the all caps, poor grammar and spelling was enough of an indicator.
And yes, two Cmdr. stations. Why do we have to be limited to just one Cmdr. station and a ton of ensigns or Lt. Cdr. stations? I'd like to actually get some use out of my boff powers, other than something something 1 or 2 on each boff.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
What is your biggest problem with this ship as i don't seem to have that much with it?please no long winded posts.
Free ship made the same and better or much better , the console is a joke (there is no reason for lost power when it separete the saucer **actualy it most buff more than already +5 to all, because the saucer is gone and dont drain power from the warp core**) and ofcourse there is no reason to tank anything in this game when yuo have a timer for opcionals... and be honest bro that ship cantbe the best healer with that Boff setup. And look this way yuo MOST climb to ALL reputations and the TOP GEAR to have a chance to be competent, and i dont talk of PVP since to me that is a waste of time.
You completely misread my intention with that. I was spoofing some of the people who wandered in, complaining that we were complaining. thought the all caps, poor grammar and spelling was enough of an indicator.
And yes, two Cmdr. stations. Why do we have to be limited to just one Cmdr. station and a ton of ensigns or Lt. Cdr. stations? I'd like to actually get some use out of my boff powers, other than something something 1 or 2 on each boff.
oh my bad, ive seen to many non satirical posts like that to be sure whats satire and whats not anymore. multiple commander stations may be a thing in the future, but i dont think quite yet.
- worst turn rate
- worst damage dealing
- worst station setup, id have to get long winded to explain
- for the purpose of being an unkillable tank, its station setup is sub par for just that
- pos ugly galaxy X exists, so a galaxy that doesn't look terrible and riced out will always have to suck more then the galaxy X
- no mater what you want to do with the cruiser, deal damage, heal, support, control, theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better, MUCH better
-absolutely, positively good for nothing, has no niche, other then being the worst at everything.
That sums it all up IMO.
It's not only that the ship isn't good at anything, it's more like it's the worst at everything IMO.
Look at the D'D for example. It is a all round ship as the Galaxy should be, apart from not good in AtB that ship is exactly how the GCS should have been IMO.
Other than the G -R, the D'D has a Lt. Cmdr science AND tactical BOFF station, which doesn't make it exceed more extreme ships, but makes it not the worst of them all.
And that's exactly how i want the GCS to be.
Tactical: Lt. Cmdr. Engineering: Cmdr. Engineering: Lt. Science: Lt. Cmdr.
(Same as the D'Deridex -R, just both ensigns (tac, uni) merged to a Lt. Engineering*)
Consoles, the same as D'Deridex
With such a BOFF setup the GCS would be able to be a solid and good all round cruiser, better than its precursors but not out gunning newer ships or perfom better than more specialized ships.
As you said with it's turnrate of 6, it wouldn't be a competitor to more tactical focussed cruisers, like the Regent or Avenger.
"...'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
- worst turn rate
- worst damage dealing
- worst station setup, id have to get long winded to explain
- for the purpose of being an unkillable tank, its station setup is sub par for just that
- pos ugly galaxy X exists, so a galaxy that doesn't look terrible and riced out will always have to suck more then the galaxy X
- no mater what you want to do with the cruiser, deal damage, heal, support, control, theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better, MUCH better
-absolutely, positively good for nothing, has no niche, other then being the worst at everything.
The only part of this I agree with is " theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better". I've got two toons that use the Gal-X, one is fairly unkillable and provides great support. There is a great niche build to which my other one is more tuned, however being sci' I don't get the advantage a tac' captain does, but the niche build is Matt's Lanc-A-Lot build and it works wonders, just ask the many ships that've been one-shotted in Ker'rat by it.
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan
Its affiliated nature already is a given. Granted, there may be a few people who are visually impaired, but we can only do so much.
hehe, nice response:D
but my point is that the dontdrunkimshoot setup is more in line with that feeling than what we have currently in game, that what i like about it.
Never said you asked for two degrees. I put that in as a point to how poorly the ship handles compared to other DHC ships.
ho yes it is, and that also why i don't try to "transform" it into something that he isn't, i never wanted or even hope that he could be as agile as an avenger and that also why i never love the idea to give this ship the regent bo layout.
my proposal have been consistent from the start, however it is something that will never be accepted by cryptic because it is too much specialize and not flexible.
but when people see it, they don't anderstand, for them it is either all escort style with relatively hight turn rate or tanking beam or single cannon with mediocre turn.
they can't even imagine that we can have something in between.
but this don't prevent me to tell when people propose some good idea.
I have a feeling that right now your are using 3 Fleet RCS and a healthy level of power distribution in the engines to get that far just concerning bolt-ons and sliders. That is a lot of opportunity cost to give up to try to make DHC's work. Even at 21', front 45' is going to be hard to keep vs. PvP'ers. If you want to STF, it will do fine.
well, think again.
if you got the right gear, skill and trait you can achieve this without too much sacrifices.
9 in warp core efficiency, 9 in warp core potential, 9 in thruster, 6 in engine performance.
efficient captain, warp theorist, helman.
jem hadar mk12 engine, tachyo console, 3 fleet rcs
engine power level 63/35
with this i got exactly 20.4 turn
and yes it is not as easy as it would be with a battlecruiser that goes without saying, but it is well within the reach of the "workable" area.
at hese "hight" level of turn, for the ship to be better you need a much bigger difference in turn.
having 21 or 23 and even 25 would not make a sensible difference, the next level is 30 turn where it will feel much better.
however even with +1 base turn, reaching 30 turn would required 4 fleet rcs, if ever.
i might go that way too, but right now having 20 seem sufficient, that why the proposal is not to make it turn better but to gain a console slot, to reduce the price that we have to paid.
and all that is worth it, otherwise i would have return to beam, bielieve me, the difference that DHC provide against intelligent target do make a real difference.
with this i am not force to rely on a lame faw build.
on people that want to do pve tho, this isn't worth it, a faw build will do much better and you won't have to have all that turnrate.
but in the end even them will benefit from a + 1 turn, and since this ship got a cloak and is not fleet level yet, god known that we need more console slots.
What play-style is it that you have that tries to turn 21', uses DC/DHC and is in a cruiser hull that doesn't sound like its screaming Avenger? If its a looks issue, that has nothing to do with play-style, but visual appearances.
the avenger loose tanking potential to it higher turn rate, that is due to it bo layout, and that is why it is not the same playstyle that my proposal will do ( not the one of dontdrunk mind you ).
like i already said there is a way in between the hight turn "squishy" DHC boat and the beam/single cannon tank with mediocre turn, the best of both world in my mind ( but that is just a personal idea, i can understand that some see things differently )
when cryptic and players get that into their heads, well maybe we will be able to find a role for this ship that is not a regent/avenger wanabee copy.
There are guys making good use of DN's that do consistent damage all the time because of not using 45' arce guns.
not in pvp, or they are using the lame faw build of NWS.
And how are you qualifying that a 3-pack is merited?
don't make me said what i didn't, i don't known if a 3 pack is merited.
what i known however is that it is a possibility, and one that have even been mentioned by gecko himself.
so for me, a bo layout proposal that take this into account is a + if cryptic ever consider to do a second pass on these ship.
so i salute the one that take this into account, however it is not a must have.
at this point i just wish that my ship to be reworked, that it is part of a 3 pack ship or not is not my primary concern.
Yes, I am sure that when they even pitched the game to their superiors they said
"The time is nigh to punish those fools who worship Star Trek: The Next Generation. Let them see their Captain level ship as the Albatross around their neck for things to come! Pain and suffering will be will of the starship gods! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfUM5xHUY4M "
well....
the guy in this video lokk a little bit like gecko you known:D:rolleyes:
You are right it would reduce the gap, but why only go half way if it would be reworked anyway?
the real question is, what role do you have in mind that required it to completely close the gap?
So, how about giving it some kind of raised Comm array srtengths?
i personally find nothing wrong with that idea, however this is not how cryptic work.
for this to happened would required them to create a special class for this ship to justify the special treatement.
just like they do, very "intelligently", with the dreadnought.
but as you certainly already observed every things that is special and given to galaxy class only exist as excuse to remove more things from them.
the new cruiser power is a great example.
I think for the sake of "balance" everyone seems to be so anxious about when it comes to Escorts vs. Cruisers, i think the GCS -R should get something in exchange for the lack of the Spinal lance, DHCs and cloak, and a potential higher turn rate. (not to speak of that the G -X is still behind every other Cruiser in the game)
I know tactical beats everything, but just by giving the tactical version (Galaxy -X) everything and keep the G -R even more behind cannot be the right way IMO. The G -R should get something on its own, besides a more universal BOFF layout.
even tho your idea seem disconected to me in the first place, the more i think about it, the more i think you are correct.
because right now there is nothing that make this ship trully unique as of today.
it is not just comparing it with the galaxy x, but all other cstore cruiser also, they must be something that can be recognize to be this ship signature.
Yes, I am sure that when they even pitched the game to their superiors they said
"The time is nigh to punish those fools who worship Star Trek: The Next Generation. Let them see their Captain level ship as the Albatross around their neck for things to come! Pain and suffering will be will of the starship gods! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfUM5xHUY4M "
I'm sure CaptainGeko must have such a though at one point, lol.
i personally find nothing wrong with that idea, however this is not how cryptic work.
for this to happened would required them to create a special class for this ship to justify the special treatement.
just like they do, very "intelligently", with the dreadnought.
but as you certainly already observed every things that is special and given to galaxy class only exist as excuse to remove more things from them.
the new cruiser power is a great example.
Maybe by making it a "Explorer" type of ship (similar like they made the ROM ships Warbirds).
But you are right, most things Cryptic does to improve things, turn out to make just those things worse...
even tho your idea seem disconected to me in the first place, the more i think about it, the more i think you are correct.
because right now there is nothing that make this ship trully unique as of today.
it is not just comparing it with the galaxy x, but all other cstore cruiser also, they must be something that can be recognize to be this ship signature.
I'm glad you like it.
"...'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 think you all look at this ship as seen in the show and as I said it is simply an exporation ship not really desinged for combat.Klingon ship however are desinged for just that combat which is why they are more heavly armed.
There really need to be ship UI instead of just using Boffs.I would prefer phaser emitter but on this ship instead of the array as well as 2 x photon with thicker kneck.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer Star Trek Gamers
The real question you must contemplate is, does Cryptic think it will make money of it creates another version of the Galaxy class vessel? Will the fans pay for another incarnation of it this far into the game?
The Devs never really cared about our issue, why should we stop now?
They never even bothered to write one single line in this thread.
By making the Galaxy Class the most passive ship, Cryptic deliberatley condemned every TNG fan to fly the most boring ship in the game. Just because one dev just doesn't find it "cool" enough.
.
Lol. Change a few key words in this statement and you would be talking about the KDF. LOL.
well, think again.if you got the right gear, skill and trait you can achieve this without too much sacrifices.
9 in warp core efficiency, 9 in warp core potential, 9 in thruster, 6 in engine performance.
efficient captain, warp theorist, helman.
jem hadar mk12 engine, tachyo console, 3 fleet rcs
engine power level 63/35
with this i got exactly 20.4 turn
Thats what I thought. The Tachyokinetic Converter is a 3/4 (MK XII very rare) RCS console. I take it that the "helmsman" you mention is the character trait. I had a feeling there was more than what you were saying. :P
and yes it is not as easy as it would be with a battlecruiser that goes without saying, but it is well within the reach of the "workable" area.
at hese "hight" level of turn, for the ship to be better you need a much bigger difference in turn.
having 21 or 23 and even 25 would not make a sensible difference, the next level is 30 turn where it will feel much better.
however even with +1 base turn, reaching 30 turn would required 4 fleet rcs, if ever.
i might go that way too, but right now having 20 seem sufficient, that why the proposal is not to make it turn better but to gain a console slot, to reduce the price that we have to paid.
and all that is worth it, otherwise i would have return to beam, bielieve me, the difference that DHC provide against intelligent target do make a real difference.
with this i am not force to rely on a lame faw build.
I just think that the opportunity cost to make the build viable is too great compared to the outcome. I prefer my Gal-x in the single cannon/turret or single cannon/ BA variety, especially since the lance doesn't impact the cool-down of cannon skills. No FAW needed. I will toss one DHC every once and a while for opportunity fire.
on people that want to do pve tho, this isn't worth it, a faw build will do much better and you won't have to have all that turnrate.
but in the end even them will benefit from a + 1 turn, and since this ship got a cloak and is not fleet level yet, god known that we need more console slots.
I've used the freebie Bortas with an all DHC/turret layout in PvE, its a ton more fun than if I FAW spammed my way through it. Many three-point-turns were had during those times.
Maybe by making it a more Science heavy Cruiser, just a thought.
Honestly, I really think that they need to merge the Exploration Cruiser and the Star Cruiser to the same stats before they do anything else. I don't see the point of having both of them.
The real question you must contemplate is, does Cryptic think it will make money of it creates another version of the Galaxy class vessel? Will the fans pay for another incarnation of it this far into the game?
Honestly i cant find any clue of what the dev team tink ....
And they are about to introduce Dino's with .....LASERS!
Yuo know some ppl are happy with this other like my self no.. this can go so wrong , but **joke mode on** maybe if we star to drink the same from the cofe machine from the devs office maybe finally we can see the game same way they do :P **joke mode off**
...space.... the final frontier.... these are the voyages of the dominion dreadnought wasteaholics....
seriously. the 3 ships, on which half of the ip is based on, are literally left behind in this game.
just wondering which series drove some, so called "trek-lover" devs?
('lil hint: have a look on the game and tell me it's not ds9 heavy )
- i don't really care 'bout a t5 connie, but can see the reason for people to want it
- i don't really care 'bout an endgame nx-01, but can see the reason for people to want it
- i DO want a gal-x on par with the other dreadnoughts (+long promised saucer-sep!)
- i DO want a galaxy that not is worser than an excelsior. o my, worser than most any other cruisers
Honestly, I really think that they need to merge the Exploration Cruiser and the Star Cruiser to the same stats before they do anything else. I don't see the point of having both of them.
That is actually pretty reasonable. Let the Exploration Cruiser be the Satrcruiser C-store version and the fleet version gets a bit more universal in it's layout and a third tac console. Would improve the ship without changing too much.
But then again, in theory they had to change the Defiant and Intrepid as well.
^ 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
Comments
UR THREAD IS TOO LONG STFU AN QUIT BITHCING THE FALEXY JST SUX!!111
Moving along. I had an idea that would help keep the Galaxy-R and -X fairly equal but distinct and useful.
The -R would have 4 engie consoles, 4 science, 3 tac.
Lt. Tac
Cmdr. Engie
Lt. Cdr. Engie (Or a same rank Universal)
Cmdr. Sci
The -X would have 4 Engie consoles, 2 Sci, 4 Tac.
Cmdr Tac
Lt Tac
Commander Engie
Lt. Sci
That gives both ships a sensible leaning. The -R has a heavier Engie/Sci leaning, providing for healing and help, as well as helpful buff/debuff abilites. The unviersal can help give it more leaning in whatever specific direction the captain wants, adding flexibility.
The -X has a more rigid, tactical leaning, while still offering enough engie prowess to make it tough, as it should be, or a little more agile, however the Captain wants to take it, all at the expense of Sci power, and some Eng power.
How does that sound?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
I dunno, even TT and the attack patterns are pretty good stuff, even if they don't shoot things especially TT for shield heals on allies (tied in with a TSS).
Yes, I am sure that when they even pitched the game to their superiors they said
"The time is nigh to punish those fools who worship Star Trek: The Next Generation. Let them see their Captain level ship as the Albatross around their neck for things to come! Pain and suffering will be will of the starship gods! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfUM5xHUY4M "
- worst turn rate
- worst damage dealing
- worst station setup, id have to get long winded to explain
- for the purpose of being an unkillable tank, its station setup is sub par for just that
- pos ugly galaxy X exists, so a galaxy that doesn't look terrible and riced out will always have to suck more then the galaxy X
- no mater what you want to do with the cruiser, deal damage, heal, support, control, theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better, MUCH better
-absolutely, positively good for nothing, has no niche, other then being the worst at everything.
you say this, but then you cant help yourself and weigh in too
proposing 2 COM stations on the ship. this post is a joke right?
if your an escort on a real team, its your responsibility to issue TT like healers issue heals. it takes a very different mindset to play mid to high level pvp then it does to pug. in a real premade everything complements and covers each other.
EPtS1, RSP1, ET3, AtS3
EPtA1, ES1
PH1, HE2, TSS3
HE1, TSS2
ST1
this would be an amazing team healer, made from a tac less version of my proposed station setup
lol
You completely misread my intention with that. I was spoofing some of the people who wandered in, complaining that we were complaining. thought the all caps, poor grammar and spelling was enough of an indicator.
And yes, two Cmdr. stations. Why do we have to be limited to just one Cmdr. station and a ton of ensigns or Lt. Cdr. stations? I'd like to actually get some use out of my boff powers, other than something something 1 or 2 on each boff.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Free ship made the same and better or much better , the console is a joke (there is no reason for lost power when it separete the saucer **actualy it most buff more than already +5 to all, because the saucer is gone and dont drain power from the warp core**) and ofcourse there is no reason to tank anything in this game when yuo have a timer for opcionals... and be honest bro that ship cantbe the best healer with that Boff setup. And look this way yuo MOST climb to ALL reputations and the TOP GEAR to have a chance to be competent, and i dont talk of PVP since to me that is a waste of time.
oh my bad, ive seen to many non satirical posts like that to be sure whats satire and whats not anymore. multiple commander stations may be a thing in the future, but i dont think quite yet.
Yeah, that seems like a lot of boff powers, but I tried to offset the high level stations with other things.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
It's not only that the ship isn't good at anything, it's more like it's the worst at everything IMO.
Look at the D'D for example. It is a all round ship as the Galaxy should be, apart from not good in AtB that ship is exactly how the GCS should have been IMO.
Other than the G -R, the D'D has a Lt. Cmdr science AND tactical BOFF station, which doesn't make it exceed more extreme ships, but makes it not the worst of them all.
And that's exactly how i want the GCS to be.
Tactical: Lt. Cmdr.
Engineering: Cmdr.
Engineering: Lt.
Science: Lt. Cmdr.
(Same as the D'Deridex -R, just both ensigns (tac, uni) merged to a Lt. Engineering*)
Consoles, the same as D'Deridex
With such a BOFF setup the GCS would be able to be a solid and good all round cruiser, better than its precursors but not out gunning newer ships or perfom better than more specialized ships.
As you said with it's turnrate of 6, it wouldn't be a competitor to more tactical focussed cruisers, like the Regent or Avenger.
The only part of this I agree with is " theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better". I've got two toons that use the Gal-X, one is fairly unkillable and provides great support. There is a great niche build to which my other one is more tuned, however being sci' I don't get the advantage a tac' captain does, but the niche build is Matt's Lanc-A-Lot build and it works wonders, just ask the many ships that've been one-shotted in Ker'rat by it.
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan
hehe, nice response:D
but my point is that the dontdrunkimshoot setup is more in line with that feeling than what we have currently in game, that what i like about it.
ho yes it is, and that also why i don't try to "transform" it into something that he isn't, i never wanted or even hope that he could be as agile as an avenger and that also why i never love the idea to give this ship the regent bo layout.
my proposal have been consistent from the start, however it is something that will never be accepted by cryptic because it is too much specialize and not flexible.
but when people see it, they don't anderstand, for them it is either all escort style with relatively hight turn rate or tanking beam or single cannon with mediocre turn.
they can't even imagine that we can have something in between.
but this don't prevent me to tell when people propose some good idea.
well, think again.
if you got the right gear, skill and trait you can achieve this without too much sacrifices.
9 in warp core efficiency, 9 in warp core potential, 9 in thruster, 6 in engine performance.
efficient captain, warp theorist, helman.
jem hadar mk12 engine, tachyo console, 3 fleet rcs
engine power level 63/35
with this i got exactly 20.4 turn
and yes it is not as easy as it would be with a battlecruiser that goes without saying, but it is well within the reach of the "workable" area.
at hese "hight" level of turn, for the ship to be better you need a much bigger difference in turn.
having 21 or 23 and even 25 would not make a sensible difference, the next level is 30 turn where it will feel much better.
however even with +1 base turn, reaching 30 turn would required 4 fleet rcs, if ever.
i might go that way too, but right now having 20 seem sufficient, that why the proposal is not to make it turn better but to gain a console slot, to reduce the price that we have to paid.
and all that is worth it, otherwise i would have return to beam, bielieve me, the difference that DHC provide against intelligent target do make a real difference.
with this i am not force to rely on a lame faw build.
on people that want to do pve tho, this isn't worth it, a faw build will do much better and you won't have to have all that turnrate.
but in the end even them will benefit from a + 1 turn, and since this ship got a cloak and is not fleet level yet, god known that we need more console slots.
the avenger loose tanking potential to it higher turn rate, that is due to it bo layout, and that is why it is not the same playstyle that my proposal will do ( not the one of dontdrunk mind you ).
like i already said there is a way in between the hight turn "squishy" DHC boat and the beam/single cannon tank with mediocre turn, the best of both world in my mind ( but that is just a personal idea, i can understand that some see things differently )
when cryptic and players get that into their heads, well maybe we will be able to find a role for this ship that is not a regent/avenger wanabee copy.
not in pvp, or they are using the lame faw build of NWS.
don't make me said what i didn't, i don't known if a 3 pack is merited.
what i known however is that it is a possibility, and one that have even been mentioned by gecko himself.
so for me, a bo layout proposal that take this into account is a + if cryptic ever consider to do a second pass on these ship.
so i salute the one that take this into account, however it is not a must have.
at this point i just wish that my ship to be reworked, that it is part of a 3 pack ship or not is not my primary concern.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
well....
the guy in this video lokk a little bit like gecko you known:D:rolleyes:
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
the real question is, what role do you have in mind that required it to completely close the gap?
i personally find nothing wrong with that idea, however this is not how cryptic work.
for this to happened would required them to create a special class for this ship to justify the special treatement.
just like they do, very "intelligently", with the dreadnought.
but as you certainly already observed every things that is special and given to galaxy class only exist as excuse to remove more things from them.
the new cruiser power is a great example.
even tho your idea seem disconected to me in the first place, the more i think about it, the more i think you are correct.
because right now there is nothing that make this ship trully unique as of today.
it is not just comparing it with the galaxy x, but all other cstore cruiser also, they must be something that can be recognize to be this ship signature.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Maybe by making it a more Science heavy Cruiser, just a thought.
Maybe by making it a "Explorer" type of ship (similar like they made the ROM ships Warbirds).
But you are right, most things Cryptic does to improve things, turn out to make just those things worse...
I'm glad you like it.
There really need to be ship UI instead of just using Boffs.I would prefer phaser emitter but on this ship instead of the array as well as 2 x photon with thicker kneck.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
R.I.P
R.I.P
Thats what I thought. The Tachyokinetic Converter is a 3/4 (MK XII very rare) RCS console. I take it that the "helmsman" you mention is the character trait. I had a feeling there was more than what you were saying. :P
I just think that the opportunity cost to make the build viable is too great compared to the outcome. I prefer my Gal-x in the single cannon/turret or single cannon/ BA variety, especially since the lance doesn't impact the cool-down of cannon skills. No FAW needed. I will toss one DHC every once and a while for opportunity fire.
I've used the freebie Bortas with an all DHC/turret layout in PvE, its a ton more fun than if I FAW spammed my way through it. Many three-point-turns were had during those times.
You won the lottery there.
Honestly, I really think that they need to merge the Exploration Cruiser and the Star Cruiser to the same stats before they do anything else. I don't see the point of having both of them.
And they are about to introduce Dino's with .....LASERS!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Honestly i cant find any clue of what the dev team tink ....
Same question made mi self when whe hit the 300 pages
Yuo know some ppl are happy with this other like my self no.. this can go so wrong , but **joke mode on** maybe if we star to drink the same from the cofe machine from the devs office maybe finally we can see the game same way they do :P **joke mode off**
Sry for mi english
seriously. the 3 ships, on which half of the ip is based on, are literally left behind in this game.
just wondering which series drove some, so called "trek-lover" devs?
('lil hint: have a look on the game and tell me it's not ds9 heavy
- i don't really care 'bout a t5 connie, but can see the reason for people to want it
- i don't really care 'bout an endgame nx-01, but can see the reason for people to want it
- i DO want a gal-x on par with the other dreadnoughts (+long promised saucer-sep!)
- i DO want a galaxy that not is worser than an excelsior. o my, worser than most any other cruisers
...and the book keeps growing.
That is actually pretty reasonable. Let the Exploration Cruiser be the Satrcruiser C-store version and the fleet version gets a bit more universal in it's layout and a third tac console. Would improve the ship without changing too much.
But then again, in theory they had to change the Defiant and Intrepid as well.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!