I would disagree as the largely-accepted "best role" for the Oddy is a heal-boat and you jsut replaced it with that.
I would feel far more comfortable if the Gal-X Dread actually did out-gun the Oddy on a DHC standpoint with a Lt Com and Lt Universal but with only a Lt Sci behind the two Engineering stations.
I'm talking about the Galaxy -R (which this thread is about), not the G- X, which i don't care about.
Btw. my proposed BOFF layout would make the GCS a science heavy Cruiser, which is not necessarily a "healboat".
"...'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
Both styles have a place in Star Trek. Excelsior existed a long time among with Ambassador and Galaxy Class i don't see a reason why both styles couldn't continue to exist at the same time. Even if its only for the aesthetics.
Because you were talking about the influences used in new ship design, especially the next flagship of the Federation. TNG design styles were obviously put to the wayside when the development of Intrepid and Sovereign came about. Using TNG aesthetics for the next flagship makes about as much sense as using the aesthetics of a Constitution MK I for it.
To be honest i can't see any resembance of the GCS in the Odysseys design.
The odysseys "huge" saucer you are referrring to isn't especially big comparded to the rest of the ship. (in fact, i belive it is even smaller in relation to the rest than the sovereigns saucer.)
The general shape of the Odyssey design with its comparable big and bulky engineering hull, "fat" neck and loooong nacelles share much more alikeness to the Excelsior and Sovereign style than to the les streched Ambassador or GCS style to me.
Look at the deflector dish, that screams Galaxy, as does the shape of the front of the secondary hull. As far as the saucer, the percentage of area compared to secondary hull is similar to Galaxy, the difference is its turned sideways and slip forward a bit.
The nacelles and most everything else is Sovy' Intrepid, not Excelsior. Theres actually more of Excelsior in Ambassador than there is in Ody'.
I like the last option the most TBH.
But in order to make a FED/KDF alliance in STO possible the Romulans would need much more allies to balance the FED/KDF supermacy.
Maybe with the Cardassians and a possible (free) Borg faction they could pose a serious threat.
Doesn't really matter. This part is set in stone and won't change.
I think the 80s Star Trek (TNG) was also a "better" vision of the future just as TOS was in the 60s.
In my opinion that's what Star Trek made so different from other shows.
With the exception of Idiocracy and Planet of the Apes, and the Blade Runner wannabes, most depictions of the future is brighter than it is at the time of writing.
When watching TNG i am annoyed myself by the "don't shoot, we don't want to make them angry" - mentality which is shown. But the important thing for me is the peaceful premise of humanity, which is of course a utopia. Realisticly Humanity would be much more like the cardassians in the future or some other rather unfriendly race in Trek (most probably like the Borg ->facebook and other internet stuff)
You can still be peaceful, but not a bunch of milquetoasts, Kirk was "peaceful" but didn't hesitate to open a can of W.A. when it came down to it. The Federation during the TNG-show era, if the Captain drew a line that the enemy could not cross and they crossed it, the Captain drew another line. If you did that to Kirk, he would introduce you to the chain-of-command.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG6_5pOCvcQ
I a certain way you are right.
Personally i never was a big TOS fan, most ppl behaved like idiots except McCoy and Spock, which where the only sane ppl there IMO, lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG6_5pOCvcQWheren't some of the producers of NBSG the same ppl that made DS9.
(obviously specialized in reworking other ppls ideas into something they find much more "cool" :mad:)
No idea. The only funny tidbit I know is that Young Kirk and Young Picard do get to fight against each other in a movie.... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596350/
AFAIK ppl complained in STOs beta that the cobra phasers where to un-cool. So Cryptic gladly made phasere the only handweapons with one un-cool looking and one cool looking version.
(i use the word "cool" just to show what Cryptics devs seem to find awesome but isn't necessary "cool" in my eyes.)
True but still it doesn't look creased and washed up like the TNG (series) uniform.
TNg doesn't have to be the only series Cryptics devs doen't like very much. Personally i think TRIBBLE should be renamed into "
Star Trek: DS9 & Escorts".
Take another look at the WOK uniforms, there is texture overlap something fierce, places that should be white have bits of red, main fabric texture on them. The texture has build up past the end point of the clothes, etc.
The problem i see with Cryptics "logic" behind this, is they only look at one side of the medal.
Surely the GCS was a tough ship, but it surely wasn't the ship with the least Firepower of all starfleet.
They should find a balance between those extremes, instead of just making it a extreme tank.
They had to make a choice between the Sovy' and Galaxy between which would be the tough tank and the other was the tactical ship. The Star Cruiser took up the sci spot. Given the choice of the two, the Galaxy made the better choice for the engie heavy "tough" ship
Let's assume the option for a new BOFF or Console Layout would be off the table.
Then i would say the GCS should get a similar space set, like the Romulan Singularity Harness.
But instead of a Console - Zero-Point Energy Conduit, Romulan Hyper-Plasma Torpedo Launcher and Experimental Romulan Plasma Beam Array, it should get a equal Phaser and Photon torpedo set. (with according set bonuses)
A Engineer-ized Nebula BOFF layout would look like this:
For the consoles i would use the same layout as the D'D -R has
Consoles: 3 (fleet 4), 3, 3
I think that would be a much better representation for the GCS, and still not outgunning (MMO balance) the Regent or the Odyssey.
You are swinging back to overboard-land again. It doesn't need a space multi-piece set, nor does it need a singularity counterpart. This is where you start to lose people, keep it simple. Give it a LT. uni and a heavy beam array and be done with it.
Even in the shows ships wheren't blown up all the time.
Ships can get damaged so heavy they only can get repaired in a spacedock.
You shouldn't forget that humanity has evolved (no matter how much DS9 wants us to belive they didn't).
Killing should be the very last option and since disabling is technically possible it should be a viable option, at least for Starfleet players.
This would also underline the differences between the various factions and their philosophy.
Its a time of war, even the tree-huggin' Federation Fleets jobs areto kill people and break things. Unless there's an actual purpose for not blowing a particular ship out of my sky, let us blow them up. In space, I can't hear them scream, but its real fun to watch them explode.
Still the deciding sea side battle was won by the greeks AFAIK.
The naval battle was actually seperate from Thermopylae, but was still critical. If the pass had fallen either in a shorter time, or the troops that Leonidas didn't redeploy away from that front, the Persians would've run roughshot over Greece. They ended up taking Athens but the time that they held and the troops that they saved kept the effort alive and allowed the Athenians to press the naval campaign instead of doubling back all the way. As it was Themistocles had to withdrawl his fleet to Salamis because of Thermopylae. If Leonidas didn't hold out as well as he had, they very may well would have had to scrap the campaign in scope and time.
So defensive is only good if you can strike back. But just sitting there and get punched doesn't help you very much.
Doesn't help you much, but it worked well for Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr..
BTW DDIS has a PvP build that he argues works wonders with no tactical BOffs for the rest of the team and helps them win. You'll need to take that up with him though.
And that's the fault the un-holy trinity has. Starfleet ships aren't made to act in groups, they are almost all the time on their own. Especially a ship that is supposed to act far away from reinforcements HAS to have some means to at least disable/kill a enemy in order to survive. Such a ship need to be balanced in offensive AND defensive, but each extreme would lead the ship to need some reinforcement.
I beg your pardon? Starfleet ships are made to act alone? I seriously doubt that. Just because we saw one ship in the episodes doesn't mean that's the SOP of Starfleet. If theres a real, known threat, I have never seen them go piecemeal.
ah the galaxy class, the biggest victim of ship stats and stat trends in the game.
first we have the defient to thank for that. being so tactical focused, the tac ensign made sense on it. but that also dragged along it's tier mates, the galaxy and intrepid along with it to VA. the intrepid certainly doesn't suffer from its station setup, there are a ton of great sci abilities at ensign. though the station setup hardly matches the intrepid that well imo. something more along the lines of COM sci, LTC tac, LT sci, TL eng and ENS eng would be the actual intrepid class.
of but the galaxy, also being slave to the defiant station setup, suffers greatly. its exacerbated more recently with doffs like the tech doffs and the damage control doffs, that allow you to run only 1 copy of any of the EPtX ability, and it lets you have the uptime of having 2 of those abilities. so 3 at ensign level and 1 at LT level for your s subsytem boosting abilities is very outdated on a cruiser, a waist of slots. when using the right doffs, you have the 3rd odd eng ENS, the only thing you can put there is ET1, a mediocre heal that interrupts TT and ST cooldowns. at also makes having ET3 anywhere on the ship feel redundant and unideal. regardless, you got global cooldowns interrupting your healing and supporting in ways the star cruiser for example doesn't have to deal with. the ensifn level sci heals are extremly good compared to just ET1. so your a worse healer no mater what then a star cruiser. as it is theres no other point to this ship then to heal with it, and its already got a built in hurdle for doing that well.
its worth mentioning that the flawed ship system has not a single advantage associated with size. not more or better station powers, not more powerful weapons, no noticeable increase in base hitpoints, no subsystem power level advantage, none of that. thats just all i can think of off the top of my head for big ship advantages, and there are non of them. small ships on the other hand have the same stats as large ships, like excelsior, ktinga, wile also having small ship advantages. higher turn rate, higher impulse mods, access to stupidly more powerful weapons, ability to actually use torpedoes effectively, higher defense scores, and station powers that synergize with, and improve all those advantages. there is nothing to synergize with largeness at all, even turn consoles hate large ships and favor already high turn rates. nothing synergizes with largeness because theres not a single advantage to largeness. so its fare to say the bigger it is, the worse it is.
well the galaxy class specifically, it needs to be broken away from the defiant station type. but what of the galaxy from canons? that should be the guide to any galaxy class fix. we didn't get to see the D do all that much fighting, as the federation was basically at peace with everything, and fighting is expensive in the pre cgi day. then the cardasian and the fact that they were at war for the federation for decades got added. other conflicts got mentioned too, "the last tzenkethy war", implying there were several, tholians destroying star bases, so some warfare there, and skirmishes with other minor powers too. all of these things mentioned happening off screen took place durring development of the galaxy class. oh, its built to defend the federation alright.
the galaxy is twice the volume of the ambassador class that it succeeded, and all ships that came after it in cannon are so much smaller then it, that the volume of the saucer alone is greater then any of them, by a substantial amount. in fact 1 akira class and 1 sovereign class combined have only slightly more volume then a galaxy class's saucer. length is a misleading figure among ships, volume means actual size.
according to the show creators made tech manuals, the galaxy class design objectives were to
Provide a mobile platform for a wide range of ongoing scientific and cultural research projects.
Replace aging Ambassador and Oberth class starships as primary instruments of Starfleet's exploration programs.
Provide autonomous capability for full execution of Federation policy options in outlying areas.
Incorporate recent advancements in warp powerplant technology and improved science instrumentation.
before anyone says the galaxy is just old and inferior
DESIGN LIFE
Spaceframe design life of approximately one hundred
years, assuming approximately five major shipwide system
swapouts and upgrades at average intervals of twenty years.
Such upgrades help insure the continuing usefulness of the
ship even though significant advances in technology are
anticipated during that time. Minor refurbishment and upgrade
to occur at approximately one- to five-year intervals,
depending on specific mission requirements and hardware
availability.
there is every indication that the galaxy would age better then the ambassador at this point in its existence too. it comes with extreamly large phaser arrays, extreamly large torpedo bays and is designed to have basically every component swappable decades later as technology progresses.
this is also an interesting passage
DESIGN LIFE
The forty-two decks are internally divided around major
load-bearing structures. A great many systems, especially
the pressurized habitation sections, are suspended within the
open spaces, essentially "floating" on flexible ligaments to
minimize mechanical, thermal, and conductive radiation
shocks. As the Enterprise left the Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards,
approximately 35% of the internal volume was not yet filled
with room modules and remained as empty spaceframe for
future expansion and mission-specific applications.
it sounds like a significant, if not a majority amount of the ship is modular, and whats the same thing as being modular in game? universal stations. the ship we see in canon, and described by the creators of canon, is not some insanely overspecialized for engendering fail ship. its a ship with near bop like universal station potential. that should be an advantage to largeness, modular setups granted by universal stations.
fixed galaxy R stations
COM eng
LTC eng
LT uni
LT uni
ENS uni
3 universal stations, but dont worry, your a lot more limited in potential setup then you might think. you have the 3 low level stations to arrange your sci and tactical as you please, to be assault or star cruiser like or have a double LT in one or the other. there is no access to any high end LTC and up abilities here. with the galaxy r's movement and firepower disadvantage, a setup like this would give it a shot at relevance unmong other choices.
i think the fleet version should have a universal LTC as well, with only the COM eng established. you could make one of the LTs eng, but that would prevent COM and LTC setups. with what you could build off of this, it still wouldn't be a better healer then the recluse or the sci ody ether.
and for christ sake, a 4/3/3 console setup, the galaxy isn't an engineering to a fault ship like the fail POS we have in game. best of all these changes don't take away anything from anyone crazy enough to complain about a change to the station setup, you can maintain the fail setup all you want.
i wont even get into how powerful its weapon are in canon, and how it should be at the top of the firepower food chain, and not literally the bottom in game. this is enough.
Because you were talking about the influences used in new ship design, especially the next flagship of the Federation. TNG design styles were obviously put to the wayside when the development of Intrepid and Sovereign came about. Using TNG aesthetics for the next flagship makes about as much sense as using the aesthetics of a Constitution MK I for it.
The TNG style could have been continued, there's no reason to go back to Excelsior proportions and ignoring later ships design.
My point wasn't to substitute one style with another, but to give us some options.
Look at the deflector dish, that screams Galaxy, as does the shape of the front of the secondary hull. As far as the saucer, the percentage of area compared to secondary hull is similar to Galaxy, the difference is its turned sideways and slip forward a bit.
The nacelles and most everything else is Sovy' Intrepid, not Excelsior. Theres actually more of Excelsior in Ambassador than there is in Ody'.
Lol, if you look at it that way, then the Sov and the GCS are almost the same. :P
The general shape of the Odyssey, looks by far more like a Excelsior (stocky front, streched back) than the more compact overal shape of the GCS or Ambassador.
Surely some parts could be turned or streched to make them look likea GCS, but the point it they are not.
But you are right, the deflector and the front shape of the engineering hull resemble a bit the GCS but that's about it. Everything else looks like the fat kid of a Sovereign and Excelsior.
What i wanted to say was that, especially for a Explorer, that ship should have looked much more like a further development of the GCS design with some influences of later ships (not the other way round).
Doesn't really matter. This part is set in stone and won't change.
I wouldn't be so sure about it.
Sure, KDF and FED won't be merged into one single faction, but they easily could stop that nonsense war, almost noone cares about and work together.
That would make KDF stuff more attractive for much more players and confilcts in STO wouldn't be so scattered all over.
With the exception of Idiocracy and Planet of the Apes, and the Blade Runner wannabes, most depictions of the future is brighter than it is at the time of writing.
Not only that, Star Trek showed a almost perfect future of mankind.
I mean if you look at it in a certain way, Humans have become almost like the elves in LotR. They have evolved, and become "mature", at least in TNG.
Other Sci Fi settings, humans are almost the same as today.
You can still be peaceful, but not a bunch of milquetoasts, Kirk was "peaceful" but didn't hesitate to open a can of W.A. when it came down to it. The Federation during the TNG-show era, if the Captain drew a line that the enemy could not cross and they crossed it, the Captain drew another line. If you did that to Kirk, he would introduce you to the chain-of-command.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG6_5pOCvcQ
That's what i wanted to say.
I think Picard was too much a diplomat and too much concerned about the kids and families on board.
To create some tension in the show, the producers should have removed the counselor and all the family stuff from the ship, when they got a light rework in season 3. And additionally they should have created some story arch regarding the borg and their influence on other species outside federation space. (similar to the romulans, which was only short mentioned.)
So they do kinda have you there. As far as I remember from Beta, the "cobras" always had the same setup.
That's what i am talking about. If they don't like Trek as it is, they shouldn't make a Trek game at all.
For me it's the same as introducing mechs or tanks, just because some dev or some other MMO brainwashed people want something more "cool", not caring about Trek at all.
They had to make a choice between the Sovy' and Galaxy between which would be the tough tank and the other was the tactical ship. The Star Cruiser took up the sci spot. Given the choice of the two, the Galaxy made the better choice for the engie heavy "tough" ship
Why do make do everything so extreme in the first place?
Perpetual STO concept had the GCS and Sovereign being the same ship AFAIK, meaning they shared the same ship parts.
Althrough i am not a big fan of that idea, i think Cryptic made those ships too different.
You are swinging back to overboard-land again. It doesn't need a space multi-piece set, nor does it need a singularity counterpart. This is where you start to lose people, keep it simple. Give it a LT. uni and a heavy beam array and be done with it.
I don't hink so.
We already have a similar set already in the Game (singularity harness), the GCS would only have one more adjusted set, nothing more.
(Phasers and photon torps instead of Plasma weapons)
... does include a Lt. uni. It is just a Nebula Class with engineering and Science stations switched.
On the other hand, your idea of just turning one Lt of the BOFF layout into a uni. would make ppl only make it a tactical.
The above one, would be at least a bit more uniqe and more science focussed IMO.
The naval battle was actually seperate from Thermopylae, but was still critical. If the pass had fallen either in a shorter time, or the troops that Leonidas didn't redeploy away from that front, the Persians would've run roughshot over Greece. They ended up taking Athens but the time that they held and the troops that they saved kept the effort alive and allowed the Athenians to press the naval campaign instead of doubling back all the way. As it was Themistocles had to withdrawl his fleet to Salamis because of Thermopylae. If Leonidas didn't hold out as well as he had, they very may well would have had to scrap the campaign in scope and time.
Translated to STO, defensive has it's purpose but without a good offensive you only playing for time.
BTW DDIS has a PvP build that he argues works wonders with no tactical BOffs for the rest of the team and helps them win. You'll need to take that up with him though.
I beg your pardon? Starfleet ships are made to act alone? I seriously doubt that. Just because we saw one ship in the episodes doesn't mean that's the SOP of Starfleet. If theres a real, known threat, I have never seen them go piecemeal.
Not in STO of course, but in the shows we barely saw more than a few ships act together.
The idea of Star Trek ships working in synergy is just a lame MMO pattern, so the common MMO player doesn't have to rethink anything or has to leanr a different kind of game.
In universe, the GCS which was especially made to work without support, and in STO a explorer should be much more a all round ship than a all about defense tank.
"...'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
yea, i posted similar about the c-stoer orion barge.
it doesnt even have variable dimensions like the character models do, and it still has texture clipping.
quality control failure...
Yeah, it's not only the uniform but the badge is toally out of scale too, making it look like a kids haloween costume, lol.
if they want to do that, they need to abandon the trinity.
if someone put actual mathematical figures on why the trinity model fails, by showing how ridiculous you need to make "tank" exclusive heals & resists, just to make them viable that would put it beyond question.
my maths skills arent quite up to that even if i can reason out why the model doesnt work.
The Trinity has been abandoned long ago IMO.
Cryptic just holds on it to have a excuse for some rather un popular decisions, like keeping Cruisers in support role while Escorts have the biggest firepower and so on.
not in 400 years they didnt.
also, "general order 24" is a really nice way of phrasing "utter genocide and the total destruction of a planetary bio-dome".
what the federation got, was massive implementation of propaganda.
So Picard is the biggest liar in Star Trek history... hard to belive...
"...'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
something possessed me to look at the first few pages in this thread, and i came across my first post in it. 9 months later, i quite like this post
I like that post too, but to be honest i don't thing the devs or many ppl eher care about the canon ship at all.
The best thing we (the fans) should do is to present a good compromise between how the ship should be and whats possible to do, without making it look to OP or stepping on other ships toes.
Which means other ships should still look much more superior than the GCS otherwise we will never get enough ppl to support us.
IDK but for some reason the GCS gets so much hate from ppl, just because cryptics devs introduced it as a teethless Tank, some ppl actually belive the ship should be like that. It's something like a self-fulfilling prophecy Cryptics devs have made here.
To be honest, i am not so sure about reworking the GCS at all. As much as i know Cryptics devs they would make it not much better than now, at best.
In the worst case (which is the most likely one) they will make it even worse or just add some completely useless gimmick on it. So they can finally say they have done enough for it.
Personally i would be glad if we would get some more GCS styled Odyssey ship parts.
Maybe they could just add a much a wider saucer (like Venture, GCS or Monarch, or even Envoy class), forward and other facing pylons (like the original Star Crusiers) and shorter and wider nacelles (Stargazer Class -like). They could even add some ship parts from Perpetuals excalibur class for the Odyssey. It would still be better than nothing. (But please no more egg shaped saucers, no more bulky engineering hulls and no more backward facing and streched nacelles.)
Heck they could even sell those parts and i would buy them together with the Odyssey pack.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
if they want to do that, they need to abandon the trinity.
if someone put actual mathematical figures on why the trinity model fails, by showing how ridiculous you need to make "tank" exclusive heals & resists, just to make them viable that would put it beyond question.
my maths skills arent quite up to that even if i can reason out why the model doesnt work.
For the "tank" to work in this DPS system, the amount of hull/resists of cruisers needs to be roughly 150-200% of what is now to start seeing it become effective.
not in game it doesnt.
ingame, its just a victim. outperformed by every comparable alternative.
Its only an ensign tac, 1' turn, and a tac' console different than the Assault Cruiser. With a BA load, the turn doesn't matter as much. It has a means to kill Klingons, its just not the best tool to do it. There really arent too many cruiser hulls that I would consider a predator, and the only one in the Fed' faction is the Avenger. The Fleet Regent, Fleet Excel' an Tac' Ody' are respectable , but moderate at best vs. escorts these days. While the Gal-R might be the lowest DPS cruiser, its lumped in with cruisers (which are low DPS anyways). Its almost like trying to argue that a person is the worst painter of the group when they are competing against Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles and Helen Keller.
The TNG style could have been continued, there's no reason to go back to Excelsior proportions and ignoring later ships design.
My point wasn't to substitute one style with another, but to give us some options.
Excelsior proportions? As in an overall smaller saucer and longer/thinner nacelles? I think your the only person that I know of that really hates that.
Lol, if you look at it that way, then the Sov and the GCS are almost the same. :P
The Sovy's saucer is very similar to the Galaxy's, the biggest difference is that it is turned 90' and narrowed slightly on the "new" sides, its just not under a "neck" like the Galaxy's was.
The general shape of the Odyssey, looks by far more like a Excelsior (stocky front, streched back) than the more compact overal shape of the GCS or Ambassador.
I would go with Sovereign, but not Excelsior. ANd I would never use the term "compact" with the Galaxy either.
Surely some parts could be turned or streched to make them look likea GCS, but the point it they are not.
But you are right, the deflector and the front shape of the engineering hull resemble a bit the GCS but that's about it. Everything else looks like the fat kid of a Sovereign and Excelsior.
What i wanted to say was that, especially for a Explorer, that ship should have looked much more like a further development of the GCS design with some influences of later ships (not the other way round).
The ship looks fine, so what if it doesn't look like the Galaxy. The Galaxy was supposed to more or less be the Constitution clas eighty years in the future and it doesn't look like the Constitution either
I wouldn't be so sure about it.
Sure, KDF and FED won't be merged into one single faction, but they easily could stop that nonsense war, almost noone cares about and work together.
That would make KDF stuff more attractive for much more players and confilcts in STO wouldn't be so scattered all over.
Do you know the amount of work they would have to do to realign the factions in this game? They haven't even taken the effort to fix the "dialogue de-cloak" bug. Turning the Explorer into an escort maneuvering/dps like ship with a 150k hull and 8 guns in each of the front or rear would be more likely. Face it, the only way to have a faction realignment is if another Star Trek MMO comes out.
Not only that, Star Trek showed a almost perfect future of mankind.
I mean if you look at it in a certain way, Humans have become almost like the elves in LotR. They have evolved, and become "mature", at least in TNG.
Other Sci Fi settings, humans are almost the same as today.
That's what i wanted to say.
I think Picard was too much a diplomat and too much concerned about the kids and families on board.
To create some tension in the show, the producers should have removed the counselor and all the family stuff from the ship, when they got a light rework in season 3. And additionally they should have created some story arch regarding the borg and their influence on other species outside federation space. (similar to the romulans, which was only short mentioned.)
But that would have gotten too much in the way of Rodenberry's utopia and would have allowed too much darkness into his smiley-happy-people-place.
That's what i am talking about. If they don't like Trek as it is, they shouldn't make a Trek game at all.
For me it's the same as introducing mechs or tanks, just because some dev or some other MMO brainwashed people want something more "cool", not caring about Trek at all.
Its 40 years later, they didn't have to have the "epiladies-of-doom_ phasers. Heck, even by DS9 they pretty much were walking away from the "cobra" with the wider use of compression rifles (and the peasants rejoiced). By the time that Nemisis came around, they were more or less "hold-out" styled weapons ( ala' Type I's in TOS.)
Why do make do everything so extreme in the first place?
Perpetual STO concept had the GCS and Sovereign being the same ship AFAIK, meaning they shared the same ship parts.
Althrough i am not a big fan of that idea, i think Cryptic made those ships too different.
I understand that, but Perpetual lost out. Even if they did make the Sovereign and Galaxy the same, people would still whine. The Galaxy fans about "x" and the Sovy' fans about "y". Personally, I would rather see the Galaxy easily be able to laugh off the best assault from two escorts and be able to carry on a sustained attack and the Sovy' be able to blast away better but not be able to soak damage like the Galaxy would.
I don't hink so.
We already have a similar set already in the Game (singularity harness), the GCS would only have one more adjusted set, nothing more.
(Phasers and photon torps instead of Plasma weapons)
... does include a Lt. uni. It is just a Nebula Class with engineering and Science stations switched.
On the other hand, your idea of just turning one Lt of the BOFF layout into a uni. would make ppl only make it a tactical.
The above one, would be at least a bit more uniqe and more science focussed IMO.
It does go too far, especially for a ship that is already out. Just because there is a similar set is in the game means that the ship should get it. Why not add the Heavy beam array weapon and the uni and call it a day?
As far as the boff layout. Two LT tacs are still not anwyhere near as being tactical as a LTCMDR spot is, and they can carry it over to the Gal-X for an easy parallel upgrade. Plus with the ship still having an Eng CMDR, LTCMDR, and Ensign it still sways heavy to engineering.
Your idea of sending LCMDR to sci and only leaving a dedicated Eng CMDR and Ensign makes it not so engineer strong, which was something we alot of in TNG.
Translated to STO, defensive has it's purpose but without a good offensive you only playing for time.
Translated to, he made the better choice in redeploying his troops and not putting up as strong of a fight that he could've. If he didn't send the thousands of troops away that he did, it would have been a meat grinder that would have been worse for them. He used the proper amount of force that was worth risking to do the job. You can't commit everything to the highest level of firepower and win all of the time.
Not in STO of course, but in the shows we barely saw more than a few ships act together.
The idea of Star Trek ships working in synergy is just a lame MMO pattern, so the common MMO player doesn't have to rethink anything or has to leanr a different kind of game.
In universe, the GCS which was especially made to work without support, and in STO a explorer should be much more a all round ship than a all about defense tank.
I disagree, in a good MMO ships would work synergeticaly well, just as they would in a fleet action. The whole point of an MMO is to work with others to accomplish things that one person couldnt do, otherwise we wouldnt need the contact of others. The problem with STO's brand of MMO is that the tactical overpowers all and the engineer pays the price. Making engineering skills better and cruisers not as deficient in combat would go a long way to fix that. Theres no reason why the Explorer shouldn't be able to turn its engeering prowess into a more offensive asset and act as a velvet hammer, or at least an anvil to the lighter ships hammer.
The Sovy's saucer is very similar to the Galaxy's, the biggest difference is that it is turned 90' and narrowed slightly on the "new" sides, its just not under a "neck" like the Galaxy's was.
If you turn your house upside down it surely looks the same in a certain way, but better?
To pack the same volume into a shape like the Sovereign, tha ship had to be three times the length. So in my opinion the GCS shape can easily called compact.
No i rather want to have some more very simple options for the Odyssey.
Like more pylon and Nacelle variations, similar to the Star Cruisers. Some more different shaped saucers would be nice too but not mandatory. With just some already existing ship parts (Star Cruiser Pylons and Nacelles) the Odyssey could have much more options and would look much better imo.
The ship looks fine, so what if it doesn't look like the Galaxy. The Galaxy was supposed to more or less be the Constitution clas eighty years in the future and it doesn't look like the Constitution either
No to both.
First is only your opinion, not mine.
Second, the GCS wasn't just designed to be a future constitution, but a whole new ship for a new Star Trek series.
(unless all Starflleet ships are supposed to be more or less constitutions for you.)
Do you know the amount of work they would have to do to realign the factions in this game? They haven't even taken the effort to fix the "dialogue de-cloak" bug. Turning the Explorer into an escort maneuvering/dps like ship with a 150k hull and 8 guns in each of the front or rear would be more likely. Face it, the only way to have a faction realignment is if another Star Trek MMO comes out.
Please not another Star Trek MMO.
The only thing everyone should heve learned if anything is that Trek and MMO don't fit together.
Its 40 years later, they didn't have to have the "epiladies-of-doom_ phasers. Heck, even by DS9 they pretty much were walking away from the "cobra" with the wider use of compression rifles (and the peasants rejoiced). By the time that Nemisis came around, they were more or less "hold-out" styled weapons ( ala' Type I's in TOS.)
I think ppl just hate everything thats different to the common "rule of cool". Everything that looks different has to be made look like a much more cool or military looking thing. (ship or other item design)
So instead of creating something unique or a continuation of the existing items, they completely scrapped the look of it and made Phasers look like normal sci fi guns? Very Creative, really.
I understand that, but Perpetual lost out. Even if they did make the Sovereign and Galaxy the same, people would still whine. The Galaxy fans about "x" and the Sovy' fans about "y". Personally, I would rather see the Galaxy easily be able to laugh off the best assault from two escorts and be able to carry on a sustained attack and the Sovy' be able to blast away better but not be able to soak damage like the Galaxy would.
I am sure Escort jockeys would find a way to whine about it for sure, lol.
In my opinion, cryptic made STO too different to trek from the beginning. They've included too many of their Star Wars/BSG ideas into STO and made it a completely different game as it should be.
(Like escorts, small heavy armed ships zipping around the big clumsy ones that cannont defend themselves and are degraded to be supporters only.)
It does go too far, especially for a ship that is already out. Just because there is a similar set is in the game means that the ship should get it. Why not add the Heavy beam array weapon and the uni and call it a day?
As far as the boff layout. Two LT tacs are still not anwyhere near as being tactical as a LTCMDR spot is, and they can carry it over to the Gal-X for an easy parallel upgrade. Plus with the ship still having an Eng CMDR, LTCMDR, and Ensign it still sways heavy to engineering.
Your idea of sending LCMDR to sci and only leaving a dedicated Eng CMDR and Ensign makes it not so engineer strong, which was something we alot of in TNG.
But if you just make one Lt into universal, which one would it be?
They would make the Science station into universal and of course ppl would make it a second tactical station.
Assuming they would make the Lt. tac station universal, the ship would be completely useless for me and most other players, no matter what dontdrunk says.
I disagree, in a good MMO ships would work synergeticaly well, just as they would in a fleet action. The whole point of an MMO is to work with others to accomplish things that one person couldnt do, otherwise we wouldnt need the contact of others. The problem with STO's brand of MMO is that the tactical overpowers all and the engineer pays the price. Making engineering skills better and cruisers not as deficient in combat would go a long way to fix that. Theres no reason why the Explorer shouldn't be able to turn its engeering prowess into a more offensive asset and act as a velvet hammer, or at least an anvil to the lighter ships hammer.
I was talking about the shows, but you are right. Engineering shouldn't be restricted to healing and resistance only (offensive powers are really nothing to be scared about).
One of the first things would be to give all Team powers the same auto shield distribution as Tactical team. (TT would get some other ability as compensation)
In my opinion this would make all ships much more versatile and would help all non tactical heavy ships to become much more viable.
The funny thing is if cryptics would want to do that, they could realize it with just one single patch (not much work involved IMO)
The thing is to keep Engineering the self buffing path, while science keeps being the Crowd control and support path.
(Cryptic didn't really seperate both in a good way, so both engineering and science are overlapping when it comes to healing Crowd Control and support)
Another thing to do would be to (don't shoot me@escort jockeys) nerf most tactical powers. But to be honest, i think nerfing things should be the very last option a game designer has. I'd rather would like to see several Engineering power being simply buffed.
Like the various emergency powers to x, they should be much more powerful IMO (especially the higher ranking ones).
Sorry for typos or other misspellings in advance
"...'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
last interview with gecko concerning the galaxy x show that they read forum people suggestions.
he was talking about giving this ship some power set bonus with antimatter spread, saucer sep and maybe cloak, i am not sure.
all these idea have been post in this or other galaxy thread already i am sure.
so, bring good idea to improve these ships is not vain, the best can be implemented by cryptic one day.
last interview with gecko concerning the galaxy x show that they read forum people suggestions.
he was talking about giving this ship some power set bonus with antimatter spread, saucer sep and maybe cloak, i am not sure.
all these idea have been post in this or other galaxy thread already i am sure.
so, bring good idea to improve these ships is not vain, the best can be implemented by cryptic one day.
mi english isnt perfect but i understend the same (im still dont get why dev are so obseced with the saucer sep for the galaxy-X :P ) but also i find they think they do a "great thing" for cruciers with this "auras of commmand" if that buf anything inside the aura what is the gain for the cruciers ???? all ship are buffed no especific fix to cruciers....
I not sure if criptic dont want to fix the galaxy because they give away for veterans.... but the ship need to be fixed or be part of a new pack OF ONLY GALAXY not a pack of T3 galaxy + T5 galaxy-R + T5 galaxy-X ...
by the way the Galaxy-R most come with the extended frontal beam array 320? MK XII [ACC]x2 [DMG]x2 **(quad cannons come with [dmg]x4)** from the idea of dontdrunkimshoot, capable to move to any other starfleet ship BUT since no other ship has a so large phaser emiter the over all dmg most be lowered at least a 15% if is not equiped in a galaxy-R or a Galaxy-X.
we all see that main beam array take down galors or any thing in front of them very easily so,but for avoid to madeit OP or a javelin i think that can help some,
also a Scie option can be the Pegasus phase console capable to mask energy signature of the ship (i want to avoid to full cloak so dont brake the kitomer treaty but keep the decloak bonus ot 3/4 of a real cloak ) and give 30% resist to CRT + 15% dmg resist while operating max time 1 min, CoolDown 1 min, if active drain 45 power from AUX + 35 from weapons + 35 shield, Can fire torpedos mines and only the extended beam array on phase mode and use boff powers (but NOT beam tactical)
im open ton any suggestion. this need some work to avoid OP and the crying of escort capitains :P
mi english isnt perfect but i understend the same (im still dont get why dev are so obseced with the saucer sep for the galaxy-X :P ) but also i find they think they do a "great thing" for cruciers with this "auras of commmand" if that buf anything inside the aura what is the gain for the cruciers ???? all ship are buffed no especific fix to cruciers....
I not sure if criptic dont want to fix the galaxy because they give away for veterans.... but the ship need to be fixed or be part of a new pack OF ONLY GALAXY not a pack of T3 galaxy + T5 galaxy-R + T5 galaxy-X ...
by the way the Galaxy-R most come with the extended frontal beam array 320? MK XII [ACC]x2 [DMG]x2 **(quad cannons come with [dmg]x4)** from the idea of dontdrunkimshoot, capable to move to any other starfleet ship BUT since no other ship has a so large phaser emiter the over all dmg most be lowered at least a 15% if is not equiped in a galaxy-R or a Galaxy-X.
we all see that main beam array take down galors or any thing in front of them very easily so,but for avoid to madeit OP or a javelin i think that can help some,
also a Scie option can be the Pegasus phase console capable to mask energy signature of the ship (i want to avoid to full cloak so dont brake the kitomer treaty but keep the decloak bonus ot 3/4 of a real cloak ) and give 30% resist to CRT + 15% dmg resist while operating max time 1 min, CoolDown 1 min, if active drain 45 power from AUX + 35 from weapons + 35 shield, Can fire torpedos mines and only the extended beam array on phase mode and use boff powers (but NOT beam tactical)
im open ton any suggestion. this need some work to avoid OP and the crying of escort capitains :P
sry for mi english
Phase claok can happen for that Allegron Treaty is now null ande void. but really the Galaxy only needs a fix in BO slots. make it all universal and there you go, the main issue is fixed.
To pack the same volume into a shape like the Sovereign, tha ship had to be three times the length. So in my opinion the GCS shape can easily called compact.
Or use more of the secondary hull space laterally. You like a tall ship, thats fine. I still dont call that compact.
No i rather want to have some more very simple options for the Odyssey.
Like more pylon and Nacelle variations, similar to the Star Cruisers. Some more different shaped saucers would be nice too but not mandatory. With just some already existing ship parts (Star Cruiser Pylons and Nacelles) the Odyssey could have much more options and would look much better imo.
I'm not so sure the way the nacelles come off of the Star Cruisers would work well with the Ody' hull.
No to both.
First is only your opinion, not mine.
Second, the GCS wasn't just designed to be a future constitution, but a whole new ship for a new Star Trek series.
(unless all Starflleet ships are supposed to be more or less constitutions for you.)
It was a whole new ship, but was a progression of where starship design had gone over the 80 years. It was the ship it sent out, just like the Connie' 80 years before, to "explore strange new worlds... etc". It was the expression of the Connie's 80 year later replacement.
You can refer to anything you want, just expect when the Middle Earth Walking Dead gets mentioned, Randall will return, and it won't be pretty. Even using the sword of Gondor won't stop "Ringers" from looking less Potsie-like than this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JToIHroU-WY .
Well you must hate Star Treks positive view of human future really much....
(how do you find all these crappy videos? lol)
No, I just don't by the overly shiney-happy-people aspect of the first few years of TNG and the artificial, everyones the best-of-the-best in the show, like... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w67dhHLUK3M ...
Barclay was a welcome addition to the show, just because it helped turn the ship a little bit off the pretentiousness turnpike.
I think ppl just hate everything thats different to the common "rule of cool". Everything that looks different has to be made look like a much more cool or military looking thing. (ship or other item design)
So instead of creating something unique or a continuation of the existing items, they completely scrapped the look of it and made Phasers look like normal sci fi guns? Very Creative, really.
So when TNG made from a departure of TOS/and movies (up until that point) designs, that was okay for you,but let someone depart from TNG designs and then, oh my God, its a travesty of justice? Sorry guys, can't do that! The guy in the pajama's and an air filter for glasses says its a continuation TNG's designs or the highway.
I am sure Escort jockeys would find a way to whine about it for sure, lol.
In my opinion, cryptic made STO too different to trek from the beginning. They've included too many of their Star Wars/BSG ideas into STO and made it a completely different game as it should be.
(Like escorts, small heavy armed ships zipping around the big clumsy ones that cannont defend themselves and are degraded to be supporters only.)
I have always said that all cruisers should have a more powerful role than they do. I think that escorts should be a lot more of a glass cannon than they are.
But if you just make one Lt into universal, which one would it be?
They would make the Science station into universal and of course ppl would make it a second tactical station.
Assuming they would make the Lt. tac station universal, the ship would be completely useless for me and most other players, no matter what dontdrunk says.
You are correct, I forgot about the layout. Then I suggest an Ensign uni'
I was talking about the shows, but you are right. Engineering shouldn't be restricted to healing and resistance only (offensive powers are really nothing to be scared about).
One of the first things would be to give all Team powers the same auto shield distribution as Tactical team. (TT would get some other ability as compensation)
In my opinion this would make all ships much more versatile and would help all non tactical heavy ships to become much more viable.
The funny thing is if cryptics would want to do that, they could realize it with just one single patch (not much work involved IMO)
The thing is to keep Engineering the self buffing path, while science keeps being the Crowd control and support path.
(Cryptic didn't really seperate both in a good way, so both engineering and science are overlapping when it comes to healing Crowd Control and support)
Another thing to do would be to (don't shoot me@escort jockeys) nerf most tactical powers. But to be honest, i think nerfing things should be the very last option a game designer has. I'd rather would like to see several Engineering power being simply buffed.
Like the various emergency powers to x, they should be much more powerful IMO (especially the higher ranking ones).
Sorry for typos or other misspellings in advance
Or ramp up engie' skills. I would love for DEM, RSP, or Aceton beam to actually do something.
I honestly don't understand the extreme support behind this specific ship.
Personally, it's one of my least favorite ships in the Star Trek universe. Its saucer is too bulky, everything else is too stubby, and I've never liked the wide oval design they used for the saucer. I like the classic round saucer of the Connie and Excelsior, and I love the long oval saucer of the Sovereign.
In TNG, its weapons are either completely ineffective or vastly overpowered, probably due to the show's visual quality at the time, when space battles were almost painful to watch, and had very low budget effects.
I like the current setup of the Fleet Galaxy class, and I don't understand the hate.
I honestly don't understand the extreme support behind this specific ship.
Personally, it's one of my least favorite ships in the Star Trek universe. Its saucer is too bulky, everything else is too stubby, and I've never liked the wide oval design they used for the saucer. I like the classic round saucer of the Connie and Excelsior, and I love the long oval saucer of the Sovereign.
In TNG, its weapons are either completely ineffective or vastly overpowered, probably due to the show's visual quality at the time, when space battles were almost painful to watch, and had very low budget effects.
I like the current setup of the Fleet Galaxy class, and I don't understand the hate.
I honestly don't understand the extreme support behind this specific ship.
Personally, it's one of my least favorite ships in the Star Trek universe. Its saucer is too bulky, everything else is too stubby, and I've never liked the wide oval design they used for the saucer. I like the classic round saucer of the Connie and Excelsior, and I love the long oval saucer of the Sovereign.
Boils down to taste. While it may be the least favourite Star Trek design to you, it's the most favourite for other people. And there are people on this thread that say the same about the Sovereign.
You have to remember, many people that play STO got acquainted with Star Trek through TNG and the 'D' is their embodiment of Enterprise and Starfleet design.
In TNG, its weapons are either completely ineffective or vastly overpowered, probably due to the show's visual quality at the time, when space battles were almost painful to watch, and had very low budget effects.
Again, it comes to personal preferences. What was painful for you to watch, might be enjoyable for others.
I like the current setup of the Fleet Galaxy class, and I don't understand the hate.
It's not hate. It's a desire for the ship to have a beneficial use at end game. I'd be ok with the current setup as well, if this game had any need for tanks. Her curse is that it's a specialized engineering tank in a offensive oriented game where tanks are not needed and engineering skills are generally not on the offensive side.
The extreme support comes from several generations of Star Trek fans that play STO and got into Star Trek through TNG. To us, the Galaxy class is amongst the first visuelizations that pops out in our head when someone mentions Star Trek.
people cant tell why its bad? even someone with a limited amount of ship building knowledge should see a problem
the station setup is very bad, overspecialized for eng at the low level, were there is the least variety of skills to choose from.
every skill you can choose down low is crippled by global cooldowns, even across all 3 skill types
for every unideal station slot in eng, your losing an ideal station slot in ether sci or tac
below average cruiser mobility
worst number of tac consoles
least number of tac skills
since doffs were introduced a low number of eng skills had become more ideal due to tech and damage control doffs, so having that many eng skills actually got worse over time
simply does nothing well, excels at nothing
pick a cruiser, any cruiser. its better at doing what its best at then the galaxy is at doing that.
I honestly don't understand the extreme support behind this specific ship.
Can yuo understand why ppl are so happy with the fleet defiant??? ppl like or dislike things but here we are talking about a ship price 2500 (Z) LVL 50 outmached by free ship lvl 40...
Personally, it's one of my least favorite ships in the Star Trek universe. Its saucer is too bulky, everything else is too stubby, and I've never liked the wide oval design they used for the saucer. I like the classic round saucer of the Connie and Excelsior, and I love the long oval saucer of the Sovereign.
A personal preference i can understand this but is not about preferences
In TNG, its weapons are either completely ineffective or vastly overpowered, probably due to the show's visual quality at the time, when space battles were almost painful to watch, and had very low budget effects.
so? we are not in a TV chapter is a game were a ship is outclased and very outdated for the game itself
if any of yuo take a time to read a few more will find we dont want a Over Power galaxy we know the are new ships but the galaxy cant be the most pasive ship in a Star Trek Game
people cant tell why its bad? even someone with a limited amount of ship building knowledge should see a problem
the station setup is very bad, overspecialized for eng at the low level, were there is the least variety of skills to choose from.
every skill you can choose down low is crippled by global cooldowns, even across all 3 skill types
for every unideal station slot in eng, your losing an ideal station slot in ether sci or tac
below average cruiser mobility
worst number of tac consoles
least number of tac skills
since doffs were introduced a low number of eng skills had become more ideal due to tech and damage control doffs, so having that many eng skills actually got worse over time
simply does nothing well, excels at nothing
pick a cruiser, any cruiser. its better at doing what its best at then the galaxy is at doing that.
yep bro but looks like some ppl dont or cant see a problem with eng powers and also the shared cooldown. i wander if they really try to fly the ship here or only speak because they are boring .....
yep bro but looks like some ppl dont or cant see a problem with eng powers and also the shared cooldown. i wander if they really try to fly the ship here or only speak because they are boring .....
when people try this ship, just for try it actually, it is normal that they don't anderstand how shafted he is.
at the moment where you seriously try to be effective with it, anyone will realise over time how limited the ship really is in comparaison to over ship.
with some ship the difference is not that big, like with the star cruiser for example, the problem is that the star cruiser is a free LV40 ship while the galaxy retrofit is a cstore ship.
the problem is that the star cruiser is a cryptic design while the galaxy is one of the most iconic ship in star trek.
(I have an idea for a galaxy bundle or a galaxy rehaul, I've been wondering what anyone thinks about it.
Could someone look over it and see what you think? PM with your thoughts because I want to know if it could go over with anyone else.)
On topic:
We just need better low level engineering abilities that are on par with tactical and science. Or engineering career officers should have an ability that inately speeds up weapons and console cooldowns (I don't count doffs, I talking straight captain abillities). Or have engineering captains have the ability to pump out an extra shot or two for beam arrays or three extra vollies for turrets and cannons.
Just something to make engineering captains have a more powerful advantage that is more aggresive-passive than passive-aggresive.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "Look at me I'm a target!" "Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK! "How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?" My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
While I'm all for giving the fleet galaxy more flexibility. Ie give it a ensign and maybe lt uni, the way its currently implemented makes it one of the sturdiest and tanky ships in the game, along side a operations oddy.
I currently fly a ops oddy, with a setup exactly like one you can do in fleet galaxy, not only am I one of the toughest, my damage averages 5k+. Likely more once i get fleet weapons. Really 5k is all you need in pve, and in pvp I generally play healer, becuase I'm tough to kill more then one escort required and at least one with subnuc, with good healing capability.
At the risk of being argumentative, I have to disagree completely with the assessment. The Galaxy class CRUISER was meant to be "a Multimission Exploration cruiser" ( see Utopia Planetia Canon Records) It is NOT a Battleship. Even in the Future's Past episode when Picard refered to it as a Battleship Guinan pointed out its obvious design flaws for such a role. It is a Huge vessel with powerful engines. How many times was this ship out gunned by a single opponent in the series? (Sure,Mostly for dramatic episodes) But this ship has taken on several ships and taken the hits. How can you not call this a Tank?
At the risk of being argumentative, I have to disagree completely with the assessment. The Galaxy class CRUISER was meant to be "a Multimission Exploration cruiser" ( see Utopia Planetia Canon Records) It is NOT a Battleship. Even in the Future's Past episode when Picard refered to it as a Battleship Guinan pointed out its obvious design flaws for such a role. It is a Huge vessel with powerful engines. How many times was this ship out gunned by a single opponent in the series? (Sure,Mostly for dramatic episodes) But this ship has taken on several ships and taken the hits. How can you not call this a Tank?
The only real weaknesses of the endgame Galaxy variants is the lack of universal bridge officer slots on the C-Store Retrofit, and the shared cool downs of engineering abilities.
Other than that, it's a decent cruiser. And it's possible to do the majority of endgame content with one. The fact that other cruiser classes can supposedly do it better is largely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that it can. That's probably why the developers are in no big hurry to tinker with the current set up, even though it does need a little polish (i.e. universal slots and dealing with the issues with engineering powers in general).
If you love the Galaxy, and pony up the Zen/Fleet Credits for one, it will serve you well for the majority of the game's content (making it worth it). If the fact that the freebie Star Cruisers and Assault Cruisers are more well rounded bothers you that much, then fly the free ships. It's that simple.
the problem is that the star cruiser is a cryptic design while the galaxy is one of the most iconic ship in star trek.
I would argue that the TOS Connie is the icon ship of Star Trek. When I Google images of "Starship Enterprise", TOS/TOS movie Constitution classes are the most populous images. More satires have done with the image of the TOS ship and crew, not to mention the amount of TOS/Movie Connie' models at hobby stores versus TNG.
Comments
I'm talking about the Galaxy -R (which this thread is about), not the G- X, which i don't care about.
Btw. my proposed BOFF layout would make the GCS a science heavy Cruiser, which is not necessarily a "healboat".
Because you were talking about the influences used in new ship design, especially the next flagship of the Federation. TNG design styles were obviously put to the wayside when the development of Intrepid and Sovereign came about. Using TNG aesthetics for the next flagship makes about as much sense as using the aesthetics of a Constitution MK I for it.
Look at the deflector dish, that screams Galaxy, as does the shape of the front of the secondary hull. As far as the saucer, the percentage of area compared to secondary hull is similar to Galaxy, the difference is its turned sideways and slip forward a bit.
The nacelles and most everything else is Sovy' Intrepid, not Excelsior. Theres actually more of Excelsior in Ambassador than there is in Ody'.
Doesn't really matter. This part is set in stone and won't change.
With the exception of Idiocracy and Planet of the Apes, and the Blade Runner wannabes, most depictions of the future is brighter than it is at the time of writing.
You can still be peaceful, but not a bunch of milquetoasts, Kirk was "peaceful" but didn't hesitate to open a can of W.A. when it came down to it. The Federation during the TNG-show era, if the Captain drew a line that the enemy could not cross and they crossed it, the Captain drew another line. If you did that to Kirk, he would introduce you to the chain-of-command.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG6_5pOCvcQ
I'll agree to disagree there.
No idea. The only funny tidbit I know is that Young Kirk and Young Picard do get to fight against each other in a movie.... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596350/
To be honest, the "cobra" phasers are pretty much the opposite of cool, the look like and epilady ( http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epilady-Classic-Coil-Epilator-Body-Hair-Removal-Travel-Dual-Voltage-White-New-/251165282261).
So they do kinda have you there. As far as I remember from Beta, the "cobras" always had the same setup.
Take another look at the WOK uniforms, there is texture overlap something fierce, places that should be white have bits of red, main fabric texture on them. The texture has build up past the end point of the clothes, etc.
They had to make a choice between the Sovy' and Galaxy between which would be the tough tank and the other was the tactical ship. The Star Cruiser took up the sci spot. Given the choice of the two, the Galaxy made the better choice for the engie heavy "tough" ship
You are swinging back to overboard-land again. It doesn't need a space multi-piece set, nor does it need a singularity counterpart. This is where you start to lose people, keep it simple. Give it a LT. uni and a heavy beam array and be done with it.
Its a time of war, even the tree-huggin' Federation Fleets jobs areto kill people and break things. Unless there's an actual purpose for not blowing a particular ship out of my sky, let us blow them up. In space, I can't hear them scream, but its real fun to watch them explode.
The naval battle was actually seperate from Thermopylae, but was still critical. If the pass had fallen either in a shorter time, or the troops that Leonidas didn't redeploy away from that front, the Persians would've run roughshot over Greece. They ended up taking Athens but the time that they held and the troops that they saved kept the effort alive and allowed the Athenians to press the naval campaign instead of doubling back all the way. As it was Themistocles had to withdrawl his fleet to Salamis because of Thermopylae. If Leonidas didn't hold out as well as he had, they very may well would have had to scrap the campaign in scope and time.
Doesn't help you much, but it worked well for Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr..
BTW DDIS has a PvP build that he argues works wonders with no tactical BOffs for the rest of the team and helps them win. You'll need to take that up with him though.
I beg your pardon? Starfleet ships are made to act alone? I seriously doubt that. Just because we saw one ship in the episodes doesn't mean that's the SOP of Starfleet. If theres a real, known threat, I have never seen them go piecemeal.
When your as outnumbered as they were, youre gonna get beat down and beat down bad.
The Explorer Cruiser has a way to "kill" Klingons, its not standing there with only its shields either.
My point wasn't to substitute one style with another, but to give us some options.
Lol, if you look at it that way, then the Sov and the GCS are almost the same. :P
The general shape of the Odyssey, looks by far more like a Excelsior (stocky front, streched back) than the more compact overal shape of the GCS or Ambassador.
Surely some parts could be turned or streched to make them look likea GCS, but the point it they are not.
But you are right, the deflector and the front shape of the engineering hull resemble a bit the GCS but that's about it. Everything else looks like the fat kid of a Sovereign and Excelsior.
What i wanted to say was that, especially for a Explorer, that ship should have looked much more like a further development of the GCS design with some influences of later ships (not the other way round).
I wouldn't be so sure about it.
Sure, KDF and FED won't be merged into one single faction, but they easily could stop that nonsense war, almost noone cares about and work together.
That would make KDF stuff more attractive for much more players and confilcts in STO wouldn't be so scattered all over.
Not only that, Star Trek showed a almost perfect future of mankind.
I mean if you look at it in a certain way, Humans have become almost like the elves in LotR. They have evolved, and become "mature", at least in TNG.
Other Sci Fi settings, humans are almost the same as today.
That's what i wanted to say.
I think Picard was too much a diplomat and too much concerned about the kids and families on board.
To create some tension in the show, the producers should have removed the counselor and all the family stuff from the ship, when they got a light rework in season 3. And additionally they should have created some story arch regarding the borg and their influence on other species outside federation space. (similar to the romulans, which was only short mentioned.)
That's what i am talking about. If they don't like Trek as it is, they shouldn't make a Trek game at all.
For me it's the same as introducing mechs or tanks, just because some dev or some other MMO brainwashed people want something more "cool", not caring about Trek at all.
Why do make do everything so extreme in the first place?
Perpetual STO concept had the GCS and Sovereign being the same ship AFAIK, meaning they shared the same ship parts.
Althrough i am not a big fan of that idea, i think Cryptic made those ships too different.
I don't hink so.
We already have a similar set already in the Game (singularity harness), the GCS would only have one more adjusted set, nothing more.
(Phasers and photon torps instead of Plasma weapons)
And...
Tactical: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr.
Engineering: Ensign
Science: Lt. Cmdr.
Universal: Lt.
... does include a Lt. uni. It is just a Nebula Class with engineering and Science stations switched.
On the other hand, your idea of just turning one Lt of the BOFF layout into a uni. would make ppl only make it a tactical.
The above one, would be at least a bit more uniqe and more science focussed IMO.
Translated to STO, defensive has it's purpose but without a good offensive you only playing for time.
They didn't have to deal with Borg and Klingons IMO. :rolleyes:
Not in STO of course, but in the shows we barely saw more than a few ships act together.
The idea of Star Trek ships working in synergy is just a lame MMO pattern, so the common MMO player doesn't have to rethink anything or has to leanr a different kind of game.
In universe, the GCS which was especially made to work without support, and in STO a explorer should be much more a all round ship than a all about defense tank.
The Trinity has been abandoned long ago IMO.
Cryptic just holds on it to have a excuse for some rather un popular decisions, like keeping Cruisers in support role while Escorts have the biggest firepower and so on.
So Picard is the biggest liar in Star Trek history... hard to belive...
I like that post too, but to be honest i don't thing the devs or many ppl eher care about the canon ship at all.
The best thing we (the fans) should do is to present a good compromise between how the ship should be and whats possible to do, without making it look to OP or stepping on other ships toes.
Which means other ships should still look much more superior than the GCS otherwise we will never get enough ppl to support us.
IDK but for some reason the GCS gets so much hate from ppl, just because cryptics devs introduced it as a teethless Tank, some ppl actually belive the ship should be like that.
To be honest, i am not so sure about reworking the GCS at all. As much as i know Cryptics devs they would make it not much better than now, at best.
In the worst case (which is the most likely one) they will make it even worse or just add some completely useless gimmick on it. So they can finally say they have done enough for it.
Personally i would be glad if we would get some more GCS styled Odyssey ship parts.
Maybe they could just add a much a wider saucer (like Venture, GCS or Monarch, or even Envoy class), forward and other facing pylons (like the original Star Crusiers) and shorter and wider nacelles (Stargazer Class -like). They could even add some ship parts from Perpetuals excalibur class for the Odyssey. It would still be better than nothing. (But please no more egg shaped saucers, no more bulky engineering hulls and no more backward facing and streched nacelles.)
Heck they could even sell those parts and i would buy them together with the Odyssey pack.
For the "tank" to work in this DPS system, the amount of hull/resists of cruisers needs to be roughly 150-200% of what is now to start seeing it become effective.
Its only an ensign tac, 1' turn, and a tac' console different than the Assault Cruiser. With a BA load, the turn doesn't matter as much. It has a means to kill Klingons, its just not the best tool to do it. There really arent too many cruiser hulls that I would consider a predator, and the only one in the Fed' faction is the Avenger. The Fleet Regent, Fleet Excel' an Tac' Ody' are respectable , but moderate at best vs. escorts these days. While the Gal-R might be the lowest DPS cruiser, its lumped in with cruisers (which are low DPS anyways). Its almost like trying to argue that a person is the worst painter of the group when they are competing against Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles and Helen Keller.
Excelsior proportions? As in an overall smaller saucer and longer/thinner nacelles? I think your the only person that I know of that really hates that.
The Sovy's saucer is very similar to the Galaxy's, the biggest difference is that it is turned 90' and narrowed slightly on the "new" sides, its just not under a "neck" like the Galaxy's was.
I would go with Sovereign, but not Excelsior. ANd I would never use the term "compact" with the Galaxy either.
Surely some parts could be turned or streched to make them look likea GCS, but the point it they are not.
I guess you would rather have the Typhoon?
The ship looks fine, so what if it doesn't look like the Galaxy. The Galaxy was supposed to more or less be the Constitution clas eighty years in the future and it doesn't look like the Constitution either
Do you know the amount of work they would have to do to realign the factions in this game? They haven't even taken the effort to fix the "dialogue de-cloak" bug. Turning the Explorer into an escort maneuvering/dps like ship with a 150k hull and 8 guns in each of the front or rear would be more likely. Face it, the only way to have a faction realignment is if another Star Trek MMO comes out.
Please don't ever relate anything to LotR. As Randal Graves best summed it up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxAEo3CWeq8
But that would have gotten too much in the way of Rodenberry's utopia and would have allowed too much darkness into his smiley-happy-people-place.
Me personally... (28 second mark( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XJzT9G93Y
Its 40 years later, they didn't have to have the "epiladies-of-doom_ phasers. Heck, even by DS9 they pretty much were walking away from the "cobra" with the wider use of compression rifles (and the peasants rejoiced). By the time that Nemisis came around, they were more or less "hold-out" styled weapons ( ala' Type I's in TOS.)
I understand that, but Perpetual lost out. Even if they did make the Sovereign and Galaxy the same, people would still whine. The Galaxy fans about "x" and the Sovy' fans about "y". Personally, I would rather see the Galaxy easily be able to laugh off the best assault from two escorts and be able to carry on a sustained attack and the Sovy' be able to blast away better but not be able to soak damage like the Galaxy would.
It does go too far, especially for a ship that is already out. Just because there is a similar set is in the game means that the ship should get it. Why not add the Heavy beam array weapon and the uni and call it a day?
As far as the boff layout. Two LT tacs are still not anwyhere near as being tactical as a LTCMDR spot is, and they can carry it over to the Gal-X for an easy parallel upgrade. Plus with the ship still having an Eng CMDR, LTCMDR, and Ensign it still sways heavy to engineering.
Your idea of sending LCMDR to sci and only leaving a dedicated Eng CMDR and Ensign makes it not so engineer strong, which was something we alot of in TNG.
Translated to, he made the better choice in redeploying his troops and not putting up as strong of a fight that he could've. If he didn't send the thousands of troops away that he did, it would have been a meat grinder that would have been worse for them. He used the proper amount of force that was worth risking to do the job. You can't commit everything to the highest level of firepower and win all of the time.
In some ways they had to deal with much worse enemies, and both paid for it with their lives.
I disagree, in a good MMO ships would work synergeticaly well, just as they would in a fleet action. The whole point of an MMO is to work with others to accomplish things that one person couldnt do, otherwise we wouldnt need the contact of others. The problem with STO's brand of MMO is that the tactical overpowers all and the engineer pays the price. Making engineering skills better and cruisers not as deficient in combat would go a long way to fix that. Theres no reason why the Explorer shouldn't be able to turn its engeering prowess into a more offensive asset and act as a velvet hammer, or at least an anvil to the lighter ships hammer.
Compared to the prominent Nacelles and the general streched shape of the Odyssey or Soverign the GCS can surely be called compact.
Here's a graphic that shows the difference: LINK
To pack the same volume into a shape like the Sovereign, tha ship had to be three times the length. So in my opinion the GCS shape can easily called compact.
No i rather want to have some more very simple options for the Odyssey.
Like more pylon and Nacelle variations, similar to the Star Cruisers. Some more different shaped saucers would be nice too but not mandatory. With just some already existing ship parts (Star Cruiser Pylons and Nacelles) the Odyssey could have much more options and would look much better imo.
No to both.
First is only your opinion, not mine.
Second, the GCS wasn't just designed to be a future constitution, but a whole new ship for a new Star Trek series.
(unless all Starflleet ships are supposed to be more or less constitutions for you.)
Please not another Star Trek MMO.
The only thing everyone should heve learned if anything is that Trek and MMO don't fit together.
I was more refering to: Five Races
And btw. I refer to anything i want, my friend.
Well you must hate Star Treks positive view of human future really much....
(how do you find all these crappy videos? lol)
I think ppl just hate everything thats different to the common "rule of cool". Everything that looks different has to be made look like a much more cool or military looking thing. (ship or other item design)
So instead of creating something unique or a continuation of the existing items, they completely scrapped the look of it and made Phasers look like normal sci fi guns? Very Creative, really.
I am sure Escort jockeys would find a way to whine about it for sure, lol.
In my opinion, cryptic made STO too different to trek from the beginning. They've included too many of their Star Wars/BSG ideas into STO and made it a completely different game as it should be.
(Like escorts, small heavy armed ships zipping around the big clumsy ones that cannont defend themselves and are degraded to be supporters only.)
But if you just make one Lt into universal, which one would it be?
They would make the Science station into universal and of course ppl would make it a second tactical station.
Assuming they would make the Lt. tac station universal, the ship would be completely useless for me and most other players, no matter what dontdrunk says.
I was talking about the shows, but you are right. Engineering shouldn't be restricted to healing and resistance only (offensive powers are really nothing to be scared about).
One of the first things would be to give all Team powers the same auto shield distribution as Tactical team. (TT would get some other ability as compensation)
In my opinion this would make all ships much more versatile and would help all non tactical heavy ships to become much more viable.
The funny thing is if cryptics would want to do that, they could realize it with just one single patch (not much work involved IMO)
The thing is to keep Engineering the self buffing path, while science keeps being the Crowd control and support path.
(Cryptic didn't really seperate both in a good way, so both engineering and science are overlapping when it comes to healing Crowd Control and support)
Another thing to do would be to (don't shoot me@escort jockeys) nerf most tactical powers. But to be honest, i think nerfing things should be the very last option a game designer has. I'd rather would like to see several Engineering power being simply buffed.
Like the various emergency powers to x, they should be much more powerful IMO (especially the higher ranking ones).
Sorry for typos or other misspellings in advance
he was talking about giving this ship some power set bonus with antimatter spread, saucer sep and maybe cloak, i am not sure.
all these idea have been post in this or other galaxy thread already i am sure.
so, bring good idea to improve these ships is not vain, the best can be implemented by cryptic one day.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
mi english isnt perfect but i understend the same (im still dont get why dev are so obseced with the saucer sep for the galaxy-X :P ) but also i find they think they do a "great thing" for cruciers with this "auras of commmand" if that buf anything inside the aura what is the gain for the cruciers ???? all ship are buffed no especific fix to cruciers....
I not sure if criptic dont want to fix the galaxy because they give away for veterans.... but the ship need to be fixed or be part of a new pack OF ONLY GALAXY not a pack of T3 galaxy + T5 galaxy-R + T5 galaxy-X ...
by the way the Galaxy-R most come with the extended frontal beam array 320? MK XII [ACC]x2 [DMG]x2 **(quad cannons come with [dmg]x4)** from the idea of dontdrunkimshoot, capable to move to any other starfleet ship BUT since no other ship has a so large phaser emiter the over all dmg most be lowered at least a 15% if is not equiped in a galaxy-R or a Galaxy-X.
we all see that main beam array take down galors or any thing in front of them very easily so,but for avoid to madeit OP or a javelin i think that can help some,
also a Scie option can be the Pegasus phase console capable to mask energy signature of the ship (i want to avoid to full cloak so dont brake the kitomer treaty but keep the decloak bonus ot 3/4 of a real cloak ) and give 30% resist to CRT + 15% dmg resist while operating max time 1 min, CoolDown 1 min, if active drain 45 power from AUX + 35 from weapons + 35 shield, Can fire torpedos mines and only the extended beam array on phase mode and use boff powers (but NOT beam tactical)
im open ton any suggestion. this need some work to avoid OP and the crying of escort capitains :P
sry for mi english
Phase claok can happen for that Allegron Treaty is now null ande void. but really the Galaxy only needs a fix in BO slots. make it all universal and there you go, the main issue is fixed.
Really, take a look at the Galaxy saucer and turn it 90', just try it. Looks a lot like the Sovy's saucer.
Or use more of the secondary hull space laterally. You like a tall ship, thats fine. I still dont call that compact.
I'm not so sure the way the nacelles come off of the Star Cruisers would work well with the Ody' hull.
It was a whole new ship, but was a progression of where starship design had gone over the 80 years. It was the ship it sent out, just like the Connie' 80 years before, to "explore strange new worlds... etc". It was the expression of the Connie's 80 year later replacement.
I will agree to disagree.
You can refer to anything you want, just expect when the Middle Earth Walking Dead gets mentioned, Randall will return, and it won't be pretty. Even using the sword of Gondor won't stop "Ringers" from looking less Potsie-like than this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JToIHroU-WY
No, I just don't by the overly shiney-happy-people aspect of the first few years of TNG and the artificial, everyones the best-of-the-best in the show, like... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w67dhHLUK3M ...
Barclay was a welcome addition to the show, just because it helped turn the ship a little bit off the pretentiousness turnpike.
As far as the crappy videos, just a long memory.
So when TNG made from a departure of TOS/and movies (up until that point) designs, that was okay for you,but let someone depart from TNG designs and then, oh my God, its a travesty of justice? Sorry guys, can't do that! The guy in the pajama's and an air filter for glasses says its a continuation TNG's designs or the highway.
I have always said that all cruisers should have a more powerful role than they do. I think that escorts should be a lot more of a glass cannon than they are.
You are correct, I forgot about the layout. Then I suggest an Ensign uni'
Or ramp up engie' skills. I would love for DEM, RSP, or Aceton beam to actually do something.
Personally, it's one of my least favorite ships in the Star Trek universe. Its saucer is too bulky, everything else is too stubby, and I've never liked the wide oval design they used for the saucer. I like the classic round saucer of the Connie and Excelsior, and I love the long oval saucer of the Sovereign.
In TNG, its weapons are either completely ineffective or vastly overpowered, probably due to the show's visual quality at the time, when space battles were almost painful to watch, and had very low budget effects.
I like the current setup of the Fleet Galaxy class, and I don't understand the hate.
i am right with ya man.... no clue =(
Boils down to taste. While it may be the least favourite Star Trek design to you, it's the most favourite for other people. And there are people on this thread that say the same about the Sovereign.
You have to remember, many people that play STO got acquainted with Star Trek through TNG and the 'D' is their embodiment of Enterprise and Starfleet design.
Again, it comes to personal preferences. What was painful for you to watch, might be enjoyable for others.
It's not hate. It's a desire for the ship to have a beneficial use at end game. I'd be ok with the current setup as well, if this game had any need for tanks. Her curse is that it's a specialized engineering tank in a offensive oriented game where tanks are not needed and engineering skills are generally not on the offensive side.
The extreme support comes from several generations of Star Trek fans that play STO and got into Star Trek through TNG. To us, the Galaxy class is amongst the first visuelizations that pops out in our head when someone mentions Star Trek.
the station setup is very bad, overspecialized for eng at the low level, were there is the least variety of skills to choose from.
every skill you can choose down low is crippled by global cooldowns, even across all 3 skill types
for every unideal station slot in eng, your losing an ideal station slot in ether sci or tac
below average cruiser mobility
worst number of tac consoles
least number of tac skills
since doffs were introduced a low number of eng skills had become more ideal due to tech and damage control doffs, so having that many eng skills actually got worse over time
simply does nothing well, excels at nothing
pick a cruiser, any cruiser. its better at doing what its best at then the galaxy is at doing that.
Can yuo understand why ppl are so happy with the fleet defiant??? ppl like or dislike things but here we are talking about a ship price 2500 (Z) LVL 50 outmached by free ship lvl 40...
Now can yuo see the problem?
A personal preference i can understand this but is not about preferences
yep bro but looks like some ppl dont or cant see a problem with eng powers and also the shared cooldown. i wander if they really try to fly the ship here or only speak because they are boring .....
when people try this ship, just for try it actually, it is normal that they don't anderstand how shafted he is.
at the moment where you seriously try to be effective with it, anyone will realise over time how limited the ship really is in comparaison to over ship.
with some ship the difference is not that big, like with the star cruiser for example, the problem is that the star cruiser is a free LV40 ship while the galaxy retrofit is a cstore ship.
the problem is that the star cruiser is a cryptic design while the galaxy is one of the most iconic ship in star trek.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Could someone look over it and see what you think? PM with your thoughts because I want to know if it could go over with anyone else.)
On topic:
We just need better low level engineering abilities that are on par with tactical and science. Or engineering career officers should have an ability that inately speeds up weapons and console cooldowns (I don't count doffs, I talking straight captain abillities). Or have engineering captains have the ability to pump out an extra shot or two for beam arrays or three extra vollies for turrets and cannons.
Just something to make engineering captains have a more powerful advantage that is more aggresive-passive than passive-aggresive.
"Look at me I'm a target!"
"Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK!
"How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?"
My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
I currently fly a ops oddy, with a setup exactly like one you can do in fleet galaxy, not only am I one of the toughest, my damage averages 5k+. Likely more once i get fleet weapons. Really 5k is all you need in pve, and in pvp I generally play healer, becuase I'm tough to kill more then one escort required and at least one with subnuc, with good healing capability.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
The only real weaknesses of the endgame Galaxy variants is the lack of universal bridge officer slots on the C-Store Retrofit, and the shared cool downs of engineering abilities.
Other than that, it's a decent cruiser. And it's possible to do the majority of endgame content with one. The fact that other cruiser classes can supposedly do it better is largely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that it can. That's probably why the developers are in no big hurry to tinker with the current set up, even though it does need a little polish (i.e. universal slots and dealing with the issues with engineering powers in general).
If you love the Galaxy, and pony up the Zen/Fleet Credits for one, it will serve you well for the majority of the game's content (making it worth it). If the fact that the freebie Star Cruisers and Assault Cruisers are more well rounded bothers you that much, then fly the free ships. It's that simple.
I would argue that the TOS Connie is the icon ship of Star Trek. When I Google images of "Starship Enterprise", TOS/TOS movie Constitution classes are the most populous images. More satires have done with the image of the TOS ship and crew, not to mention the amount of TOS/Movie Connie' models at hobby stores versus TNG.