That's painfully obvious. Having 2 tactical consoles is a serious disadvantage in this game. It doesn't help if the cruiser has 5 engineering consoles or 3 science consoles instead (because it's stuck with 2 low lvl science abilities anyway.)
All they do, especially Geko since he's the spokesperson, is pretending that there isn't a problem with those ships. Stronger/exclusive comms for 2-tac cruisers (and selected KDF battlecruisers) would've been an ingenious move. Imagine, even the heavy cruiser R would have a benefit and purpose over the fleet version. Oh well...
what? ... not only the show ALL OF THEM and the galaxy face a full scuad of galors without problem, self refit to a combat mode IN FLY at WARP also WAS THE CORE SHIP FOR MOST on screen FLEET attacks on the dominion war ,
dont confuse crew laziness and not so competent performance of TNG crew with the capabilitys of the ship ...
mayor example of laziness of them : they were boarded and captured by ferengys :eek:
sure yuo think the defiant was a great ship with more capabilitys in all areas , the same ship what use as many mirandas left in starfleet like extra shields because she cant take many real hits
The defiant was great for its purpose.... But the galaxy was a disappointment to star fleet, and as far as the other parts go, well, remember one jem hadar ship destroyed the Odyssey, how did that "reconfiguring into a warship at warp" go for them....
Fully agreed. The TNG crew was mostly completely incompetent and pretty naive most of the time. Picard should have listend to worf more often, a lot of problems could have been prevented if they had been a bit more cautious and more resolute. On the other hand Worf himself wasn't a bright light either...
I think most ppl (like comtedeloach2) often confuse the ships potential with the (terrrible) performance of its crew. But at a closer look and some examination of the various shows, a less superficial observer can reckognize the GCS as a excellent ship.
Btw, i like your sig.
pretty much they also confuse the enterprise as being the ONLY way the galaxy class was presented. the enterprise was the flagship it was set up to show the ideals of starfleet in a mobile platform so it had families and more civilian oriented areas aboard the ship. it was also mainly a first response exploration vessel and was fitted with more science labs for this reason. the enterprise was basically a cruise liner in space.
then take into comparison the Venture from DS9 it was fitted with extra phaser arrays (giving it more then the sovereign class) compared to the enterprise and was basically a combat vessel and was confirmed by the VFX crew as being in every single major assault shown on the show every major engagement that featured the galaxy one of them was the USS venture. it was also one of the first ships to breach cardassia prime's defenses in the final assault according tot he DS9 producers
in short the enterprise was just one configuration of the galaxy as it was developed to be modular and the interior volume could be refitted at a starbase with ease for any mission it could encounter
The defiant was great for its purpose.... But the galaxy was a disappointment to star fleet, and as far as the other parts go, well, remember one jem hadar ship destroyed the Odyssey, how did that "reconfiguring into a warship at warp" go for them....
the oddy had no shields and was RAMMED in the main torpedo storage in the neck. i would love to see any ship survive that
Constitution Refit Enterprise was phasered right into the neck at the torpedo bays and didnt go boom...Picard rammed his entire ship into the Scimitar and didnt go boom...
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
Constitution Refit Enterprise was phasered right into the neck at the torpedo bays and didnt go boom...Picard rammed his entire ship into the Scimitar and didnt go boom...
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
hi again a small correction was hit in the deuterium and antimater sroage area very near to the main deflector (remenber first contac, why they dont shoot at the deflector when it was connected to the ship).
And still asking mi self why the captain not order to use the tractor beam to repel that ship, maybe because inthe show was needed to demostrate how bad are the dominion and how far they will go to win a battle. there is no other reason to that ship go down against a few bugs (same they blowup when in range to any other galaxy in the same show.
sry for mi english
i wasnt having a good day but im start to laugh at some things today, maybe this day is not lost
With introducing the Comm Array powers, the power/usefulness herachy of Cruisers and especially Starfleet Cruisers hasn't changed at all.
Underperforming ships are still just as underperforming as before, while tactical focussed ships are advantaged.
Personally i think they introduced comm arrays as a alibi buff, so they can always say they made cruisers more powerful and don't have to care about them anymore. It's a typical (for Cryptic) superficial game mechanic change, that doesn't really solve the problem it is supposed to fix in the first place.
I agree, it is a red herring, as I preedicted a while back. They should have been on the "lumbering juggernaugts" only . And the effects are way too short. I have to hit one of the commands every five seconds, which is far too distracting. I would rather be focusing on blasting the baddies . The weapons drain reduction is nice though, its the one I've seen the most improvement from. But why couldn't they had made them a 15 second duration?
For me it seems that Cryptic doesn't really care about the cruiser issue at all. They just buffed them all the same. Ships that got some aditional gimmick got one or two array powers less and they think, problem solved. Obviously they didn't really considered about taking a closer look at the problem and give ships that are underperforming in the first place a addiitonal buff.
I dont think that is that they don't care. I think they don't know how to fix it without upsetting the way the ships work in the game (and the Escort owners at the same time.) I appreciate that they tried to do soemthing, but they really need to have a focus group (in multiple ctiies) that invites players of all classes to really understand the problem, and maybe even have the players show how they actually use the ships in a real-game situation and explain while they are doing it. But I don't think that they will be willing to do something as such.
Constitution Refit Enterprise was phasered right into the neck at the torpedo bays and didnt go boom...Picard rammed his entire ship into the Scimitar and didnt go boom...
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
Don't remember any other ship being rammed by a ship that then blew up and survived. The sovereign rammed the Scimitar nose to nose and neither ship blew up hence why they survived. Overall it was a screen plot that doomed the Odyssey to show how dangerous the Dominion was. Also if it was so much of a disappointment and was unsafe then the Federation would have never allowed Starfleet Officers to contunie to serve on them. The Galaxy Class was one of their success stories while big and probably hard to construct quickly they made up for that by being able to be fitted for any mission that Starfleet needed them to do. Whether it was front line fighting, exploration, or Science it could be fitted however they wanted, which is probably why it was rated at a 100 year service life.
Again this is a game not the show so can we just get the Galaxy up to specs along with all other T5 cruisers.
Constitution Refit Enterprise was phasered right into the neck at the torpedo bays and didnt go boom...Picard rammed his entire ship into the Scimitar and didnt go boom...
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
the refit was hit int he launcher the torpedo storage is actually below that on the refit in the primary hull section.
the E rammed with the saucer section unless i missed the part where picard rammed the deflector at the scimitar. if you did not forget the D's saucer hit a planet and took visibly less damage wile doing so
Guys, did anyone in favor of the galaxy class actually watch the show? The Galaxy class was a underperformer in the show, too. It was either blowing eps conduits everywhere or you got the constant countdown of shield values until they were gone....It was fast, yes (not as fast as the camera ship, but thats another arguement) but thats about it. It is wasnt for tachyon beams that ship would have blown up on its first season. The oval main section looked like it was squished. The only time it had decent shields was the time barkley created the supershield, and the only time it won in combat was the time the whole crew was brainwashed to believe they were at war with a technologically inferior race.
Let it go, in all the Galaxy class was a failed experiment as far as a war ship goes, it was an explorer with families aboard. The only problem is that after a week of exploring gaseous anomolys on STO everybody would have quit......
i watched the show, and save for some pants on head TRIBBLE moments, there was several examples showing what a power house a galaxy was. the galaxy is a huge ship with the largest and most powerful main arrays, and largest most burst capable torp launchers of any ship class. aside from that, its basically a blank slate, with a full 70% of its internal volume totally modular and hot swappable.
the single galaxy class we are most familiar with, the E-D, was the diplomatic flagship, the ideals of the federation made manifest in ship form. it used all of its configurable interior for luxury apartments and expansive science labs in every single field of study.
this actually dragged on its combat performance, in chain of command when the enterprise was temporarily commanded by jelico, he did things very differently, he acted as if he was part of a military, and he took measures to bypass and shut down a lot of the science labs during high alert because they were such a useless draw on power in a fight. the ship was not optimized for combat, but it could still easily defend itself dispite that. it just goes to show how not cockiee cutter various ships are, that they come in vastly different configurations to serve very different purposes.
no one could call the E-D a battleship, it was not configured to be one. but, in yesterdays enterprise you see exactly what a galaxy class looks like that is actually configured to be a battleship. again galaxy class are blank slates, they are whatever their configuration makes them to be.
its pretty obvious how proportionately weak 23rd century weapons were to 24th century. the reliant's beams could just barely breach the hull, the array on a galaxy class has been known to blow up ships larger then the connie almost immediately after they breach their shields. the enterprise E ramed its crew quarters into the scimitars hangerbay. boy, no wonder nether exploded.
by the time the dominion war started, galaxys were serving as battleships, and slaughtering everything in thier path. during operation return, at least 1 galaxy class totally breached the dominion lines and then started flanking to help other ships make it through. during the actual war you dont see a single galaxy go down on screen ether. there was as many as 15 galaxy class in a single image of a single fleet, thes ships were clearly mass produced far beyond the original 6. it was not a failure, the class was not shelved or replaced by anything in canon.
of the galaxy class that were destroyed? the enterprise D was the worst offender. it fired a single shot the crew was to stupid to actually use more then 10% of the ships arsenal to defend itself there, instead relying on a stupid gimic. if the E-D opend fire like it did here- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=H_XbWq49vUM the BOP would have been destroyed 3 or 4 times over. infant every time the enterprise lost, if it has actually fired ALL its weapons at least as long as it did here, it would have won with little drama. nothing we see a sovereign or defiant or any other starfleet ship do do even comes close to that show of force ether. there was also that time when those huge main arrays dissolved a greater amount of volume in a borg cube then there was volume of the enterprise itself!
people dont give the odyssey any credit ether. it hull tanked 3 bug ships for 10 minutes, and then disengaged under its own power, not having sustained more then minor damage. after 10 minutes of getting its hull pounded on. the bug ships were nearly harmless to it, even though the dominion had already for at least a year infiltrated the federation and learned every single thing there was to know about federation defensive and offensive technology, allowing the bug ships's shields to also be basically phaser proof, in addition to their weapons completely penetrating federation shields. in the end it took ramming the deflector, torpedo storage, main engineering, and antimatter pod storage area of the ship to finally blow the it up. and if the antimatter pods hadn't lost containment, it actually would not have exploded, it took a few seconds for it to light up, it was those that finally blew.
the writing was so bad when the E-D was forced to lose, that the show could have been taking place in a runabout and it wouldn't have effected the story. in fact it would have actually made sense. ~5 ferengi suddenly in control of a ship of over 1000? was the bridge crew the only people on the entire ship that day? at any time they could have had someone in a transporter room beam them into the brig, or space. it would be easier to kick in the the doors of a police station and take it by force then storming a ship like that without hundreds of boarding parties.
there you have it, the galaxy class if you actually watched the show.
Constitution Refit Enterprise was phasered right into the neck at the torpedo bays and didnt go boom...Picard rammed his entire ship into the Scimitar and didnt go boom...
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
you have just been striked by the " what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic "forum galaxy wing, sorry bud, but we have 400 pages training to responded argument like thisXD.
you are not going to win.
mr worf, fire phaser on full and a simultaneous spread of torpedo:D:D
you have just been striked by the " what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic "forum galaxy wing, sorry bud, but we have 400 pages training to responded argument like thisXD.
you are not going to win.
mr worf, fire phaser on full and a simultaneous spread of torpedo:D:D
Please, you werent even born when I was watching Star Trek, you lost this arguement before you even began it....
The defiant was great for its purpose.... But the galaxy was a disappointment to star fleet, and as far as the other parts go, well, remember one jem hadar ship destroyed the Odyssey, how did that "reconfiguring into a warship at warp" go for them....
To be fair, not many starships would have survived being rammed at full impulse by a Roach Boat. Especially with weakened shields. And we have to assume the Odyssey was a standard Galaxy class vessel, since there is no evidence to the contrary. If fact, comments made in "The Search" support the standard Galaxy assumption.
While it's true that the standard Galaxy wasn't a warship, it was still a tactical powerhouse in terms of phaser arrays, the capabilities of the torpedo launchers, and anti-matter mines. It had excellent phaser coverage of both hulls and a first rate deflector shield grid. That much firepower may seem excessive for an exploration vessel/mobile embassy, but the Galaxy class had precious cargo to defend. And was prepared for potential unknown threats as best as the Fleet could at that time.
But the Federation's best was no match for the technological juggernauts of the Borg and Dominion. Over time, the class was updated to better deal with these new threats. The few failures of the Galaxy was no fault of the design, but poor long-term planning by Starfleet (in-universe) and the whims of the writers (IRL). Overall, the confirmed (i.e. that we know of) loss of only four ships in a fifteen period is actually a pretty good record.
In any case, the performance on-screen, both good and bad is no indication of how it should perform in-game. Like I said before, it's a decent cruiser as is and most game content (including endgame) can be played successfully using the Galaxy as it stands now. It just needs a little polish to be first rate.
In any case, the performance on-screen, both good and bad is no indication of how it should perform in-game. Like I said before, it's a decent cruiser as is and most game content (including endgame) can be played successfully using the Galaxy as it stands now. It just needs a little polish to be first rate.
saying performance on screen shouldn't mater for in game performance is SO easy for something like the excelsior to say. hell, basically any ship, because any ship is better then the galaxy in game, but is NOT in canon.
little polish? the galaxy needs a fundamental station setup change to be second rate
saying performance on screen shouldn't mater for in game performance is SO easy for something like the excelsior to say. hell, basically any ship, because any ship is better then the galaxy in game, but is NOT in canon.
little polish? the galaxy needs a fundamental station setup change to be second rate
The Galaxy could get by without a station or console layout change if they make damage less dependent on Tactical consoles and give us some Engineering slot options. Of course, Cryptic would never be willing to do something like that, so I've officially given up on the ship and am now flying the Tactical variant of the Odyssey.
Unless you have some way to prove to us that you're one of the Okudas or something, you'll have to earn our respect. claiming to be an old TRIBBLE and thinking that age grants wisdom, you are sorely mistaken.
So far, I see no reason to respect what you say. Care to try again and maybe approach this in a nicer, less holier-than-thou manner?
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
saying performance on screen shouldn't mater for in game performance is SO easy for something like the excelsior to say. hell, basically any ship, because any ship is better then the galaxy in game, but is NOT in canon.
little polish? the galaxy needs a fundamental station setup change to be second rate
On-screen performance not reflecting in-game performance, and vice versa, is a fact of life.
The Galaxy was the bleeding edge in canon for a time. And even after, it was still a fine design that was very capable.
The fact that other endgame cruisers are supposedly better than the Galaxy is irrelevant The Galaxy is still useable at endgame, for both the casual player and the player who treats this game like an exercise in accounting. And it can be used successfully at that. That's all that counts in the end. If you like the ship, use it. Most of the posts in this thread are likely to give the new player poking around on here the impression that it's useless. Which, of course, is total BS. The Galaxy, as is, is a decent cruiser.
The "little polish" I refer to is universal bridge officer stations for the C-Store variant. And addressing the problems with engineering powers and shared cool downs on a ship that is engineering heavy. This would make a half-way decent cruiser a better overall ship, if a solution can be worked out. Radical revisions or turning the Galaxy into an oversized science vessel, or tactical engine of doom, is not necessary.
The Galaxy isn't the best in the game. But it doesn't suck either, except to hard core fans who want it to be something it isn't, and to the power gamers/PvP "miniscule minority" who worship at the holy altar of DPS.
Most of the posts in this thread are likely to give the new player poking around on here the impression that it's useless. Which, of course, is total BS. The Galaxy, as is, is a decent cruiser.
I haven't read most of the posts in this thread, bit I can agree with your assessment that the Galaxy Exploration Retrofit is a decent cruiser as is.
I also think that it should have had a universal Lt. Commander's Boff Station from its introduction. This would reflect its multipurpose role, for which its separation ability was intended.
Losing a console slot and 13% hull strength for that ability always bothered me as well.
Still... it is my favorite and most flown ship in the game.
eta: and it should be able to mount at least one dual heavy cannon.
I think there's a distinction to be made between the Galaxy being usable at endgame and being a decent cruiser.
On the first point, the ship is definitely usable at endgame; so are T4 ships, really. Most content in the game just isn't that difficult. People have done STFs in T1 ships - outside of a few select things like No Win Scenario, you can get it done in whatever ship you like. So the Galaxy is quite usable at endgame (I used it myself for a while).
Of course, this doesn't mean that it's a decent cruiser. The Galaxy is either matched or bettered in anything it can do by another endgame cruiser. It takes several of the worst possible outcomes in ship design and slaps them all onto the one ship (3rd ensign slot, poor turn rate, 2 tac consoles). The only thing it does have going for it is that it has more hull than comparable cruisers - probably the worst thing to have an advantage in. And due to the overspecialisation of its console and boff layout, it's not even the tankiest ship in the game.
You could take the Galaxy as it is right now and slap 3 tac consoles on it, and the ship wouldn't be brokenly overpowered (not that I think this should happen!). It would probably be middle of the pack at best. The ship's problems are numerous and crippling, and it really needs an overhaul to reach even average status.
i watched the show, and save for some pants on head TRIBBLE moments, there was several examples showing what a power house a galaxy was. the galaxy is a huge ship with the largest and most powerful main arrays, and largest most burst capable torp launchers of any ship class. aside from that, its basically a blank slate, with a full 70% of its internal volume totally modular and hot swappable.
the single galaxy class we are most familiar with, the E-D, was the diplomatic flagship, the ideals of the federation made manifest in ship form. it used all of its configurable interior for luxury apartments and expansive science labs in every single field of study.
this actually dragged on its combat performance, in chain of command when the enterprise was temporarily commanded by jelico, he did things very differently, he acted as if he was part of a military, and he took measures to bypass and shut down a lot of the science labs during high alert because they were such a useless draw on power in a fight. the ship was not optimized for combat, but it could still easily defend itself dispite that. it just goes to show how not cockiee cutter various ships are, that they come in vastly different configurations to serve very different purposes.
no one could call the E-D a battleship, it was not configured to be one. but, in yesterdays enterprise you see exactly what a galaxy class looks like that is actually configured to be a battleship. again galaxy class are blank slates, they are whatever their configuration makes them to be.
its pretty obvious how proportionately weak 23rd century weapons were to 24th century. the reliant's beams could just barely breach the hull, the array on a galaxy class has been known to blow up ships larger then the connie almost immediately after they breach their shields. the enterprise E ramed its crew quarters into the scimitars hangerbay. boy, no wonder nether exploded.
by the time the dominion war started, galaxys were serving as battleships, and slaughtering everything in thier path. during operation return, at least 1 galaxy class totally breached the dominion lines and then started flanking to help other ships make it through. during the actual war you dont see a single galaxy go down on screen ether. there was as many as 15 galaxy class in a single image of a single fleet, thes ships were clearly mass produced far beyond the original 6. it was not a failure, the class was not shelved or replaced by anything in canon.
of the galaxy class that were destroyed? the enterprise D was the worst offender. it fired a single shot the crew was to stupid to actually use more then 10% of the ships arsenal to defend itself there, instead relying on a stupid gimic. if the E-D opend fire like it did here- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=H_XbWq49vUM the BOP would have been destroyed 3 or 4 times over. infant every time the enterprise lost, if it has actually fired ALL its weapons at least as long as it did here, it would have won with little drama. nothing we see a sovereign or defiant or any other starfleet ship do do even comes close to that show of force ether. there was also that time when those huge main arrays dissolved a greater amount of volume in a borg cube then there was volume of the enterprise itself!
people dont give the odyssey any credit ether. it hull tanked 3 bug ships for 10 minutes, and then disengaged under its own power, not having sustained more then minor damage. after 10 minutes of getting its hull pounded on. the bug ships were nearly harmless to it, even though the dominion had already for at least a year infiltrated the federation and learned every single thing there was to know about federation defensive and offensive technology, allowing the bug ships's shields to also be basically phaser proof, in addition to their weapons completely penetrating federation shields. in the end it took ramming the deflector, torpedo storage, main engineering, and antimatter pod storage area of the ship to finally blow the it up. and if the antimatter pods hadn't lost containment, it actually would not have exploded, it took a few seconds for it to light up, it was those that finally blew.
the writing was so bad when the E-D was forced to lose, that the show could have been taking place in a runabout and it wouldn't have effected the story. in fact it would have actually made sense. ~5 ferengi suddenly in control of a ship of over 1000? was the bridge crew the only people on the entire ship that day? at any time they could have had someone in a transporter room beam them into the brig, or space. it would be easier to kick in the the doors of a police station and take it by force then storming a ship like that without hundreds of boarding parties.
there you have it, the galaxy class if you actually watched the show.
100% agreement.
Man if Cryptics devs where only half as knowledgeable about the GCS as you, we would have a really awesome ship in STO.
I agree, most ocasions where the GCS was underperforming, where pretty hair-raising IMO, like the rascals episode. Another thing is the excessively diplomatic behaviour of Picard. I mean come on, its ok to be a diplomat but the E -D was waving the white flag a bit too often. (especially in the pilot, the writers should have some other sollution IMO)
I still don't get what the GCS haters or ppl arguing against a better STO version have against that ship in the first place.
No one here wants a OP GCS, no one wants a GCS that outguns a Regent. All we want is a decent representation of the ship we like.
I mean the GCS isn't the only starfleet ship in STO, why do they even care about it if they don't like it?
It would be the same as if i would go to a Excelsior thread and constantly arguing against it being so much better than 80% of all other Starfleet Cruisers.
There are more than enough other ships they can fly, the GCS won't become a competitior to them as long as the same ppl are in charge of cryptic.
Live and let live, guys.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
The Galaxy isn't the best in the game. But it doesn't suck either, except to hard core fans who want it to be something it isn't, and to the power gamers/PvP "miniscule minority" who worship at the holy altar of DPS.
I'm as much as a Galaxy fan as many others in this thread, but I agree with this.
I have never witnessed "hate" towards Galaxy players either. My main character that's around since pre F2P commands a Galaxy all the time and I do quite well. I even did try PvP a few times and it was pretty funny that a decloak alpha strike romulan escort-thingy wasn't able to kill me. At all
The Galaxy is no battleship. It is a command ship, essentially. Starfleet's heaviest class of ships are 'Explorers', not battleships. Heavily armed but not nimble enough to use those weapons in a very tactical way. Instead, the Galaxy holds her ground, takes the flak, coordinates the offense and steamrolls resistance on the advance. Thus, I am okay with the Galaxy to have huge defensive capabilities but it needs some love.
As much as I like a complete revamp I came to the conclusion that it is actually not necessary. If cryptic would boost the comm arrays on cruisers with only 2 tac consoles she would have a unique function along the Star Cruiser and Heavy Cruiser R and non-tac Oddyssey variants. Though that will probably not happen, but one can dream
At best it's fair to suggest a universal ensign or a universal Lt + Ens combom but at least that ensign in it's fleet variant just to mirror the Negh'Var. Why it didn't get this ensign, I don't know. And I still would love to see general purpose damage consoles be available for engineering slots. But no LTC tactical/universal slots or more than 3 tac consoles IMO. The Galaxy is a powerful ship but a specialized light cruiser like the Prometheus or a more tactically focussed heavy cruiser like the Sovereign would probably outwit a Galaxy due to higher manneuvreability and that should be reflected in it's game manifest. If we will get heavy beam arrays for large cruisers at one point, general purpose damage consoles for engineers, better comm arrays for low-tac cruisers and/or one or two low universal boffs I think the ship would feel more versatile
^ 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
also for those that say that E-D's defeat in generations is definitive proof that the galaxy was a horrible class lets just remember generations was a horrible movie with more plot holes then a full season of voyager
also for those that say that E-D's defeat in generations is definitive proof that the galaxy was a horrible class lets just remember generations was a horrible movie with more plot holes then a full season of voyager
I must fully agree with that man. The whole movie just seems to be made to get rid of the enterprise -D and to show some TOS cast.
For me that movie is the best example of people in charge not caring or knowing anything about Star Trek, just as STO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
For me that movie is the best example of people in charge not caring or knowing anything about Star Trek, just as STO.
I'm pretty sure they were already planning to get rid of the E-D. I get that some like its looks (not me though, not by a longshot!) but they were looking at it from the perspective of a future movie franchise based around the next gen crew. I'm sure they were planning to have a dozen movies, each making more money than the one before; all starring a cooler looking, more bad TRIBBLE feeling ship. So for that, the E-D had to go. Also, the more knowlegeabe fans would be able to point out to their friends times when the E-D was shown to be less than useless in the shows. Bad writing or not, it happenned and could come back to bite them later on in the movies if the E-D was still around.
As to why the Galaxy was made so subpar, again, I must point out that the game was much different back in the day and the galaxy didn't feel as bad back then. As to why it hasn't been upgraded and likely never will, there's a likely reason for that as well. Its no secret that the Galaxy, Defiant, and Intrepid are generally avoided. Their overspecialized boff layouts are no longer competitive with modern ones. As older ships from the game's launch that can be forgiven, what cannot be so easily overlooked is the way the fleet versions of these ships did nothing to fix the outdated boff layouts and in some ways made the ships worse relative to other 10 console ships. So the question is: Why? The answer: To make sure they sold more ships. Ships are their cheap to make high performing big ticket sale items. Be they from the C-store, lockboxes, lobi store, etc, ships bring in more per dollar spent in designing then than anything else. Imagine how fewer ships they would sell if the Iconics had decent boff layouts and stats?
100% agreement.
Man if Cryptics devs where only half as knowledgeable about the GCS as you, we would have a really awesome ship in STO.
First of all, there's no such thing as being knowledgeable about the Galaxy class. It's like claiming to be knowledgeable about unicorns. You are either just making things up that sound good to you, or you are repeating made up "facts" that sounded good to somebody else. Neither is a valid source of knowledge. More galling, though, is the tendency to ignore the made up facts that you don't like in favor of the made up facts that you do, all while claiming to be "experts" with superior reasoning and rationale. At best, the posts about how great the Galaxy class "really" was are very narrowly focused fan fiction, with all the limited appeal and Mary-Sue sentimentality that implies.
I agree, most ocasions where the GCS was underperforming, where pretty hair-raising IMO, like the rascals episode. Another thing is the excessively diplomatic behaviour of Picard. I mean come on, its ok to be a diplomat but the E -D was waving the white flag a bit too often. (especially in the pilot, the writers should have some other sollution IMO)
I love how you, in particular, claim to love Trek, but then talk about how much you hate everything the show stood for. Stay classy!
I still don't get what the GCS haters or ppl arguing against a better STO version have against that ship in the first place.
No one here wants a OP GCS, no one wants a GCS that outguns a Regent. All we want is a decent representation of the ship we like.
I mean the GCS isn't the only starfleet ship in STO, why do they even care about it if they don't like it?
It would be the same as if i would go to a Excelsior thread and constantly arguing against it being so much better than 80% of all other Starfleet Cruisers.
There are more than enough other ships they can fly, the GCS won't become a competitior to them as long as the same ppl are in charge of cryptic.
Live and let live, guys.
This is an incredible bit of tangled logic - I cannot imagine the cognitive dissonance it must take to distort your mind enough to conceive of this reasoning, let alone accept it. For starters, people who don't want to change the Galaxy aren't necessarily "Galaxy haters" - they may just see no need to fix something that's not really broken. Disagreeing with the small number of rabid Galaxy fans in this thread doesn't make anyone a "hater", or unreasonable, or anything else. It just means we have a different opinion than you do. The fact that you need to convince people to change their minds in order to get what you want does not imply that people who fail to be convinced are haters, it just means your argument is not persuasive enough.
Second, the Galaxy class ISN'T really broken, as has been pointed out in this thread multiple times. The ship can complete the endgame missions, so there's no content that a Galaxy fan is excluded from. Moreover, the push to make the Galaxy better is not in a vacuum - while you claim you don't want to take anything away from other players, those of us who can reason clearly understand that in order to solve the "problem" you have (the Galaxy being perceived as the least effective combat ship), can only be solved by buffing the Galaxy so that something ELSE is the least effective combat ship. The best evidence for this is how this thread has reacted to the Comm Arrays. The Galaxy class is now unquestionably better than it was, yet people still want more buffs for the Galaxy specifically, because it's position relative to other cruisers hasn't changed.
Taken together, this means that far from being the benign, "live and let live" kind of campaign you want to pretend it is, your push to improve the Galaxy is, in fact, an active campaign in competition with other players/ship types. The "problem" with the Galaxy is not that it can't compete against the NPCs and PVE content, it's that other ships are "better" at those jobs, and that's frustrating to Galaxy fans who want to both fly their favorite ship and demonstrate their epeen. The thing is, I get it - it's annoying to have to choose between the ship you like the most aesthetically and the ship you like the most mechanically - but it's something that almost everyone has to do. That said, most of us don't get up in arms about it, and we recognize that buffing one ship to be better so as to assuage a perceived slight by that ships fans will necessarily create a whole new group of fans who feel slighted by being the new "worst ship". We haven't solved the problem, just foisted it on to someone else.
At best, you can argue that you're trying to make everything perform at exactly the same level, but that's about as fanciful an idea as unicorns and Cruise-ship styled explorers that are also super-battleships. The fact is, if ships are to be different from each other, then ships are going to be (to quote Brown v Board) inherently unequal. There will always be a broad consensus among the internet-erati about the mechanically best ship, and even if you can act to narrow those differences, the people on the "bottom" of the list will always still feel slighted. In my experience, narrowing the gap actually makes the people on the bottom scream louder, as they don't understand why they couldn't have been buffed just a little bit more, to make up for being at the bottom for so long. Basically, they argue that if the differences don't matter that much, why shouldn't they be buffed to be on top, since they are so frustrated with being on the bottom so long. Not a persuasive argument.
On the other hand, you could argue that this thread was somehow a sign that there is a large number of fans who support the change, and treat it as basically a "vote", whereby the larger number of Galaxy fans "deserve" a buff, and the fans of some less well known ship (say, the Cheyenne) just have to suck it up. That just shows that you are basically bullies, though, and in any case rests on the specious assumption that a long thread populated by a few individuals who can't let it go is somehow indicative of a large number of followers, instead of a small number of extremely ardent Galaxy zealots. Again, not persuasive.
Comments
The defiant was great for its purpose.... But the galaxy was a disappointment to star fleet, and as far as the other parts go, well, remember one jem hadar ship destroyed the Odyssey, how did that "reconfiguring into a warship at warp" go for them....
pretty much they also confuse the enterprise as being the ONLY way the galaxy class was presented. the enterprise was the flagship it was set up to show the ideals of starfleet in a mobile platform so it had families and more civilian oriented areas aboard the ship. it was also mainly a first response exploration vessel and was fitted with more science labs for this reason. the enterprise was basically a cruise liner in space.
then take into comparison the Venture from DS9 it was fitted with extra phaser arrays (giving it more then the sovereign class) compared to the enterprise and was basically a combat vessel and was confirmed by the VFX crew as being in every single major assault shown on the show every major engagement that featured the galaxy one of them was the USS venture. it was also one of the first ships to breach cardassia prime's defenses in the final assault according tot he DS9 producers
in short the enterprise was just one configuration of the galaxy as it was developed to be modular and the interior volume could be refitted at a starbase with ease for any mission it could encounter
the oddy had no shields and was RAMMED in the main torpedo storage in the neck. i would love to see any ship survive that
The Galaxy class was a disappointment to Star Fleet, that they made changes later that fixed some of the problems irrelevent, it is what was on the screen that counts, and that was pretty sad, overall...
hi again a small correction was hit in the deuterium and antimater sroage area very near to the main deflector (remenber first contac, why they dont shoot at the deflector when it was connected to the ship).
And still asking mi self why the captain not order to use the tractor beam to repel that ship, maybe because inthe show was needed to demostrate how bad are the dominion and how far they will go to win a battle. there is no other reason to that ship go down against a few bugs (same they blowup when in range to any other galaxy in the same show.
sry for mi english
i wasnt having a good day but im start to laugh at some things today, maybe this day is not lost
I agree, it is a red herring, as I preedicted a while back. They should have been on the "lumbering juggernaugts" only . And the effects are way too short. I have to hit one of the commands every five seconds, which is far too distracting. I would rather be focusing on blasting the baddies . The weapons drain reduction is nice though, its the one I've seen the most improvement from. But why couldn't they had made them a 15 second duration?
I dont think that is that they don't care. I think they don't know how to fix it without upsetting the way the ships work in the game (and the Escort owners at the same time.) I appreciate that they tried to do soemthing, but they really need to have a focus group (in multiple ctiies) that invites players of all classes to really understand the problem, and maybe even have the players show how they actually use the ships in a real-game situation and explain while they are doing it. But I don't think that they will be willing to do something as such.
Don't remember any other ship being rammed by a ship that then blew up and survived. The sovereign rammed the Scimitar nose to nose and neither ship blew up hence why they survived. Overall it was a screen plot that doomed the Odyssey to show how dangerous the Dominion was. Also if it was so much of a disappointment and was unsafe then the Federation would have never allowed Starfleet Officers to contunie to serve on them. The Galaxy Class was one of their success stories while big and probably hard to construct quickly they made up for that by being able to be fitted for any mission that Starfleet needed them to do. Whether it was front line fighting, exploration, or Science it could be fitted however they wanted, which is probably why it was rated at a 100 year service life.
Again this is a game not the show so can we just get the Galaxy up to specs along with all other T5 cruisers.
the refit was hit int he launcher the torpedo storage is actually below that on the refit in the primary hull section.
the E rammed with the saucer section unless i missed the part where picard rammed the deflector at the scimitar. if you did not forget the D's saucer hit a planet and took visibly less damage wile doing so
i watched the show, and save for some pants on head TRIBBLE moments, there was several examples showing what a power house a galaxy was. the galaxy is a huge ship with the largest and most powerful main arrays, and largest most burst capable torp launchers of any ship class. aside from that, its basically a blank slate, with a full 70% of its internal volume totally modular and hot swappable.
the single galaxy class we are most familiar with, the E-D, was the diplomatic flagship, the ideals of the federation made manifest in ship form. it used all of its configurable interior for luxury apartments and expansive science labs in every single field of study.
this actually dragged on its combat performance, in chain of command when the enterprise was temporarily commanded by jelico, he did things very differently, he acted as if he was part of a military, and he took measures to bypass and shut down a lot of the science labs during high alert because they were such a useless draw on power in a fight. the ship was not optimized for combat, but it could still easily defend itself dispite that. it just goes to show how not cockiee cutter various ships are, that they come in vastly different configurations to serve very different purposes.
no one could call the E-D a battleship, it was not configured to be one. but, in yesterdays enterprise you see exactly what a galaxy class looks like that is actually configured to be a battleship. again galaxy class are blank slates, they are whatever their configuration makes them to be.
its pretty obvious how proportionately weak 23rd century weapons were to 24th century. the reliant's beams could just barely breach the hull, the array on a galaxy class has been known to blow up ships larger then the connie almost immediately after they breach their shields. the enterprise E ramed its crew quarters into the scimitars hangerbay. boy, no wonder nether exploded.
by the time the dominion war started, galaxys were serving as battleships, and slaughtering everything in thier path. during operation return, at least 1 galaxy class totally breached the dominion lines and then started flanking to help other ships make it through. during the actual war you dont see a single galaxy go down on screen ether. there was as many as 15 galaxy class in a single image of a single fleet, thes ships were clearly mass produced far beyond the original 6. it was not a failure, the class was not shelved or replaced by anything in canon.
of the galaxy class that were destroyed? the enterprise D was the worst offender. it fired a single shot the crew was to stupid to actually use more then 10% of the ships arsenal to defend itself there, instead relying on a stupid gimic. if the E-D opend fire like it did here- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=H_XbWq49vUM the BOP would have been destroyed 3 or 4 times over. infant every time the enterprise lost, if it has actually fired ALL its weapons at least as long as it did here, it would have won with little drama. nothing we see a sovereign or defiant or any other starfleet ship do do even comes close to that show of force ether. there was also that time when those huge main arrays dissolved a greater amount of volume in a borg cube then there was volume of the enterprise itself!
people dont give the odyssey any credit ether. it hull tanked 3 bug ships for 10 minutes, and then disengaged under its own power, not having sustained more then minor damage. after 10 minutes of getting its hull pounded on. the bug ships were nearly harmless to it, even though the dominion had already for at least a year infiltrated the federation and learned every single thing there was to know about federation defensive and offensive technology, allowing the bug ships's shields to also be basically phaser proof, in addition to their weapons completely penetrating federation shields. in the end it took ramming the deflector, torpedo storage, main engineering, and antimatter pod storage area of the ship to finally blow the it up. and if the antimatter pods hadn't lost containment, it actually would not have exploded, it took a few seconds for it to light up, it was those that finally blew.
the writing was so bad when the E-D was forced to lose, that the show could have been taking place in a runabout and it wouldn't have effected the story. in fact it would have actually made sense. ~5 ferengi suddenly in control of a ship of over 1000? was the bridge crew the only people on the entire ship that day? at any time they could have had someone in a transporter room beam them into the brig, or space. it would be easier to kick in the the doors of a police station and take it by force then storming a ship like that without hundreds of boarding parties.
there you have it, the galaxy class if you actually watched the show.
Reported for spam
you have just been striked by the " what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic "forum galaxy wing, sorry bud, but we have 400 pages training to responded argument like thisXD.
you are not going to win.
mr worf, fire phaser on full and a simultaneous spread of torpedo:D:D
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Please, you werent even born when I was watching Star Trek, you lost this arguement before you even began it....
To be fair, not many starships would have survived being rammed at full impulse by a Roach Boat. Especially with weakened shields. And we have to assume the Odyssey was a standard Galaxy class vessel, since there is no evidence to the contrary. If fact, comments made in "The Search" support the standard Galaxy assumption.
While it's true that the standard Galaxy wasn't a warship, it was still a tactical powerhouse in terms of phaser arrays, the capabilities of the torpedo launchers, and anti-matter mines. It had excellent phaser coverage of both hulls and a first rate deflector shield grid. That much firepower may seem excessive for an exploration vessel/mobile embassy, but the Galaxy class had precious cargo to defend. And was prepared for potential unknown threats as best as the Fleet could at that time.
But the Federation's best was no match for the technological juggernauts of the Borg and Dominion. Over time, the class was updated to better deal with these new threats. The few failures of the Galaxy was no fault of the design, but poor long-term planning by Starfleet (in-universe) and the whims of the writers (IRL). Overall, the confirmed (i.e. that we know of) loss of only four ships in a fifteen period is actually a pretty good record.
In any case, the performance on-screen, both good and bad is no indication of how it should perform in-game. Like I said before, it's a decent cruiser as is and most game content (including endgame) can be played successfully using the Galaxy as it stands now. It just needs a little polish to be first rate.
saying performance on screen shouldn't mater for in game performance is SO easy for something like the excelsior to say. hell, basically any ship, because any ship is better then the galaxy in game, but is NOT in canon.
little polish? the galaxy needs a fundamental station setup change to be second rate
The Galaxy could get by without a station or console layout change if they make damage less dependent on Tactical consoles and give us some Engineering slot options. Of course, Cryptic would never be willing to do something like that, so I've officially given up on the ship and am now flying the Tactical variant of the Odyssey.
Unless you have some way to prove to us that you're one of the Okudas or something, you'll have to earn our respect. claiming to be an old TRIBBLE and thinking that age grants wisdom, you are sorely mistaken.
So far, I see no reason to respect what you say. Care to try again and maybe approach this in a nicer, less holier-than-thou manner?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
On-screen performance not reflecting in-game performance, and vice versa, is a fact of life.
The Galaxy was the bleeding edge in canon for a time. And even after, it was still a fine design that was very capable.
The fact that other endgame cruisers are supposedly better than the Galaxy is irrelevant The Galaxy is still useable at endgame, for both the casual player and the player who treats this game like an exercise in accounting. And it can be used successfully at that. That's all that counts in the end. If you like the ship, use it. Most of the posts in this thread are likely to give the new player poking around on here the impression that it's useless. Which, of course, is total BS. The Galaxy, as is, is a decent cruiser.
The "little polish" I refer to is universal bridge officer stations for the C-Store variant. And addressing the problems with engineering powers and shared cool downs on a ship that is engineering heavy. This would make a half-way decent cruiser a better overall ship, if a solution can be worked out. Radical revisions or turning the Galaxy into an oversized science vessel, or tactical engine of doom, is not necessary.
The Galaxy isn't the best in the game. But it doesn't suck either, except to hard core fans who want it to be something it isn't, and to the power gamers/PvP "miniscule minority" who worship at the holy altar of DPS.
I haven't read most of the posts in this thread, bit I can agree with your assessment that the Galaxy Exploration Retrofit is a decent cruiser as is.
I also think that it should have had a universal Lt. Commander's Boff Station from its introduction. This would reflect its multipurpose role, for which its separation ability was intended.
Losing a console slot and 13% hull strength for that ability always bothered me as well.
Still... it is my favorite and most flown ship in the game.
eta: and it should be able to mount at least one dual heavy cannon.
On the first point, the ship is definitely usable at endgame; so are T4 ships, really. Most content in the game just isn't that difficult. People have done STFs in T1 ships - outside of a few select things like No Win Scenario, you can get it done in whatever ship you like. So the Galaxy is quite usable at endgame (I used it myself for a while).
Of course, this doesn't mean that it's a decent cruiser. The Galaxy is either matched or bettered in anything it can do by another endgame cruiser. It takes several of the worst possible outcomes in ship design and slaps them all onto the one ship (3rd ensign slot, poor turn rate, 2 tac consoles). The only thing it does have going for it is that it has more hull than comparable cruisers - probably the worst thing to have an advantage in. And due to the overspecialisation of its console and boff layout, it's not even the tankiest ship in the game.
You could take the Galaxy as it is right now and slap 3 tac consoles on it, and the ship wouldn't be brokenly overpowered (not that I think this should happen!). It would probably be middle of the pack at best. The ship's problems are numerous and crippling, and it really needs an overhaul to reach even average status.
Man if Cryptics devs where only half as knowledgeable about the GCS as you, we would have a really awesome ship in STO.
I agree, most ocasions where the GCS was underperforming, where pretty hair-raising IMO, like the rascals episode. Another thing is the excessively diplomatic behaviour of Picard. I mean come on, its ok to be a diplomat but the E -D was waving the white flag a bit too often. (especially in the pilot, the writers should have some other sollution IMO)
I still don't get what the GCS haters or ppl arguing against a better STO version have against that ship in the first place.
No one here wants a OP GCS, no one wants a GCS that outguns a Regent. All we want is a decent representation of the ship we like.
I mean the GCS isn't the only starfleet ship in STO, why do they even care about it if they don't like it?
It would be the same as if i would go to a Excelsior thread and constantly arguing against it being so much better than 80% of all other Starfleet Cruisers.
There are more than enough other ships they can fly, the GCS won't become a competitior to them as long as the same ppl are in charge of cryptic.
Live and let live, guys.
I'm as much as a Galaxy fan as many others in this thread, but I agree with this.
I have never witnessed "hate" towards Galaxy players either. My main character that's around since pre F2P commands a Galaxy all the time and I do quite well. I even did try PvP a few times and it was pretty funny that a decloak alpha strike romulan escort-thingy wasn't able to kill me. At all
The Galaxy is no battleship. It is a command ship, essentially. Starfleet's heaviest class of ships are 'Explorers', not battleships. Heavily armed but not nimble enough to use those weapons in a very tactical way. Instead, the Galaxy holds her ground, takes the flak, coordinates the offense and steamrolls resistance on the advance. Thus, I am okay with the Galaxy to have huge defensive capabilities but it needs some love.
As much as I like a complete revamp I came to the conclusion that it is actually not necessary. If cryptic would boost the comm arrays on cruisers with only 2 tac consoles she would have a unique function along the Star Cruiser and Heavy Cruiser R and non-tac Oddyssey variants. Though that will probably not happen, but one can dream
At best it's fair to suggest a universal ensign or a universal Lt + Ens combom but at least that ensign in it's fleet variant just to mirror the Negh'Var. Why it didn't get this ensign, I don't know. And I still would love to see general purpose damage consoles be available for engineering slots. But no LTC tactical/universal slots or more than 3 tac consoles IMO. The Galaxy is a powerful ship but a specialized light cruiser like the Prometheus or a more tactically focussed heavy cruiser like the Sovereign would probably outwit a Galaxy due to higher manneuvreability and that should be reflected in it's game manifest. If we will get heavy beam arrays for large cruisers at one point, general purpose damage consoles for engineers, better comm arrays for low-tac cruisers and/or one or two low universal boffs I think the ship would feel more versatile
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V23g7mVMnM --- red letter media's review of generations
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
For me that movie is the best example of people in charge not caring or knowing anything about Star Trek, just as STO.
But if they make a new one,
it has to be ****-awesome. Consoles, the bling, you know.
But yes, I support a revamped Galaxy.
I hope STO get's better ...
I'm pretty sure they were already planning to get rid of the E-D. I get that some like its looks (not me though, not by a longshot!) but they were looking at it from the perspective of a future movie franchise based around the next gen crew. I'm sure they were planning to have a dozen movies, each making more money than the one before; all starring a cooler looking, more bad TRIBBLE feeling ship. So for that, the E-D had to go. Also, the more knowlegeabe fans would be able to point out to their friends times when the E-D was shown to be less than useless in the shows. Bad writing or not, it happenned and could come back to bite them later on in the movies if the E-D was still around.
As to why the Galaxy was made so subpar, again, I must point out that the game was much different back in the day and the galaxy didn't feel as bad back then. As to why it hasn't been upgraded and likely never will, there's a likely reason for that as well. Its no secret that the Galaxy, Defiant, and Intrepid are generally avoided. Their overspecialized boff layouts are no longer competitive with modern ones. As older ships from the game's launch that can be forgiven, what cannot be so easily overlooked is the way the fleet versions of these ships did nothing to fix the outdated boff layouts and in some ways made the ships worse relative to other 10 console ships. So the question is: Why? The answer: To make sure they sold more ships. Ships are their cheap to make high performing big ticket sale items. Be they from the C-store, lockboxes, lobi store, etc, ships bring in more per dollar spent in designing then than anything else. Imagine how fewer ships they would sell if the Iconics had decent boff layouts and stats?
First of all, there's no such thing as being knowledgeable about the Galaxy class. It's like claiming to be knowledgeable about unicorns. You are either just making things up that sound good to you, or you are repeating made up "facts" that sounded good to somebody else. Neither is a valid source of knowledge. More galling, though, is the tendency to ignore the made up facts that you don't like in favor of the made up facts that you do, all while claiming to be "experts" with superior reasoning and rationale. At best, the posts about how great the Galaxy class "really" was are very narrowly focused fan fiction, with all the limited appeal and Mary-Sue sentimentality that implies.
I love how you, in particular, claim to love Trek, but then talk about how much you hate everything the show stood for. Stay classy!
This is an incredible bit of tangled logic - I cannot imagine the cognitive dissonance it must take to distort your mind enough to conceive of this reasoning, let alone accept it. For starters, people who don't want to change the Galaxy aren't necessarily "Galaxy haters" - they may just see no need to fix something that's not really broken. Disagreeing with the small number of rabid Galaxy fans in this thread doesn't make anyone a "hater", or unreasonable, or anything else. It just means we have a different opinion than you do. The fact that you need to convince people to change their minds in order to get what you want does not imply that people who fail to be convinced are haters, it just means your argument is not persuasive enough.
Second, the Galaxy class ISN'T really broken, as has been pointed out in this thread multiple times. The ship can complete the endgame missions, so there's no content that a Galaxy fan is excluded from. Moreover, the push to make the Galaxy better is not in a vacuum - while you claim you don't want to take anything away from other players, those of us who can reason clearly understand that in order to solve the "problem" you have (the Galaxy being perceived as the least effective combat ship), can only be solved by buffing the Galaxy so that something ELSE is the least effective combat ship. The best evidence for this is how this thread has reacted to the Comm Arrays. The Galaxy class is now unquestionably better than it was, yet people still want more buffs for the Galaxy specifically, because it's position relative to other cruisers hasn't changed.
Taken together, this means that far from being the benign, "live and let live" kind of campaign you want to pretend it is, your push to improve the Galaxy is, in fact, an active campaign in competition with other players/ship types. The "problem" with the Galaxy is not that it can't compete against the NPCs and PVE content, it's that other ships are "better" at those jobs, and that's frustrating to Galaxy fans who want to both fly their favorite ship and demonstrate their epeen. The thing is, I get it - it's annoying to have to choose between the ship you like the most aesthetically and the ship you like the most mechanically - but it's something that almost everyone has to do. That said, most of us don't get up in arms about it, and we recognize that buffing one ship to be better so as to assuage a perceived slight by that ships fans will necessarily create a whole new group of fans who feel slighted by being the new "worst ship". We haven't solved the problem, just foisted it on to someone else.
At best, you can argue that you're trying to make everything perform at exactly the same level, but that's about as fanciful an idea as unicorns and Cruise-ship styled explorers that are also super-battleships. The fact is, if ships are to be different from each other, then ships are going to be (to quote Brown v Board) inherently unequal. There will always be a broad consensus among the internet-erati about the mechanically best ship, and even if you can act to narrow those differences, the people on the "bottom" of the list will always still feel slighted. In my experience, narrowing the gap actually makes the people on the bottom scream louder, as they don't understand why they couldn't have been buffed just a little bit more, to make up for being at the bottom for so long. Basically, they argue that if the differences don't matter that much, why shouldn't they be buffed to be on top, since they are so frustrated with being on the bottom so long. Not a persuasive argument.
On the other hand, you could argue that this thread was somehow a sign that there is a large number of fans who support the change, and treat it as basically a "vote", whereby the larger number of Galaxy fans "deserve" a buff, and the fans of some less well known ship (say, the Cheyenne) just have to suck it up. That just shows that you are basically bullies, though, and in any case rests on the specious assumption that a long thread populated by a few individuals who can't let it go is somehow indicative of a large number of followers, instead of a small number of extremely ardent Galaxy zealots. Again, not persuasive.