where is the information that says cbs are stopping cryptic from updating the failaxy to be competitive? rather than the reason JUST being cryptic trying to apply the antiqu trinity system? also, would people in this thread stop getting derail trolled into the "other games" argument" or "design age" argument.
none of those factors apply since there are ships like the star cruiser that suck almost as hard due to the antique trinity being obsolete, and the monarch and venture are just as badly afflicted by failtastic stats as the galaxy despite being new. all of which can have the most advanced gear installed to them.
And yet, you won't even TRY, will you? A defeatist attitude right out of the gate. You guys are NOTHING like Bjo Trimble and the other Star Trek fans back in the 1960's, who actually did something other than whine about their interest.
You mean to tell me that NONE of you guys have the conviction of your beliefs to pick up the phone and at least TRY to see what info you can gather? Really?
You really need to find a way to get out of your "comfort zone of just whining on this thread with ZERO results, and at least try something that MAY produce some results or helpful information. This so-called "silent majority" posting on this thread ONLY is getting you absolutely nowhere.
Responsibility for my actions? Sure, I'll take full responsibility for my actions.
Oh, you ment that I need to take responsibilty for everyone's actions here! Sorry, life doesn't work that way. I can speak only for myself, as everyone else on the thread since noone here has been elected to be the representative of anything.
You see, there is no "you guys" here, I'm sure it's a shocking concept for you, but there's just bunch of people that think a ship needs to be improved in some way. And that's about it. We all have our own ideas how to go about it and on some we agree on some we don't. There's no organized "Fans of TNG/Galaxy class" conspiracy here.
And please don't make me laugh, why didn't I monitor some other dude/girl on the thread? Do I look like a Moderator to you? Is my avatar title in purple?
Let me make this perfectly clear - I only step in when I feel that I'm personally adressed. I'm not a forum Moderator nor the Forum Police. So you're knocking on the wrong door there.
Did I intervene on you? Sorry, I thought that was called a discussion. I only pointed out that the latest poll for content has nothing to do with the Galaxy class and I asked you why don't you try explaining in a rational manner why you think that the hero ship of one of the 5 Star Trek shows deserves to be the suckiest ship in game insetad of just repeating that "it should suck at that's it".
If you call that intervening, then so be it.
Well since you're whining about this thread being temporarily being shut down, at least have the guts to admit all of the reasons why it was shut down it. It started with that idiot who compared himself of not getting the GCS that he wanted, to the struggles that African-Americans went through in the 1960's during the Civil Right Era, which included the various murders and bombings that they received during that time, and it just went downhill from there. That's why it was temporary shut down. Do you really have that level of selective memory?
This "permanent victimization" that far to many of you GCS fans willing embrace is getting you nowhere. Break out of this mentality and at least TRY to do something different.
On the old forums. Either from Wishstone or Gozer. Forget which. But it's nigh impossible to find these days.
That being said, the way I remember it, CBS said no, and that's usually the end of that.
Exactly. That's the point. The authority runs FROM CBS TO Cryptic. So if you can't get anywhere with Cryptic, then go to their "boss" CBS to see what, if anything can be done. Again, it may not go anywhere, but at least you TRIED.
If that doesn't yield the results that you are looking for, at least you can stop raging on this forum about Cryptic and start over at the CBS forum and rage about them.
No hand-holding required - I think that many of us were simply tired of hearing you tell us what we were doing wrong. That opinion is fine in itself, but is almost redundant when we seldom heard an opinon of what we could do RIGHT.
And it is therefore nice to see you offer said opinion.
As for CBS; I will concede that it's probably worth a shot, though I personally think that liaising with them would yield little result since they have bigger fish to fry, and there is no real financial incentive to interest them. But, pessimism aside, you are right in saying that there isn't anything to be lost from making the attempt.
At least you are receptive to trying something new. You guys have often suggested that your numbers were much larger that were being represented in this thread. Fine. Then it is truly in your best interests to at least try to put those "numbers to work" to see what info that you can gather, because the present course of action is getting you nowhere.
If you guys can convince them that there is enough interest to warrant further investigation, then you are further along then you are now. If they show little interest, then you know that Cryptic will also probably continue to ignore you, but at least you will know, and then you can determine if you want to continue playing this game or not.
And AGAIN, in all of those games that featured the Sovereign, the GCS was inferior to the Sovereign, and hence second rate.
AGAIN, what is you guys plan other than utilizing the same failing strategies? Probably none (as usual).
You do understand that this game is separate from those others and that noone here is saying the galaxy should be more powerful then the Sovereign. We want it on par, cause all T5 ships are suppose to be equal with each other. All Cruisers are suppose to be just as good but in different ways then the other cruisers. If i give up speed and turn I should have more hull. If i can't do as much damage I should heal better or CC better or something to make my ship as useful just in another way.
As of right now due to lets face it the lack of Tac consoles on GCS in a game that has endgame built around how fast we can make stuff go boom leaves the GCS lacking. Add to it that engineer powers share to many cooldowns with each other and lack of real diversity among them. No real need for tanks or really for healers in pve.All other cruisers can do jobs better then what a Galaxy can. Healer, tank, and CC are better done in both the Ambassador, Odyssey, and the Star cruiser. Dps has the Excelsior, Tac Odyssey, Sovereign, and now the Avenger. Yea the galaxy can do all end game but it can be done better with these other cruisers. You seem to think because it older or didn't do well in shows and other games it should suck here or we should be happy with what we have.
The GCS needs to on par with other cruisers, whether it is done by altering the layout of the BO and console slots or engineer consoles and powers are improved is of no real factor to me. Everyone has expressed what they like to have done with it. Hell I'd like it to be a mirror ship to the D'deridex romalun warbird in console and Bo slots. If that doesn't happen but its improved in other ways that is fine with me. But ppl are going to give their opinion on what they think should be done regardless of whether there is a great chance of it or not. Bottom line it does need improvement.
Maybe we should be more proactive or be ringing the CBS headquarters door bell. But I thought these forums are our way of improving our game experience and talking to the Devs.
I still don't get your point about the games. I admit - the Sovereign should have more pure firepower, but by that same game logic - in every example but Birth of the Federation - the Defiant, Intrepid, and Excelsiors should cap out at tier two ships and be for lt and MAYBE ltcom players. Just about every Trek game uses the Defiant as a small and cheap scout ship, not the warship it is in the show. I don't agree with the game logic of the Defiant being cheap and weak, but the precedent has been set by other then myself.
I also don't understand your reaction to the thread. We're on the forums trying to get something changed peacefully without going over the top. No one is (at least not me, and no one that I know of) is actively harassing a developer. No one is going into other threads and trash talking their ships. If we want to compare what we think a ship should be in this thread, what's the problem with it?
We may be beating our head against a brick wall, but you're doing the exact same thing. I might not change Cryptic's mind on the matter, but you won't change mine. If you don't like the thread and if you think we're a bunch of imbeciles, why are you bothering?
The smallest change would make the Galaxy viable - perhaps not what we want, but honestly viable. Turn the engineer ensign into a universal. Hell, do it for all three of the 'trinity ships' if they think it would balance anything. Intrepid's Sci Ensign for a uni and Defiants Tac ensign for a uni. I can think of a great deal of Defiant captains who would like an extra heal or polarized armor. Give the ships the majority of their consoles for it's profession and be done with it. Galaxy: 4, 3, 2 for standard, 4, 3, 3 for fleet. Intrepid: 3, 4, 2 for standard, 3, 4, 3 for fleet. Defiant: 3, 2, 4 for standard and 3, 3, 4 for fleet.
But - the majority of those Defiant and Intrepid players are content with their ships. So the change to just the Galaxy would make more people happy then unhappy. A universal slot means the seven people who love the Galaxy as is would stay happy, and so would the rest of the people who like it. I would love a Ltcom Uni instead - but I understand that would cause a competition with the Odyssey unfortunately.
And one last point in general. I'm not a "Galaxy hater". In fact, I rather like the design and enjoy using it in the game. So, to say that's I'm bashing it, or desiring it to remain in some sort of imagined state of "suckatude", would be an incorrect assumption to make. I just disagree with the notion that it's a useless POS that's in need of a major overhaul, and stated my reasons why. Nothing more, nothing less.
so what would be your solution to make this ship better?
in this game the excelsior and galor are the best cruisers, i cant think of much that holds less weight then in game powerfulness rankings to determine anything. of course they would make the current enterprise the best ship in all those games, they were still making movies about it back then, and they wanted to cash in on the current hero ship as much as possible, making it the best. no thought ever went into ship ranking other then newer=better.
in ST: legacy, the galaxy cost less command points then the sovereign, intrepid, defiant, and i think even the akira stock. they were all newer, the casual fan/developer just assumes newer is better. ah well, at least in legacy its extreamly easy to mod things till they are correct lol. now, all these years later in sto, in most cases the newest ship they release is the best. hell, every ship is somehow on about the same end game level too.
so what would be your solution to make this ship better?
dont mind him, he thinks if he uses the word elitist enough times, and if he acts offended enough, he will actually be the person in the thread thats the most correct. i believe he thinks its fine, even though he went on some long crazy rant, thats all he was really saying. Nothing more, nothing less.
The Galaxy Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the Galaxy at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the Galaxy but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a Galaxy and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. Galaxy owners should just tell there Galaxies they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
I gave you CBS's address and telephone number, which is apparently more than ANY of you bothered to even look up. The rest is up to you. If you have as large of a GCS fanbase as you claim, then perhaps you can organize this so called large GCS group to make a case for your position. I can't make that case for you. That's YOUR job.
Unfortunately, I'm so convinced that you guys only want to continue to whine on this forum, I'll bet that not a SINGLE ONE of you will take the effort to contact CBS directly to coherently express your concerns/requests regarding the GCS.
HEYYYYYY!!! polaron! hahaha!
would you mind a question? it just cross my mind when i was reading that post of your but.... are you a CBS guy?
no really, no joking or insulting here, it a real question.
maybe it is late and my mind going nut, didn't really known why i think about that, but the more i think about it, the more it tikkle me.
The Galaxy Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the Galaxy at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the Galaxy but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a Galaxy and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. Galaxy owners should just tell there Galaxies they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
Please explain - then - why Galor, Excelsior, Ambassador, and D'Kora class vessels - all of which are older then the galaxy - all perform on par with the Odyssey and Avenger?
Unfortunately, I'm so convinced that you guys only want to continue to whine on this forum, I'll bet that not a SINGLE ONE of you will take the effort to contact CBS directly to coherently express your concerns/requests regarding the GCS.
ho, i forget! was just to concern with my question but, no, your wrong.
there is one who just done that, stardestroyer001 did.
cbs dismissed the question, he post it in this thread just don't remember when, i think it was at you second wave of post, so maybe in the 100 or 120 pages.
On the old forums. Either from Wishstone or Gozer. Forget which. But it's nigh impossible to find these days.
That being said, the way I remember it, CBS said no, and that's usually the end of that.
no really? they said no to a competitive galaxy or no to a tos enterprise?
if that is not something that was made up it would then explain a lot of things.
the "hold" on galaxys stats make perfect sense now.
but, that is not a coherent behavior, why would they restrained the galaxy and not the ambassador?
Please explain - then - why Galor, Excelsior, Ambassador, and D'Kora class vessels - all of which are older then the galaxy - all perform on par with the Odyssey and Avenger?
Possibly people like them more then the Galaxy to receive special care. It could also be the Galaxy possibly isn't designed to be upgraded over and over like the Excelsior and Ambassador. Has anyone went over to Captain Kirks Constitution class and put transwarp and quantum torpedo and Antiprotons on it? It could be the Galaxy has reached it's peak possibly do to possible structural flaws in the design that the Excelsior possibly don't have.
The Galaxy is a exploration ship and not built for war and has weaker hulls and such. The Galaxy-X with 3 Nacelles has stronger hull and such yes but still the overall design of the ship is for exploration and built for exploring and not for taking hits or dishing them out. Nether is the Excelsior it was a experiment for the first Transwarp drive but somehow people like the Excelsiors more and got special treatment.
Please watch season 5-7 of Deep Space Nine and watch Galaxy class starships shrugging off Dominion and Cardassian weaponry while Excelsiors crumble by the dozen. The Excelsior's famed 'transwarp drive' is the standard warp drive every TNG/DS9/Voyager ship uses - between The Original Series and TNG - the warp scale chart was completely changed because of the new engines. Can't remember the exact numbers - or care enough to go look for them - but Warp 9 on Kirk's Enterprise averages about warp 5 on a Galaxy, Defiant, or Intrepid.
Also - depending on your source material - the Galaxy class spaceframe has a lifespan of 100 years with 20 year major refits scheduled, so the Galaxy should just be coming out of her second major, major refit by Star Trek Online. Should she be top of the line? No, not really. Should she be competitive with the other ships in the game? Absolutely.
The Galaxy Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the Galaxy at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the Galaxy but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a Galaxy and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. Galaxy owners should just tell there Galaxies they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
The ambassador Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the ambassador at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the ambassador but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a ambassador and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. ambassador owners should just tell there ambi they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
dont mind him, he thinks if he uses the word elitist enough times, and if he acts offended enough, he will actually be the person in the thread thats the most correct. i believe he thinks its fine, even though he went on some long crazy rant, thats all he was really saying. Nothing more, nothing less.
my question is not to argue with him, i really like to known his view on the question.
i am not totally agree with some of his argument and that exactly why i want to known his view on a possible solution.
not to troll, just curiosity.
i am like that.
i give much more interest on a solution of a guy that that have not much more interest in the ship than the one of a pure hardcore galaxy fan.
just like i am very curious to known the view of young people about star trek, some that didn't grow with the serie, a fresh view, that the answer is good or bad do not diminish my pleasure to heard it.
The Galaxy Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the Galaxy at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the Galaxy but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a Galaxy and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. Galaxy owners should just tell there Galaxies they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
if this game took place ~100 years after the galaxy first launched, and anything older was put out to pasture decades ago, this post would be about right. a 40 year old galaxy class, thanks to how modular it is, how long it was built to last, and how well starfleet keeps up on upgrades, would still be a top of the line class in 2409. that goes for anything from the 2360s and 2370s
Please watch season 5-7 of Deep Space Nine and watch Galaxy class starships shrugging off Dominion and Cardassian weaponry while Excelsiors crumble by the dozen. The Excelsior's famed 'transwarp drive' is the standard warp drive every TNG/DS9/Voyager ship uses - between The Original Series and TNG - the warp scale chart was completely changed because of the new engines. Can't remember the exact numbers - or care enough to go look for them - but Warp 9 on Kirk's Enterprise averages about warp 5 on a Galaxy, Defiant, or Intrepid.
Also - depending on your source material - the Galaxy class spaceframe has a lifespan of 100 years with 20 year major refits scheduled, so the Galaxy should just be coming out of her second major, major refit by Star Trek Online. Should she be top of the line? No, not really. Should she be competitive with the other ships in the game? Absolutely.
One of the bigger battles of the Dominion War. Please note - Galaxy class starships all OVER in the war, and doing pretty damned well for themselves.
I don't doubt that the Galaxy is strong and it is but however there is tougher ships that is made for war not saying it can't handle itself cause it can don't get me wrong. I'm just saying there is better ships now like the Ody.
Possibly people like them more then the Galaxy to receive special care. It could also be the Galaxy possibly isn't designed to be upgraded over and over like the Excelsior and Ambassador.
what???? internal space 100% modular means something i think...
Has anyone went over to Captain Kirks Constitution class and put transwarp and quantum torpedo and Antiprotons on it? It could be the Galaxy has reached it's peak possibly do to possible structural flaws in the design that the Excelsior possibly don't have.
so 80 years late of learn to made a excelcior starfleet forgot how to made ship and made worng way with the galaxy ?????
The Galaxy is a exploration ship and not built for war and has weaker hulls and such.
weaker??? starfleet will send the weaker ship to the neutral zone and long range mision without suport???? also has yuo see DS9 galaxy IS the core of the fleet and they keep goin when any other ship is erased from sky , including the excelcior....
The Galaxy-X with 3 Nacelles has stronger hull and such yes but still the overall design of the ship is for exploration and built for exploring and not for taking hits or dishing them out. Nether is the Excelsior it was a experiment for the first Transwarp drive but somehow people like the Excelsiors more and got special treatment.
look the excelcior get the special treatment before was lunch in the game so outmatch the galaxy (completely wrong concept beacuse in a single chapter of DS9 a refited excelcior survive the most loved ship for dev team "defiant" by the way this combat was not to destroy each other was for disable the other ship thats why the excelcior survive the encounter) by the way is no necesary to starfleet to engage another starfleet ship they have security code to acces remotly access the computter core of any starfleet ship and shootdown all system without the need of combat.
I agree - the Odyssey is top of the line and should be and arguably is the most powerful ship in the Federation. (Story wise she's top dog, gameplay wise, a Regent or Avenger running an aux2bat build will outperform her).
I don't want the Galaxy class to be the most powerful ship in the game. I just want it tweaked - either in bridge officer layout or in updated engineer powers so she's useful. I'll repeat myself, a universal ensign and a single moved console would make her competitive and useful in the dps heavy game we're playing.
As for ship's age and popularity - you can bet everything you have that if a T5 constitution was released with the Galaxy class's turn rate, officer stations, and console load out that there would be a thread just as big with people wanting her upgraded so they could have fun with their favorite ship - just as we are.
HEYYYYYY!!! polaron! hahaha!
would you mind a question? it just cross my mind when i was reading that post of your but.... are you a CBS guy?
no really, no joking or insulting here, it a real question.
maybe it is late and my mind going nut, didn't really known why i think about that, but the more i think about it, the more it tikkle me.
Nope. But admittedly, I am curious to see how strong you guys convictions are about the GCS. If you can get some changes done through CBS, then congratulations, job well done. Even if you don't get the changes, at least you TRIED.
However, if not a single one of you will follow up on this, and instead merely continue a clearly losing strategy, it will show that in a paradoxical way, that many of you are actually happy in your whining and misery.
I don't doubt that the Galaxy is strong and it is but however there is tougher ships that is made for war not saying it can't handle itself cause it can don't get me wrong. I'm just saying there is better ships now like the Ody.
Technically Starfleet doesn't make warships. Defiant maybe close though it was made primary as a cost effective ship for fighting the borg and a scout was it not. Quick and easy to replace from what I have read while small and fast enough to evade other larger ships. It maybe the closest thing to a warship that Starfleet made. Odyssey also not a warship its an explorer just like the Galaxy. The sovereign most likely is a replacement for the work horse of the federation excelsior class. Not to say that these ships aint able to handle a fight but none where made just for a battleship or warship.
Possibly people like them more then the Galaxy to receive special care. It could also be the Galaxy possibly isn't designed to be upgraded over and over like the Excelsior and Ambassador. Has anyone went over to Captain Kirks Constitution class and put transwarp and quantum torpedo and Antiprotons on it? It could be the Galaxy has reached it's peak possibly do to possible structural flaws in the design that the Excelsior possibly don't have.
The Galaxy is a exploration ship and not built for war and has weaker hulls and such. The Galaxy-X with 3 Nacelles has stronger hull and such yes but still the overall design of the ship is for exploration and built for exploring and not for taking hits or dishing them out. Nether is the Excelsior it was a experiment for the first Transwarp drive but somehow people like the Excelsiors more and got special treatment.
The Galaxy has a pretty tough hull seeing as it could hull tank three bug ships all at once. The ship was made to be modular and refitted. Meaning that at anytime most of the saucer could have whatever was needed added to the ship for whatever mission they had need of her to do. It was meant to be upgraded as someone else stated every 20 years and it would be in the process or just had its second refitting. Its younger then both the Excelsior and the Ambassador so it should be more then capable of out performing both of those ships. Has more storage for torpedo's and bigger phaser stripes then both the older ships. Took out Galors in the Dominion war pretty well which is not reflected in this game at all.
The ship is nowhere near ready for a rocking chair and retirement. Honestly I understand why we GCS ppl are fighting for an upgrade but have no clue why some ppl clearly don't seem to want or think it deserves any fix whatsoever.
ho, i forget! was just to concern with my question but, no, your wrong.
there is one who just done that, stardestroyer001 did.
cbs dismissed the question, he post it in this thread just don't remember when, i think it was at you second wave of post, so maybe in the 100 or 120 pages.
Then I'm confused. If you guys knew that CBS already turned this down, why are you always raging at Cryptic and their developers instead of CBS?
It's no wonder that your cause is going nowhere. You expect Cryptic to do something that you guys won't try to do for yourselves? Really? If what you say it true, then you guys truly are wasting your time on this forum if you expect Cryptic to violate their directive and licensing agreement from CBS regarding this matter.
Based on what you said, the title of this thread should REALLY be "What is your beef with the Galaxy CBS?"
Comments
And yet, you won't even TRY, will you? A defeatist attitude right out of the gate. You guys are NOTHING like Bjo Trimble and the other Star Trek fans back in the 1960's, who actually did something other than whine about their interest.
You mean to tell me that NONE of you guys have the conviction of your beliefs to pick up the phone and at least TRY to see what info you can gather? Really?
You really need to find a way to get out of your "comfort zone of just whining on this thread with ZERO results, and at least try something that MAY produce some results or helpful information. This so-called "silent majority" posting on this thread ONLY is getting you absolutely nowhere.
On the old forums. Either from Wishstone or Gozer. Forget which. But it's nigh impossible to find these days.
That being said, the way I remember it, CBS said no, and that's usually the end of that.
Well since you're whining about this thread being temporarily being shut down, at least have the guts to admit all of the reasons why it was shut down it. It started with that idiot who compared himself of not getting the GCS that he wanted, to the struggles that African-Americans went through in the 1960's during the Civil Right Era, which included the various murders and bombings that they received during that time, and it just went downhill from there. That's why it was temporary shut down. Do you really have that level of selective memory?
This "permanent victimization" that far to many of you GCS fans willing embrace is getting you nowhere. Break out of this mentality and at least TRY to do something different.
Exactly. That's the point. The authority runs FROM CBS TO Cryptic. So if you can't get anywhere with Cryptic, then go to their "boss" CBS to see what, if anything can be done. Again, it may not go anywhere, but at least you TRIED.
If that doesn't yield the results that you are looking for, at least you can stop raging on this forum about Cryptic and start over at the CBS forum and rage about them.
At least you are receptive to trying something new. You guys have often suggested that your numbers were much larger that were being represented in this thread. Fine. Then it is truly in your best interests to at least try to put those "numbers to work" to see what info that you can gather, because the present course of action is getting you nowhere.
If you guys can convince them that there is enough interest to warrant further investigation, then you are further along then you are now. If they show little interest, then you know that Cryptic will also probably continue to ignore you, but at least you will know, and then you can determine if you want to continue playing this game or not.
You do understand that this game is separate from those others and that noone here is saying the galaxy should be more powerful then the Sovereign. We want it on par, cause all T5 ships are suppose to be equal with each other. All Cruisers are suppose to be just as good but in different ways then the other cruisers. If i give up speed and turn I should have more hull. If i can't do as much damage I should heal better or CC better or something to make my ship as useful just in another way.
As of right now due to lets face it the lack of Tac consoles on GCS in a game that has endgame built around how fast we can make stuff go boom leaves the GCS lacking. Add to it that engineer powers share to many cooldowns with each other and lack of real diversity among them. No real need for tanks or really for healers in pve.All other cruisers can do jobs better then what a Galaxy can. Healer, tank, and CC are better done in both the Ambassador, Odyssey, and the Star cruiser. Dps has the Excelsior, Tac Odyssey, Sovereign, and now the Avenger. Yea the galaxy can do all end game but it can be done better with these other cruisers. You seem to think because it older or didn't do well in shows and other games it should suck here or we should be happy with what we have.
The GCS needs to on par with other cruisers, whether it is done by altering the layout of the BO and console slots or engineer consoles and powers are improved is of no real factor to me. Everyone has expressed what they like to have done with it. Hell I'd like it to be a mirror ship to the D'deridex romalun warbird in console and Bo slots. If that doesn't happen but its improved in other ways that is fine with me. But ppl are going to give their opinion on what they think should be done regardless of whether there is a great chance of it or not. Bottom line it does need improvement.
Maybe we should be more proactive or be ringing the CBS headquarters door bell. But I thought these forums are our way of improving our game experience and talking to the Devs.
I also don't understand your reaction to the thread. We're on the forums trying to get something changed peacefully without going over the top. No one is (at least not me, and no one that I know of) is actively harassing a developer. No one is going into other threads and trash talking their ships. If we want to compare what we think a ship should be in this thread, what's the problem with it?
We may be beating our head against a brick wall, but you're doing the exact same thing. I might not change Cryptic's mind on the matter, but you won't change mine. If you don't like the thread and if you think we're a bunch of imbeciles, why are you bothering?
The smallest change would make the Galaxy viable - perhaps not what we want, but honestly viable. Turn the engineer ensign into a universal. Hell, do it for all three of the 'trinity ships' if they think it would balance anything. Intrepid's Sci Ensign for a uni and Defiants Tac ensign for a uni. I can think of a great deal of Defiant captains who would like an extra heal or polarized armor. Give the ships the majority of their consoles for it's profession and be done with it. Galaxy: 4, 3, 2 for standard, 4, 3, 3 for fleet. Intrepid: 3, 4, 2 for standard, 3, 4, 3 for fleet. Defiant: 3, 2, 4 for standard and 3, 3, 4 for fleet.
But - the majority of those Defiant and Intrepid players are content with their ships. So the change to just the Galaxy would make more people happy then unhappy. A universal slot means the seven people who love the Galaxy as is would stay happy, and so would the rest of the people who like it. I would love a Ltcom Uni instead - but I understand that would cause a competition with the Odyssey unfortunately.
the ambassador is not a warship.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
so what would be your solution to make this ship better?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
in ST: legacy, the galaxy cost less command points then the sovereign, intrepid, defiant, and i think even the akira stock. they were all newer, the casual fan/developer just assumes newer is better. ah well, at least in legacy its extreamly easy to mod things till they are correct lol. now, all these years later in sto, in most cases the newest ship they release is the best. hell, every ship is somehow on about the same end game level too.
dont mind him, he thinks if he uses the word elitist enough times, and if he acts offended enough, he will actually be the person in the thread thats the most correct. i believe he thinks its fine, even though he went on some long crazy rant, thats all he was really saying. Nothing more, nothing less.
People move on to better things. Galaxy owners should just tell there Galaxies they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
HEYYYYYY!!! polaron! hahaha!
would you mind a question? it just cross my mind when i was reading that post of your but.... are you a CBS guy?
no really, no joking or insulting here, it a real question.
maybe it is late and my mind going nut, didn't really known why i think about that, but the more i think about it, the more it tikkle me.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Please explain - then - why Galor, Excelsior, Ambassador, and D'Kora class vessels - all of which are older then the galaxy - all perform on par with the Odyssey and Avenger?
ho, i forget! was just to concern with my question but, no, your wrong.
there is one who just done that, stardestroyer001 did.
cbs dismissed the question, he post it in this thread just don't remember when, i think it was at you second wave of post, so maybe in the 100 or 120 pages.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
no really? they said no to a competitive galaxy or no to a tos enterprise?
if that is not something that was made up it would then explain a lot of things.
the "hold" on galaxys stats make perfect sense now.
but, that is not a coherent behavior, why would they restrained the galaxy and not the ambassador?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Possibly people like them more then the Galaxy to receive special care. It could also be the Galaxy possibly isn't designed to be upgraded over and over like the Excelsior and Ambassador. Has anyone went over to Captain Kirks Constitution class and put transwarp and quantum torpedo and Antiprotons on it? It could be the Galaxy has reached it's peak possibly do to possible structural flaws in the design that the Excelsior possibly don't have.
The Galaxy is a exploration ship and not built for war and has weaker hulls and such. The Galaxy-X with 3 Nacelles has stronger hull and such yes but still the overall design of the ship is for exploration and built for exploring and not for taking hits or dishing them out. Nether is the Excelsior it was a experiment for the first Transwarp drive but somehow people like the Excelsiors more and got special treatment.
Also - depending on your source material - the Galaxy class spaceframe has a lifespan of 100 years with 20 year major refits scheduled, so the Galaxy should just be coming out of her second major, major refit by Star Trek Online. Should she be top of the line? No, not really. Should she be competitive with the other ships in the game? Absolutely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4pMCk575d8
One of the bigger battles of the Dominion War. Please note - Galaxy class starships all OVER in the war, and doing pretty damned well for themselves.
The ambassador Class is obsolete much like captain Kirks first ship isn't useful anymore except space museums to look at the past. Obsoleted things don't get upgraded they move on to the better and some day even the Odyssey and the Avenger will be obsolete. You got to realize the pain of obsoleteness and just let go and brace the future. There is no beef with the ambassador at all it is just Obsolete it is not as good any more. You can add 4 or 5 maby 10 nacelles on the ambassador but it still wouldn't be good enough anymore. Heck you can put 2 warpcores in a ambassador and still wouldn't be as good as the Odyssey.
People move on to better things. ambassador owners should just tell there ambi they are decommissioned to trophies cause of obsoleteness.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
my question is not to argue with him, i really like to known his view on the question.
i am not totally agree with some of his argument and that exactly why i want to known his view on a possible solution.
not to troll, just curiosity.
i am like that.
i give much more interest on a solution of a guy that that have not much more interest in the ship than the one of a pure hardcore galaxy fan.
just like i am very curious to known the view of young people about star trek, some that didn't grow with the serie, a fresh view, that the answer is good or bad do not diminish my pleasure to heard it.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
if this game took place ~100 years after the galaxy first launched, and anything older was put out to pasture decades ago, this post would be about right. a 40 year old galaxy class, thanks to how modular it is, how long it was built to last, and how well starfleet keeps up on upgrades, would still be a top of the line class in 2409. that goes for anything from the 2360s and 2370s
I don't doubt that the Galaxy is strong and it is but however there is tougher ships that is made for war not saying it can't handle itself cause it can don't get me wrong. I'm just saying there is better ships now like the Ody.
what???? internal space 100% modular means something i think...
so 80 years late of learn to made a excelcior starfleet forgot how to made ship and made worng way with the galaxy ?????
weaker??? starfleet will send the weaker ship to the neutral zone and long range mision without suport???? also has yuo see DS9 galaxy IS the core of the fleet and they keep goin when any other ship is erased from sky , including the excelcior....
look the excelcior get the special treatment before was lunch in the game so outmatch the galaxy (completely wrong concept beacuse in a single chapter of DS9 a refited excelcior survive the most loved ship for dev team "defiant" by the way this combat was not to destroy each other was for disable the other ship thats why the excelcior survive the encounter) by the way is no necesary to starfleet to engage another starfleet ship they have security code to acces remotly access the computter core of any starfleet ship and shootdown all system without the need of combat.
I don't want the Galaxy class to be the most powerful ship in the game. I just want it tweaked - either in bridge officer layout or in updated engineer powers so she's useful. I'll repeat myself, a universal ensign and a single moved console would make her competitive and useful in the dps heavy game we're playing.
As for ship's age and popularity - you can bet everything you have that if a T5 constitution was released with the Galaxy class's turn rate, officer stations, and console load out that there would be a thread just as big with people wanting her upgraded so they could have fun with their favorite ship - just as we are.
Nope. But admittedly, I am curious to see how strong you guys convictions are about the GCS. If you can get some changes done through CBS, then congratulations, job well done. Even if you don't get the changes, at least you TRIED.
However, if not a single one of you will follow up on this, and instead merely continue a clearly losing strategy, it will show that in a paradoxical way, that many of you are actually happy in your whining and misery.
Technically Starfleet doesn't make warships. Defiant maybe close though it was made primary as a cost effective ship for fighting the borg and a scout was it not. Quick and easy to replace from what I have read while small and fast enough to evade other larger ships. It maybe the closest thing to a warship that Starfleet made. Odyssey also not a warship its an explorer just like the Galaxy. The sovereign most likely is a replacement for the work horse of the federation excelsior class. Not to say that these ships aint able to handle a fight but none where made just for a battleship or warship.
The Galaxy has a pretty tough hull seeing as it could hull tank three bug ships all at once. The ship was made to be modular and refitted. Meaning that at anytime most of the saucer could have whatever was needed added to the ship for whatever mission they had need of her to do. It was meant to be upgraded as someone else stated every 20 years and it would be in the process or just had its second refitting. Its younger then both the Excelsior and the Ambassador so it should be more then capable of out performing both of those ships. Has more storage for torpedo's and bigger phaser stripes then both the older ships. Took out Galors in the Dominion war pretty well which is not reflected in this game at all.
The ship is nowhere near ready for a rocking chair and retirement. Honestly I understand why we GCS ppl are fighting for an upgrade but have no clue why some ppl clearly don't seem to want or think it deserves any fix whatsoever.
Then I'm confused. If you guys knew that CBS already turned this down, why are you always raging at Cryptic and their developers instead of CBS?
It's no wonder that your cause is going nowhere. You expect Cryptic to do something that you guys won't try to do for yourselves? Really? If what you say it true, then you guys truly are wasting your time on this forum if you expect Cryptic to violate their directive and licensing agreement from CBS regarding this matter.
Based on what you said, the title of this thread should REALLY be "What is your beef with the Galaxy CBS?"