As to the content poll - lets be fair. TNG seasons 1-5 threats were Romulans (allies now with homeworld destroyed), Borg (you know - when they were scary and awesome), the Ferengi (before they became over ambitious barkeeps), and the 'villian if the week'.
Seasons six and seven were internal conflict, the maquis, and warp speed speedlimits.
But on the positive side, just about every "villain of the week" could be steamrolled by a T2 Connie' if using enough guile. I mean most of them were might as well have been "pre-warp".
Voyager won because it has seventy THOUSAND light years of new content possible. Kazon, Vidians, Krennin, Psycho Ocampa, Borg controlled space, the Malon... Its ripe territory for missions and unknown baddies. I would much rather fight Voth then Sheliak.
Just because I think Voyager enemies would be more fun, it doesn't mean I wouldn't rather face them in a shiny upgraded Galaxy with some actual firepower.
It never really helped that the vast majority of the "villians" in TNG, such as the Sheliak, had zero development. They were supposedly so powerful, yet we saw nothing to really suggest it.
^^^^
Not when it's the same 15 or so people posting the exact same things over and over ad nauseum. Of late I'd say yreodred and dontdrunkimshoot lead the reposting charge on this particular thread.
On one point of view, yes, there are others with different ideas on how to approach an improvement of the ship.
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.
Question, what are you categorizing "improved in some way"? There have been different schools of thought on it, but it seems only some ideas seem to be "considered for improvement".
Really, I've guess that you're never played "Birth of The Federation" where the most two powerful ships were the Sovereign and the Defiant. As a matter of fact, you needed an Advanced Shipyard to even build those ships. You DIDN"T need one for the GCS."
Actually, the two most powerful Fed' ships in BoTF were the Defiant and the Constellation. I couldn't believe how much Constellations ran roughshot over ships compared the the Sovy', Galaxy, Galaxy-X. I didn't even bother to build to many "Battleships" and "dreadnaughts."
It kind of reminds me of a Robotech site I used to be on. There was this guy that insisted to pit a modern aircraft against a Valkyrie, no matter what someone suggested for an aircraft and its use there was some full paged essay on the thirty ways the Valk' would beat the plane. I got tired of looking at it and typed "B-2/ TE-416 nuclear armed Tomahawk at the airbase."
Probably been asked in 4k posts but I am not delving into that maelstrom to find out. In the episode"best of both worlds" where riker separates the Ent D and the saucer section fires it's phaser array much like cannons, why can't the Galaxy Class do that kind of firing patter with it's array?
It could be a type of array only found on the galaxy[tier 5] or a module, but why not give it a rapid fire style phaser attack that can do a quick burst fire that even has a higher damage than cannons, but can't be used that often, like a 5 minute cool down.
but for that 10 seconds, better have some shields!
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
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.
Yes, I remember being quite inflamed about the comparison between the two, and other similar statements.
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.
There is a clear difference between not wanting/ or thinking it deserves a fix and disagreeing with what passed for the "mainstream" as to how that fix should be done.
cbs isn't micromanaging cryptic to the point were its dictating exact station setups. they would only protest if something truly outlandish was proposed, like the defiant having all sci stations or something. luckily they know cryptic wont attempt something silly like that. talking to cbs about it would be pointless, this is cryptic's jurisdiction.
unless they were familiar with the game, and played it, the guy you would get a hold of at cbs would have absolutely no idea what 'it has to many eng station powers' would even mean, you would just come off as a very very strange little nerd.
I would love to hear that phone call though, it would be on the level of the 911 call about McDonalds not having enough Chicken MCNuggets for the "Wait......wuh?" factor.
Still don't understand why the G-X only gets 2 though I'm hoping real soon they either release the fleet version or atleast one of the Devs talks about what they decided as I think it was Geko who said they are revamping the G-X. Hopefully they are doing some dramatic changes to actually make only having 2 of the 4 commands justified.
The Gal-x should have 3 Tac' consoles AND the all 4 commands.
I would love to hear that phone call though, it would be on the level of the 911 call about McDonalds not having enough Chicken MCNuggets for the "Wait......wuh?" factor.
"Whats a 'BoFF' again?"
"Who is this Connie you keep talking about?"
"EPTSE whaaaaaaat?"
lol, exactly. trolloron beam went a little overboard there, proboly the best example to date showing he is nothing but a troll that is more mad then everyone who would like the galaxy class improved combined. to react like that to the very obvious being pointed out about who is actually in the position to change anything was almost as funny as it was sad.
Over 4,000 posts, nay, 2k-3k posts should've already have gotten the dev's sick of seeing this. As far as people saying arguing "worth/worthlessness" goes, it really depends on which side of the discussion a person is. There are plenty that think its a fine ship, just not as fine as some of the people argue it is. Some of those same people also understand that making every ship a tactical-centric ship (LTCMDR tac boff) also is a weak model for a game. Some of us would like to see more work put into the areas that the Explorer has an advantage, engineer boff powers and consoles, but have been labeled "naysayers" because its not in line with other peoples opinions.
look, i dont want to get in some pvp vs pve fight here, but you really cant understand how bad the galaxy class is in practice until you try to be competitive with it in pvp. there is a serious disconnect here of opinions of people who only pve, and of course have no trouble completing any pve with it easily, and me and well maybe no one else in this thread that do nearly nothing but pvp that really see how bad it is there.
i could do all the story pve content in a small craft. maybe not a type 8, but one of the better small craft. it wouldn't be fun, but it would be possible. using the reasoning that you can complete the pve in the galaxy R is no benchmark of anything.
lets just say you cant complete ANY pvp content with a shuttle, you would die in a second. the sides of the discussion are not equal, and no one is capable of accepting that just maybe their opinion of the ship might be partly based in ignorance.
May I step in on this one? Thanks in advance. I would:
1) Boost the effect of crew size on skills such as:
-Tactical Team
-Engineer Team
-Science Team
i suppose this wouldn't be to bad. bigger ships do need all the help they can get vs ships that have much better turn rates. but ship crews are not created equal, a galaxy has like 1000, wile the negvar has more then twice that. some ships have absolutely huge crews too. unless crew numbers were more balanced across big ships, there would be disproportionately better teams skills across big ships.
2) Make engineer boff skills more potent, including (bot not limited to), especially higher ranked:
- Aceton Beam
- DEM
- RSP
beter RSP? dude no, hell no. you can practically have RSP3 on at all times thanks to doffs and AtB, the duration is already way to long on that. this is the problem with boosting eng skills, EVERY ship has access to them, you end up boosting the good ships more by buffing eng powers. what happened when all cruisers got commands? there was no change in the cruiser hierarchy. cruisers just got slightly better vs sci ships and escorts. the same thing will happen, or worse, when you just focus on improving eng skills.
and you dont have to be a pvper to know right now how powerful cruisers are currently. nothing is better at blowing through stfs and anything else with the highest DPS levels then cruisers currently. to say nothing of the huge impact they are having in pvp. the last thing the game needs right now is an across the board buff to cruisers.
sure aceton beam sucks, at least at LTC level, if it were at ens level starting it would be sorta useful though. this is something that could actually help the galaxy in particular.
DEM is hugely powerful currently. i can remove a quarter to a half of a cruisers hull in 10 seconds when i have DEM+FAW/CRF on these days. making DEM more powerful would ruin pvp, and make pve even more easy.
3)Engineer Team also give a shield health buff (Yreo's idea)
haveing ET doing what ST does to is not a good idea. i think ET should also boost the skill points for hull and shield repair though for 10 seconds, so other heals work better. TT boosts weapons training to boost damage a bit, so why not. ST should boost offensive sci skill tree things like particle gens and flow caps
4) Reduce power drain of beam weapons on cruisers
(I know that the cruiser commands do all drain, but hitting the button every five seconds? Yick)
the cruiser commands are passive. you activate it and its just on indefinitely, until you change passives. my power levels currently dont go below 100 on my 8 beam boat anymore, and with season 8 there will be warp cores that reduce power drain even more. 2 part borg console set has a proc that goes off every 0 to 7 seconds that removes power drain, and that DEM doff removes it as well for 8 seconds. not to mention overcaping. power drain is completely negated these days.
5) Make Generic Weapon Buff Consoles (Beam, Cannon, Torps', and Mines) Engineering consoles ( Cruisers and Sci' ships can make good use of this)
that would remove all other eng consoles from consideration. the bug ship has 5 tac consoles and 4 eng consoles, whats really going to benefit from that. as someone who railed endlessly against more cruisers having LTC tacs, even though in my proposed galaxy runing no tac at all would be the best way to use that ship, supporting something like this is 10 times worse then having an optional LTC on a galaxy would ever be, if you have a problem with everything being made more tac heavy.
here's the current status of cruisers in pvp and pve:
they are the best at completing all content. doing things to improve them as a whole would be reckless at this point.
the only anomaly to be found is the galaxy R, being the worst one in practice by a fair amount. there is no worst escort or sci ship, there should be no worst cruiser. and the galaxy in particular shouldn't be the worst, but above average. i would settle for it being simply competitive though.
Lets say for arguments sake, they make it possible to buy universal stations on their ships. How many Galaxy's get sold directly because of it? I'd argue very few, the ones who would use the Galaxy with uni-stations most likely already own it, in either Gal-R, Fleet, and Gal-X config's. I really don't see a spike in ship sales coming from it because most would just upgrade what they already have.[/QUOTE]
Kinda missed what I was saying. Not giving it universal Boff slots. Giving it the option to use any Bo and console slotting from another ship you own. Hence why you would still have a chance for sales as ppl would still buy the better or more useful to them Bo and console slots but they actually be using the ship they like instead. Also to have the option to have three different GCS with those different setups they have 3 fleet GCS most likely. So you got 3 Fleet ship modules they have to pay for plus up to three other ships whose Bo and Console slotting they using so they have bought those ships too.
The Refit adds an Ensign Science. However we know in the Fleet version the Ensign is another Engineer. So why not just match the Refit Version....like especially if your like me and bought it at Captain.
Another Example....
Long Range Science Vessel http://sto.gamepedia.com/Intrepid
Adds an Ensign Engineering that at Fleet version is now another Science.
Are the Tier 4 Brdige refit layouts better? If so why not just use them. Viola!
they never was an ensign science added to the tier 5 version in comparaison to the tier 4.
and the tier 4 althought is as "good"as the tier 5 version considering bo layout, it also have less hull, less shield, 0.20 of inertia instead of 0.25, 1 weapons slot less in the back and 1 less console slot.
so basically, you got the same in less good.
so, again, what are you talking about? can you clarified?
that would remove all other eng consoles from consideration. the bug ship has 5 tac consoles and 4 eng consoles, whats really going to benefit from that. as someone who railed endlessly against more cruisers having LTC tacs, even though in my proposed galaxy runing no tac at all would be the best way to use that ship, supporting something like this is 10 times worse then having an optional LTC on a galaxy would ever be, if you have a problem with everything being made more tac heavy.
i already explain that before and more or less what you said before when starboardnacelle comme with this proposal, and said it is not a good idea.
but i was told i just wanted to be argumentative or something like that.
that the problem when you speak about this with people that play pve seriously and do pvp sometime for fun with friends.
they just can't even begun to imagine all the repercussions that the changes they propose would bring. and that normal, pve content accustom them to not care about the rest.
the npc won't go to the exchange to buy mk12 tact console to fit there engi slot and use there auxtobatfawrefractingtetryonmariondem build on them
and you dont have to be a pvper to know right now how powerful cruisers are currently. nothing is better at blowing through stfs and anything else with the highest DPS levels then cruisers currently. to say nothing of the huge impact they are having in pvp. the last thing the game needs right now is an across the board buff to cruisers.
I highlighted the areas of confusion to me. You think that cruisers are the best ships for speeding through stfs in? Not escorts?
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
I highlighted the areas of confusion to me. You think that cruisers are the best ships for speeding through stfs in? Not escorts?
yep. 5 players with 8 beam/7beam+cutting beam, AtB, DEM, FAW tac cruisers/scimitar annihilate stfs the fastest by far. there has been enough power creep, and overcaping, and drain resist that thats what creates the highest DPS.
a big part of it is FAW, if there is more then 2 targets in range, fires 2 different beams per 'shot'. and FAW causes an array to shoot 5 shots, so each array is actually fireing 10 beams when ever FAW is on.
so what would be your solution to make this ship better?
1. Address the problems with engineering abilities in space venues. Engineering is awesome on ground maps, but typically sucks in space. There's really only two or three engineering abilities that are exceptionally useful in space-based combat. Making engineering suck less in space venues would go a long way toward helping sort out the issues with the Galaxy class.
2. Universal bridge officer stations for the Galaxy-R. Lieutenant and/or ensign universals would offer flexibility that the vessel currently lacks. A lieutenant commander universal slot would be overkill in my opinion.
3. Ditch the saucer separation console on the Galaxy-R for something useful. The ability should be innate for the standard Galaxy offerings, anyway. Like transwarp is on the Excelsior retrofit. And I don't believe the Galaxy-X needs saucer separation at all, by the way. It just doesn't fit in with the "flavor" of the ship, from my POV. They need to focus on the problems with the phaser lance instead (like inherent accuracy problems).
4. Shared cool downs need to be addressed or adjusted. One example is the shared cool downs for Tactical Team, Science Team, and Engineering Team, which I find to be ridiculous from a game play standpoint. And completely unnecessary.
Those are just a few I can think of right off of the top of my head. Other than these issues, I have no real gripe with the Galaxy in-game. It's still a very usable ship for those who enjoy it, even in endgame. But these polishes would make it an excellent choice (as far as cruisers go).
1. Address the problems with engineering abilities in space venues. Engineering is awesome on ground maps, but typically sucks in space. There's really only two or three engineering abilities that are exceptionally useful in space-based combat. Making engineering suck less in space venues would go a long way toward helping sort out the issues with the Galaxy class.
2. Universal bridge officer stations for the Galaxy-R. Lieutenant and/or ensign universals would offer flexibility that the vessel currently lacks. A lieutenant commander universal slot would be overkill in my opinion.
3. Ditch the saucer separation console on the Galaxy-R for something useful. The ability should be innate for the standard Galaxy offerings, anyway. Like transwarp is on the Excelsior retrofit. And I don't believe the Galaxy-X needs saucer separation at all, by the way. It just doesn't fit in with the "flavor" of the ship, from my POV. They need to focus on the problems with the phaser lance instead (like inherent accuracy problems).
4. Shared cool downs need to be addressed or adjusted. One example is the shared cool downs for Tactical Team, Science Team, and Engineering Team, which I find to be ridiculous from a game play standpoint. And completely unnecessary.
Those are just a few I can think of right off of the top of my head. Other than these issues, I have no real gripe with the Galaxy in-game. It's still a very usable ship for those who enjoy it, even in endgame. But these polishes would make it an excellent choice (as far as cruisers go).
I completely agree with this post! *squeal of approval*
^ 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
I highlighted the areas of confusion to me. You think that cruisers are the best ships for speeding through stfs in? Not escorts?
yes, cruiser, with auxtobat faw build.
some elite pve guys have use the power creep to make the beam the best dps weapons in the game, but to do that you will have to have a double faw build.
it been 1 month now that pvp pug been rolfstomp by premade pve cruiser faw.
it simple, they overcapped weapons power with gear and bo power, EPTW, leech console, AMP warpcore, auxtobat, dem marion and kcb 2piece proc.
that way there beam alway fire at 125 weapons powers.
doff to reduce attack pattern cooldown and romulan for crit, crit console if they got enought console slot left, and 4 or 5 tact console cruisers.
there builds are squishy, but who care? everything is melt in less than 3 secondes.
many in my fleet do it, 15k average in a regent ( this player is not very good ), 25k average in a scimitar.
there is a channel to join them, they will test you first, there the 5k channel, the 10k and then the 20k.
yes, cruiser, with auxtobat faw build.
some elite pve guys have use the power creep to make the beam the best dps weapons in the game, but to do that you will have to have a double faw build.
it been 1 month now that pvp pug been rolfstomp by premade pve cruiser faw.
it simple, they overcapped weapons power with gear and bo power, EPTW, leech console, AMP warpcore, auxtobat, dem marion and kcb 2piece proc.
that way there beam alway fire at 125 weapons powers.
doff to reduce attack pattern cooldown and romulan for crit, crit console if they got enought console slot left, and 4 or 5 tact console cruisers.
there builds are squishy, but who care? everything is melt in less than 3 secondes.
many in my fleet do it, 15k average in a regent ( this player is not very good ), 25k average in a scimitar.
there is a channel to join them, they will test you first, there the 5k channel, the 10k and then the 20k.
Though those builds only work because the doff is obviously broken. Also don't the parsers just spike high damage because it's split between targets?
^ 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
it simple, they overcapped weapons power with gear and bo power, EPTW, leech console, AMP warpcore, auxtobat, dem marion and kcb 2piece proc.
that way there beam alway fire at 125 weapons powers.
While it's true beam arrays are over the top in term of sustained damage right now, overcap doesn't work like most thing and the only way to stay at 125 power is an omega amp proc (it procs a lot).
You can do tests, even at 200 weapon power you will always see a power drop to 115 using only 2 beams (though you will generate x amount of power every .5 s during the rotation depending on how high your power transfer rate is).
About the galaxy i still think it needs the engineering ensign or lieutenant moved to universal.
Just don't compare the ship to the excelsior which is a lockbox level ship (8 turn 40 inertia superb boff layout and no drawback).
Just don't compare the ship to the excelsior which is a lockbox level ship (8 turn 40 inertia superb boff layout and no drawback).
Both are C-Store ships.
Both should be on par with other T5 ships and at least equal useable and fun to fly. The GCS is neither.
"...'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
Comments
Wasn't in it.
But on the positive side, just about every "villain of the week" could be steamrolled by a T2 Connie' if using enough guile. I mean most of them were might as well have been "pre-warp".
It never really helped that the vast majority of the "villians" in TNG, such as the Sheliak, had zero development. They were supposedly so powerful, yet we saw nothing to really suggest it.
On one point of view, yes, there are others with different ideas on how to approach an improvement of the ship.
Question, what are you categorizing "improved in some way"? There have been different schools of thought on it, but it seems only some ideas seem to be "considered for improvement".
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
May I step in on this one? Thanks in advance. I would:
1) Boost the effect of crew size on skills such as:
-Tactical Team
-Engineer Team
-Science Team
2) Make engineer boff skills more potent, including (bot not limited to), especially higher ranked:
- Aceton Beam
- DEM
- RSP
3)Engineer Team also give a shield health buff (Yreo's idea)
4) Reduce power drain of beam weapons on cruisers
(I know that the cruiser commands do all drain, but hitting the button every five seconds? Yick)
5) Make Generic Weapon Buff Consoles (Beam, Cannon, Torps', and Mines) Engineering consoles ( Cruisers and Sci' ships can make good use of this)
Yes, I remember being quite inflamed about the comparison between the two, and other similar statements.
There is a clear difference between not wanting/ or thinking it deserves a fix and disagreeing with what passed for the "mainstream" as to how that fix should be done.
I would love to hear that phone call though, it would be on the level of the 911 call about McDonalds not having enough Chicken MCNuggets for the "Wait......wuh?" factor.
"Whats a 'BoFF' again?"
"Who is this Connie you keep talking about?"
"EPTSE whaaaaaaat?"
The Gal-x should have 3 Tac' consoles AND the all 4 commands.
I dunno, kinda looks like shoe stretcher to me:
http://www.savontv.com/wooden-shoe-stretcher.html
lol, exactly. trolloron beam went a little overboard there, proboly the best example to date showing he is nothing but a troll that is more mad then everyone who would like the galaxy class improved combined. to react like that to the very obvious being pointed out about who is actually in the position to change anything was almost as funny as it was sad.
look, i dont want to get in some pvp vs pve fight here, but you really cant understand how bad the galaxy class is in practice until you try to be competitive with it in pvp. there is a serious disconnect here of opinions of people who only pve, and of course have no trouble completing any pve with it easily, and me and well maybe no one else in this thread that do nearly nothing but pvp that really see how bad it is there.
i could do all the story pve content in a small craft. maybe not a type 8, but one of the better small craft. it wouldn't be fun, but it would be possible. using the reasoning that you can complete the pve in the galaxy R is no benchmark of anything.
lets just say you cant complete ANY pvp content with a shuttle, you would die in a second. the sides of the discussion are not equal, and no one is capable of accepting that just maybe their opinion of the ship might be partly based in ignorance.
i suppose this wouldn't be to bad. bigger ships do need all the help they can get vs ships that have much better turn rates. but ship crews are not created equal, a galaxy has like 1000, wile the negvar has more then twice that. some ships have absolutely huge crews too. unless crew numbers were more balanced across big ships, there would be disproportionately better teams skills across big ships.
beter RSP? dude no, hell no. you can practically have RSP3 on at all times thanks to doffs and AtB, the duration is already way to long on that. this is the problem with boosting eng skills, EVERY ship has access to them, you end up boosting the good ships more by buffing eng powers. what happened when all cruisers got commands? there was no change in the cruiser hierarchy. cruisers just got slightly better vs sci ships and escorts. the same thing will happen, or worse, when you just focus on improving eng skills.
and you dont have to be a pvper to know right now how powerful cruisers are currently. nothing is better at blowing through stfs and anything else with the highest DPS levels then cruisers currently. to say nothing of the huge impact they are having in pvp. the last thing the game needs right now is an across the board buff to cruisers.
sure aceton beam sucks, at least at LTC level, if it were at ens level starting it would be sorta useful though. this is something that could actually help the galaxy in particular.
DEM is hugely powerful currently. i can remove a quarter to a half of a cruisers hull in 10 seconds when i have DEM+FAW/CRF on these days. making DEM more powerful would ruin pvp, and make pve even more easy.
haveing ET doing what ST does to is not a good idea. i think ET should also boost the skill points for hull and shield repair though for 10 seconds, so other heals work better. TT boosts weapons training to boost damage a bit, so why not. ST should boost offensive sci skill tree things like particle gens and flow caps
the cruiser commands are passive. you activate it and its just on indefinitely, until you change passives. my power levels currently dont go below 100 on my 8 beam boat anymore, and with season 8 there will be warp cores that reduce power drain even more. 2 part borg console set has a proc that goes off every 0 to 7 seconds that removes power drain, and that DEM doff removes it as well for 8 seconds. not to mention overcaping. power drain is completely negated these days.
that would remove all other eng consoles from consideration. the bug ship has 5 tac consoles and 4 eng consoles, whats really going to benefit from that. as someone who railed endlessly against more cruisers having LTC tacs, even though in my proposed galaxy runing no tac at all would be the best way to use that ship, supporting something like this is 10 times worse then having an optional LTC on a galaxy would ever be, if you have a problem with everything being made more tac heavy.
they are the best at completing all content. doing things to improve them as a whole would be reckless at this point.
the only anomaly to be found is the galaxy R, being the worst one in practice by a fair amount. there is no worst escort or sci ship, there should be no worst cruiser. and the galaxy in particular shouldn't be the worst, but above average. i would settle for it being simply competitive though.
Kinda missed what I was saying. Not giving it universal Boff slots. Giving it the option to use any Bo and console slotting from another ship you own. Hence why you would still have a chance for sales as ppl would still buy the better or more useful to them Bo and console slots but they actually be using the ship they like instead. Also to have the option to have three different GCS with those different setups they have 3 fleet GCS most likely. So you got 3 Fleet ship modules they have to pay for plus up to three other ships whose Bo and Console slotting they using so they have bought those ships too.
sorry, i don't anderstand what you saying.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Exploration_Cruiser<----this is a tier 4 ship
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Exploration_Cruiser_Retrofit<--- this is the tier 5 version
the one that we are talking about in this thread
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Exploration_Cruiser_Retrofit<--- and this is the fleet version
they never was an ensign science added to the tier 5 version in comparaison to the tier 4.
and the tier 4 althought is as "good"as the tier 5 version considering bo layout, it also have less hull, less shield, 0.20 of inertia instead of 0.25, 1 weapons slot less in the back and 1 less console slot.
so basically, you got the same in less good.
so, again, what are you talking about? can you clarified?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
i already explain that before and more or less what you said before when starboardnacelle comme with this proposal, and said it is not a good idea.
but i was told i just wanted to be argumentative or something like that.
that the problem when you speak about this with people that play pve seriously and do pvp sometime for fun with friends.
they just can't even begun to imagine all the repercussions that the changes they propose would bring. and that normal, pve content accustom them to not care about the rest.
the npc won't go to the exchange to buy mk12 tact console to fit there engi slot and use there auxtobatfawrefractingtetryonmariondem build on them
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I highlighted the areas of confusion to me. You think that cruisers are the best ships for speeding through stfs in? Not escorts?
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
yep. 5 players with 8 beam/7beam+cutting beam, AtB, DEM, FAW tac cruisers/scimitar annihilate stfs the fastest by far. there has been enough power creep, and overcaping, and drain resist that thats what creates the highest DPS.
a big part of it is FAW, if there is more then 2 targets in range, fires 2 different beams per 'shot'. and FAW causes an array to shoot 5 shots, so each array is actually fireing 10 beams when ever FAW is on.
1. Address the problems with engineering abilities in space venues. Engineering is awesome on ground maps, but typically sucks in space. There's really only two or three engineering abilities that are exceptionally useful in space-based combat. Making engineering suck less in space venues would go a long way toward helping sort out the issues with the Galaxy class.
2. Universal bridge officer stations for the Galaxy-R. Lieutenant and/or ensign universals would offer flexibility that the vessel currently lacks. A lieutenant commander universal slot would be overkill in my opinion.
3. Ditch the saucer separation console on the Galaxy-R for something useful. The ability should be innate for the standard Galaxy offerings, anyway. Like transwarp is on the Excelsior retrofit. And I don't believe the Galaxy-X needs saucer separation at all, by the way. It just doesn't fit in with the "flavor" of the ship, from my POV. They need to focus on the problems with the phaser lance instead (like inherent accuracy problems).
4. Shared cool downs need to be addressed or adjusted. One example is the shared cool downs for Tactical Team, Science Team, and Engineering Team, which I find to be ridiculous from a game play standpoint. And completely unnecessary.
Those are just a few I can think of right off of the top of my head. Other than these issues, I have no real gripe with the Galaxy in-game. It's still a very usable ship for those who enjoy it, even in endgame. But these polishes would make it an excellent choice (as far as cruisers go).
I completely agree with this post! *squeal of approval*
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
yes, cruiser, with auxtobat faw build.
some elite pve guys have use the power creep to make the beam the best dps weapons in the game, but to do that you will have to have a double faw build.
it been 1 month now that pvp pug been rolfstomp by premade pve cruiser faw.
it simple, they overcapped weapons power with gear and bo power, EPTW, leech console, AMP warpcore, auxtobat, dem marion and kcb 2piece proc.
that way there beam alway fire at 125 weapons powers.
doff to reduce attack pattern cooldown and romulan for crit, crit console if they got enought console slot left, and 4 or 5 tact console cruisers.
there builds are squishy, but who care? everything is melt in less than 3 secondes.
many in my fleet do it, 15k average in a regent ( this player is not very good ), 25k average in a scimitar.
there is a channel to join them, they will test you first, there the 5k channel, the 10k and then the 20k.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Though those builds only work because the doff is obviously broken. Also don't the parsers just spike high damage because it's split between targets?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
While it's true beam arrays are over the top in term of sustained damage right now, overcap doesn't work like most thing and the only way to stay at 125 power is an omega amp proc (it procs a lot).
You can do tests, even at 200 weapon power you will always see a power drop to 115 using only 2 beams (though you will generate x amount of power every .5 s during the rotation depending on how high your power transfer rate is).
About the galaxy i still think it needs the engineering ensign or lieutenant moved to universal.
Just don't compare the ship to the excelsior which is a lockbox level ship (8 turn 40 inertia superb boff layout and no drawback).
Both should be on par with other T5 ships and at least equal useable and fun to fly. The GCS is neither.