Obviously you don't PVP much in a Galaxy or you would be embarressed or raging mad at how badly the setup is. I would even Challenge you myself I have to prove you wrong, but if you accept, you have to do it quickly because soon I will not have access to the forums one I get to China next week.
Apparently, You do not know what you are saying. you only do 1 on1 pvp or pug pvp. The galaxy R nor the Galaxy X aint for pvp pugs or 1 or 1 pvp.
Galaxy R and galaxy x tests the capability of player to build around the ship and know its role.
I remember players complaining Galaxy X many years back upto the point the Hakashin put how to play a Galaxy X, as an alpha striker. The same thing can be said of a Galaxy R. Dont know how to build, dont know how to play it, you will utterly fail.
They shouldn't have made the Galaxy a ship just to cater to one carreer. Every escort works just as powerful wether the captain is Tac, ENG, or Sci. it would be only fair for the cruisers work as well, no matter the career type.
Like I always say, the USS Enterprise D has 3 Tac command bridge officers to one Eng and no sci.
Ships shouldn't have a special carreers, only the Captains have carreers.
the ent-D did have a sci LT commander data he was the chief science officer and second officer (third in command) he wore gold because of his dual role as chief of operations. and the costume department thought brent spiner in the white make up looked better in gold then blue
actually that is another thing they should have slit career boffs. boffs that can be fitted in to both careers and have access to both powers
say with data as an example he counts as a engineer and a science and would be able to be placed as a sci or eng boff and have access to both eng and sci powers so on a gal-r you could have grav well and aux2stif
I think we all have to remember that the Galaxy class starships were developed in the 2250s. STO takes place nearly 60 years later. It was powerful yes, and was likely one of the most powerful designs of the mid 24th century. However, 60 years of subsequent development likely means it was inevitably going to be rendered obsolete.
As an analogy, could a newly made copy of the 60s era Kitty Hawk Class carrier defeat say the USS George HW Bush? With an expert crew, possibly. But given relatively equal crews and tactics, the Kitty Hawk inevitably has the disadvantage as its design, provided no major changes were made, includes deficiencies that were later corrected in subsequent classes like the Nimitz.
Can the 1960s cruiser USS Belknap dominate a modern Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer?
sure it could
refit it with 2013 class weapons the burke has what 1990 weaponry ?
Its not the hull its what is inside the hull that counts
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
I remember players complaining Galaxy X many years back upto the point the Hakashin put how to play a Galaxy X, as an alpha striker. The same thing can be said of a Galaxy R. Dont know how to build, dont know how to play it, you will utterly fail.
lol @ Gal-R being an alpha striker.
Really not getting why some people are so resistant to allowing the Galaxies to have some flexibility via universal stations and console slots.
The problems with the Galaxy's bridge officer stations are well known. Anyone that knows anything about the mechanics of the game can see that. Three ensign level engineering stations just don't work with the skills we currently have available. Your choices are the conflicting cool downs of EPtX or ET and TT (which is a staple of any end game build). As for fundamentally changing all engineering skills. Do you really have the confidence in the devs ability to rework all engineering skills? They can't even fix Fire at will!
I'm really fed up with people claiming this ship is the ultimate tank and/or healer. The Galaxy is neither of these things. Nearly all the Federation cruisers are damage sponges, all are quite tanky, including the much more offensive oriented cruisers. That's the main issue. I can jump in a Fleet Assault Cruiser, or Fleet Avenger and "tank" just as much damage as a Fleet Galaxy and then pump out double the dps. Or I can use the Fleet Support Cruiser or Odyssey and be a better support/healer/tank then the Galaxy. The Galaxy is just not good at anything. It's not a good damage dealer and it's not a good support ship either. It simply fails at everything. This Galaxy is the worst cruiser in the game.
But yes the first part is what needs to be changed and improved not changing a ship.
That last part I'm fed up with people claiming that tact cruiser can out tank, which really isn't the case... Galaxy and oddy can out tank tact focused cruisers on fed side at least... The only things that can some times out tank me are recluse, and some of the other lock box ships. Most of them are OP anyways.
They shouldn't have made the Galaxy a ship just to cater to one carreer. Every escort works just as powerful wether the captain is Tac, ENG, or Sci. it would be only fair for the cruisers work as well, no matter the career type.
Like I always say, the USS Enterprise D has 3 Tac command bridge officers to one Eng and no sci.
Ships shouldn't have a special carreers, only the Captains have carreers.
That bull escorts aren't just as powerful with engi captians... Alpha strike and subnuc are too powerful in a escort to fly as engineering ever... Also you can still tank with out tact team in galaxy in tact or sci. Just not as well... Engi captians are better off in cruisers or science vessels.
Also I should note your build needs alot of work RSP past teir 1 is pointless.. Aux to battery will also hurt your healing, and torpedo spread doesn't do much for cruiser as fire at will would. Two weapon power consoles too o.O your already using aux to battery there is no need for them replace with neutrinos you'll get a better tank. Never mix teams remove the other two teams if you plan on using tact team.
Its really no wonder from the build you've shown how you can't tank in your tact. I would also respec your skills if you plan on going offensive pvp galaxy. Make sure to max defense and accuracy, you don't need max armor either. Unless your going full tank 3-6 in armor is fine.
Also picard was more science then he was tact. The red color on his uniform was just becuase he is the captian same with riker, though he was probably tact. Worf was security, and Tasha yar had yellow uniform before him.
Honestly the show has no baring on the BOFFS in game, becuase if they were most would be universal.
That last part I'm fed up with people claiming that tact cruiser can out tank, which really isn't the case... Galaxy and oddy can out tank tact focused cruisers on fed side at least...
...le sigh :rolleyes:
Tactical officers, the most squishy career since they don't have access to any captain skills that are defensive in nature, can tank all day in any of the more tactical oriented cruisers. As for a pure support ships you are correct the Odyssey is a good choice, but the Galaxy is not. The Odyssey and Ambassador would be the ships to pick if you want to absorb damage and/or heal.
The Galaxy sucks at everything. It's terrible as an offensive cruiser because it has limited tac officer stations and the lowest number of tactical console slots of any fedship, giving it the worst damage of all the cruisers, tied only with the Fleet Star Cruiser. And it also sucks as a support cruiser, again because of it's bridge officer layout, which lacks flexibility (no universals) and has limited science stations with only an Lt sci. The three ensign level engineering stations exasperate the problem and offer nothing of any consequence in any role offensive or defensive.
Just a quick point, all those who say that the Galaxy Class is old in the world of STO, according to the TNG Technical Manual the Galaxy Class has a Design Life of approx. 100 years with the potential for 5 major shipwide system swapouts and upgrades every 20 years. If we go by the Enterprise D which was built in 2360's then the Galaxy Class isn't even half way through it's design life yet.
The Continuing Voyages of Bridge Commander Captain Lee Drake - USS Sovereign Captain Draxon - IKS RanKuf Commander Torenn - IRW Soryak Captain Gregory MacCray - USS Geronimo
Its not just the Galaxy class. I'd like a relevant Intrepid, Galaxy, Soverign. Maybe Starfleet stopped the practice of refitting...
There are only a handful of, Cryptic Trek ships, that i can actually look at without feeling insulted. The Regent is one of them, and if anything, that should have been the new Enterprise.
It seems, there may be a disconnect between the people who make the decision, and the idea that these original ships have nostalgic value, and that they are pleasant to look at, because they are, pleasant to look at.
Then again. Flogging the same ships, over and over again, a refit every Season. That would annoy me. So im divided.
I know the are alot of people out there trying to turn the Galaxy ship into a science ship but you forget that Picard, and Riker were tactical officers, along with Worf, the best at tactical systems, all packed in one bridge. Only one Ops officer(Data), one engineer(Laforge), and no science officer. Doctor Crushe occasionally doubled as science officer when new lifeforms was discoverd. Voyager was the crew that had her captain with Science background, and not other tactical experience besides Tuvoc. The all explore Enterprise got it's behind kicked in all first 4 seasons until Archer got fed up with being cannon fodder and started arming the ship with top of the line weapons to ward off the aggresive alien cultures.
There was no show with all Engineers on board.
I would like her to be a science cruiser, yes. Quite similiar to her little sister, the Nebula but ultimately that is based on personal preference. Though your depiction of the crew is not correct. Picard most likely served in Command Division most of his career (he was flight controller on board of the Stargazer) you cannot place him in a "tactical" role. He had a very deep undersandiong of tactics but his most prominent abilities were his scientific interests and his diplomatic skills. And Will Riker was an Engineer prior to his command training. The Ent-D had Worf and Yar, sure, but Data, LaForge, Troi, Wesley and O'Brien they all would promote a Eng/Sci heavy layout, if that would in any way be relevant to the in-game incarnation of the ship
I don't think that Voy had no one with tactical finesse. The thing is in the time of "Enterprise" there was no Starfleet. It was just an united earth ship and was under the jurisdiction of the united earth space probing authority (or something like that, I forgot the name). It was supposedly in this time they discovered that space is hostile and in order to explore the unknown you had to defend yourself. That's why they got military (MACOS) in there. well, that and to glorify the US armed services post 9/11 But with the foundation of the Federation and Starfleet the memberworlds abandoned their militaries and their ressources were absorbed into Starfleet. Fromt his time forward, everyone serving on a Starfleet vessel had to recieve at least basic tactical training, even the botanists in science division. You still had Starfleet Tactical, though it was a strategic department not a specialization. The "tactical" branch in STO really shouldn't exist, it's just to please the trinity of DD/Tank/Mage. They should've placed all players into command division and let them design a character background during creation
Really not getting why some people are so resistant to allowing the Galaxies to have some flexibility via universal stations and console slots.
Well, at least in my opinion I'd argue with game mechanics. Universal stations above Lt grade are soething very powerful and reserved to the top of the line ships. The Galaxy R is here since season 2 in it's current configuration - retractively changing that ship in such a way seems out of the question, mechanically and from a loose in-game lore's standpoint.
^ 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
Its not just the Galaxy class. I'd like a relevant Intrepid, Galaxy, Soverign. Maybe Starfleet stopped the practice of refitting...
(...)
Did i mention the Regent is awesome?
The Regent IS the sovereigns refit. The Galaxy, Intrepid and Defiant have Refits as well: The Venture, the Bellerophon and the Sao Paolo. They all look quite nice and would be great, if only they would be available at T5. I'd vote for fleet versions of those. A Venture would feature more sci consoles and boff skills than the Galaxy, A Bellerophon is a bit more tactical focussed than a Intrepid and the Sao Paolo would get a engineer boost over the Defiant.
The ideas are already in-game. They just need to be made relevant in endgame.
^ 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
Tactical officers, the most squishy career since they don't have access to any captain skills that are defensive in nature, can tank all day in any of the more tactical oriented cruisers. As for a pure support ships you are correct the Odyssey is a good choice, but the Galaxy is not. The Odyssey and Ambassador would be the ships to pick if you want to absorb damage and/or heal.
The Galaxy sucks at everything. It's terrible as an offensive cruiser because it has limited tac officer stations and the lowest number of tactical console slots of any fedship, giving it the worst damage of all the cruisers, tied only with the Fleet Star Cruiser. And it also sucks as a support cruiser, again because of it's bridge officer layout, which lacks flexibility (no universals) and has limited science stations with only an Lt sci. The three ensign level engineering stations exasperate the problem and offer nothing of any consequence in any role offensive or defensive.
:rolleyes:This were i disagree even though I acknowledge the issues with ensign engineering. Having multiple emergency power to x. Can and has added to my galaxy and my ops oddy survivability which in pvp. Has kept me from not only dying but keeping others from dying as well.
In my oddy I choose engineering over science for that vary reason, I have more survivability with a engi in both my universal slot. Tact actually has several things that help survivability A. alpha strike can be used to add pressure, to keep others from engaging you longer then you feel you can take. B. going down fighting adds a bunch of resistance...
Sure they aren't as powerful a engi can get since they gain quite abit shield power. But you can compensate for that with the power sliders. The only other defensive tool is rotate shield frequency but that's only a small shield regen and a 10% shield damage resistance with a huge cooldown.
Any class can play any ship, but engi's as space class = tank, so who can be surprised when tact isn't able to pull off as much survival as a engi... When tact captain abilities are focused on burst dps... Science are focused on team support...
ho, thank for the lesson, i wouldn't have been able to figure it out without you:rolleyes:
so again, since you don't seem to anderstand, my point here is that the galaxy is so bad at avoiding damage that your survival time with a tact captain in this ship will be greatly reduced in comparison to any other ship with that same tact captain.
my point is that if you want to play this ship in a timeframe long enought to allow you to do what you have to do, you will be "force" to rely on engi power to survive.
this phenomena is more pronounce on this ship than any other in the game and pointing out directly to it imbalance stats.
If you don't want the galaxy class starship be around your playstyle, then why even think about changing the BOFF seating, as well console slots... I mean while a ensign universal should be there. Other then that the seating is fine. The only problems aren't with the ship, but engi boff abilities and perhaps engi consoles...
before making the so well known in this thread, stereotype conclusion that i want MOAR tact power for this ship, learn to known who you are speaking with.
just like i state in post 4923 of this same thread, i am not for making this ship a tactical ship in spirit, i don't think it would be a good idea to give him more tact console and a lt commander tact.
so, no! i certainly don't want this ship to fit my playstyle, try again.
and no, this ship seating is not fine, because better boff power abilitie would not change the fact that this ship is a redundant inferior version of the star cruiser.
like we already explain ten thousand time in this tread, just like the cruiser command, better engie boff will not change the redundancy of this ship since the allocation of it bo power don't allow him to do something different than any other ship in game.
an enhanced engi power star cruiser will still "outrole" an enhance engi power galaxy retrofit.
it is just simple logic, 3 ensign engi power is useless with share cooldown so you end up with a ship that is using only 11 boff power to the least, and a star cruiser got a lt science an ensign science wich is better than having just a lt science like the galaxy have ( that could solve your subnuc problem btw, just saying ).
and even in the eventuality that they rebuild eng power making version that didn't share cooldown, so you could actually use your 12 bo power, your ship will still be far less efficient due to it inertia, turn rate a flight speed, even without speaking about console allocation too.
turn rate and speed are one the most, if not the most, important stats in this game.
The current galaxy fits my playstyle.. It works well, its not a dps machine by any standards, the game is constantly making all ships weaker and weaker due to a dps power creep. But the issues in the game aren't going to get any better if you just want to push more Tact into everything.
Instead engi boff abilities need a revamp, and new ones added.
the galaxy need a more balanced bo layout, like in real life too much of one categorie is never a good thing, and new engi power ( althought still welcome ) will not change the problem that the galaxy retrofit is suffering.
the ody is hardly a practical choice if you want a LTC tac, your stuck with a LT tac as well. too much for a beam boat, in the AtB age.
like i said, it is not because you have 3tact console and a lt commander tact in a 6 base turn ship that it is good to go in comparison to over cruiser with more turn and inertia.
because theres not a thing wrong with the star cruiser? it fills its role just fine, and is a FAR better ship in practice then the galaxy. it can fill a non tactical role well, the galaxy cant.
i known that, and you known that, but not everyone do, people will still questioning the fact that their star cruiser are not as "tact" oriented as these new galaxy rebuild.
and even if you don't want to face this outcom, cryptic will, bielieve me.
no matter how logical, reasonable and justify these build are, the potential QQ in forum and all is something that cryptic will try to avoid at all cost if possible, you just can't ignore this...really.
way to much pve logic there. heal boat, non tactical cruisers have thier place. it would be absurd to change all the zombie/tank/healboat cruisers into tac ships. the newest cruiser, that voth ship launched today, is the greatest zombie of all.
this have nothing to do with pve logic, but more with how the average player think in this game.
the game is dps centric, most of the pve players bielieve that it is better to have a more dps oriented ship.
so what do you think will be their reaction when they learn that the galaxy was rebuild to be slightly more tactical ship?
no more suspence, they will demand to have the same treatement, even if that treatement is in complete contradiction with the ship original role.
If you not one of those jumping back and forth between the IP examples and STO examples of how a Galaxy should work then why be offended by my poking fun of some of the uber ideas that fill this thread?
Since I do own a AGT dreadnought (and have shortly after it stopped being a special offer for bringing 3 other players to STO) I will address it.
I find no issue with it using the many gimmicks availible now ingame due to power creep.
Its drfenses, turn and gameplay can all be improvdd with ease of build.
I enjoy a;
LT-BFAW1 APB1
E - BO1
C - EPTS1 A2B1 RSP2 DEM3
LT - EPTE1 A2B1
LT - PH1 HE2
Set up with no issues. Its fun for pve or pvp.
If any changes need be made simply switch the LTC/E boff and LT/T boff.
Of course if you got good team members that stick together and cross heal, you can tank forever but I have alot of fleet members that are on at different timezones so I am forced to pug it and is left to tank on my own.
I have gone up against some infamous Bug players from Fed and Klink side. Some of thise names like Cryox from "House of Beautiful Orions" fleet(Klingon), and Edna "ATNK" fleet. Those bug players I can't tank long against because their tac powers and cannon volleys outlast my longest RSP 3 shield tanking power. The bad thing is that i run into those players quite often when I PVP. and in many times i always end up on 1v1 with them. Once they kill you they hunt you down after you spawn in through the whole match. Thats what make me angry because I can't even wound these guys, let alone kill them with just 2 weapon consoles.
I do alot better when I'm in my Galaxy X and in my Ambassador because either of them have 3 weapons consoles.
indeed, but one really shoudn't try to use a galaxy retrofit to kill player, it is really to bad for it, however like you mention it lack a great deal of survivability wich suppose to be it strenght.
i meet cryox many time in kerrat with my galaxy x ( or cryingHAX like james like to call him) he is not that much of a treat alone if you have a beam build ( but that become very problematic when i am using my cannon build, yeah i known i am silly, i just love that:) )
especially with the eptx change since lor, these tiny ship spam epte and all allowing them to get out or enter my firering range in a matter of a second ( yes firering range, not arc ).
but HOBOS players are very good to test build efficiency when they spawn camp you, that for sure, hehe.
:rolleyes:This were i disagree even though I acknowledge the issues with ensign engineering. Having multiple emergency power to x. Can and has added to my galaxy and my ops oddy survivability which in pvp. Has kept me from not only dying but keeping others from dying as well.
In my oddy I choose engineering over science for that vary reason, I have more survivability with a engi in both my universal slot. Tact actually has several things that help survivability A. alpha strike can be used to add pressure, to keep others from engaging you longer then you feel you can take. B. going down fighting adds a bunch of resistance...
Sure they aren't as powerful a engi can get since they gain quite abit shield power. But you can compensate for that with the power sliders. The only other defensive tool is rotate shield frequency but that's only a small shield regen and a 10% shield damage resistance with a huge cooldown.
I'm on my phone so I won't comment on most of this, but in reference to tac consoles I meant cruisers. That's why I specifically mentioned the star cruiser.
a troll like you cannot be satisfied? You are really trying to compare different ships? a Fleet Fed cruiser vs a lobi store ship?
Apparently, you cannot play galaxy r to its fullest and good at whinning and complaining at the forums.
Apparently, You do not know what you are saying. you only do 1 on1 pvp or pug pvp. The galaxy R nor the Galaxy X aint for pvp pugs or 1 or 1 pvp.
Galaxy R and galaxy x tests the capability of player to build around the ship and know its role.
I remember players complaining Galaxy X many years back upto the point the Hakashin put how to play a Galaxy X, as an alpha striker. The same thing can be said of a Galaxy R. Dont know how to build, dont know how to play it, you will utterly fail.
Apparently you punked out, Mr new guy. There no such thing as a ship just to look at. The Galaxy X and R are rather costly to just sit and look pretty. Why don't you sit on the sideline and be quiet because you didn't want to be proven wrong about the Galaxy in a 1 v1. You are so cowardice that you didn't even want to test a Galaxy and see its problems.
The Galaxy X failed as an alpha striker because the Lance can't even bust through weakened shields. The Dev half-heartedly designed the Galaxy Classes because they first came in giving all the Klingon ships tougher hull and with more firepower then they came out with DS9 and Lock Box ships. That when Cryptic broke its tank/heal/DPS roles, then its been down hill from there.
If you not one of those jumping back and forth between the IP examples and STO examples of how a Galaxy should work then why be offended by my poking fun of some of the uber ideas that fill this thread?
Since I do own a AGT dreadnought (and have shortly after it stopped being a special offer for bringing 3 other players to STO) I will address it.
I find no issue with it using the many gimmicks availible now ingame due to power creep.
Its drfenses, turn and gameplay can all be improvdd with ease of build.
I enjoy a;
LT-BFAW1 APB1
E - BO1
C - EPTS1 A2B1 RSP2 DEM3
LT - EPTE1 A2B1
LT - PH1 HE2
Set up with no issues. Its fun for pve or pvp.
If any changes need be made simply switch the LTC/E boff and LT/T boff.
why? very simple.
no matter that some of us are asking for change that i personally found inapropriate, the pattern of intervention of people like you are alway the same.
you first question the idea that this ship should be made a tactical monster, in wich i gree so far.
but then you, as usual, slighty bend to implye the idea that this ship is good as is, and that we just don't build it right.
just like you have done in the quote above.
that, is what bother me, this ship IS bad, their is no build, no gear, no doff, no rep, that will make this ship do something as good, or better than any other in this game ( i speak about the galaxy retrofit here not the galaxy x ).
and the same could be said for the galaxy x, but only in the area of tactical ship.
these ship never been use seriously by the best pvpers in this game, not before and certainly not now, and their is a reason for that, their overall performance just suck period.
you can have fun with them, but no serious pvper will pretend to be efficient with them.
Originally Posted by aquitaine985
The Dread just doesn't really work. I've never seen one in ANY PVP that made me stop and think "Hmm, I should probably stay away for that dude".They're either WAY too tanky to bother trying to kill Or are stuffed with C Store consoles to give the impression they are "hard" to kill, when infact are just tedious.
so to resume, that is what bother me, peoples that constantly jump in the tread trying to disprove that this ship is bad with no real extend experience of the ship.
if you want to argue that some proposal are too much or not in line with what this ship should be, i don't care, when you trying to prove that this ship is in fact good as is, here i will have a problem with you.
Really not getting why some people are so resistant to allowing the Galaxies to have some flexibility via universal stations and console slots.[/QUOTE]
Simples everyone needs a whipping boy. The Galaxy is that whipping boy. God forbid a Galaxy in PvP being able to actually defend itself aggressively against a escort and take one out with pure firepower. I hear the words NERF being screamed by the PvP community static punchbag stands up to the bullies
I've been putting a lot of effort into my galaxy retrofit and, its taken some time, but I've found a fair setup for doing decent damage while still staying alive. This is not the fleet ship, but I'm working on getting that. I've found that you don't necessarily have to sacrifice damage output or damage resistance to gain turn rate. A really useful item is the lobi item tachyokinetic converter. It increases turn rate and crit chance/damage. Also, the engineering consoles from the fleet dilithium mine give different options in addition to 18 kinetic and energy damage resistance, including turn rate. 3 of these, plus the converter, gives a huge turn rate increase. Now, I was lucky enough to get a mkXII purple phaser relay console in the rommie survivor doff pack, and that 30% increase plus the 26.6% from a blue dil store console makes for a nice increase in damage output. Combines with the extra weapon power from using saucer seperation, I do a decent amount of damage throughout the mission, enough to make second place a few times. And I still retain all my heal abilities and resistances. While I agree that the galaxy needs a revamp, its not nearly as bad as most people think. It just needs a lot of attention and trial and error to find a balance that works for you (plus a few million energy credits).
I would like her to be a science cruiser, yes. Quite similiar to her little sister, the Nebula but ultimately that is based on personal preference. Though your depiction of the crew is not correct. Picard most likely served in Command Division most of his career (he was flight controller on board of the Stargazer) you cannot place him in a "tactical" role. He had a very deep undersandiong of tactics but his most prominent abilities were his scientific interests and his diplomatic skills. And Will Riker was an Engineer prior to his command training. The Ent-D had Worf and Yar, sure, but Data, LaForge, Troi, Wesley and O'Brien they all would promote a Eng/Sci heavy layout, if that would in any way be relevant to the in-game incarnation of the ship
I don't think that Voy had no one with tactical finesse. The thing is in the time of "Enterprise" there was no Starfleet. It was just an united earth ship and was under the jurisdiction of the united earth space probing authority (or something like that, I forgot the name). It was supposedly in this time they discovered that space is hostile and in order to explore the unknown you had to defend yourself. That's why they got military (MACOS) in there. well, that and to glorify the US armed services post 9/11 But with the foundation of the Federation and Starfleet the memberworlds abandoned their militaries and their ressources were absorbed into Starfleet. Fromt his time forward, everyone serving on a Starfleet vessel had to recieve at least basic tactical training, even the botanists in science division. You still had Starfleet Tactical, though it was a strategic department not a specialization. The "tactical" branch in STO really shouldn't exist, it's just to please the trinity of DD/Tank/Mage. They should've placed all players into command division and let them design a character background during creation
Well, at least in my opinion I'd argue with game mechanics. Universal stations above Lt grade are soething very powerful and reserved to the top of the line ships. The Galaxy R is here since season 2 in it's current configuration - retractively changing that ship in such a way seems out of the question, mechanically and from a loose in-game lore's standpoint.
Let me correct you. Picard don't start off as command. He was given command of the Stargazer becasue he was a fighter spirit and he made risky irrational decisions in the past. Remember the episode when Picard got stabed through the heart and Q gave him a chance to change his life during his academy days. He desided not to fight the Nassigans and later lost all his friends and became an ops officer on the Enterprise D and was a old Lt. that didn't get promoted. It was only when he agreed to keep is fighter history then things returned to normal with him being the captain of the Enterprise D.
You can't count the whole cast of the show as being bridge officers on the Enterprise. Wesley was an acting ensign for most of the show, and didn't choose his career till after he graduated SFA. He never ever have command ability. In the end he was a Tac officer as well. Troi didn't even get command ability till she passed her crew evaluation almost at the end of the last season. And she is not knowledgeable in engineering or science. She was still just a counsoler. Chief Obrion was enlisted and never was an officer on the Enterprise D. His primary role was in the transporter room, not on the bridge. Data as I already said before was a standing for science and engineering. You can't count LTC Laforge because every ship had a chief engineer.
Engineering tank ships are not practical in this game bacause the ENG powers have shorter durations than the same level Tac power and Sci powers do. Engineering powers don't debuff or remove debuffs. Engineers do better in ground battles.
I think Boff layout should be LTC Tac/Cmdr Eng/LTC uni/LT Sci, at least in the Fleet version. There should be no use for an Ensign power in a tier 5 cruiser.
The other part of your explanation of Starfleet makes no sense because if its this all civilian, NASA like, organization then why were there military ranks and when someone screwed up bad they got court martialed and put in jail. NASA don't court martial people, that just fire them. Anytime someone conducts themselves badley they get put in the brigg instead of getting kicked off the ship. So what do you have to say about that?
why? very simple.
no matter that some of us are asking for change that i personally found inapropriate, the pattern of intervention of people like you are alway the same.
you first question the idea that this ship should be made a tactical monster, in wich i gree so far.
but then you, as usual, slighty bend to implye the idea that this ship is good as is, and that we just don't build it right.
just like you have done in the quote above.
that, is what bother me, this ship IS bad, their is no build, no gear, no doff, no rep, that will make this ship do something as good, or better than any other in this game ( i speak about the galaxy retrofit here not the galaxy x ).
and the same could be said for the galaxy x, but only in the area of tactical ship.
these ship never been use seriously by the best pvpers in this game, not before and certainly not now, and their is a reason for that, their overall performance just suck period.
you can have fun with them, but no serious pvper will pretend to be efficient with them.
so to resume, that is what bother me, peoples that constantly jump in the tread trying to disprove that this ship is bad with no real extend experience of the ship.
if you want to argue that some proposal are too much or not in line with what this ship should be, i don't care, when you trying to prove that this ship is in fact good as is, here i will have a problem with you.
Then do not use it for seriuos pvp.
I didnt say under a proper build. I said I have no issue with it currently under existing power creep mechanics, which do overcome some it its short commings.
I even suggested a simple boff change to it (AGT) more tactical.
As too my " intervention style" of posting, I would not post so if the thread did not constantly just revolve between uber & under ideas dispersed with just general complaints.
This thread is a roller coaster of gripe that far outshines anything I have ever seen KDF produce and has really reached a point imo that it needs a fork stuck in it.
Seriuosly, how many pages is it with no majority agreed upon idea of what the fans want?
Other than a fixed galaxy that is.
I've been putting a lot of effort into my galaxy retrofit and, its taken some time, but I've found a fair setup for doing decent damage while still staying alive. This is not the fleet ship, but I'm working on getting that. I've found that you don't necessarily have to sacrifice damage output or damage resistance to gain turn rate. A really useful item is the lobi item tachyokinetic converter. It increases turn rate and crit chance/damage. Also, the engineering consoles from the fleet dilithium mine give different options in addition to 18 kinetic and energy damage resistance, including turn rate. 3 of these, plus the converter, gives a huge turn rate increase. Now, I was lucky enough to get a mkXII purple phaser relay console in the rommie survivor doff pack, and that 30% increase plus the 26.6% from a blue dil store console makes for a nice increase in damage output. Combines with the extra weapon power from using saucer seperation, I do a decent amount of damage throughout the mission, enough to make second place a few times. And I still retain all my heal abilities and resistances. While I agree that the galaxy needs a revamp, its not nearly as bad as most people think. It just needs a lot of attention and trial and error to find a balance that works for you (plus a few million energy credits).
Thats what i have been doing to my Galaxy Classes to improve turn rate.
Thats what i have been doing to my Galaxy Classes to improve turn rate.
I've been considering losing the saucer sep and just putting a 4th console in, but I'm rather partial to the small amount of extra damage the saucer gives. I tried using just the rcs consoles from the dil store, but that was a bust. I didn't realize how much of a difference 54 defense points makes.
Troi was Picard's sci BOFF, and I'm pretty sure Riker was Eng career.
Trio has no Science Knowledge. She has only been a counselor in all the shows and movies. She never came up with a theory or en equation. She only sensed people's feelinggs and advised. Doctor Crusher was the only official Science Officer onboard but she spent most of the time in sickbay or bio labs. She did help implament the Thermal shialding to the Enterprise D.
Its not just the Galaxy class. I'd like a relevant Intrepid, Galaxy, Soverign. Maybe Starfleet stopped the practice of refitting...
There are only a handful of, Cryptic Trek ships, that i can actually look at without feeling insulted. The Regent is one of them, and if anything, that should have been the new Enterprise.
It seems, there may be a disconnect between the people who make the decision, and the idea that these original ships have nostalgic value, and that they are pleasant to look at, because they are, pleasant to look at.
Then again. Flogging the same ships, over and over again, a refit every Season. That would annoy me. So im divided.
Did i mention the Regent is awesome?
The Galaxy in STO has not got upgraded or made right from the begining.
Comments
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
a troll like you cannot be satisfied? You are really trying to compare different ships? a Fleet Fed cruiser vs a lobi store ship?
Apparently, you cannot play galaxy r to its fullest and good at whinning and complaining at the forums.
Apparently, You do not know what you are saying. you only do 1 on1 pvp or pug pvp. The galaxy R nor the Galaxy X aint for pvp pugs or 1 or 1 pvp.
Galaxy R and galaxy x tests the capability of player to build around the ship and know its role.
I remember players complaining Galaxy X many years back upto the point the Hakashin put how to play a Galaxy X, as an alpha striker. The same thing can be said of a Galaxy R. Dont know how to build, dont know how to play it, you will utterly fail.
the ent-D did have a sci LT commander data he was the chief science officer and second officer (third in command) he wore gold because of his dual role as chief of operations. and the costume department thought brent spiner in the white make up looked better in gold then blue
actually that is another thing they should have slit career boffs. boffs that can be fitted in to both careers and have access to both powers
say with data as an example he counts as a engineer and a science and would be able to be placed as a sci or eng boff and have access to both eng and sci powers so on a gal-r you could have grav well and aux2stif
sure it could
refit it with 2013 class weapons the burke has what 1990 weaponry ?
Its not the hull its what is inside the hull that counts
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
This board needs a report post button.
lol @ Gal-R being an alpha striker.
Really not getting why some people are so resistant to allowing the Galaxies to have some flexibility via universal stations and console slots.
That last part I'm fed up with people claiming that tact cruiser can out tank, which really isn't the case... Galaxy and oddy can out tank tact focused cruisers on fed side at least... The only things that can some times out tank me are recluse, and some of the other lock box ships. Most of them are OP anyways.
That bull escorts aren't just as powerful with engi captians... Alpha strike and subnuc are too powerful in a escort to fly as engineering ever... Also you can still tank with out tact team in galaxy in tact or sci. Just not as well... Engi captians are better off in cruisers or science vessels.
Also I should note your build needs alot of work RSP past teir 1 is pointless.. Aux to battery will also hurt your healing, and torpedo spread doesn't do much for cruiser as fire at will would. Two weapon power consoles too o.O your already using aux to battery there is no need for them replace with neutrinos you'll get a better tank. Never mix teams remove the other two teams if you plan on using tact team.
Its really no wonder from the build you've shown how you can't tank in your tact. I would also respec your skills if you plan on going offensive pvp galaxy. Make sure to max defense and accuracy, you don't need max armor either. Unless your going full tank 3-6 in armor is fine.
Infact here are the changes i think you should make http://skillplanner.stoacademy.com/?build=editedgalaxy_4992
Also picard was more science then he was tact. The red color on his uniform was just becuase he is the captian same with riker, though he was probably tact. Worf was security, and Tasha yar had yellow uniform before him.
Honestly the show has no baring on the BOFFS in game, becuase if they were most would be universal.
...le sigh :rolleyes:
Tactical officers, the most squishy career since they don't have access to any captain skills that are defensive in nature, can tank all day in any of the more tactical oriented cruisers. As for a pure support ships you are correct the Odyssey is a good choice, but the Galaxy is not. The Odyssey and Ambassador would be the ships to pick if you want to absorb damage and/or heal.
The Galaxy sucks at everything. It's terrible as an offensive cruiser because it has limited tac officer stations and the lowest number of tactical console slots of any fedship, giving it the worst damage of all the cruisers, tied only with the Fleet Star Cruiser. And it also sucks as a support cruiser, again because of it's bridge officer layout, which lacks flexibility (no universals) and has limited science stations with only an Lt sci. The three ensign level engineering stations exasperate the problem and offer nothing of any consequence in any role offensive or defensive.
Captain Lee Drake - USS Sovereign
Captain Draxon - IKS RanKuf
Commander Torenn - IRW Soryak
Captain Gregory MacCray - USS Geronimo
There are only a handful of, Cryptic Trek ships, that i can actually look at without feeling insulted. The Regent is one of them, and if anything, that should have been the new Enterprise.
It seems, there may be a disconnect between the people who make the decision, and the idea that these original ships have nostalgic value, and that they are pleasant to look at, because they are, pleasant to look at.
Then again. Flogging the same ships, over and over again, a refit every Season. That would annoy me. So im divided.
Did i mention the Regent is awesome?
I would like her to be a science cruiser, yes. Quite similiar to her little sister, the Nebula but ultimately that is based on personal preference. Though your depiction of the crew is not correct. Picard most likely served in Command Division most of his career (he was flight controller on board of the Stargazer) you cannot place him in a "tactical" role. He had a very deep undersandiong of tactics but his most prominent abilities were his scientific interests and his diplomatic skills. And Will Riker was an Engineer prior to his command training. The Ent-D had Worf and Yar, sure, but Data, LaForge, Troi, Wesley and O'Brien they all would promote a Eng/Sci heavy layout, if that would in any way be relevant to the in-game incarnation of the ship
I don't think that Voy had no one with tactical finesse. The thing is in the time of "Enterprise" there was no Starfleet. It was just an united earth ship and was under the jurisdiction of the united earth space probing authority (or something like that, I forgot the name). It was supposedly in this time they discovered that space is hostile and in order to explore the unknown you had to defend yourself. That's why they got military (MACOS) in there. well, that and to glorify the US armed services post 9/11
Well, at least in my opinion I'd argue with game mechanics. Universal stations above Lt grade are soething very powerful and reserved to the top of the line ships. The Galaxy R is here since season 2 in it's current configuration - retractively changing that ship in such a way seems out of the question, mechanically and from a loose in-game lore's standpoint.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The Regent IS the sovereigns refit. The Galaxy, Intrepid and Defiant have Refits as well: The Venture, the Bellerophon and the Sao Paolo. They all look quite nice and would be great, if only they would be available at T5. I'd vote for fleet versions of those. A Venture would feature more sci consoles and boff skills than the Galaxy, A Bellerophon is a bit more tactical focussed than a Intrepid and the Sao Paolo would get a engineer boost over the Defiant.
The ideas are already in-game. They just need to be made relevant in endgame.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
:rolleyes:This were i disagree even though I acknowledge the issues with ensign engineering. Having multiple emergency power to x. Can and has added to my galaxy and my ops oddy survivability which in pvp. Has kept me from not only dying but keeping others from dying as well.
In my oddy I choose engineering over science for that vary reason, I have more survivability with a engi in both my universal slot. Tact actually has several things that help survivability A. alpha strike can be used to add pressure, to keep others from engaging you longer then you feel you can take. B. going down fighting adds a bunch of resistance...
Sure they aren't as powerful a engi can get since they gain quite abit shield power. But you can compensate for that with the power sliders. The only other defensive tool is rotate shield frequency but that's only a small shield regen and a 10% shield damage resistance with a huge cooldown.
Your wrong about it having the lowest tac consoles alot of fed ships only have two tact consoles.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Research_Science_Vessel_Retrofit
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Deep_Space_Science_Vessel
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Advanced_Research_Vessel_Retrofit
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Caitian_Atrox_Carrier
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Odyssey_Science_Cruiser
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Odyssey_Operations_Cruiser
ho, thank for the lesson, i wouldn't have been able to figure it out without you:rolleyes:
so again, since you don't seem to anderstand, my point here is that the galaxy is so bad at avoiding damage that your survival time with a tact captain in this ship will be greatly reduced in comparison to any other ship with that same tact captain.
my point is that if you want to play this ship in a timeframe long enought to allow you to do what you have to do, you will be "force" to rely on engi power to survive.
this phenomena is more pronounce on this ship than any other in the game and pointing out directly to it imbalance stats.
before making the so well known in this thread, stereotype conclusion that i want MOAR tact power for this ship, learn to known who you are speaking with.
just like i state in post 4923 of this same thread, i am not for making this ship a tactical ship in spirit, i don't think it would be a good idea to give him more tact console and a lt commander tact.
so, no! i certainly don't want this ship to fit my playstyle, try again.
and no, this ship seating is not fine, because better boff power abilitie would not change the fact that this ship is a redundant inferior version of the star cruiser.
like we already explain ten thousand time in this tread, just like the cruiser command, better engie boff will not change the redundancy of this ship since the allocation of it bo power don't allow him to do something different than any other ship in game.
an enhanced engi power star cruiser will still "outrole" an enhance engi power galaxy retrofit.
it is just simple logic, 3 ensign engi power is useless with share cooldown so you end up with a ship that is using only 11 boff power to the least, and a star cruiser got a lt science an ensign science wich is better than having just a lt science like the galaxy have ( that could solve your subnuc problem btw, just saying ).
and even in the eventuality that they rebuild eng power making version that didn't share cooldown, so you could actually use your 12 bo power, your ship will still be far less efficient due to it inertia, turn rate a flight speed, even without speaking about console allocation too.
turn rate and speed are one the most, if not the most, important stats in this game.
the galaxy need a more balanced bo layout, like in real life too much of one categorie is never a good thing, and new engi power ( althought still welcome ) will not change the problem that the galaxy retrofit is suffering.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
like i said, it is not because you have 3tact console and a lt commander tact in a 6 base turn ship that it is good to go in comparison to over cruiser with more turn and inertia.
i known that, and you known that, but not everyone do, people will still questioning the fact that their star cruiser are not as "tact" oriented as these new galaxy rebuild.
and even if you don't want to face this outcom, cryptic will, bielieve me.
no matter how logical, reasonable and justify these build are, the potential QQ in forum and all is something that cryptic will try to avoid at all cost if possible, you just can't ignore this...really.
this have nothing to do with pve logic, but more with how the average player think in this game.
the game is dps centric, most of the pve players bielieve that it is better to have a more dps oriented ship.
so what do you think will be their reaction when they learn that the galaxy was rebuild to be slightly more tactical ship?
no more suspence, they will demand to have the same treatement, even if that treatement is in complete contradiction with the ship original role.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Since I do own a AGT dreadnought (and have shortly after it stopped being a special offer for bringing 3 other players to STO) I will address it.
I find no issue with it using the many gimmicks availible now ingame due to power creep.
Its drfenses, turn and gameplay can all be improvdd with ease of build.
I enjoy a;
LT-BFAW1 APB1
E - BO1
C - EPTS1 A2B1 RSP2 DEM3
LT - EPTE1 A2B1
LT - PH1 HE2
Set up with no issues. Its fun for pve or pvp.
If any changes need be made simply switch the LTC/E boff and LT/T boff.
R.I.P
indeed, but one really shoudn't try to use a galaxy retrofit to kill player, it is really to bad for it, however like you mention it lack a great deal of survivability wich suppose to be it strenght.
i meet cryox many time in kerrat with my galaxy x ( or cryingHAX like james like to call him) he is not that much of a treat alone if you have a beam build ( but that become very problematic when i am using my cannon build, yeah i known i am silly, i just love that:) )
especially with the eptx change since lor, these tiny ship spam epte and all allowing them to get out or enter my firering range in a matter of a second ( yes firering range, not arc ).
but HOBOS players are very good to test build efficiency when they spawn camp you, that for sure, hehe.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I'm on my phone so I won't comment on most of this, but in reference to tac consoles I meant cruisers. That's why I specifically mentioned the star cruiser.
Apparently you punked out, Mr new guy. There no such thing as a ship just to look at. The Galaxy X and R are rather costly to just sit and look pretty. Why don't you sit on the sideline and be quiet because you didn't want to be proven wrong about the Galaxy in a 1 v1. You are so cowardice that you didn't even want to test a Galaxy and see its problems.
The Galaxy X failed as an alpha striker because the Lance can't even bust through weakened shields. The Dev half-heartedly designed the Galaxy Classes because they first came in giving all the Klingon ships tougher hull and with more firepower then they came out with DS9 and Lock Box ships. That when Cryptic broke its tank/heal/DPS roles, then its been down hill from there.
why? very simple.
no matter that some of us are asking for change that i personally found inapropriate, the pattern of intervention of people like you are alway the same.
you first question the idea that this ship should be made a tactical monster, in wich i gree so far.
but then you, as usual, slighty bend to implye the idea that this ship is good as is, and that we just don't build it right.
just like you have done in the quote above.
that, is what bother me, this ship IS bad, their is no build, no gear, no doff, no rep, that will make this ship do something as good, or better than any other in this game ( i speak about the galaxy retrofit here not the galaxy x ).
and the same could be said for the galaxy x, but only in the area of tactical ship.
these ship never been use seriously by the best pvpers in this game, not before and certainly not now, and their is a reason for that, their overall performance just suck period.
you can have fun with them, but no serious pvper will pretend to be efficient with them.
so to resume, that is what bother me, peoples that constantly jump in the tread trying to disprove that this ship is bad with no real extend experience of the ship.
if you want to argue that some proposal are too much or not in line with what this ship should be, i don't care, when you trying to prove that this ship is in fact good as is, here i will have a problem with you.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Simples everyone needs a whipping boy. The Galaxy is that whipping boy. God forbid a Galaxy in PvP being able to actually defend itself aggressively against a escort and take one out with pure firepower. I hear the words NERF being screamed by the PvP community static punchbag stands up to the bullies
Let me correct you. Picard don't start off as command. He was given command of the Stargazer becasue he was a fighter spirit and he made risky irrational decisions in the past. Remember the episode when Picard got stabed through the heart and Q gave him a chance to change his life during his academy days. He desided not to fight the Nassigans and later lost all his friends and became an ops officer on the Enterprise D and was a old Lt. that didn't get promoted. It was only when he agreed to keep is fighter history then things returned to normal with him being the captain of the Enterprise D.
You can't count the whole cast of the show as being bridge officers on the Enterprise. Wesley was an acting ensign for most of the show, and didn't choose his career till after he graduated SFA. He never ever have command ability. In the end he was a Tac officer as well. Troi didn't even get command ability till she passed her crew evaluation almost at the end of the last season. And she is not knowledgeable in engineering or science. She was still just a counsoler. Chief Obrion was enlisted and never was an officer on the Enterprise D. His primary role was in the transporter room, not on the bridge. Data as I already said before was a standing for science and engineering. You can't count LTC Laforge because every ship had a chief engineer.
Engineering tank ships are not practical in this game bacause the ENG powers have shorter durations than the same level Tac power and Sci powers do. Engineering powers don't debuff or remove debuffs. Engineers do better in ground battles.
I think Boff layout should be LTC Tac/Cmdr Eng/LTC uni/LT Sci, at least in the Fleet version. There should be no use for an Ensign power in a tier 5 cruiser.
The other part of your explanation of Starfleet makes no sense because if its this all civilian, NASA like, organization then why were there military ranks and when someone screwed up bad they got court martialed and put in jail. NASA don't court martial people, that just fire them. Anytime someone conducts themselves badley they get put in the brigg instead of getting kicked off the ship. So what do you have to say about that?
Then do not use it for seriuos pvp.
I didnt say under a proper build. I said I have no issue with it currently under existing power creep mechanics, which do overcome some it its short commings.
I even suggested a simple boff change to it (AGT) more tactical.
As too my " intervention style" of posting, I would not post so if the thread did not constantly just revolve between uber & under ideas dispersed with just general complaints.
This thread is a roller coaster of gripe that far outshines anything I have ever seen KDF produce and has really reached a point imo that it needs a fork stuck in it.
Seriuosly, how many pages is it with no majority agreed upon idea of what the fans want?
Other than a fixed galaxy that is.
R.I.P
Thats what i have been doing to my Galaxy Classes to improve turn rate.
I've been considering losing the saucer sep and just putting a 4th console in, but I'm rather partial to the small amount of extra damage the saucer gives. I tried using just the rcs consoles from the dil store, but that was a bust. I didn't realize how much of a difference 54 defense points makes.
Trio has no Science Knowledge. She has only been a counselor in all the shows and movies. She never came up with a theory or en equation. She only sensed people's feelinggs and advised. Doctor Crusher was the only official Science Officer onboard but she spent most of the time in sickbay or bio labs. She did help implament the Thermal shialding to the Enterprise D.
The Galaxy in STO has not got upgraded or made right from the begining.
Troi was Picards Bene Gesserit Reverand Mother.
R.I.P