Is that a challenge I hear? Shall I do Cure? Hive? NWS?
Or is it entirely going in one ear and out the other that the galaxy does enough to be viable. It doesnt have to be a standout, it doesnt have to be the UBERLEET SUPERSHIP OF KILLEVERYTHINGWITHONEBUTTON like the Noobitar is.
Btw the boff layout is fine. As before, I did 6000 DPS with the LEVEL 30 VERSION MAN.
I was down a weapon, and a console, hull points, and a whole fricken bridge officer (including trait buff from probably leadership), and I was using MARK EIGHT ENGINES AND DEFLECTOR.
Is this a "l2p" thing here? I mean seriously... useless ensign slot? EPTW1 = 10 percent more damage. DERP???@!!!
I just took a level 30 Exploration Cruiser into ISE with my Avenger Captain and did almost 6000 DPS with it, was the aggro tank the whole fight, did not die, and had a mix of really good and really awful gear on it.
(ignore the a2b, i didnt have the doffs on for it, so all it did was give me useless power shunting and not much else)
I dont see any issue with the galaxy class.
maybe if you have just try to read the thread a little, you would have an idea of what we are complaining for.
instead of just assuming and loosing your time to try to proove a meaningless point.
so to answer to your all too predictable and stereotype assumptions:
_ NO, we don't want a god ship
_ NO, we don't want a gigantic escort ( remember that one? )
_ NO, we don't want that the galaxy retrofit be the best cruiser EVA.
but since i known too well that you wouldn't take the time to search in this thread what are the points we are arguing for, or just simply ask us before going to conclusion, i will quote dontdrunkimshoot who resume it better than i ever will.
- worst turn rate
- worst damage dealing
- worst station setup, id have to get long winded to explain
- for the purpose of being an unkillable tank, its station setup is sub par for just that
- pos ugly galaxy X exists, so a galaxy that doesn't look terrible and riced out will always have to suck more then the galaxy X
- no mater what you want to do with the cruiser, deal damage, heal, support, control, theres 5 cruisers that do any of those jobs better, MUCH better
-absolutely, positively good for nothing, has no niche, other then being the worst at everything.
or
people cant tell why its bad? even someone with a limited amount of ship building knowledge should see a problem
the station setup is very bad, overspecialized for eng at the low level, were there is the least variety of skills to choose from.
every skill you can choose down low is crippled by global cooldowns, even across all 3 skill types
for every unideal station slot in eng, your losing an ideal station slot in ether sci or tac
below average cruiser mobility
worst number of tac consoles
least number of tac skills
since doffs were introduced a low number of eng skills had become more ideal due to tech and damage control doffs, so having that many eng skills actually got worse over time
simply does nothing well, excels at nothing
pick a cruiser, any cruiser. its better at doing what its best at then the galaxy is at doing that.
I'd like to discuss and get opinions on something that has been bothering me since they added the cruiser com array powers. The Galaxy Dreadnought Cruiser as most of you know ended up with only two of the powers (Attract Fire, and Weapon System Efficiency). For the life of me I can't understand why they would decide to do this to the dreadnought. I would understand if the ship was op in some way or another, but in all honesty it's really not a good ship to begin with so why no Shield Modulation & Strategic Maneuvering?
I was personally very disappointed. The Galaxy Dreadnought is about the only Galaxy worth using at engame. It at least has 3 tac officer stations and 3 tac consoles so you can manage to muster some offence with it, but even so the ship is far from the top of the cruiser food chain. Unfortunately, now the lack of Shield Modulation & Strategic Maneuvering make it even less desirable then it was already. [/rant]
yeah, we pointed this right away with drunk in this thread, but i suspect that gecko do it on purpose because he want to improve the stats of the ship, that what he was talking about in one of the last podcast.
if it not that, it really a bad joke.
or someone that really don't want this ship to be any better.
Is that a challenge I hear? Shall I do Cure? Hive? NWS?
Or is it entirely going in one ear and out the other that the galaxy does enough to be viable. It doesnt have to be a standout, it doesnt have to be the UBERLEET SUPERSHIP OF KILLEVERYTHINGWITHONEBUTTON like the Noobitar is.
Btw the boff layout is fine. As before, I did 6000 DPS with the LEVEL 30 VERSION MAN.
I was down a weapon, and a console, hull points, and a whole fricken bridge officer (including trait buff from probably leadership), and I was using MARK EIGHT ENGINES AND DEFLECTOR.
Is this a "l2p" thing here? I mean seriously... useless ensign slot? EPTW1 = 10 percent more damage. DERP???@!!!
All I ever use is Weapons system efficiency. The only time I will run another is bc there's another cruiser in the team. But with the limited range it's sometimes advisable to have both cruisers run weapon systems efficiency so they can cover a greater area of support for the whole team.
I hardly ever use weapon system efficiency since I generally run an aux2bat build with DEM3 and Marion. Weapon energy is not an issue so I generally run the Shield or Maneuvering buff. Both of which I think the dreadnought could use to great effect since it has a lower shield modifier then the other cruisers (because of the lack of a fleet version) and is one of the least maneuverable of the fedcruisers.
yeah, we pointed this right away with drunk in this thread, but i suspect that gecko do it on purpose because he want to improve the stats of the ship, that what he was talking about in one of the last podcast.
if it not that, it really a bad joke.
or someone that really don't want this ship to be any better.
I had considered that as well, but I've lost all hope that the devs will do anything to improve the older ships that have been left in the dust with all the power creep. The standard Galaxy is completely irrelevant in the current game and the lack of com powers make the dreadnought undesirable as well, not that it was that desirable to being with.
I had considered that as well, but I've lost all hope that the devs will do anything to improve the older ships that have been left in the dust with all the power creep. The standard Galaxy is completely irrelevant in the current game and the lack of com powers make the dreadnought undesirable as well, not that it was that desirable to being with.
dstal talked about it, gecko talked about it, it will happen, we just don't known on wich ship and when.
the first one will be the dreadnought trought,since gecko wait for his ship artist to finish the saucer sep abilitie to enhanced it stats, then they could give him a fleet version.
i am using auxtobat with my dread, but not marion, even if i own one, but weapons efficiency is still pretty noticeable when active.
i hope that the enhancement gecko talked about are worth the lost of the other 2 abilities.
I just took a level 30 Exploration Cruiser into ISE with my Avenger Captain and did almost 6000 DPS with it, was the aggro tank the whole fight, did not die, and had a mix of really good and really awful gear on it.
(ignore the a2b, i didnt have the doffs on for it, so all it did was give me useless power shunting and not much else)
I dont see any issue with the galaxy class.
6k is nothing in ISE, even a tier 4 ship could do that, oh wait. i could proboly make a 10k fleet galaxy, but other cruisers i could get to 15k or 20k just as easily.
as far as damage is concerned, galaxy is the worst ship in the game, its also the worst then some tac cruisers at support and healing.
Long time lurker of the forums here, and I agree with the galaxy getting an improvement. Also got an idea stuck in my head which won't leave until I post it somewhere, even though it'll never happen, so please humor me for a second.
Instead of the lance as it is, make it like a mode you set the X into; it disables all your other weapons, has a 30 degree angle, and its range is 15km. Would have to do a good amount of damage as it's your only gun. Also takes 3 seconds to change between lance and regular weapons and can change modes in cloak, and is affected by beam overload.
As for the one off ability:
Overcharge lance:
5 minute cool down
Does extreme amount of damage
Charges up for 3 seconds
Deals 5-25% of your max hull as damage to yourself. (not sure exact amount)
500m-1k knock back on self
Accuracy: 90% @ 0-5km, 90%-10% @ 5km-13km+, 95%-100% to non moving targets.
Disables weapons subsystem for 5 seconds
(maybe) front shield arc disabled/disables engine, shield, and auxiliary subsystems for 3 seconds
Changes out of lance mode and put mode into cool down for 30 seconds
cannot be used in cloak, when uncloaked, goes into cool down for 15 seconds
(maybe) unaffected by captain abilities, so they don't have to balance for a gdf and alpha attack. (Though I'm sure many would complain they aren't allowed to kill a guy twice over.)
phew, now that that is out of my head I feel better. Keep going guys, this is one of many threads I keep track off, and for a comparatively realistic idea, allow the lance to change colors when equipped with andorian phasers, I love that blue
All Fleet Retrofits should have the universal Ensign. I just realized that, otherwise, people that buy the refits (all of them, Science, Escort and Cruiser alike) are "not allowed" to continue their purchased ships in end game since all of them rely on a different ensign BOFF station. I think that is a reason that doesn't need any justification, canon or otherwise.
^ 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
6k is nothing in ISE, even a tier 4 ship could do that, oh wait. i could proboly make a 10k fleet galaxy, but other cruisers i could get to 15k or 20k just as easily.
as far as damage is concerned, galaxy is the worst ship in the game, its also the worst then some tac cruisers at support and healing.
I dont think you followed my actual point to post that. Sure for you or me, or any of the people pulling 15, 20, 40, etc dps its nothing. We do that in our sleep.
But we arent the average player/ship builder in the game. The average pug 3-4k dps cruiser will attest to that. Even a halfassed decent build on a captain level galaxy is adequate for the PvE of the game.
Its enough to do what needs to be done, is what I am saying.
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
I dont think you followed my actual point to post that. Sure for you or me, or any of the people pulling 15, 20, 40, etc dps its nothing. We do that in our sleep.
But we arent the average player/ship builder in the game. The average pug 3-4k dps cruiser will attest to that. Even a halfassed decent build on a captain level galaxy is adequate for the PvE of the game.
Its enough to do what needs to be done, is what I am saying.
and i am sure you didn't follow this thread to bielieve that we argue that thiss ship is not sufficient to finish any stf.
because so are tier 3 ship btw, the only difference is that these ship don't cost 2500z and are not relabelled tier5.
that is a sensible difference.
I dont think you followed my actual point to post that. Sure for you or me, or any of the people pulling 15, 20, 40, etc dps its nothing. We do that in our sleep.
But we arent the average player/ship builder in the game. The average pug 3-4k dps cruiser will attest to that. Even a halfassed decent build on a captain level galaxy is adequate for the PvE of the game.
Its enough to do what needs to be done, is what I am saying.
most people in this thread want to use the galaxy and not be self nerfing them selves. being able to complete all pve content is a non factor when i could do all story content in a shuttle, all featured episodes in a tier 1 ship, and all qued content in a tier 3 ship.
we would like the galaxy to be mid tier at least at ether damage or support, or both. currently its an anomaly, its the worst cruiser, worst ship in the game, with not a single thing it can do well. theres nothing like it in the escort or sci ship ranks, is sorta unprecedented.
anyway, this is the setup for it ive been favoring, doesn't seem to over the top when you look at the temporal ships, and this new voth sci ship
COM eng LTC uni
LT uni LT sci
ENS sci
it could be the first cruiser that could go tacless, and be a super heal boat, or it could be run as a tac cruiser at various levels, but it will still be behind the monbosh, avenger, galor, excelsior, regent and fleet heavy in terms of tac cruiser ranking. even if it got a 3rd tac console, its 4 base turn rate down from the best.
They just need to make a new ship BASED on the Galaxy design (kind of looking like it) as hell, it's 60+ years old and we all know how immersion breaking it would be for such an old design to be a top tier ship.:eek::D
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
They just need to make a new ship BASED on the Galaxy design (kind of looking like it) as hell, it's 60+ years old and we all know how immersion breaking it would be for such an old design to be a top tier ship.:eek::D
120 year old excelsiors are fine though. also crummy galors that in the show weren't even a threat to a galaxy class. its just a 50 years old design too, seeing as each ship was built to last 100 years, and be upgraded continually, gutted and overhauled every 20, its not unreasonable at all to think the ship would still be among the top cruisers.
After dropping in an out of this thread i'm still trying to understand the opposition to improving the Galaxy class, and why those against such changes feel the ship in cannon was a failure.
Lets look at this objectivity starting with the TNG
TNG
This was a 1st and foremost a Science fiction show, it was about exploring the unknown and expanding our knowledge of the universe. It was about putting the crew in situations where it was about human endeavour and ingenuity that saved the day not the brute force of a phaser array.
However when faced with traditional enemies such as Klingons/Romulans and Cardassians the Galaxy was never shown to be outmatched.
In fact the Galaxy did a lot of posturing on the Romulan/Klingon and Cardassian boarders to deter aggression from these powers most noticeably against the Romulans and Cardassians. I think we can all agree that both these powers wouldn't hesitate to exploit and take aggressive action against an enemy starship if they thought it was weak. Civilians on board the ship, making people feel it was a cruise liner. Lets turn our attention to the battle of Wolf 359. Did the Saratoga a Miranda Class variant not have Sisko's wife and son on board, Making this assumption not hold any water.
The ship was destroyed by a outdated bird of prey. Shields were compromised and she took the best part of a dozen torpedo's to the stardrive before warp core failure.
The Borg acknowledged Picard commanded the Federations most powerful ship. This was on the 2nd meeting between the two and the Borg on the 1st meeting TRIBBLE the computer core and must have downloaded ship specs and information from the starfleet database
At launch the Galaxy was the most advanced ship in the fleet and on numerous occasions was stated as being Starfleets most powerful ship. At this time you had all these classes in service (Only ships in STO listed)
Miranda/Excelsior/Constellation/Nebula/Ambassador/Soyuz/Cheyenne/Centaur the Galaxy was better armed, better shielded and had a more powerful warpcore and better top speed than all these ships
DS9
This was a show about Political conflict and was more of an action show than one of exploration which TNG was.
The loss of the U.S.S Odyssey to the Dominion. People keep coming back to this and pointing to it as a failure of the class. It got pawned by the Dominion ect. Lets put the record straight on this. The Dominion was the next big threat, There weapons could penetrate Federation shields, The ship fought for several minutes before withdrawing under her own power before the Jem'hadar rammed the ship to hammer home the point that this is our space and we will protect it at all costs. Now lets look at the newly arrived Defiant and her mission to find the founders, I recall the ship having its TRIBBLE handed to her a lot quicker than the Galaxy and she only survived as the Dominion captured her instead of destroying her.
So the Defiant a purpose built warship failed just as the Galaxy did in its 1st contact against a Dominion attack.
Later in the series the Defiant is shown to be blowing up Bugships in single volleys from her quad cannons. Well the Defiant was a warship, the show became a war show, its not good having a warship that cannot kill or take hits from the enemy.
Lakota vs the Defiant. This fight ended in stalemate, however from the remarks of the Lakota captain about the armour equipped to the Defiant it suggests the Lakota was expecting to be able to stop the ship.
The Defiant other than in 1 episode where Tom Riker stole the ship. It was never shown again being able to take down another ship outside its weight class. All through the Dominion war the Defiant took on Bugships. The Galaxy engaged Galors, and Dominion capital ships.
Voyager.
Now here we didn't see much of the Galaxy as Voyager was lost in the Delta Quadrant.
Now with what i have brought up in here please explain me how and why these tier 4/5 and fleet ships should be superior to the Galaxy Class when it is established that the Galaxy is better than them all
Nebula
Excelsior
Cheyenne (Know has fleet heavy cruiser)
Ambassador
No one her is asking for a god ship or the Galaxy to be a top of the line cruiser but she should be above the 4 ships i have listed above.
I have no beef with the Regent/Avenger and Odyssey classes being better than her. But not the other 4 ships.
Let's face it, as long as Mr. Rivera (or some other TNG/GCS hater) is in charge of Cryptic, we won't see a non-crappy Galaxy Class in STO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I vote for a fleet Venture-type refit. Well, basically all T4 refits should get a fleet variant.
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Refit
Venture type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Ens. Sci (Universal?)
4/2/4 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
42,900 Hull, 1.2 Shield mod, 6 Turn
Fleet Dreadnought Cruiser Refit
Venture-X type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Ens. Tac (Universal?)
4/4/2 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
40,000 Hull, 1.1 shield mod, 7 Turn, can equip cannons
What do you think? Three low universal stations, otherwise they carry on the emphasize of their non fleet counterparts into 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
I vote for a fleet Venture-type refit. Well, basically all T4 refits should get a fleet variant.
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Refit
Venture type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Ens. Sci (Universal?)
4/2/4 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
42,900 Hull, 1.2 Shield mod, 6 Turn
rather good i think, that seem more like something cryptic would be agree on since you keep the commander and lt commander eng ( things that define this ship in sto ) in stone.
4/2/4 for the console is good and more in line with the tanking purpose of the ship rather than it tactical abilitie.
but also could do 4/3/3 for the one that absolutely want the 3nd tact console
Fleet Dreadnought Cruiser Refit
Venture-X type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Ens. Tac (Universal?)
4/4/2 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
40,000 Hull, 1.1 shield mod, 7 Turn, can equip cannons
nope, nope, nope, sorry.
the galaxy dreadnought need a ltcommander tact, otherwise it will stay the joke tactical cruiser that it is right now.
i agree tho with the 7 base turn even if i don't bielieve anymore that cryptic will directly enhanced the base turn of the ship, but will do it by set bonuses instead ( like the odyssey for example )
my personal choice on it layout.
lt commander tact
commander eng
lt commander eng
ensign science
ensign science
nope, nope, nope, sorry.
the galaxy dreadnought need a ltcommander tact, otherwise it will stay the joke tactical cruiser that it is right now.
i agree tho with the 7 base turn even if i don't bielieve anymore that cryptic will directly enhanced the base turn of the ship, but will do it by set bonuses instead ( like the odyssey for example )
my personal choice on it layout.
lt commander tact
commander eng
lt commander eng
ensign science
ensign science
+10 weapon, +5 shield, +5 engine
thers an idea too. ya my second favorite station change would be a variation of the d'deridex staion setup, that is primarily eng barely, with very heavy tac and sci
so d'deridex is
COM eng LTC tac LTC sci ENS tac ENS uni
galaxy R could be
COM eng LTC eng LTC sci ENS tac ENS uni
galaxy X could be
COM eng
LTC eng LTC tac ENS sci ENS uni
except i sort of hate were that leaves the galaxy R, tactically. the galaxy is not the least tactical cruiser ever in the canon, infact i can and have provided ampul documentation showing its firepower to be without peer. this would be the ultimate case of the galaxy R has to 'suck' because the galaxy X exists. anyway, that galaxy R station setup basically already exists on the recluse already.
I'm just glad to see this thread has calmed down a little and isn't churning out 3 pages a day of circular arguements. Maybe I can start participating again.
I would prefer to see a more of a forced tactical focus on the X. Let it have access to some better Tac abilities, at the expense of some of that excess engie power.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
rather good i think, that seem more like something cryptic would be agree on since you keep the commander and lt commander eng ( things that define this ship in sto ) in stone.
4/2/4 for the console is good and more in line with the tanking purpose of the ship rather than it tactical abilitie.
but also could do 4/3/3 for the one that absolutely want the 3nd tact console
nope, nope, nope, sorry.
the galaxy dreadnought need a ltcommander tact, otherwise it will stay the joke tactical cruiser that it is right now.
i agree tho with the 7 base turn even if i don't bielieve anymore that cryptic will directly enhanced the base turn of the ship, but will do it by set bonuses instead ( like the odyssey for example )
my personal choice on it layout.
lt commander tact
commander eng
lt commander eng
ensign science
ensign science
+10 weapon, +5 shield, +5 engine
Thank you for your sentiment I do get your objection towards the Venture "X" variant I sketched, though I was trying to keep the original ship's tone (which was okay for the Venture?). I do concur that a LTC tac on the X and a LTC sci on the regular Venture would also be a very tempting set-up, however that will essentially make both of them completely new ships and I see it's hard to rationalize those changes in the games' current state. The support cruiser people will rage and the world will end etc.
I would however settle for +15 weapon and +5 engine power for the X to counter the phaser "lance". The thing is people always assume that the X needs more tactical focus. But I seriously ask at this point: Why? The ship was never shown to be a superior tactical focussed ship aside from having a huge TRIBBLE gun mounted below the saucer that fused both hulls together. Other than that it got a third warp nacell which probably makes it go faster or more stable at warp, but nothing says it is a huge TRIBBLE battle cruiser. It's a retrofitted Galaxy Class, essentially. The "dreadnaught" term (for this ship) is a invention by Cryptic and as you know they don't really do anything to justify it in the first place
thers an idea too. ya my second favorite station change would be a variation of the d'deridex staion setup, that is primarily eng barely, with very heavy tac and sci
(...)
except i sort of hate were that leaves the galaxy R, tactically. the galaxy is not the least tactical cruiser ever in the canon, infact i can and have provided ampul documentation showing its firepower to be without peer. this would be the ultimate case of the galaxy R has to 'suck' because the galaxy X exists. anyway, that galaxy R station setup basically already exists on the recluse already.
If we continue to harp on the sentiment that every ship is useless that doesn't feature 3 tac consoles or more you are right. Yet, I really like a D'd like setup with two LTC stations as well.
I could see the Venture having Cmdr Eng, LTC Sci, LTC Eng, Ens Tac, Ens Sci (uni) and the Venture X Cmdr Eng, LTC Tac, LTC Eng, Ens Sci, Ens Tac (uni).
The Galaxy might not be the least tactical ship, but it is certainly no specialist. It has lots of firepower but lacks the finesse to utilize that. And, in this game, the X's existence unfortunately means that the other version has to have a different focus if you want those two ships to be two seperate entities. I personally could settle with a LTC tac on the X, although I think that the setup I suggested does a lot to offer a variety of tac abilities (three low unis) that doesn't step on either the assault cruisers or battle cruisers toes.
I might add that I really only play ships that have 2 tac consoles fed side because those are ships I like So I might be a bit biased since I don't feel all that left behind...
I'm just glad to see this thread has calmed down a little and isn't churning out 3 pages a day of circular arguements. Maybe I can start participating again.
I would prefer to see a more of a forced tactical focus on the X. Let it have access to some better Tac abilities, at the expense of some of that excess engie power.
Like I said earlier, I understand why but there really is no indication that the X IS anything other than a retrofit Explorer in the first place. More weapon power for the "lance" and a bit more engine power, slightly more turn and 4 tac consoles I get all of that. I'm just afraid a LTC tac would push the ship too far out of its original role. I wouldn't complain, I'm just on neo1nx's side regarding my suggestion for the fleet Venture: It's more likely that Cryptic will take such a change if it doesn't TRIBBLE around too much in their power creep carussel
EDIT: @ all: I do concur that the lance has to be improved as well. Make it at least en par with the Guramba's weapon. And then imagine, you have a eng heavy cruiser with a possiblity of three tac stations (lt lt ens), 4 tac consoles, a innate weapon energy bonus that can on a reduced cooldown land significant critical hits (50k and up) - you don't really need the ltc tac on that. Though, like I said, if so the venture should get a LTC sci, maybe using the d'd modified set up. Hmm...
Both would be fine with me, the first ones keep them in the classic "cruiser" line while the others might step on other ship's nacelles...
Further, I do think that if the trend continues and we do get combined utility/damage consoles for science and engineering slots these could be pretty powerful and 2 tac ships wouldn't be left behind anymore.
^ 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
EDIT: @ all: I do concur that the lance has to be improved as well. Make it at least en par with the Guramba's weapon. And then imagine, you have a eng heavy cruiser with a possiblity of three tac stations (lt lt ens), 4 tac consoles, a innate weapon energy bonus that can on a reduced cooldown land significant critical hits (50k and up) - you don't really need the ltc tac on that. Though, like I said, if so the venture should get a LTC sci, maybe using the d'd modified set up. Hmm...
Both would be fine with me, the first ones keep them in the classic "cruiser" line while the others might step on other ship's nacelles...
Further, I do think that if the trend continues and we do get combined utility/damage consoles for science and engineering slots these could be pretty powerful and 2 tac ships wouldn't be left behind anymore.
Personally i would go with the first proposed pair, because i think two ensign BOFF slots (even universal ones) aren't really helpful IMO. Does it step on other ships nacelles (nice phrase btw. )?
I don't know and to be honest i don't care, sooner or later the possible amount of sense-making BOFF layouts is reached and a new ship HAS to use the same BOFF layout like a already existing one. So i would much more like to see ppl asking themselves "does that BOFF layout make sense on this ship?". I know that's a more simulation point of view and not a MMO attitude, but in my opinion ships in STO should first and foremost reflect their "original" counterparts from TV (or movie) instead of pressing them into a mold, no matter if it's appropriate or not.
(BOFF - Console Layout and power levels still are variables that can make a ship stats unique)
Personally i would go another way and make the Venture the Engineering brother of the Nebula:
The Galaxy -X on the other hand gets the same BOFF layout, but Science and Tactical reversed: Galaxy -X Tac: Lt.Cmdr. Engineering: Cmdr. Engineering: Ens. Science: Lt. Universal: Lt.
Consoles 4, 2, 4 (Console Layout: Tactical heavy)
Maybe a bit OP but if you consider the lack of a hangar (god forbid, lol), the low turnrate and the lack of DHCs (at least the GCS), i think it would be ok.
"...'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
Personally i would go with the first proposed pair, because i think two ensign BOFF slots (even universal ones) aren't really helpful IMO. Does it step on other ships nacelles (nice phrase btw. )?
I don't know and to be honest i don't care, sooner or later the possible amount of sense-making BOFF layouts is reached and a new ship HAS to use the same BOFF layout like a already existing one. So i would much more like to see ppl asking themselves "does that BOFF layout make sense on this ship?". I know that's a more simulation point of view and not a MMO attitude, but in my opinion ships in STO should first and foremost reflect their "original" counterparts from TV (or movie) instead of pressing them into a mold, no matter if it's appropriate or not.
(BOFF - Console Layout and power levels still are variables that can make a ship stats unique)
In fact I do share your point of view. But then again, this game generates money by having all unique ships and every change you want is affiliated with a new purchase. I can't see them being ready to duplicate a ship's setup, yet. But I wouldn't complain
Personally i would go another way and make the Venture the Engineering brother of the Nebula: (...) The Galaxy -X on the other hand gets the same BOFF layout, but Science and Tactical reversed:
We keep coming back to that and I must say it is still my most favorite BOFF layout (just got that Fleet Nebula ^^) , to be honest. And swapping the tac and sci slots for the dreadnaught is a great move. This would definitely get my vote as well Though I would make the Venture type a 2 tac console ship to prevent outrage and to encourage sci experiments. The X is a 4/4/2 console layout as well, so should the regular. I really hope we see more Eng and Sci consoles that also improve damage a little bit so we lose that pesky tac fixation. I really don't think it's overpowered: The regular Venture should lose a bit hull, gain a bit shield and the X should lose a bit more hull, gain one turn etc. to keep the balance.
Oh, and a Venture-esque skin for the Nebula would be quite welcome as well
^ 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 would however settle for +15 weapon and +5 engine power for the X to counter the phaser "lance".
first, power to weapons are not to counter the lance here, that would be a useless use of them, the lance, just like bo will drawn 50 power of your weapons no matter how much overcapping you got in that area.
second +15 is also overkill, giving this ship +10 allow you to reach 125 weapons power without relying on special gears or console, or skillpoint, so that good.
but if you give him +15 that mean that this would be at the expense of either the shield or engine, and here the price is not worht it for a slow cruiser like this.
The thing is people always assume that the X needs more tactical focus. But I seriously ask at this point: Why? The ship was never shown to be a superior tactical focussed ship aside from having a huge TRIBBLE gun mounted below the saucer that fused both hulls together. Other than that it got a third warp nacell which probably makes it go faster or more stable at warp, but nothing says it is a huge TRIBBLE battle cruiser. It's a retrofitted Galaxy Class, essentially. The "dreadnaught" term (for this ship) is a invention by Cryptic and as you know they don't really do anything to justify it in the first place
never shown to be a superior tactical focussed ship?
i don't known what you need as a proof.
the ship litterally rolfstomp a negvar type ship in what? 3 or 5 shot, i don't remember, and make the second one cry to it mammy.
i never see any star trek hero ship disposed of enemy of that size, that quick, without special technology.
this ship was reoriented to tactical because in this alternate timeline the federation were in war with the klingons.
we are not talking about an explorer anymore here, but about a ship retrofitted to be on part with other ship of it time and to defend the federation.
the lance is not here to throw flower to newcomer or first contact species but to destroy hull of starship, and so daes the little cannon on the saucer.
all that with a cloacking abilitie and i am sure that the now legendary versatilitie of the ship have been use to push it abilitie toward tactical.
it might not be the best tactical cruiser in it own timeline but it is certainly much more powerfull than the sto version we were giving.
in sto mechanics, a tactical ship with only a lt BO as tactical is not a serious idea, even the starcruiser got a lt tac.
i wouldn't call the galaxy dreadnought a huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser just because we would give him a lt commander tact, we are still talking a bout a 6 base turn and 25 inertia ship.
huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser suit more the scimitar for that matter:
+10 weapon power
integrated battle cloack
7 degree turn
double shielding
5 fore weapons
5 tactical console
hangar pet
and many other things specific to romulan faction like singularity abilitie, crit BO...
THAT, is a huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser, not a galaxy dread with a lt commander tact.
it daesn't matter that cryptic call him a dreadnought, what matter is that it is a tactical ship, and in this game a ship can not pretend to do a tactical job if he only got a lt tac combined with 6 base turnrate.
that where the joke is, especially when cryptic give him the abilitie to mount cannon.
a lt commander tact is the minimum to give this ship justice.
one could ask for more, but it would then be an other regent/avenger clone, and i bielieve that this ship got the abilitie to do something different.
something in between, and something that would not denied it primarely eng focus.
I personally could settle with a LTC tac on the X, although I think that the setup I suggested does a lot to offer a variety of tac abilities (three low unis) that doesn't step on either the assault cruisers or battle cruisers toes.
no, that the countrary that happened, having too much low tact slot is almost as bad as having 3 ensign eng slot.
it furthemore become highly redundant if you go for an auxtobat build and all that is at the expense of survivabilities ( no science bo ).
so that really, really is a bad idea. in everyway you can think of it for a 6 turn ship.
I might add that I really only play ships that have 2 tac consoles fed side because those are ships I like So I might be a bit biased since I don't feel all that left behind...
yes, that is the reason why you think that this is a good idea, if you try to play a tactical ship like it should be play, you will quickly realized the shortcomming of your solution.
Comments
How well did it do in the PvP queues?
maybe if you have just try to read the thread a little, you would have an idea of what we are complaining for.
instead of just assuming and loosing your time to try to proove a meaningless point.
so to answer to your all too predictable and stereotype assumptions:
_ NO, we don't want a god ship
_ NO, we don't want a gigantic escort ( remember that one? )
_ NO, we don't want that the galaxy retrofit be the best cruiser EVA.
but since i known too well that you wouldn't take the time to search in this thread what are the points we are arguing for, or just simply ask us before going to conclusion, i will quote dontdrunkimshoot who resume it better than i ever will.
or
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
yeah, we pointed this right away with drunk in this thread, but i suspect that gecko do it on purpose because he want to improve the stats of the ship, that what he was talking about in one of the last podcast.
if it not that, it really a bad joke.
or someone that really don't want this ship to be any better.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
no not L2P but L2R
learn to read
I hardly ever use weapon system efficiency since I generally run an aux2bat build with DEM3 and Marion. Weapon energy is not an issue so I generally run the Shield or Maneuvering buff. Both of which I think the dreadnought could use to great effect since it has a lower shield modifier then the other cruisers (because of the lack of a fleet version) and is one of the least maneuverable of the fedcruisers.
I had considered that as well, but I've lost all hope that the devs will do anything to improve the older ships that have been left in the dust with all the power creep. The standard Galaxy is completely irrelevant in the current game and the lack of com powers make the dreadnought undesirable as well, not that it was that desirable to being with.
dstal talked about it, gecko talked about it, it will happen, we just don't known on wich ship and when.
the first one will be the dreadnought trought,since gecko wait for his ship artist to finish the saucer sep abilitie to enhanced it stats, then they could give him a fleet version.
i am using auxtobat with my dread, but not marion, even if i own one, but weapons efficiency is still pretty noticeable when active.
i hope that the enhancement gecko talked about are worth the lost of the other 2 abilities.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
6k is nothing in ISE, even a tier 4 ship could do that, oh wait. i could proboly make a 10k fleet galaxy, but other cruisers i could get to 15k or 20k just as easily.
as far as damage is concerned, galaxy is the worst ship in the game, its also the worst then some tac cruisers at support and healing.
Instead of the lance as it is, make it like a mode you set the X into; it disables all your other weapons, has a 30 degree angle, and its range is 15km. Would have to do a good amount of damage as it's your only gun. Also takes 3 seconds to change between lance and regular weapons and can change modes in cloak, and is affected by beam overload.
As for the one off ability:
Overcharge lance:
phew, now that that is out of my head I feel better. Keep going guys, this is one of many threads I keep track off, and for a comparatively realistic idea, allow the lance to change colors when equipped with andorian phasers, I love that blue
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I dont think you followed my actual point to post that. Sure for you or me, or any of the people pulling 15, 20, 40, etc dps its nothing. We do that in our sleep.
But we arent the average player/ship builder in the game. The average pug 3-4k dps cruiser will attest to that. Even a halfassed decent build on a captain level galaxy is adequate for the PvE of the game.
Its enough to do what needs to be done, is what I am saying.
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
and i am sure you didn't follow this thread to bielieve that we argue that thiss ship is not sufficient to finish any stf.
because so are tier 3 ship btw, the only difference is that these ship don't cost 2500z and are not relabelled tier5.
that is a sensible difference.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
most people in this thread want to use the galaxy and not be self nerfing them selves. being able to complete all pve content is a non factor when i could do all story content in a shuttle, all featured episodes in a tier 1 ship, and all qued content in a tier 3 ship.
we would like the galaxy to be mid tier at least at ether damage or support, or both. currently its an anomaly, its the worst cruiser, worst ship in the game, with not a single thing it can do well. theres nothing like it in the escort or sci ship ranks, is sorta unprecedented.
anyway, this is the setup for it ive been favoring, doesn't seem to over the top when you look at the temporal ships, and this new voth sci ship
COM eng
LTC uni
LT uni
LT sci
ENS sci
it could be the first cruiser that could go tacless, and be a super heal boat, or it could be run as a tac cruiser at various levels, but it will still be behind the monbosh, avenger, galor, excelsior, regent and fleet heavy in terms of tac cruiser ranking. even if it got a 3rd tac console, its 4 base turn rate down from the best.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
120 year old excelsiors are fine though. also crummy galors that in the show weren't even a threat to a galaxy class. its just a 50 years old design too, seeing as each ship was built to last 100 years, and be upgraded continually, gutted and overhauled every 20, its not unreasonable at all to think the ship would still be among the top cruisers.
Lets look at this objectivity starting with the TNG
TNG
This was a 1st and foremost a Science fiction show, it was about exploring the unknown and expanding our knowledge of the universe. It was about putting the crew in situations where it was about human endeavour and ingenuity that saved the day not the brute force of a phaser array.
However when faced with traditional enemies such as Klingons/Romulans and Cardassians the Galaxy was never shown to be outmatched.
In fact the Galaxy did a lot of posturing on the Romulan/Klingon and Cardassian boarders to deter aggression from these powers most noticeably against the Romulans and Cardassians. I think we can all agree that both these powers wouldn't hesitate to exploit and take aggressive action against an enemy starship if they thought it was weak.
Civilians on board the ship, making people feel it was a cruise liner. Lets turn our attention to the battle of Wolf 359. Did the Saratoga a Miranda Class variant not have Sisko's wife and son on board, Making this assumption not hold any water.
The ship was destroyed by a outdated bird of prey. Shields were compromised and she took the best part of a dozen torpedo's to the stardrive before warp core failure.
The Borg acknowledged Picard commanded the Federations most powerful ship. This was on the 2nd meeting between the two and the Borg on the 1st meeting TRIBBLE the computer core and must have downloaded ship specs and information from the starfleet database
At launch the Galaxy was the most advanced ship in the fleet and on numerous occasions was stated as being Starfleets most powerful ship. At this time you had all these classes in service (Only ships in STO listed)
Miranda/Excelsior/Constellation/Nebula/Ambassador/Soyuz/Cheyenne/Centaur the Galaxy was better armed, better shielded and had a more powerful warpcore and better top speed than all these ships
DS9
This was a show about Political conflict and was more of an action show than one of exploration which TNG was.
The loss of the U.S.S Odyssey to the Dominion. People keep coming back to this and pointing to it as a failure of the class. It got pawned by the Dominion ect. Lets put the record straight on this. The Dominion was the next big threat, There weapons could penetrate Federation shields, The ship fought for several minutes before withdrawing under her own power before the Jem'hadar rammed the ship to hammer home the point that this is our space and we will protect it at all costs. Now lets look at the newly arrived Defiant and her mission to find the founders, I recall the ship having its TRIBBLE handed to her a lot quicker than the Galaxy and she only survived as the Dominion captured her instead of destroying her.
So the Defiant a purpose built warship failed just as the Galaxy did in its 1st contact against a Dominion attack.
Later in the series the Defiant is shown to be blowing up Bugships in single volleys from her quad cannons. Well the Defiant was a warship, the show became a war show, its not good having a warship that cannot kill or take hits from the enemy.
Lakota vs the Defiant. This fight ended in stalemate, however from the remarks of the Lakota captain about the armour equipped to the Defiant it suggests the Lakota was expecting to be able to stop the ship.
The Defiant other than in 1 episode where Tom Riker stole the ship. It was never shown again being able to take down another ship outside its weight class. All through the Dominion war the Defiant took on Bugships. The Galaxy engaged Galors, and Dominion capital ships.
Voyager.
Now here we didn't see much of the Galaxy as Voyager was lost in the Delta Quadrant.
Now with what i have brought up in here please explain me how and why these tier 4/5 and fleet ships should be superior to the Galaxy Class when it is established that the Galaxy is better than them all
Nebula
Excelsior
Cheyenne (Know has fleet heavy cruiser)
Ambassador
No one her is asking for a god ship or the Galaxy to be a top of the line cruiser but she should be above the 4 ships i have listed above.
I have no beef with the Regent/Avenger and Odyssey classes being better than her. But not the other 4 ships.
Thank you for taking the time to read
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Refit
Venture type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Ens. Sci (Universal?)
4/2/4 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
42,900 Hull, 1.2 Shield mod, 6 Turn
Fleet Dreadnought Cruiser Refit
Venture-X type variant
Cmdr. Eng
Lt. Cdr. Eng
Lt. Sci (Universal?)
Lt. Tac (Universal?)
Ens. Tac (Universal?)
4/4/2 consoles (Eng/Tac/Sci)
40,000 Hull, 1.1 shield mod, 7 Turn, can equip cannons
What do you think? Three low universal stations, otherwise they carry on the emphasize of their non fleet counterparts into endgame.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
i don't known what this guy wanted to said, i didn't have time to read before branflakes moderate him.
flash gordon mod, hehe:D
so you see, devs read this thread.
but don't expect them to post here.
still like to known what this guy wanted to said.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
rather good i think, that seem more like something cryptic would be agree on since you keep the commander and lt commander eng ( things that define this ship in sto ) in stone.
4/2/4 for the console is good and more in line with the tanking purpose of the ship rather than it tactical abilitie.
but also could do 4/3/3 for the one that absolutely want the 3nd tact console
nope, nope, nope, sorry.
the galaxy dreadnought need a ltcommander tact, otherwise it will stay the joke tactical cruiser that it is right now.
i agree tho with the 7 base turn even if i don't bielieve anymore that cryptic will directly enhanced the base turn of the ship, but will do it by set bonuses instead ( like the odyssey for example )
my personal choice on it layout.
lt commander tact
commander eng
lt commander eng
ensign science
ensign science
+10 weapon, +5 shield, +5 engine
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
thers an idea too. ya my second favorite station change would be a variation of the d'deridex staion setup, that is primarily eng barely, with very heavy tac and sci
so d'deridex is
COM eng
LTC tac
LTC sci
ENS tac
ENS uni
galaxy R could be
COM eng
LTC eng
LTC sci
ENS tac
ENS uni
galaxy X could be
COM eng
LTC eng
LTC tac
ENS sci
ENS uni
except i sort of hate were that leaves the galaxy R, tactically. the galaxy is not the least tactical cruiser ever in the canon, infact i can and have provided ampul documentation showing its firepower to be without peer. this would be the ultimate case of the galaxy R has to 'suck' because the galaxy X exists. anyway, that galaxy R station setup basically already exists on the recluse already.
COM eng
LTC uni
LTC sci
LT uni
or
COM eng
LTC uni
LTC uni
ENS sci
ENS tac
id be fine with that though
I would prefer to see a more of a forced tactical focus on the X. Let it have access to some better Tac abilities, at the expense of some of that excess engie power.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Thank you for your sentiment
I would however settle for +15 weapon and +5 engine power for the X to counter the phaser "lance". The thing is people always assume that the X needs more tactical focus. But I seriously ask at this point: Why? The ship was never shown to be a superior tactical focussed ship aside from having a huge TRIBBLE gun mounted below the saucer that fused both hulls together. Other than that it got a third warp nacell which probably makes it go faster or more stable at warp, but nothing says it is a huge TRIBBLE battle cruiser. It's a retrofitted Galaxy Class, essentially. The "dreadnaught" term (for this ship) is a invention by Cryptic and as you know they don't really do anything to justify it in the first place
If we continue to harp on the sentiment that every ship is useless that doesn't feature 3 tac consoles or more you are right. Yet, I really like a D'd like setup with two LTC stations as well.
I could see the Venture having Cmdr Eng, LTC Sci, LTC Eng, Ens Tac, Ens Sci (uni) and the Venture X Cmdr Eng, LTC Tac, LTC Eng, Ens Sci, Ens Tac (uni).
The Galaxy might not be the least tactical ship, but it is certainly no specialist. It has lots of firepower but lacks the finesse to utilize that. And, in this game, the X's existence unfortunately means that the other version has to have a different focus if you want those two ships to be two seperate entities. I personally could settle with a LTC tac on the X, although I think that the setup I suggested does a lot to offer a variety of tac abilities (three low unis) that doesn't step on either the assault cruisers or battle cruisers toes.
I might add that I really only play ships that have 2 tac consoles fed side because those are ships I like
Like I said earlier, I understand why but there really is no indication that the X IS anything other than a retrofit Explorer in the first place. More weapon power for the "lance" and a bit more engine power, slightly more turn and 4 tac consoles I get all of that. I'm just afraid a LTC tac would push the ship too far out of its original role. I wouldn't complain, I'm just on neo1nx's side regarding my suggestion for the fleet Venture: It's more likely that Cryptic will take such a change if it doesn't TRIBBLE around too much in their power creep carussel
EDIT: @ all: I do concur that the lance has to be improved as well. Make it at least en par with the Guramba's weapon. And then imagine, you have a eng heavy cruiser with a possiblity of three tac stations (lt lt ens), 4 tac consoles, a innate weapon energy bonus that can on a reduced cooldown land significant critical hits (50k and up) - you don't really need the ltc tac on that. Though, like I said, if so the venture should get a LTC sci, maybe using the d'd modified set up. Hmm...
EDIT 2: What layout looks better in your opinion?
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Refit (Venture type)
Fleet Dreadnaught Cruiser Refit (Venture 'X' type)
Or DDIS inspired "alternate D'Deridex" layout
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Refit (Venture type) Alternative layout
Fleet Dreadnaught Cruiser Refit (Venture 'X' type) Alternative layout
Both would be fine with me, the first ones keep them in the classic "cruiser" line while the others might step on other ship's nacelles...
Further, I do think that if the trend continues and we do get combined utility/damage consoles for science and engineering slots these could be pretty powerful and 2 tac ships wouldn't be left behind anymore.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Personally i would go with the first proposed pair, because i think two ensign BOFF slots (even universal ones) aren't really helpful IMO. Does it step on other ships nacelles (nice phrase btw.
I don't know and to be honest i don't care, sooner or later the possible amount of sense-making BOFF layouts is reached and a new ship HAS to use the same BOFF layout like a already existing one. So i would much more like to see ppl asking themselves "does that BOFF layout make sense on this ship?". I know that's a more simulation point of view and not a MMO attitude, but in my opinion ships in STO should first and foremost reflect their "original" counterparts from TV (or movie) instead of pressing them into a mold, no matter if it's appropriate or not.
(BOFF - Console Layout and power levels still are variables that can make a ship stats unique)
Personally i would go another way and make the Venture the Engineering brother of the Nebula:
Galaxy (Venture)
Tac: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr.
Engineering: Ens.
Science: Lt. Cmdr.
Universal: Lt.
Consoles: 4, 3, 3
(Console Layout: Tactical and Science - balanced)
The Galaxy -X on the other hand gets the same BOFF layout, but Science and Tactical reversed:
Galaxy -X
Tac: Lt.Cmdr.
Engineering: Cmdr.
Engineering: Ens.
Science: Lt.
Universal: Lt.
Consoles 4, 2, 4
(Console Layout: Tactical heavy)
Maybe a bit OP but if you consider the lack of a hangar (god forbid, lol), the low turnrate and the lack of DHCs (at least the GCS), i think it would be ok.
You have a engineering galaxy same as what is currently available
A science galaxy
Lt tact
LtC engineering
Ens engineering
Lt sci
Cmd science
Consoles
3 eng
4 sci
2 tact
Sensor analysis included.
And a tactical galaxy
Lt engineering
LtC tactical
Cmd engineering
Ens Tactical
Lt science
Consoles
4 engineering
2 science
3 tactical
Perhaps this is something they should have done with the Odessy pack instead of being lazy and giving it a different console configuration.
In fact I do share your point of view. But then again, this game generates money by having all unique ships and every change you want is affiliated with a new purchase. I can't see them being ready to duplicate a ship's setup, yet. But I wouldn't complain
We keep coming back to that and I must say it is still my most favorite BOFF layout (just got that Fleet Nebula ^^) , to be honest. And swapping the tac and sci slots for the dreadnaught is a great move. This would definitely get my vote as well
Oh, and a Venture-esque skin for the Nebula would be quite welcome as well
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
first, power to weapons are not to counter the lance here, that would be a useless use of them, the lance, just like bo will drawn 50 power of your weapons no matter how much overcapping you got in that area.
second +15 is also overkill, giving this ship +10 allow you to reach 125 weapons power without relying on special gears or console, or skillpoint, so that good.
but if you give him +15 that mean that this would be at the expense of either the shield or engine, and here the price is not worht it for a slow cruiser like this.
never shown to be a superior tactical focussed ship?
i don't known what you need as a proof.
the ship litterally rolfstomp a negvar type ship in what? 3 or 5 shot, i don't remember, and make the second one cry to it mammy.
i never see any star trek hero ship disposed of enemy of that size, that quick, without special technology.
this ship was reoriented to tactical because in this alternate timeline the federation were in war with the klingons.
we are not talking about an explorer anymore here, but about a ship retrofitted to be on part with other ship of it time and to defend the federation.
the lance is not here to throw flower to newcomer or first contact species but to destroy hull of starship, and so daes the little cannon on the saucer.
all that with a cloacking abilitie and i am sure that the now legendary versatilitie of the ship have been use to push it abilitie toward tactical.
it might not be the best tactical cruiser in it own timeline but it is certainly much more powerfull than the sto version we were giving.
in sto mechanics, a tactical ship with only a lt BO as tactical is not a serious idea, even the starcruiser got a lt tac.
i wouldn't call the galaxy dreadnought a huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser just because we would give him a lt commander tact, we are still talking a bout a 6 base turn and 25 inertia ship.
huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser suit more the scimitar for that matter:
+10 weapon power
integrated battle cloack
7 degree turn
double shielding
5 fore weapons
5 tactical console
hangar pet
and many other things specific to romulan faction like singularity abilitie, crit BO...
THAT, is a huge TRIBBLE battlecruiser, not a galaxy dread with a lt commander tact.
it daesn't matter that cryptic call him a dreadnought, what matter is that it is a tactical ship, and in this game a ship can not pretend to do a tactical job if he only got a lt tac combined with 6 base turnrate.
that where the joke is, especially when cryptic give him the abilitie to mount cannon.
a lt commander tact is the minimum to give this ship justice.
one could ask for more, but it would then be an other regent/avenger clone, and i bielieve that this ship got the abilitie to do something different.
something in between, and something that would not denied it primarely eng focus.
no, that the countrary that happened, having too much low tact slot is almost as bad as having 3 ensign eng slot.
it furthemore become highly redundant if you go for an auxtobat build and all that is at the expense of survivabilities ( no science bo ).
so that really, really is a bad idea. in everyway you can think of it for a 6 turn ship.
yes, that is the reason why you think that this is a good idea, if you try to play a tactical ship like it should be play, you will quickly realized the shortcomming of your solution.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271