It's unbeliveable why this ship hasn't been fixed by now. Not only that, there hasn't been any response by ANY dev to this thread, ever.
Is there any reason to belive they will even consider take a closer look on that ship?
To be honest my patience has run out.
I mean we don't ask for a big game change or something that is completely unrealistic.
Just a small BOFF change on the Galaxy Class. Is that already too much to ask for?
Maybe Cryptic devs are already overstrained or Mr. Rivera has a bad day, I DO NOT CARE.
I just want that friggin ship finally to be fun and not be ashamed by its impotence in battle. Heck they even could make the Galor or the Excelsior a better ship, just because some dev (mr. Rivera) is a fan of that ship.
Am i the only one seeing the bizarreness in this?
Man i wish there where some other Trek game where the devs would really care to make a good Star Trek game and listen to the players.
I mean it's more than offending to be ignored in this matter, but if some dev says the GCS would be ok as it is, it only show how little this person and Cryptic understand of their own game or Star Trek in general.
Seriously after almost four years my patience has run out, Cryptic should finally do something about it.
"...'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
Not only that, there hasn't been any response by ANY dev to this thread, ever.
Not entirely true. Branflakes did pop up several pages back and censored someone. I suppose he disagreed with the post.
Has someone tried to make a sort of Bug Report post about the inefficiency of the Galaxy series, having made it sound clinical and business like instead of 400 pages of rambling and whatnot?
Why not put it in the Fed Gameplay subforum, since it relate to gameplay in general?
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Not entirely true. Branflakes did pop up several pages back and censored someone. I suppose he disagreed with the post.
Has someone tried to make a sort of Bug Report post about the inefficiency of the Galaxy series, having made it sound clinical and business like instead of 400 pages of rambling and whatnot?
Why not put it in the Fed Gameplay subforum, since it relate to gameplay in general?
Well that could meand someone may read it from time to time, but didn't bother to comment it or even try to seriously argue our case to Mr Rivera.
I don't know but their lack of interest isn't very encouraging and in no case strengthen my belive in Cryptic. (not if i had any, lol)
Seriously, i am at the point i do no longer care for other things than ships in STO.
It's not they wouldn't create ships with good BOFF/Console layout and other stats, but when it comes to Starfleet ships Cryptics designers seem to belive the ugiler the better.
It is almost as if they would thing a good looking Starfleet ship HAS to perform bad (or at least be a teethless tank) and the more offensive a Starfleet ship becomes, the more uglier it has to be. THANKS MR. RIVERA.
Maybe we should really create bug reports about the GCS-R, at least we COULD archive to get at least some attention.
Personally i find it unbeliveable that CBS doesn't intervene. The assumingly vetoed a T5 Constitution (which is ok in my eyes), but they DO NOT CARE about the GCS being the most crappy ship in STO.
On the other hand Cryptic pretends as if they would work on the Galaxy -X and would keep it from release because of some clipping issue with the saucer sep, lol.
Maybe they haven't looked at it yet, but the GCS-R has clipping issues and errors with the saucer seperation for years!
This whole issue just seems to be based on Mr. Riveras dislike towards TNG the GCS or whatever. It's frustrating and "not Exiting" in terms of STOs devs.
"...'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 support no saucer separation on the galaxy-x unless the saucer is a viable combat pet. but even then if its a console it will end up in the bank collecting dust like the one i had come with my gal-r
Oh i know seeing how cryptic don't appear to want to improve the Galaxy's all round performance in STO can we protest to have a hippy flower skin we can print on the saucer section, wacky acid colors all over the ship, replicators making pot for the crew, and crew quarters turned into bordello's. And rename the class the love boat class so it fits with the perception of people who don't recognize the galaxy as the feds main battleship during the TNG-VOY TV run
Thank you
And yes my posts are really starting to quack up as my frustration builds with the constant bugs and lack of action in bringing older ships up to spec. Rather than old mirror ships from lock boxes being repackaged time and again, how about a mirror galaxy in the next one. You think they make money now on lock boxes, it wil be the biggest selling lock box next to the Jem Bug, Make it so
That is actually out of question, at least to me. The "Dreadnaught" can't have saucer seperation. The additional phaser emitter fused the two sections toegether, period. I know they want to make it seperatable and have some sort of pulsewave firemode fpr the saucer, but that doesn't make the least bit of sense, as well as them stating that it's just cosmetical errors they can't fix. Like yreodred said, the Explorer has clipping issues since the game launched. If you use any other skin than the Galaxy skin on it the seperation will mess up at some point. This seems to be such a huge error they just cannot handle for some reason.
That being said, the Galaxy X doesn't make much sense in the first place. The "lance" does nothing the ship couldn't do already and the additional nacelle means it can go faster/more stable at warp and if those three antennas are supposed to be cannons is entirely up to speculation. That was what I meant a few posts ago when I said the Dreadnaught and the Explorer are not all that different, really. One can cloak and has a "super phaz0r", but other than that it's not more or less "tactical" than it's base model.
^ 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
If you read the upcoming content, a general Galaxy revamp is upcoming. As well as the saucerseperation for the dred, is almost finished. As for devs reading the blog, they are probably taking the high road. Some of the rage here at the devs is ridiculous. I've found the devs for the most part seem pretty damn responsive. At the end of the day keeping everyone happy is impossible, and the Galaxy IS slated for a revamp, just google upcoming content for sto and just about right after season 9 you will see the Galaxy revamp is being worked on, as well as the last of the canon ships. Getting on here and just being angry is fine, but it's like going and asking your boss for a raise, and when he doesn't drop everything and do it right away you start raging at him. There are some good ideas here, keep posting them, be creative, keep the idea alive. I wish the Galaxy was better also. I'm pretty sure it's coming, and I'll bet it's going to be awesome. I waited since launch for the Ambassador in game, I love it, but I had to wait a looooong time for it. Keep the faith, it's going to get fixed.
Edit: I have been using my Galaxy- R again lately. No seep ration console, I'm not sure my ship breaking into pieces is a good idea. I use to weps manifolds, two tac consoles, and I do pretty decent damage. Not equal to some other cruisers but aux2bat, epw, and some other tricks I'm keeping weapons power up close to 105-110 even while firing six phasers. Yes I know phasers blow, but I still love them.
If you read the upcoming content, a general Galaxy revamp is upcoming. As well as the saucerseperation for the dred, is almost finished. As for devs reading the blog, they are probably taking the high road. Some of the rage here at the devs is ridiculous. I've found the devs for the most part seem pretty damn responsive. At the end of the day keeping everyone happy is impossible, and the Galaxy IS slated for a revamp, just google upcoming content for sto and just about right after season 9 you will see the Galaxy revamp is being worked on, as well as the last of the canon ships. Getting on here and just being angry is fine, but it's like going and asking your boss for a raise, and when he doesn't drop everything and do it right away you start raging at him. There are some good ideas here, keep posting them, be creative, keep the idea alive. I wish the Galaxy was better also. I'm pretty sure it's coming, and I'll bet it's going to be awesome. I waited since launch for the Ambassador in game, I love it, but I had to wait a looooong time for it. Keep the faith, it's going to get fixed.
That "upcoming contend" you are refering to (according to STOWiki) has been promised for years now and we got absolutely nothing, so excuse me if my "faith" in cryptic is below zero.
"...'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
...how about a mirror galaxy in the next one. You think they make money now on lock boxes, it wil be the biggest selling lock box next to the Jem Bug, Make it so
+1
Instead of just redoing an existing galaxy, make a new Mirror Universe Galaxy.
I see them pop threw the rifts every now and again, but instead we get the "shovel" star cruiser.
@ DDIS: First I want to apologize if I sounded harsh. I just saw in your posts (and you said it literally in the recent one) that it is mandatory for a cruiser to have the double A2B setup in it, crowned by LTC tac. But that's just because it is the flavour of the month, isn't it? Prior to the magical DOFFs that majorly scrwewed with the game (my opinion) nobody gave a targ's furry TRIBBLE about A2B and now it has becomde as mandatory as TT (I use neither of them, but I don't PvP). And if everything that doesn't offer that is inferior there is really no reason to have different BOFF setups at all.
i think its mandatory for any decent cruiser to be able to use an AtB build, if a person wanted too on it. it should not lack the 2 LT eng stations to do it easily. thats not the same as saying every single cruisers build needs to run AtB, only really cruisers captained by tac captions should be using those builds. the LTC tac isn't necessary ether, but it never hurts. i mentioned even making a star cruiser a tac cruiser a few posts back, were its primary threat comes from EWP3 buffed by 4 consoles. theres plenty of ways to make cruisers deal damage that dont require them to be more escort like.
AtB builds are not flavor of the month. they have been flavor of the year, the go to way to get the most damage out of a cruiser. they will be flavor of the rest of this games life. cruisers like the avenger, regent, and fleet vorcha dont need AtB builds and still do very well, they have enough built in tac. you can use those builds on them, but its difficult, espessualy on the fleet vorcha. i dont want that same dificulty to end up on a galaxy. i'd like it to be able to run a crazy sci heavy build, without tac, as much as i might like to kirk around in it with an AtB build.
The second I don't get is what neo1nx said. What was in canon or not has absolutely no meaning in STOs gameplay, you have to agree on that one. So everything that counts has to be based on gameplay's means. And regarding that we have the Galaxy as a part of the trinity they introduced "back then". Now the trinity doesn't work anymore (it never has really) and those ships suffer and that's a reasonable complaint. But demanding a LTC tac or even uni on that 4 year old ship is way out of proportion and just doesn't seem reasonable other than "my favourite ship can't compete with recent power creep ships. I demand improvement!" - bt that's not how that game works. On the other hand, we have the refits of those trinity ships that offer a more sensible BOFF layout but are completely obsolete because they are T4 ships. So having fleet refits that emphasize on the strength of those T4 versions (which are pretty much an acknowledgement of the devs that something's wrong with the retrofits) is a reasonable demand because otherwise those refits are a complete waste of money since you cannot play them any longer.
fundamentals of canon shape all the canon ships in game completely. its why the galaxy seperates, wile the MVAM splits into 3, why the akira has a torp spread console and soft canon hanger deck, why the more tac heavy regent got made cause no one thought the soverign station setup was tac heavy enough, why kdf cruisers can use cannons, cloak, and turn better then fed cruisers, why romulans can all battelcloak and end up being the best inspite of balance concerns. the canon is everything, and in almost every instance leads to in game inbalance. good! it wouldn not look and feel like strek if they didnt put balance aside for the canon in all these examples.
how long a ship has been in game is no justification for it to suck. only newly released ships should be good? the galor is justified to be beter then the galaxy becase it was released after? the only thing thers is justification for at this point is for the fan favorites that were all introduced at launch to be updated so they are competitive. cryptic agreed when it came to the sovereign class, im not sure what the hold up is with the galaxy.
the fleet vorcha is not actually called the fleet vorcha, its called the fleet Tor'Kaht, the name of a costume variant was granted fleet status. so, there we go, theres precedence for a fleet venture right there, one they can actually get right this time. you know what i'd choose for it
That's where I am coming from, I really don't want to come across as being hysteric. But would Engineering be king in this game for some reason nobody would demand a LTC tac on the Galaxy. The gameplay is seriously borked because there is a clear tactical preference to it, but I don't think it helps to further increase that misconception instead of coming up with a few alternative builds. I realize that the LTC uni build you suggested would also make a science build possible, but a LTC uni is a pretty strong gimmick and reserved for top of the line ships and lockbox prizes first, and second you know as well as I that a LTC uni is basically reserved as a tac station as well.
Regarding the Nebby layout: I personally like it. I even don't have a problem with her being a "science vessel" - stats wise she's basically a cruiser and since it lacks virtually the entire secondary hull I see that there are less weapons on her (those 8 or 5 weapon slots dont make sense from a canon perspective in the first place ).
universal consoles are standard equipment on ships now. the newest lockbox has a ship with a uni LTC and LT, but also has an additional LTC station. the more time passes, the more common what im suggesting will look like, its been around since the temporal box already.
eng isnt useless, its actually at its core the most essential part of every build. the problem is you can have to much of it, you cant really have to much sci or tac. as long as that 'to much' sci or tac doesn't cut to deeply into your eng. every ship doesn't NEED AtB, but they all need EPtS, and they should really be running 2 different types of EPt at full uptime as well, with the help of damage control doffs. RSP for many is essential too, DEM can be great for damage, EWP is a good snare for ships that can effectively use it, eng skills are mostly great. but you dont really want more then about 3 on non cruisers, or more then 6 on cruisers. you can still do well with 7, but the 8 the galaxy has? kills it dead.
+1
Instead of just redoing an existing galaxy, make a new Mirror Universe Galaxy.
I see them pop threw the rifts every now and again, but instead we get the "shovel" star cruiser.
Come on Cryptic, Mirror Galaxy please.
I'd be all for that.
It would give Cryptic the chance to create a very different (=better) version of the ship we have in game right now.
...
how long a ship has been in game is no justification for it to suck. only newly released ships should be good? the galor is justified to be beter then the galaxy becase it was released after? the only thing thers is justification for at this point is for the fan favorites that were all introduced at launch to be updated so they are competitive. cryptic agreed when it came to the sovereign class, im not sure what the hold up is with the galaxy.
...
eng isnt useless, its actually at its core the most essential part of every build. the problem is you can have to much of it, you cant really have to much sci or tac. as long as that 'to much' sci or tac doesn't cut to deeply into your eng. every ship doesn't NEED AtB, but they all need EPtS, and they should really be running 2 different types of EPt at full uptime as well, with the help of damage control doffs. RSP for many is essential too, DEM can be great for damage, EWP is a good snare for ships that can effectively use it, eng skills are mostly great. but you dont really want more then about 3 on non cruisers, or more then 6 on cruisers. you can still do well with 7, but the 8 the galaxy has? kills it dead.
The problem isn't even the exaggerated use of Engineering BOFFs on the GCS -R.
It wouln't be even half as bad if that ship had 2 Cmdr Engineers, but the third ensign shares too many cooldowns with other powers.
Now all that wouldn't be a problem if Engineering team had a similar shield distribution ability as Tactical team. A change like that would alter the status of the GCS overnight. We finally could use torpedoes at the Galaxy (as it should be) or other tactical powers and many other ships had instantly much more tactical options. But the necessity to use Tactical team just kills it.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
The problem isn't even the exaggerated use of Engineering BOFFs on the GCS -R.
It wouln't be even half as bad if that ship had 2 Cmdr Engineers, but the third ensign shares too many cooldowns with other powers.
Now all that wouldn't be a problem if Engineering team had a similar shield distribution ability as Tactical team. A change like that would alter the status of the GCS overnight. We finally could use torpedoes at the Galaxy (as it should be) or other tactical powers and many other ships had instantly much more tactical options. But the necessity to use Tactical team just kills it.
I think science engineering and tactical teams should all share the shield distribution buff so they all are just as good as Tactical. That would fix alot of ships problems that have limited tac bo slots.
The "Teams" need some tweaks (no they don't need them, but think about it) anyway. What are "tactical teams" even that boost damage and shield distribution? Those are traits you'd apply to engineers. Tactical Teams should be a boarding party-esque ability on self, allies or enemy ships (on enemy ships of course you are the boarding party). Science could boost and heal shields and enginnering repairs and boosts power.
And further, you actually should need a level 3 team to clear a level 3 debuff, don't you think? Yeah, I know, the outrage... but think about it, you can put a lvl 3 aceton beam on an enemy (not that anyone uses that, lol, no dps) and you can just clear that with a lvl 1 team. Now that I think of it, is aceton beam the only engineering debuff in the game?
^ 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 think science engineering and tactical teams should all share the shield distribution buff so they all are just as good as Tactical. That would fix alot of ships problems that have limited tac bo slots.
tac team would have basically no reason to exist if they did that, and people would have way to much auto distribution.
then there would be threads about how to many tac ENS are useless, because they would be then
tac team would have basically no reason to exist if they did that, and people would have way to much auto distribution.
then there would be threads about how to many tac ENS are useless, because they would be then
How about this:
Tactical Team: removes Tactical debuffs + shield distribution + damage or critical buff
Science Team: removes Science debuffs + shield distribution + shield heal
Engineering Team: removes Engineering debuffs + shield distribution + hull heal
I have no idea why this subject doesn't come up more often, since it it the most obvious un-balance in STO in my opinion.
The need to use Tactical Team virtually leaves ships like the GCS (or any other lt tac only ship) with just only ONE single tactical power to choose from.
I won't imagine the rage if the roles where reversed and Engineering team where the only BOFF power having such a shield distribution.
Don't you think that Escort jockeys wouldn't rage for years then?
(well cryptics devs which are Escort fanatics wouldn't have made it that way anyway, but let's just pretend for a minute)
"...'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
tac team would have basically no reason to exist if they did that, and people would have way to much auto distribution.
then there would be threads about how to many tac ENS are useless, because they would be then
Then give Tactical Team the ability to buff accuracy directly. That'll give it a niche and also solve the problem of Escorts being more durable than intended.
tac team would have basically no reason to exist if they did that, and people would have way to much auto distribution.
then there would be threads about how to many tac ENS are useless, because they would be then
It would on tac heavy ships where you have few science and Engineering boff choices you would use Tac team for the distribution of shields just like now. Yea they would miss out on a shield buff and a hull heal but thats choice. The kinda tough choice that science and cruisers make now with having to use a tac boff slot for tac team. If your running say the defiant you'd still want to use an ensign for tac team cause u need the 2 engineer and 2 science slots for other things that are more important. Also like mentioned could buff up tac team with a slight bonus to acc or crit. Should be hard choices like these and as a Escort you should have the loss of survivability due to your DPS. You want the hull heal from engineer team or the shield heal from science then your gonna have some tough choices just like Science and Cruisers have had that don't have that many Tac abilities.
The Galaxy class starship is a Battleship, though it's my most favorite ship, it feels like it under performs compared to other ships. I do believe to should receive a buff.
Veteran of STO, had it for 5 years. Unfortunately, my Original account is gone.
honestly I feel like people on this thread don't actually use the galaxy alot... The ship its self preforms pretty good in the hands of the right setup, and skill in use of cruisers. While i use a OPs oddy it's setup is exactly like a fleet galaxy 3 engi boffs and everything. Do I think there are some balance issues, yes but I think its mostly the engi boff powers themselves.
If your looking for offensive+best dps cruiser the galaxy just isn't that I'm sorry the galaxy doesn't fit your desired role or style. But its not gimped just becuase of that... The Team abilities are unbalanced honestly I think ships should auto balance shield hp based on many factors. If you have to rotate ability to stay competitive then that ability needs to be base line and automatic or stripped away. Becuase ability rotation are one of the most boring things in this game and others. I like more responding to situations as they come. One of the reasons I choose to balance my shields manually rather then through tact team.
Having to hit space bar repeatedly with key bindings takes no skill, and is not very compelling game play. Now timing and using situation abilities, that's where this game can really shine at times.
Making tact the most important boff or console slot isn't what we need more of happening instead make new engineering abilities, and alter existing ones to make engi boff slots more valuable.So I have to say i completely disagree with the idea of making galaxy more tactical. Universal ensign I can get behind though.
honestly I feel like people on this thread don't actually use the galaxy alot... The ship its self preforms pretty good in the hands of the right setup, and skill in use of cruisers. While i use a OPs oddy it's setup is exactly like a fleet galaxy 3 engi boffs and everything. Do I think there are some balance issues, yes but I think its mostly the engi boff powers themselves.
Don't get me wrong, but people saying things like that should fly good ships once in a while and play on a harder setting than "normal".
If you would have read some previous posting of Dontdrunk or other people, you would notice that the three engineering ensigns cannot be used in any synergic form. Of course you can use the GCS in game if equipped right (at least i do so) but COMPARED to any other ship the GCS feels like driving with your handbrake on (on more than just one level).
Maybe you should try the T5 Ambassador or the T5 Excelsior for a change this should give you an idea about how the Galaxy Class should feel like.
Additionally if you would have read even more postings (maybe some of mine) you yould know that one of the biggest flaws of the GCS in STO is that it is just the most passive and toothless ship in the Game.
If you would know a bit about the "real" galaxy class from the various series, you would know that this ship isn't like that at all.
Cryptic made it like that, completely ignoring anything which was established about that ship, just because they wanted to make it the engineering "hero" ship, which is completely inappropriate and just plain wrong to do.
I think we all agree here that we do not want the Galaxy Class to be a over powered ship like the most lockbox or other ships Cryptic released from time to time. The only thing i want is a more versatile and less passive Galaxy Class. But as sad as it is Cryptics devs don't seem to understand even that.
I agree, the GCS doesn't really need a Regent or Monbosh like BOFF layout, but as long as tactical team is the only way to stay alive (no matter what ship you use) the GCS only has ONE SINGLE tactical power to choose from, thats rediculus.
No matter what other ppl may say, availlable offensive engineering powers can't compete with tactical powers in their effectiveness IMO.
On the other hand as someone who has become a Trek fan with TNG, it just make me sick to see a Galor Class or Excelsior Class being tactical superior to a Galaxy Class. I think that's something Cryptic has made in complete ignorance of ANYTHNG that was ever shown in Trek.
I don't think Cryptic devs (which are obviously DS9 Fans) would have made the Defiant as boring and passive as they have made the Galaxy Class. I think they where biased when making the Galaxy Class, they obviously thought TNG = Boring so Galaxy Class = Boring.
So the Galaxy Class is NOT good as it is in STO, someone saying that should really read more than the last two pages of this thread and in no case belive everything Cryptics devs say.
EDIT:
you should try to get your hands on a Voth Bastion Cruiser. Thats EXACTLY how a Galaxy class should handle and feel in STO in my opinion. (minus the fighters of course, that should stay the Bastion cruisers Lockbox bonus)
"...'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
Both members of my fleet and a fleet that some friends of mine can vouch for, I fly Galaxies a lot. Almost exclusively. I have a T4 Galaxy that I still fly, and actually use a lot, along with a Galaxy Dreadnought, and both have helped make the other ship better. Right now, despite ALL of the work that has gone into my Galaxy-X, it does less DPS than my T4 Gal does, and part of that is because of the AP build loaded into the T4. I set it up JUST BEFORE Sphere of Influence dropped, so I managed to snag some AP Mag Regulators before they went insane in price. My T4 is hell on Voth by itself. It will go down, but she won't be by herself. Before I altered my Dread to have a similar weapons loadout, it would be hard-pressed to cause hull damage to a Voth ship, and that was with a full broadside with 6 Adv. Fleet Phaser Arrays and a KCB. Now, while facing a target, I can bring to bear all of the forward weapons, and three rear weapons on either ship, and my T4 Gal will make a mess out of Voth ships, unless she is overrun. My Gal-X is almost as strong. At best. And you know what? Neither of those, if you look, are Aux2Bat builds. Best I get is EPtW and DEM on my Dread, and she is the weaker of the two!
On one hand, these ships are passable for end-game PvE content. And equipped with the best gear and weapons, a good hand at the controls, they aren't a huge hindrance. I know that for a fact, because I have run nothing but Elites in PvE missions with friends. I'm not the scariest ship out there, but I can carry my weight, and even manage to not be the lowest DPS ship there!
HOWEVER. I have PvPed in my Gal-X with various friends, all of whom have been at this far longer than me, and I am a joke. My closest competition was another Gal-X driver, and at my best, I managed to knock his hull down to 70% shortly before I exploded.
I'm not even going to try in my T4. It has a hull strength comparable to my Gal-X, and it's still squishy. I might hurt my human opponent a little more before I go, but that's it.
The only use the Galaxy family has in STO is at best for End-Game PvE content. Nothing more, and even then, you have to have a damned strong build, or some damned good friend who can deal with your eccentricity.
And for the record, I have a T4.5 Assault Cruiser obtained from levelling up, and I also have a Mirror AC. I also have both Mirror Escorts. So I am aware of what somewhat better ships can do. The Galaxy-X was the only ship I could afford, and I saved up a while to get it, because flying it was a personal dream. Same for the base-model Galaxy, because that's all I can get. I'll never be a threat in either ship in PvP. The Gal-X CAN be a threat in PvP, but only as an alpha striker, and only with a VERY SPECIFIC BUILD FOR THAT ONE FUNCTION.
And to be honest? At this point, it's just not real fair to the Galaxy fans. The Galaxy Refit and the Galaxy-X BOTH need some revisions at this point in order to be effective, and I mean just in basic gameplay function alone, before even getting to the visuals! I understand Yreodred's complaints, but as I'm sure he might agree with, before we go around trying to dress it up, these ships need to be made functionally competitive again first and foremost. I want to see the day when the GCS series stop being referred to as Failaxy and get back to being called Galaxy.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
But for serious, with extremely specific builds yup the galaxy can be pretty passably and fairly strong in PvE, the Gal-X, same thing BUT you really need to focus on Phasers so you can ge the most out of your gimmick gun.
At best on the Gal-X i can knock a friend(in on of those lovely unkillable recluses) down to 70% with an extremely well timed uber buffed alpha, lance strike.
Thats not ok. Cause thats all i get and then smash and pop i go.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
On one hand, these ships are passable for end-game PvE content. And equipped with the best gear and weapons, a good hand at the controls, they aren't a huge hindrance. I know that for a fact, because I have run nothing but Elites in PvE missions with friends. I'm not the scariest ship out there, but I can carry my weight, and even manage to not be the lowest DPS ship there!
You shouldn't forget that this fact isn't due to the GCSs BOFF layout. If someone manages to outgun somone else when flying a GCS it is because the other person has not a optimal Build.
So for example if i use the same equipment and a similar effective compilation of BO powers on my regent i can be by far more effective and dangerous compared to if i would fly my Galaxy -R.
I'm not saying that the GCs should get a tac heavy BOFF layout like the Regent or a similar ship, but it should be versatile enough to offer some alternatives even if it where a Science heavy ship like the new Voth bastion Cruiser for example.
And to be honest? At this point, it's just not real fair to the Galaxy fans. The Galaxy Refit and the Galaxy-X BOTH need some revisions at this point in order to be effective, and I mean just in basic gameplay function alone, before even getting to the visuals! I understand Yreodred's complaints, but as I'm sure he might agree with, before we go around trying to dress it up, these ships need to be made functionally competitive again first and foremost. I want to see the day when the GCS series stop being referred to as Failaxy and get back to being called Galaxy.
I'm waiting for that day too, but i think STO won't be the game that archives that. Not as long as the devs claim there wouldn't any problem regarding the GCS at all. (or at least ignoring it.)
Maybe we should make it a PvP related issue, maybe the devs listen then.
"...'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
STO has an unhealthy emphasis on DPS. Were there STFs that ranked players on survival, endurance and support - perhaps the Galaxy would have more love, considering you could stack quite a few layers of hull plating on it.
I'm soon going to do a perma-death run with an engineer. I'm considering the Galaxy, after I do some heavy comparative research on the other cruisers. (There's so many since I last joined the game. :rolleyes:)
I'd be happy for them to put even more engineer or science consoles on it! I'll be as harmless as a kitten, but laughing when I'm heal-tanking. :P
Don't get me wrong, but people saying things like that should fly good ships once in a while and play on a harder setting than "normal".
If you would have read some previous posting of Dontdrunk or other people, you would notice that the three engineering ensigns cannot be used in any synergic form. Of course you can use the GCS in game if equipped right (at least i do so) but COMPARED to any other ship the GCS feels like driving with your handbrake on (on more than just one level).
Maybe you should try the T5 Ambassador or the T5 Excelsior for a change this should give you an idea about how the Galaxy Class should feel like.
Additionally if you would have read even more postings (maybe some of mine) you yould know that one of the biggest flaws of the GCS in STO is that it is just the most passive and toothless ship in the Game.
If you would know a bit about the "real" galaxy class from the various series, you would know that this ship isn't like that at all.
Cryptic made it like that, completely ignoring anything which was established about that ship, just because they wanted to make it the engineering "hero" ship, which is completely inappropriate and just plain wrong to do.
I think we all agree here that we do not want the Galaxy Class to be a over powered ship like the most lockbox or other ships Cryptic released from time to time. The only thing i want is a more versatile and less passive Galaxy Class. But as sad as it is Cryptics devs don't seem to understand even that.
I agree, the GCS doesn't really need a Regent or Monbosh like BOFF layout, but as long as tactical team is the only way to stay alive (no matter what ship you use) the GCS only has ONE SINGLE tactical power to choose from, thats rediculus.
No matter what other ppl may say, availlable offensive engineering powers can't compete with tactical powers in their effectiveness IMO.
On the other hand as someone who has become a Trek fan with TNG, it just make me sick to see a Galor Class or Excelsior Class being tactical superior to a Galaxy Class. I think that's something Cryptic has made in complete ignorance of ANYTHNG that was ever shown in Trek.
I don't think Cryptic devs (which are obviously DS9 Fans) would have made the Defiant as boring and passive as they have made the Galaxy Class. I think they where biased when making the Galaxy Class, they obviously thought TNG = Boring so Galaxy Class = Boring.
So the Galaxy Class is NOT good as it is in STO, someone saying that should really read more than the last two pages of this thread and in no case belive everything Cryptics devs say.
EDIT:
you should try to get your hands on a Voth Bastion Cruiser. Thats EXACTLY how a Galaxy class should handle and feel in STO in my opinion. (minus the fighters of course, that should stay the Bastion cruisers Lockbox bonus)
I hate the look of the voth ships, so I'm not likely to pick them up. I can't comment on the ds9 vs tng thing in cryptic team. But i don't find my ship boring at all I have very reactive setup, due to me abandoning tactical team all to gather. The funny thing is I can tank well with out it. Perhaps better with but I have no trouble staying alive even in most pvp, though there have been a very few escort builds which pop my ship before i can react and usually that's becuase I have quite a few on me as well.
" Maybe you should try the T5 Ambassador or the T5 Excelsior for a change this should give you an idea about how the Galaxy Class should feel like. "
I have I don't like the excelsior boff setup, I lose too much survivability from my current setup and end up with redundant tact powers especially if i want to go BO 3. The ambassador is a nice ship, but honestly the only difference between it and galaxy is more turn and less hull, and LTC science and one more tact console... For my build to work right i need a LTC and Com Engi.
"the GCS only has ONE SINGLE tactical power to choose from, thats rediculus."
Abandon tact team and learn to live with out it then you will have two tact power
"No matter what other ppl may say, availlable offensive engineering powers can't compete with tactical powers in their effectiveness IMO."
This is where me and you totally agree, we need more engineering powers that A. don't have global cooldown with science or tact, and half our other engineer powers. B. that allow more tactical versatility and C. That require timing and skill to use
Like wouldn't it be awesome if Aceton Beam was a 360 power and instead of reducing energy weapon damage it strips Tact buffs off target enemy including HY and rapid fire etc, alpha, beta, etc.
Direct energy modulation instead of piercing shields or along with, completely bypasses some shield % resistance, directed energy modulation 3 having the biggest jump. one has like 5% 2 has like 10% but 20% or 25% for 3.
EPW should have a slight increase to fire rate along with its damage increase as well starting with EPW 2...
New abilities like energy dampening field could replace aceton Beam, have work like commands having reduction enemy energy damage within a certain radius, it would be a energy weapon denial zone. Subnuc can strip though.
Maybe torpedo or general weapon targeting ability which allows for long range shots, with less fallout damage drop...
But new models of it should be released so its a compettive ship in PvE dealing the type of damage the Avenger and Fleet Assualt can but in a differnt way as many have proposed
A few examples
A ship specific console that increases phaser damage
A ship specific console that increases photon damage
The Deflector shot as part of the ship
antimatter spread as part of the ship
giving it a better BOFF layout
The new models could bw sold as stand alone variants or even put into a lock box
and they would out sell these Voth ships hands down if they were of real value
Face it cryptic...........Most of us do not want alien ships ...we want our Star Trek favorites and we want them to compete not be obsolete when we buy them
just watching the sales of the voth ships over the weekend they must be the worst selling lock box ships ever
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
Just to check official canon, only ship to solo a Borg Cube....twice and survive. Blasted holes through one that you could see through. Took on three Kavort BoP and killed one before presumably being destroyed in The episode with Enterprise C. Took a massive beating from the Dominion for like 10 minutes before a suicide run finished It off. Four Galaxies helped roast Cardassians and the Dominion when retaking Deep six nine. Yet it's outclassed by Excelsior, A 100 plus year old Klingon battle cruiser, hell every tier 5 ship in the game. It is past time to fix the ship agreed. Maybe it's time to start the email campaign? The ship might be engineering heavy, I think that's clear from the show. But in now way is it as toothless as the version available suggest. Devs if your reading how about a straight answer to end this thread or at least end the speculation?
Yeah but there are enough older ships running around that are more capable to make it a bit silly. Not asking for it to be the best, just a little more competitive.
To be fair most of those ships were built decades after the Galaxy.
I don't think that this should have any bearing on whether or not to improve or not improve the Galaxy to match or not match with ships of the same teir in the current state of the game. Canon should not have this big of an impact on how mechanics in a game play out.
If we follow this logic, than the Odyssey (one of Starfleet's most recent designs) would be destroying other ships left and right with a single phaser beam. Don't even start with the Avenger. And the Temporal ships, which are probably built hundreds of years after all of the other in-game ships...
This shouldn't be a discussion on the capabilities of the Galaxy-class compared to other ships in canon, but rather a discussion on the capabilities of the Galaxy-class compared to other ships in game.
So the Galaxy was shown to be able to take a serious beating in canon, as well as being pretty combat able, how can we reflect this in-game without going beyond the parameters set up by the game?
Does that make sense, or am I just throwing out nonsense?
(Also, not directed at you, hartzilla, your post was just convenient for me to butt in. )
Comments
Is there any reason to belive they will even consider take a closer look on that ship?
To be honest my patience has run out.
I mean we don't ask for a big game change or something that is completely unrealistic.
Just a small BOFF change on the Galaxy Class. Is that already too much to ask for?
Maybe Cryptic devs are already overstrained or Mr. Rivera has a bad day, I DO NOT CARE.
I just want that friggin ship finally to be fun and not be ashamed by its impotence in battle. Heck they even could make the Galor or the Excelsior a better ship, just because some dev (mr. Rivera) is a fan of that ship.
Am i the only one seeing the bizarreness in this?
Man i wish there where some other Trek game where the devs would really care to make a good Star Trek game and listen to the players.
I mean it's more than offending to be ignored in this matter, but if some dev says the GCS would be ok as it is, it only show how little this person and Cryptic understand of their own game or Star Trek in general.
Seriously after almost four years my patience has run out, Cryptic should finally do something about it.
Not entirely true. Branflakes did pop up several pages back and censored someone. I suppose he disagreed with the post.
Has someone tried to make a sort of Bug Report post about the inefficiency of the Galaxy series, having made it sound clinical and business like instead of 400 pages of rambling and whatnot?
Why not put it in the Fed Gameplay subforum, since it relate to gameplay in general?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
I don't know but their lack of interest isn't very encouraging and in no case strengthen my belive in Cryptic. (not if i had any, lol)
Seriously, i am at the point i do no longer care for other things than ships in STO.
It's not they wouldn't create ships with good BOFF/Console layout and other stats, but when it comes to Starfleet ships Cryptics designers seem to belive the ugiler the better.
It is almost as if they would thing a good looking Starfleet ship HAS to perform bad (or at least be a teethless tank) and the more offensive a Starfleet ship becomes, the more uglier it has to be. THANKS MR. RIVERA.
Maybe we should really create bug reports about the GCS-R, at least we COULD archive to get at least some attention.
Personally i find it unbeliveable that CBS doesn't intervene. The assumingly vetoed a T5 Constitution (which is ok in my eyes), but they DO NOT CARE about the GCS being the most crappy ship in STO.
On the other hand Cryptic pretends as if they would work on the Galaxy -X and would keep it from release because of some clipping issue with the saucer sep, lol.
Maybe they haven't looked at it yet, but the GCS-R has clipping issues and errors with the saucer seperation for years!
This whole issue just seems to be based on Mr. Riveras dislike towards TNG the GCS or whatever. It's frustrating and "not Exiting" in terms of STOs devs.
Oh i know seeing how cryptic don't appear to want to improve the Galaxy's all round performance in STO can we protest to have a hippy flower skin we can print on the saucer section, wacky acid colors all over the ship, replicators making pot for the crew, and crew quarters turned into bordello's. And rename the class the love boat class so it fits with the perception of people who don't recognize the galaxy as the feds main battleship during the TNG-VOY TV run
Thank you
And yes my posts are really starting to quack up as my frustration builds with the constant bugs and lack of action in bringing older ships up to spec. Rather than old mirror ships from lock boxes being repackaged time and again, how about a mirror galaxy in the next one. You think they make money now on lock boxes, it wil be the biggest selling lock box next to the Jem Bug, Make it so
That being said, the Galaxy X doesn't make much sense in the first place. The "lance" does nothing the ship couldn't do already and the additional nacelle means it can go faster/more stable at warp and if those three antennas are supposed to be cannons is entirely up to speculation. That was what I meant a few posts ago when I said the Dreadnaught and the Explorer are not all that different, really. One can cloak and has a "super phaz0r", but other than that it's not more or less "tactical" than it's base model.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Edit: I have been using my Galaxy- R again lately. No seep ration console, I'm not sure my ship breaking into pieces is a good idea. I use to weps manifolds, two tac consoles, and I do pretty decent damage. Not equal to some other cruisers but aux2bat, epw, and some other tricks I'm keeping weapons power up close to 105-110 even while firing six phasers. Yes I know phasers blow, but I still love them.
+1
Instead of just redoing an existing galaxy, make a new Mirror Universe Galaxy.
I see them pop threw the rifts every now and again, but instead we get the "shovel" star cruiser.
Come on Cryptic, Mirror Galaxy please.
i think its mandatory for any decent cruiser to be able to use an AtB build, if a person wanted too on it. it should not lack the 2 LT eng stations to do it easily. thats not the same as saying every single cruisers build needs to run AtB, only really cruisers captained by tac captions should be using those builds. the LTC tac isn't necessary ether, but it never hurts. i mentioned even making a star cruiser a tac cruiser a few posts back, were its primary threat comes from EWP3 buffed by 4 consoles. theres plenty of ways to make cruisers deal damage that dont require them to be more escort like.
AtB builds are not flavor of the month. they have been flavor of the year, the go to way to get the most damage out of a cruiser. they will be flavor of the rest of this games life. cruisers like the avenger, regent, and fleet vorcha dont need AtB builds and still do very well, they have enough built in tac. you can use those builds on them, but its difficult, espessualy on the fleet vorcha. i dont want that same dificulty to end up on a galaxy. i'd like it to be able to run a crazy sci heavy build, without tac, as much as i might like to kirk around in it with an AtB build.
fundamentals of canon shape all the canon ships in game completely. its why the galaxy seperates, wile the MVAM splits into 3, why the akira has a torp spread console and soft canon hanger deck, why the more tac heavy regent got made cause no one thought the soverign station setup was tac heavy enough, why kdf cruisers can use cannons, cloak, and turn better then fed cruisers, why romulans can all battelcloak and end up being the best inspite of balance concerns. the canon is everything, and in almost every instance leads to in game inbalance. good! it wouldn not look and feel like strek if they didnt put balance aside for the canon in all these examples.
how long a ship has been in game is no justification for it to suck. only newly released ships should be good? the galor is justified to be beter then the galaxy becase it was released after? the only thing thers is justification for at this point is for the fan favorites that were all introduced at launch to be updated so they are competitive. cryptic agreed when it came to the sovereign class, im not sure what the hold up is with the galaxy.
the fleet vorcha is not actually called the fleet vorcha, its called the fleet Tor'Kaht, the name of a costume variant was granted fleet status. so, there we go, theres precedence for a fleet venture right there, one they can actually get right this time. you know what i'd choose for it
COM eng
LTC uni
LT uni
LTsci
ENS sci
4/3/3
universal consoles are standard equipment on ships now. the newest lockbox has a ship with a uni LTC and LT, but also has an additional LTC station. the more time passes, the more common what im suggesting will look like, its been around since the temporal box already.
eng isnt useless, its actually at its core the most essential part of every build. the problem is you can have to much of it, you cant really have to much sci or tac. as long as that 'to much' sci or tac doesn't cut to deeply into your eng. every ship doesn't NEED AtB, but they all need EPtS, and they should really be running 2 different types of EPt at full uptime as well, with the help of damage control doffs. RSP for many is essential too, DEM can be great for damage, EWP is a good snare for ships that can effectively use it, eng skills are mostly great. but you dont really want more then about 3 on non cruisers, or more then 6 on cruisers. you can still do well with 7, but the 8 the galaxy has? kills it dead.
It would give Cryptic the chance to create a very different (=better) version of the ship we have in game right now.
Mr. Rivera... just saying...
The problem isn't even the exaggerated use of Engineering BOFFs on the GCS -R.
It wouln't be even half as bad if that ship had 2 Cmdr Engineers, but the third ensign shares too many cooldowns with other powers.
Now all that wouldn't be a problem if Engineering team had a similar shield distribution ability as Tactical team. A change like that would alter the status of the GCS overnight. We finally could use torpedoes at the Galaxy (as it should be) or other tactical powers and many other ships had instantly much more tactical options. But the necessity to use Tactical team just kills it.
I think science engineering and tactical teams should all share the shield distribution buff so they all are just as good as Tactical. That would fix alot of ships problems that have limited tac bo slots.
And further, you actually should need a level 3 team to clear a level 3 debuff, don't you think? Yeah, I know, the outrage... but think about it, you can put a lvl 3 aceton beam on an enemy (not that anyone uses that, lol, no dps) and you can just clear that with a lvl 1 team. Now that I think of it, is aceton beam the only engineering debuff in the game?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
tac team would have basically no reason to exist if they did that, and people would have way to much auto distribution.
then there would be threads about how to many tac ENS are useless, because they would be then
How about this:
Tactical Team: removes Tactical debuffs + shield distribution + damage or critical buff
Science Team: removes Science debuffs + shield distribution + shield heal
Engineering Team: removes Engineering debuffs + shield distribution + hull heal
I have no idea why this subject doesn't come up more often, since it it the most obvious un-balance in STO in my opinion.
The need to use Tactical Team virtually leaves ships like the GCS (or any other lt tac only ship) with just only ONE single tactical power to choose from.
I won't imagine the rage if the roles where reversed and Engineering team where the only BOFF power having such a shield distribution.
Don't you think that Escort jockeys wouldn't rage for years then?
(well cryptics devs which are Escort fanatics wouldn't have made it that way anyway, but let's just pretend for a minute)
Then give Tactical Team the ability to buff accuracy directly. That'll give it a niche and also solve the problem of Escorts being more durable than intended.
It would on tac heavy ships where you have few science and Engineering boff choices you would use Tac team for the distribution of shields just like now. Yea they would miss out on a shield buff and a hull heal but thats choice. The kinda tough choice that science and cruisers make now with having to use a tac boff slot for tac team. If your running say the defiant you'd still want to use an ensign for tac team cause u need the 2 engineer and 2 science slots for other things that are more important. Also like mentioned could buff up tac team with a slight bonus to acc or crit. Should be hard choices like these and as a Escort you should have the loss of survivability due to your DPS. You want the hull heal from engineer team or the shield heal from science then your gonna have some tough choices just like Science and Cruisers have had that don't have that many Tac abilities.
"Make it so" - Captain Picard
Build I am working for my Federation, Klingon, and Romulans.
If your looking for offensive+best dps cruiser the galaxy just isn't that
Having to hit space bar repeatedly with key bindings takes no skill, and is not very compelling game play. Now timing and using situation abilities, that's where this game can really shine at times.
Making tact the most important boff or console slot isn't what we need more of happening instead make new engineering abilities, and alter existing ones to make engi boff slots more valuable.So I have to say i completely disagree with the idea of making galaxy more tactical. Universal ensign I can get behind though.
If you would have read some previous posting of Dontdrunk or other people, you would notice that the three engineering ensigns cannot be used in any synergic form. Of course you can use the GCS in game if equipped right (at least i do so) but COMPARED to any other ship the GCS feels like driving with your handbrake on (on more than just one level).
Maybe you should try the T5 Ambassador or the T5 Excelsior for a change this should give you an idea about how the Galaxy Class should feel like.
Additionally if you would have read even more postings (maybe some of mine) you yould know that one of the biggest flaws of the GCS in STO is that it is just the most passive and toothless ship in the Game.
If you would know a bit about the "real" galaxy class from the various series, you would know that this ship isn't like that at all.
Cryptic made it like that, completely ignoring anything which was established about that ship, just because they wanted to make it the engineering "hero" ship, which is completely inappropriate and just plain wrong to do.
I think we all agree here that we do not want the Galaxy Class to be a over powered ship like the most lockbox or other ships Cryptic released from time to time. The only thing i want is a more versatile and less passive Galaxy Class. But as sad as it is Cryptics devs don't seem to understand even that.
I agree, the GCS doesn't really need a Regent or Monbosh like BOFF layout, but as long as tactical team is the only way to stay alive (no matter what ship you use) the GCS only has ONE SINGLE tactical power to choose from, thats rediculus.
No matter what other ppl may say, availlable offensive engineering powers can't compete with tactical powers in their effectiveness IMO.
On the other hand as someone who has become a Trek fan with TNG, it just make me sick to see a Galor Class or Excelsior Class being tactical superior to a Galaxy Class. I think that's something Cryptic has made in complete ignorance of ANYTHNG that was ever shown in Trek.
I don't think Cryptic devs (which are obviously DS9 Fans) would have made the Defiant as boring and passive as they have made the Galaxy Class. I think they where biased when making the Galaxy Class, they obviously thought TNG = Boring so Galaxy Class = Boring.
So the Galaxy Class is NOT good as it is in STO, someone saying that should really read more than the last two pages of this thread and in no case belive everything Cryptics devs say.
EDIT:
you should try to get your hands on a Voth Bastion Cruiser. Thats EXACTLY how a Galaxy class should handle and feel in STO in my opinion. (minus the fighters of course, that should stay the Bastion cruisers Lockbox bonus)
On one hand, these ships are passable for end-game PvE content. And equipped with the best gear and weapons, a good hand at the controls, they aren't a huge hindrance. I know that for a fact, because I have run nothing but Elites in PvE missions with friends. I'm not the scariest ship out there, but I can carry my weight, and even manage to not be the lowest DPS ship there!
HOWEVER. I have PvPed in my Gal-X with various friends, all of whom have been at this far longer than me, and I am a joke. My closest competition was another Gal-X driver, and at my best, I managed to knock his hull down to 70% shortly before I exploded.
I'm not even going to try in my T4. It has a hull strength comparable to my Gal-X, and it's still squishy. I might hurt my human opponent a little more before I go, but that's it.
The only use the Galaxy family has in STO is at best for End-Game PvE content. Nothing more, and even then, you have to have a damned strong build, or some damned good friend who can deal with your eccentricity.
And for the record, I have a T4.5 Assault Cruiser obtained from levelling up, and I also have a Mirror AC. I also have both Mirror Escorts. So I am aware of what somewhat better ships can do. The Galaxy-X was the only ship I could afford, and I saved up a while to get it, because flying it was a personal dream. Same for the base-model Galaxy, because that's all I can get. I'll never be a threat in either ship in PvP. The Gal-X CAN be a threat in PvP, but only as an alpha striker, and only with a VERY SPECIFIC BUILD FOR THAT ONE FUNCTION.
And to be honest? At this point, it's just not real fair to the Galaxy fans. The Galaxy Refit and the Galaxy-X BOTH need some revisions at this point in order to be effective, and I mean just in basic gameplay function alone, before even getting to the visuals! I understand Yreodred's complaints, but as I'm sure he might agree with, before we go around trying to dress it up, these ships need to be made functionally competitive again first and foremost. I want to see the day when the GCS series stop being referred to as Failaxy and get back to being called Galaxy.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
But for serious, with extremely specific builds yup the galaxy can be pretty passably and fairly strong in PvE, the Gal-X, same thing BUT you really need to focus on Phasers so you can ge the most out of your gimmick gun.
At best on the Gal-X i can knock a friend(in on of those lovely unkillable recluses) down to 70% with an extremely well timed uber buffed alpha, lance strike.
Thats not ok. Cause thats all i get and then smash and pop i go.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
So for example if i use the same equipment and a similar effective compilation of BO powers on my regent i can be by far more effective and dangerous compared to if i would fly my Galaxy -R.
I'm not saying that the GCs should get a tac heavy BOFF layout like the Regent or a similar ship, but it should be versatile enough to offer some alternatives even if it where a Science heavy ship like the new Voth bastion Cruiser for example.
I'm waiting for that day too, but i think STO won't be the game that archives that. Not as long as the devs claim there wouldn't any problem regarding the GCS at all. (or at least ignoring it.)
Maybe we should make it a PvP related issue, maybe the devs listen then.
I'm soon going to do a perma-death run with an engineer. I'm considering the Galaxy, after I do some heavy comparative research on the other cruisers. (There's so many since I last joined the game. :rolleyes:)
I'd be happy for them to put even more engineer or science consoles on it! I'll be as harmless as a kitten, but laughing when I'm heal-tanking. :P
" Maybe you should try the T5 Ambassador or the T5 Excelsior for a change this should give you an idea about how the Galaxy Class should feel like. "
I have I don't like the excelsior boff setup, I lose too much survivability from my current setup and end up with redundant tact powers especially if i want to go BO 3. The ambassador is a nice ship, but honestly the only difference between it and galaxy is more turn and less hull, and LTC science and one more tact console... For my build to work right i need a LTC and Com Engi.
"the GCS only has ONE SINGLE tactical power to choose from, thats rediculus."
Abandon tact team and learn to live with out it then you will have two tact power
"No matter what other ppl may say, availlable offensive engineering powers can't compete with tactical powers in their effectiveness IMO."
This is where me and you totally agree, we need more engineering powers that A. don't have global cooldown with science or tact, and half our other engineer powers. B. that allow more tactical versatility and C. That require timing and skill to use
Like wouldn't it be awesome if Aceton Beam was a 360 power and instead of reducing energy weapon damage it strips Tact buffs off target enemy including HY and rapid fire etc, alpha, beta, etc.
Direct energy modulation instead of piercing shields or along with, completely bypasses some shield % resistance, directed energy modulation 3 having the biggest jump. one has like 5% 2 has like 10% but 20% or 25% for 3.
EPW should have a slight increase to fire rate along with its damage increase as well starting with EPW 2...
New abilities like energy dampening field could replace aceton Beam, have work like commands having reduction enemy energy damage within a certain radius, it would be a energy weapon denial zone. Subnuc can strip though.
Maybe torpedo or general weapon targeting ability which allows for long range shots, with less fallout damage drop...
But new models of it should be released so its a compettive ship in PvE dealing the type of damage the Avenger and Fleet Assualt can but in a differnt way as many have proposed
A few examples
A ship specific console that increases phaser damage
A ship specific console that increases photon damage
The Deflector shot as part of the ship
antimatter spread as part of the ship
giving it a better BOFF layout
The new models could bw sold as stand alone variants or even put into a lock box
and they would out sell these Voth ships hands down if they were of real value
Face it cryptic...........Most of us do not want alien ships ...we want our Star Trek favorites and we want them to compete not be obsolete when we buy them
just watching the sales of the voth ships over the weekend they must be the worst selling lock box ships ever
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
To be fair most of those ships were built decades after the Galaxy.
I don't think that this should have any bearing on whether or not to improve or not improve the Galaxy to match or not match with ships of the same teir in the current state of the game. Canon should not have this big of an impact on how mechanics in a game play out.
If we follow this logic, than the Odyssey (one of Starfleet's most recent designs) would be destroying other ships left and right with a single phaser beam. Don't even start with the Avenger. And the Temporal ships, which are probably built hundreds of years after all of the other in-game ships...
This shouldn't be a discussion on the capabilities of the Galaxy-class compared to other ships in canon, but rather a discussion on the capabilities of the Galaxy-class compared to other ships in game.
So the Galaxy was shown to be able to take a serious beating in canon, as well as being pretty combat able, how can we reflect this in-game without going beyond the parameters set up by the game?
Does that make sense, or am I just throwing out nonsense?
(Also, not directed at you, hartzilla, your post was just convenient for me to butt in.