And that's what I'm trying to say as well. There is no 'consortium of Galaxy fans'. I only speak for myself. Sometimes I agree with the rest of the Galaxy fans in this thread and sometimes, like in the case of giving her a hangar for ex., I don't.
I am also not condoning anyone generalizing people for his/hers own agenda, but I'm also not going to 'police' people, especially on internet forums. I'll only react when I feel I'm called upon, like in the case of being a Galaxy fan and being generalized. Noone should expect me to react if someone generalizes a group I have not relation to. No, it's not nice and it's insulting when anyone does it, I may react to such things when they happen IRL, but not on an internet forum if I'm not personally concerned.
I'm saying this just to be clear that just like you, I don't condone this behavior, but I'm also not going to 'police' anyone that didn't adress me personally or as a part of a group. I say this because there have been people that wanted some of 'us' to "police" (exact word used) the rest of 'us'.
That's not my role here. If myself and player A share opinion on topic 1, that doesn't mean that I'll wave my finger and say 'naughty, naughty!' if player A is insulting towards player B. However if player B says I'm an TRIBBLE because player A insulted him and I happen to share an opinion on topic 1 with player A, I'll give him/her a piece of my mind.
I would never ask anyone to police anyone else. Even thought the "naughty,naughty" could be entertaining. I was just pointing out that it wasn't one point of view that exhibits such behavior.
He is. But there's a slight difference in the narative. That's why I used the word 'adamant'.
It's not him comming here and simply saying "I think you're all overreacting. The ship is fine, I do 12k DPS with her." like kimmym did, and I happened to agree with a large portion of her points.
He comes here trying to convince the Galaxy supporters how 'insignificant' they are, how noone in the universe cares about the ship, how it would prevent devs to make new ships, how it would make Cryptic lose money, etc, etc.....you get my point.
There's a strong difference in the narrative and maybe it's just me, but that tone that has been pretty constant throughoht his posts here leads me to believe of some personal issues related to this ship.
It could also be that he is probably not the most eloquent and cheerful of dispositioned person to grace the thread. I could never imagine such a thing amongst a sci-fi thread. I don't know which kind of forums have less social grace, sci-fi or politics.
them, doesn't seem like the only people not happy with just that, by the way you describe it.
No need to argue semantics DD', Them is plural, meaning more that one. If two people aren't have, that qualifies as "them". Would Yreo, Neo and yourself be satisfied with just a Uni Ensign? You three are the primary "them" I had in mind.
I have come to the conclusion that Cryptic are not fans of The Next Generation because at every turn they have basically placated the Galaxy Class, even the Fleet Version is appalling compared to the ludicrous upgrades that the Defiant gets (5 Tactical Console Slots... Really!?)...
I am trying to get to the bottom as to why Cryptic continually hate on the Galaxy Class. It seems as if they only put it in the game to give a "Star Trek Feeling" but have put no effort into the Galaxies design or set up.
First off, why on Earth does an Excelsior and Fleet Excelsior (4 Tactical Console Slots btw and 1 Lieutenant Commander Console) complete outpower a Galaxy when the Galaxy is a newer and more tactically powerful ship!
The Galaxy Class in the game is COMPLETELY disappointing compared to its on screen counter part. Thats all well and good but you had a chance to change that and what do you do... PUT ANOTHER ENGINEERING CONSOLE ON IT!
It doesn't need that! What it needs is Tactical Power and not to be completely useless next to the Odyssey, a ship which you try to force most cruiser captains to use... I want more love for the Galaxy Class and less biased towards the Odyssey... Make the Galaxy Class a viable ship!
I have come to the conclusion that Cryptic know absolutely nothing about Star Trek and we'd be better off with the actual Star Trek fans producing this game because at least they could get the ships actually right to beginwith.
No need to argue semantics DD', Them is plural, meaning more that one. If two people aren't have, that qualifies as "them". Would Yreo, Neo and yourself be satisfied with just a Uni Ensign? You three are the primary "them" I had in mind.
i have no problem being lumped in to a group like that, or if you really did just mean me. i dont get sensitive over such things. the rest of your post though, you talk about just making the ENS universal leaving the galaxy class still inferior to to its closest alternatives.
Plus, making and ensign sci just makes it a slower Star Cruiser and an ensign tac makes it a Gal-X without a lance, DHC (which is kinda silly if equipped with more than one, IMHO), and cloak capability.
so, what i was getting at is you sound like your part of the 'them' you refereed too, not being happy with a uni ENS, then going to the trouble of spelling out how its not enough.
to answer your question of would i just be satisfied with just an ENS uni, no. mainly for the reason you just lined out. if they had just done the right thing and given the fleet galaxy a universal ENS from the start though, this thread proboly never would have happened, and the ship would just be bad, not an order of magnitude worse then every other choice.
i have no problem being lumped in to a group like that, or if you really did just mean me. i dont get sensitive over such things. the rest of your post though, you talk about just making the ENS universal leaving the galaxy class still inferior to to its closest alternatives.
so, what i was getting at is you sound like your part of the 'them' you refereed too, not being happy with a uni ENS, then going to the trouble of spelling out how its not enough.
to answer your question of would i just be satisfied with just an ENS uni, no. mainly for the reason you just lined out. if they had just done the right thing and given the fleet galaxy a universal ENS from the start though, this thread proboly never would have happened, and the ship would just be bad, not an order of magnitude worse then every other choice.
Basically, I was characterizing to the OP why people, such as yourself, would not be satisfied with it. I know, generally, what you and others have been saying and understand what your (and others) point is. I'm just not parallel to "them's" point on how to fix it.
As far as my opinion of a uni-ensign, I wouldn't really care either way. IMHO, the only thing that is really holding the design back, as-is, is that engineer skills and (somehwat) consoles aren't on the same level as sci and tac are, especially when a ship leans heavy into its primary aspect (tac/sci/eng).
While the Fleet consoles have worked to bring parity somewhat closer, the abilities are still weaker on the engie side. Just dealing with the cooldown handicap of aux2X or EPTX, when those are pretty much the primary repeatable skills is a problem. THe fact that EPTX is one of the few ensign abilities makes it harder for those that do not want to maintain EPTflexibility (as I do).
eng skills are on a bell curve. they have the most cant live without skills, but also the most underwhelming and most triped up by global cooldowns.
for example, ships basically cant function unless they have enough eng to keep at least EPtS on all the time. and ships that cant keep 2 different EPt skills up at all times are at a pretty steep disadvantage. since doffs though, any ship can pull that off easily, even if all they have is a LT eng.
if the steemrunner had 2 LT sci and an ENS eng, the ship just plain wouldn't be useable. the sweet spot for eng skills is only having a few of them, no more then 5 generally, or else your doing without enormously better sci or tac skills. AtB builds is a bandaid for having to much eng, but some ships, basically just the galaxy R, have to much eng to the point of total dysfunction.
buffing eng skills are dangerous though, because beam boat cruisers, as long as faw is fully functional, can pretty much dominate anything the fastest. non cruisers, or anything using DHCs takes more effort and cant just erase everything in range as quickly or easily. when you buff eng skills, you extend this gap. this is why over and over again i call out the idea of buffing eng, for just the galaxy's benefit, your are harming the balance of the entire game, squeing something thats already frankly far to squed as it is even more.
buffing eng skills are dangerous though, because beam boat cruisers, as long as faw is fully functional, can pretty much dominate anything the fastest. non cruisers, or anything using DHCs takes more effort and cant just erase everything in range as quickly or easily. when you buff eng skills, you extend this gap. this is why over and over again i call out the idea of buffing eng, for just the galaxy's benefit, your are harming the balance of the entire game, squeing something thats already frankly far to squed as it is even more.
yes, this is an other side effect that buffing eng will do other than not helping the galaxy retrofit..
but most of the casual pvper and pvers can't see that, they only see eng power to the prism of the pve experience, meaning, not very usefull or powerfull as tact or sci.
but that is not the role of eng power.
and wanting them to do more with the current state of the game is not the most "brilliant" idea one would think it is in the first place.
I really hope the Gal-R isn't included in the give away.
I kind of get the feeling that the stuff in the give aways are things that aren't selling anyway, and once they've given it to basically everyone, I can't imagine them going back to it for some fixes. There wouldn't be a point, since there would be little to no ROI since everyone would have it already.
Yea is true since i have farm lot of dilithium to buy one and late have to start farm more dilitthium to get gear to rise up the performance (same gear in any other ship will be great in the galaxy is a small punch , HELL IN A FREE LVL 40 SHIP CAN DO THE SAME, in some circunstances the lvl 40 ship are best than the galaxy ..... )
a few monts ago have farm dilithum like slave to get the wide angle torpedo for a idea i was testing (and is hard to know i have sleeping in ESD a bether ship than i like to fly , and im sure criptic think the galaxy-R is a perfect ship`and has no need of "FIX" and i will not be sorprised if late of the player event of 28 they will say :
--A lot of ppl have the galaxy-R so whe made a great job on her ... ---
not much hope on a real fix but i will not give up in this imposible quest to make them see they are loosing a lot of money ignoring the chance of a fix in this iconic ship ........
and sry for mi english
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
eng skills are on a bell curve. they have the most cant live without skills, but also the most underwhelming and most triped up by global cooldowns.
for example, ships basically cant function unless they have enough eng to keep at least EPtS on all the time. and ships that cant keep 2 different EPt skills up at all times are at a pretty steep disadvantage. since doffs though, any ship can pull that off easily, even if all they have is a LT eng.
if the steemrunner had 2 LT sci and an ENS eng, the ship just plain wouldn't be useable. the sweet spot for eng skills is only having a few of them, no more then 5 generally, or else your doing without enormously better sci or tac skills. AtB builds is a bandaid for having to much eng, but some ships, basically just the galaxy R, have to much eng to the point of total dysfunction.
buffing eng skills are dangerous though, because beam boat cruisers, as long as faw is fully functional, can pretty much dominate anything the fastest. non cruisers, or anything using DHCs takes more effort and cant just erase everything in range as quickly or easily. when you buff eng skills, you extend this gap. this is why over and over again i call out the idea of buffing eng, for just the galaxy's benefit, your are harming the balance of the entire game, squeing something thats already frankly far to squed as it is even more.
With enough effort and thought to it, they could rework eng skills to where the balance wouldn't be skewed. Also, I do believe the need to look at FAW and make it more equalized , I rarely even use BO on STF's with my Nebula because of FAW.
The goal of fixing should be making it to where more than 5 engineering skills (in your opinion, I would say 7) doesn't feel like a detriment.
Ships can't function unless EPtS has almost 100% uptime?
I beg to differ. I only have one EPtS power, and I only use it when I need it. And when I use it, I usually combine it with TSS, because at that point, my shields are pretty low. If it gets bad enough, I'll use RSP.
Other than that, those powers all sit unused while I cycle A2B and my Tac skills.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
Ships can't function unless EPtS has almost 100% uptime?
I beg to differ. I only have one EPtS power, and I only use it when I need it. And when I use it, I usually combine it with TSS, because at that point, my shields are pretty low. If it gets bad enough, I'll use RSP.
Other than that, those powers all sit unused while I cycle A2B and my Tac skills.
if you are using an auxtobat build, you are not really using only 1 EPTS power, well you don't even just using 1 tss too, against good players in pvp the equivalent of 2 epts power is mandatory, unless you relying on other science power to survive, some use fbp in between epts and rsp for example, but these build are subnuk trap.
i sometime don't use my epts either, but that just because some people ignore me from time to time for whatever reasons, however against good players that will not, having just 1 epts without auxtobat in a regular cruiser will make you the primary target because people will see that you can not resist and regenerate as good as the others.
some ship can rely on auxtobat to easily have the equivalent of 2 epts power, some others can't.
ship can function without a almost 100% uptime of epts, it just that that you will be more squishy than other, and only using epts when your shield are low is not the best idea, especially nowaday, you are exposing yourself to vaper by doing that.
drunk is an experimented pvper, when he said that having 2 epts power is mandatory, it is in an intensive pvp environement, where you are forced to use your ship to 100% to survive.
With enough effort and thought to it, they could rework eng skills to where the balance wouldn't be skewed.
they won't put all that effort and thought to make 3 or 4 eng cruiser work better, or look like they work better.
it is too bad that there is no ask cryptic anymore, we should have ask these question to them directly to see if that something that they even think about, like:
do you think engeneering power need an overhaul? some people complaigning that somes ship get limited with too much ensign engi bo slot because there is not enought different ensign engi power.
if that is something that you have thought about, how important it is on your radar?
ship can function without a almost 100% uptime of epts, it just that that you will be more squishy than other, and only using epts when your shield are low is not the best idea, especially nowaday, you are exposing yourself to vaper by doing that.
drunk is an experimented pvper, when he said that having 2 epts power is mandatory, it is in an intensive pvp environement, where you are forced to use your ship to 100% to survive.
Ah, there was a difference in context I didn't see. I almost never PvP. When I do, it's just one-on-one and a long-TRIBBLE time of constant pewing, lol. I'm apparently one of the few Tac officers who play this game.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
they won't put all that effort and thought to make 3 or 4 eng cruiser work better, or look like they work better.
Some people here think that there's a conspiracy to keep TNG ships the worst in the game, but they still post here anyways. If they are so sure of their beliefs, is that not as futile as what you are saying that Cryptic won't put much effort with what I am saying?
it is too bad that there is no ask cryptic anymore, we should have ask these question to them directly to see if that something that they even think about, like:
do you think engeneering power need an overhaul? some people complaigning that somes ship get limited with too much ensign engi bo slot because there is not enought different ensign engi power.
if that is something that you have thought about, how important it is on your radar?
I do miss "Ask Cryptic" too. ANd I have been a proponent of more lower end eng (and others) skills.
if you are using an auxtobat build, you are not really using only 1 EPTS power, well you don't even just using 1 tss too, against good players in pvp the equivalent of 2 epts power is mandatory, unless you relying on other science power to survive, some use fbp in between epts and rsp for example, but these build are subnuk trap.
i sometime don't use my epts either, but that just because some people ignore me from time to time for whatever reasons, however against good players that will not, having just 1 epts without auxtobat in a regular cruiser will make you the primary target because people will see that you can not resist and regenerate as good as the others.
some ship can rely on auxtobat to easily have the equivalent of 2 epts power, some others can't.
ship can function without a almost 100% uptime of epts, it just that that you will be more squishy than other, and only using epts when your shield are low is not the best idea, especially nowaday, you are exposing yourself to vaper by doing that.
drunk is an experimented pvper, when he said that having 2 epts power is mandatory, it is in an intensive pvp environement, where you are forced to use your ship to 100% to survive.
I take it that you meant "experienced", not "experimented"
Those of us that have been fortunate to have grabbed up the Rechargeable Shield Battery love to throw that in the mix too. It works well with engineer captains as it boosts energy levels too.
With enough effort and thought to it, they could rework eng skills to where the balance wouldn't be skewed. Also, I do believe the need to look at FAW and make it more equalized , I rarely even use BO on STF's with my Nebula because of FAW.
The goal of fixing should be making it to where more than 5 engineering skills (in your opinion, I would say 7) doesn't feel like a detriment.
But you have your opinion, and I have mine.
BO is a pointless skill in pve, with it the total dps you end up doing would be less, then if you were to just keep firing normally, or used faw. due to the power drain and the time it takes to normalize power levels.
going for peak spike itself is pointless in pve, because NPCs tend to just be giant balls of hitpoints, and theres always a lot of them. true spike can only be pulled off every 2 minutes or so, and only against 1 target, its incompatible with any pve content.
nether FAW nor BO need to be changed though, all the skills have the places you use them, not every skill should be good in every situation. if you made BO more like faw, how could it be a weapon of spike only, like it is now? tamper with that and you delete the foundation of escort pvp game play. but this is what your opinions of what should be done always does, unbalances or pulls the rug out from under the meta game in ways you dont understand.
BO is a pointless skill in pve, with it the total dps you end up doing would be less, then if you were to just keep firing normally, or used faw. due to the power drain and the time it takes to normalize power levels.
going for peak spike itself is pointless in pve, because NPCs tend to just be giant balls of hitpoints, and theres always a lot of them. true spike can only be pulled off every 2 minutes or so, and only against 1 target, its incompatible with any pve content.
nether FAW nor BO need to be changed though, all the skills have the places you use them, not every skill should be good in every situation. if you made BO more like faw, how could it be a weapon of spike only, like it is now? tamper with that and you delete the foundation of escort pvp game play. but this is what your opinions of what should be done always does, unbalances or pulls the rug out from under the meta game in ways you dont understand.
The thing that kills BO is the amount of energy drain. Even when running a bunch of energy bootsers and drainng reducers, its still is a big hit to take, especially for the damage tradeoff that isn't as worth it s the drain.
After some tinkering and playing around with builds and after a few failures and some help from a certain member of my fleet this is probably the best sort of build that the two of us could come up with, its now able to stand toe to toe with cubes and such in PvE without to much trouble its designed and built around buffing the hell out of its spinal lance (which is why i brought it) I believe in its current Mk5 status as I call it the cutting beam on the back as been swapped out for another elite fleet phaser array, granted its not aux2bat but I hate that setup anyway but with the right doffs it works just as well without it.
After some tinkering and playing around with builds and after a few failures and some help from a certain member of my fleet this is probably the best sort of build that the two of us could come up with, its now able to stand toe to toe with cubes and such in PvE without to much trouble its designed and built around buffing the hell out of its spinal lance (which is why i brought it) I believe in its current Mk5 status as I call it the cutting beam on the back as been swapped out for another elite fleet phaser array, granted its not aux2bat but I hate that setup anyway but with the right doffs it works just as well without it.
With 2 Conn Officer doffs you can run TT, APB1 and BFAW1. This would increase dps and allow TT to be on global CD as well as boosting attack patterns.
I have 2 Conn officers (Attack patterns)
2 Energy weapons (Reduce CD on beam special attacks)
1 Fabrication engineer (Reverse polarity)
1 systems engineer i think (Reduces CD on emergency power abilities
Oh and the tac consoles have recently been replaced with the MKXII spire (+CrtH) ones
Some people here think that there's a conspiracy to keep TNG ships the worst in the game, but they still post here anyways. If they are so sure of their beliefs, is that not as futile as what you are saying that Cryptic won't put much effort with what I am saying?
it would be futile indeed if what they bielieve is true.
and they don't bielieve in a conspiracy but the undoing of 1 person, namely gecko.
who in their mind were suppose to be an anti tng fan and hater of the galaxy class.
i can't, objectively, share that opinion, even if i can make some joke about it from time to time.
i bielieve however that their is some kind of bias view from gecko concerning the galaxy class potential and, more important, the obvious will to make it inferior to the sovereign in every way ( when it was introduced into the game ) because of the perceive inferiority that this ship represent in many of the star trek fan mind in comparison to the sovereign.
and since the free assault cruiser is not really a "killer" to beguin with, you can only end up with a really crappy galaxy class.
this bias view on the canon is, it seem, only active with this ship in the game.
we can't said that the exelsior have been made delibaratly inferior to the galaxy and sovereign because of it status in canon!
it the contrary that happened, and that is just one example among many others, like the nova class for example.
the galaxy class with the connie are the pinnacle of the pressure that the dogma " they must not be equal in any way to newer ship" impose in this game.
this is an mmo, these ships in the same tiers are supposed to be as efficient as all the others but in a different way, it is not fair to set up their stats in a way that would make them directly inferior to any others combinations.
if you don't want it to be that way, don't bring it to the same tier as the other ship ( tier 5 ). that the only way, and that is the way used to not make the connie an end ship game, and that fine.
but at the second were you allow a ship to the tier 5 status, you can't use the excuse of the perceive canon to delibaratly made it inferior, in every way, to the others.
that is what, i try to get to the devs attentions here, in this thread, a fair allocation of stats and a indentification of the role this ship should have in this game would terminate this thread.
or at least it would go on other subject as just, this ship is bad, make it better.
I take it that you meant "experienced", not "experimented"
Those of us that have been fortunate to have grabbed up the Rechargeable Shield Battery love to throw that in the mix too. It works well with engineer captains as it boosts energy levels too.
yes, experienced is what i meant
The thing that kills BO is the amount of energy drain. Even when running a bunch of energy bootsers and drainng reducers, its still is a big hit to take, especially for the damage tradeoff that isn't as worth it s the drain.
that is what drunk said to you in his post
BO is a pointless skill in pve, with it the total dps you end up doing would be less, then if you were to just keep firing normally, or used faw. due to the power drain and the time it takes to normalize power levels.
going for peak spike itself is pointless in pve, because NPCs tend to just be giant balls of hitpoints, and theres always a lot of them. true spike can only be pulled off every 2 minutes or so, and only against 1 target, its incompatible with any pve content.
so, to resume,BO is a pvp power, it is best use as a finisher were you don't have to care about power drain that ensue because the target is gone, and they are other similar situation and combination were it is good in pvp.
you can not ask it to be as effective for pve or you would ruin the base balanced of pvp.
like it or not, this game have been designed with pvp in mind by the devs.
you can not redirect the purpose of power to better fit pve content at the expanse of pvp, even if 95% of people are playing pve content.
Here's a picture from the Galaxy get together today.
im at the office but when i get home (still have 4 hs to go ) first thing to do is join to the event .
see yuo all there my fellow captain of the galaxy class
and sry for mi english
ill try to take many screenshoot today and post here
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
im at the office but when i get home (still have 4 hs to go ) first thing to do is join to the event .
see yuo all there my fellow captain of the galaxy class
and sry for mi english
ill try to take many screenshoot today and post here
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
Your missing out on all the fun! We just did a Galaxy only PvP match 10 vs 10. It was fun as hell!
Comments
I would never ask anyone to police anyone else. Even thought the "naughty,naughty" could be entertaining. I was just pointing out that it wasn't one point of view that exhibits such behavior.
It could also be that he is probably not the most eloquent and cheerful of dispositioned person to grace the thread. I could never imagine such a thing amongst a sci-fi thread. I don't know which kind of forums have less social grace, sci-fi or politics.
No need to argue semantics DD', Them is plural, meaning more that one. If two people aren't have, that qualifies as "them". Would Yreo, Neo and yourself be satisfied with just a Uni Ensign? You three are the primary "them" I had in mind.
I'm not so sure of that. I would argue that all of the techno-babble was an engineering, not science area, like:
" If we reroute auxiliary power through deck thirteens eps grid .... etc...."
I feel you are right sir
i have no problem being lumped in to a group like that, or if you really did just mean me. i dont get sensitive over such things. the rest of your post though, you talk about just making the ENS universal leaving the galaxy class still inferior to to its closest alternatives.
so, what i was getting at is you sound like your part of the 'them' you refereed too, not being happy with a uni ENS, then going to the trouble of spelling out how its not enough.
to answer your question of would i just be satisfied with just an ENS uni, no. mainly for the reason you just lined out. if they had just done the right thing and given the fleet galaxy a universal ENS from the start though, this thread proboly never would have happened, and the ship would just be bad, not an order of magnitude worse then every other choice.
Basically, I was characterizing to the OP why people, such as yourself, would not be satisfied with it. I know, generally, what you and others have been saying and understand what your (and others) point is. I'm just not parallel to "them's" point on how to fix it.
As far as my opinion of a uni-ensign, I wouldn't really care either way. IMHO, the only thing that is really holding the design back, as-is, is that engineer skills and (somehwat) consoles aren't on the same level as sci and tac are, especially when a ship leans heavy into its primary aspect (tac/sci/eng).
While the Fleet consoles have worked to bring parity somewhat closer, the abilities are still weaker on the engie side. Just dealing with the cooldown handicap of aux2X or EPTX, when those are pretty much the primary repeatable skills is a problem. THe fact that EPTX is one of the few ensign abilities makes it harder for those that do not want to maintain EPTflexibility (as I do).
for example, ships basically cant function unless they have enough eng to keep at least EPtS on all the time. and ships that cant keep 2 different EPt skills up at all times are at a pretty steep disadvantage. since doffs though, any ship can pull that off easily, even if all they have is a LT eng.
if the steemrunner had 2 LT sci and an ENS eng, the ship just plain wouldn't be useable. the sweet spot for eng skills is only having a few of them, no more then 5 generally, or else your doing without enormously better sci or tac skills. AtB builds is a bandaid for having to much eng, but some ships, basically just the galaxy R, have to much eng to the point of total dysfunction.
buffing eng skills are dangerous though, because beam boat cruisers, as long as faw is fully functional, can pretty much dominate anything the fastest. non cruisers, or anything using DHCs takes more effort and cant just erase everything in range as quickly or easily. when you buff eng skills, you extend this gap. this is why over and over again i call out the idea of buffing eng, for just the galaxy's benefit, your are harming the balance of the entire game, squeing something thats already frankly far to squed as it is even more.
yes, this is an other side effect that buffing eng will do other than not helping the galaxy retrofit..
but most of the casual pvper and pvers can't see that, they only see eng power to the prism of the pve experience, meaning, not very usefull or powerfull as tact or sci.
but that is not the role of eng power.
and wanting them to do more with the current state of the game is not the most "brilliant" idea one would think it is in the first place.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I kind of get the feeling that the stuff in the give aways are things that aren't selling anyway, and once they've given it to basically everyone, I can't imagine them going back to it for some fixes. There wouldn't be a point, since there would be little to no ROI since everyone would have it already.
Yea is true since i have farm lot of dilithium to buy one and late have to start farm more dilitthium to get gear to rise up the performance (same gear in any other ship will be great in the galaxy is a small punch , HELL IN A FREE LVL 40 SHIP CAN DO THE SAME, in some circunstances the lvl 40 ship are best than the galaxy
a few monts ago have farm dilithum like slave to get the wide angle torpedo for a idea i was testing (and is hard to know i have sleeping in ESD a bether ship than i like to fly , and im sure criptic think the galaxy-R is a perfect ship`and has no need of "FIX" and i will not be sorprised if late of the player event of 28 they will say :
--A lot of ppl have the galaxy-R so whe made a great job on her ... ---
not much hope on a real fix but i will not give up in this imposible quest to make them see they are loosing a lot of money ignoring the chance of a fix in this iconic ship ........
and sry for mi english
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
With enough effort and thought to it, they could rework eng skills to where the balance wouldn't be skewed. Also, I do believe the need to look at FAW and make it more equalized , I rarely even use BO on STF's with my Nebula because of FAW.
The goal of fixing should be making it to where more than 5 engineering skills (in your opinion, I would say 7) doesn't feel like a detriment.
But you have your opinion, and I have mine.
I beg to differ. I only have one EPtS power, and I only use it when I need it. And when I use it, I usually combine it with TSS, because at that point, my shields are pretty low. If it gets bad enough, I'll use RSP.
Other than that, those powers all sit unused while I cycle A2B and my Tac skills.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
ROFLMAO!!!
Thanks for the laugh, it really made my day!
if you are using an auxtobat build, you are not really using only 1 EPTS power, well you don't even just using 1 tss too, against good players in pvp the equivalent of 2 epts power is mandatory, unless you relying on other science power to survive, some use fbp in between epts and rsp for example, but these build are subnuk trap.
i sometime don't use my epts either, but that just because some people ignore me from time to time for whatever reasons, however against good players that will not, having just 1 epts without auxtobat in a regular cruiser will make you the primary target because people will see that you can not resist and regenerate as good as the others.
some ship can rely on auxtobat to easily have the equivalent of 2 epts power, some others can't.
ship can function without a almost 100% uptime of epts, it just that that you will be more squishy than other, and only using epts when your shield are low is not the best idea, especially nowaday, you are exposing yourself to vaper by doing that.
drunk is an experimented pvper, when he said that having 2 epts power is mandatory, it is in an intensive pvp environement, where you are forced to use your ship to 100% to survive.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
they won't put all that effort and thought to make 3 or 4 eng cruiser work better, or look like they work better.
it is too bad that there is no ask cryptic anymore, we should have ask these question to them directly to see if that something that they even think about, like:
do you think engeneering power need an overhaul? some people complaigning that somes ship get limited with too much ensign engi bo slot because there is not enought different ensign engi power.
if that is something that you have thought about, how important it is on your radar?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Some people here think that there's a conspiracy to keep TNG ships the worst in the game, but they still post here anyways. If they are so sure of their beliefs, is that not as futile as what you are saying that Cryptic won't put much effort with what I am saying?
I do miss "Ask Cryptic" too. ANd I have been a proponent of more lower end eng (and others) skills.
I take it that you meant "experienced", not "experimented"
Those of us that have been fortunate to have grabbed up the Rechargeable Shield Battery love to throw that in the mix too. It works well with engineer captains as it boosts energy levels too.
BO is a pointless skill in pve, with it the total dps you end up doing would be less, then if you were to just keep firing normally, or used faw. due to the power drain and the time it takes to normalize power levels.
going for peak spike itself is pointless in pve, because NPCs tend to just be giant balls of hitpoints, and theres always a lot of them. true spike can only be pulled off every 2 minutes or so, and only against 1 target, its incompatible with any pve content.
nether FAW nor BO need to be changed though, all the skills have the places you use them, not every skill should be good in every situation. if you made BO more like faw, how could it be a weapon of spike only, like it is now? tamper with that and you delete the foundation of escort pvp game play. but this is what your opinions of what should be done always does, unbalances or pulls the rug out from under the meta game in ways you dont understand.
The thing that kills BO is the amount of energy drain. Even when running a bunch of energy bootsers and drainng reducers, its still is a big hit to take, especially for the damage tradeoff that isn't as worth it s the drain.
http://www.stoacademy.com/tools/skillplanner/?build=avigalaxyb_0
Im curious... 4 EPTX and no ETX?
I have 2 Conn officers (Attack patterns)
2 Energy weapons (Reduce CD on beam special attacks)
1 Fabrication engineer (Reverse polarity)
1 systems engineer i think (Reduces CD on emergency power abilities
Oh and the tac consoles have recently been replaced with the MKXII spire (+CrtH) ones
it would be futile indeed if what they bielieve is true.
and they don't bielieve in a conspiracy but the undoing of 1 person, namely gecko.
who in their mind were suppose to be an anti tng fan and hater of the galaxy class.
i can't, objectively, share that opinion, even if i can make some joke about it from time to time.
i bielieve however that their is some kind of bias view from gecko concerning the galaxy class potential and, more important, the obvious will to make it inferior to the sovereign in every way ( when it was introduced into the game ) because of the perceive inferiority that this ship represent in many of the star trek fan mind in comparison to the sovereign.
and since the free assault cruiser is not really a "killer" to beguin with, you can only end up with a really crappy galaxy class.
this bias view on the canon is, it seem, only active with this ship in the game.
we can't said that the exelsior have been made delibaratly inferior to the galaxy and sovereign because of it status in canon!
it the contrary that happened, and that is just one example among many others, like the nova class for example.
the galaxy class with the connie are the pinnacle of the pressure that the dogma " they must not be equal in any way to newer ship" impose in this game.
this is an mmo, these ships in the same tiers are supposed to be as efficient as all the others but in a different way, it is not fair to set up their stats in a way that would make them directly inferior to any others combinations.
if you don't want it to be that way, don't bring it to the same tier as the other ship ( tier 5 ). that the only way, and that is the way used to not make the connie an end ship game, and that fine.
but at the second were you allow a ship to the tier 5 status, you can't use the excuse of the perceive canon to delibaratly made it inferior, in every way, to the others.
that is what, i try to get to the devs attentions here, in this thread, a fair allocation of stats and a indentification of the role this ship should have in this game would terminate this thread.
or at least it would go on other subject as just, this ship is bad, make it better.
yes, experienced is what i meant
that is what drunk said to you in his post
so, to resume,BO is a pvp power, it is best use as a finisher were you don't have to care about power drain that ensue because the target is gone, and they are other similar situation and combination were it is good in pvp.
you can not ask it to be as effective for pve or you would ruin the base balanced of pvp.
like it or not, this game have been designed with pvp in mind by the devs.
you can not redirect the purpose of power to better fit pve content at the expanse of pvp, even if 95% of people are playing pve content.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
im at the office but when i get home (still have 4 hs to go
see yuo all there my fellow captain of the galaxy class
and sry for mi english
ill try to take many screenshoot today and post here
trait stubborn : still flyng the galaxy ship in a lost attemp to feel the ship fit in this "Star Trek vs frikin dynos with laser in the heads" xD ( a small joke , a small smile can change your day )
Your missing out on all the fun! We just did a Galaxy only PvP match 10 vs 10. It was fun as hell!