Guys? What if they gave a tactical mode ability/gimmick to the Hull Separation console, much like the new mechanic in the Solanae/Dyson ships in the anniversary FE?
It kinda makes sense for your Boff seating to change when you Hull Separate because you are essentially moving to a different bridge (the battle bridge) to command. This will mainly affect the Odyssey, Galaxy, Fleet Galaxy-X (when it comes out), and the Prometheus-class ships.
nice idea, really.
i really didn't known how to implement it exactly, but this could be one of the solution and could make the one that want this ship to be more tacticaly oriented happy.
it could make the saucer separation really worth the shot in my opinion ( even tho i don't really like the idea to separated the ship to fight ).
maybe drunk got an idea on the subject.
Honestly, I don't care what the "PvP Community" as a whole thinks is true, I care what is in fact true.
I've seen the PvP community up in arms over TRIBBLE I beat when I was a nub at PvP. Population numbers don't indicate correctness of information. "Oh my! the Cheese group! They are nothing but OP using every broken power in the game and are unbeatable!!!!eleven!!! Yeah... beat them my second time against them in a pug, as a PvP nub. The people in the PvP community were just as certain beams sucked, too. And AtB. Just because you PvP doesn't mean you get mystic knowledge handed to you, it just means you have learned a different skill set.
Again, players do not have access to enough information to be as sure of themselves as they are, and none of us know the system well enough that we can't be surprised by it.
And another thing, hyperbole does not make your arguments any stronger. "Order of Magnitude" obviously doesn't mean what you say it does. A DPS cruiser is most certainly not an order of magnitude better then a Gal-R. It's slightly better at doing damage. Slightly.
An order of magnitude would be putting a FACR at around 150k DPS in my hands...
And I am not an order of magnitude better a healer in my Ambassador, either. I'm slightly better. Yes, in a game of combat, slightly can be all it takes, but lets be real here. This game is not balanced on the razor's edge. A couple k DPS is not that important when it is possible to make even the lowest DPS ships in the game do double the DPS that the system expects out of you.
PvP? Sure. She might be the worst pick, I'm not even really trying to debate that. My point is that inevitably there will always be a worst ship. My point is it isn't as bleak as it seems, it certainly isn't as bad as this thread would have you believe. And my last point is if the ship really turns out to be that bad, it isn't the boff layout that is to blame, it is the skills contained within the boff layout that need addressed.
I'd prefer to live in a world where a heavy engineering cruiser was a choice to fly, not ban them from existence because engineering skills lack diversity. It's the wrong fix, and anybody who is being honest and not just trying to turn the Gal-R into her own personal fantasy toy should want the same thing for the game.
Edit: She doesn't need to be the best at anything to be viable. The Defiant is not the best at anything. The Intrepid is not the best at anything. The Galaxy just needs to be as competetive in her arena as those ships are in theirs. I admit whole heartedly that she is not currently. I just also know that the difference is not anywhere near as severe as people claim, and that any number of simple, natural fixes would change this debate right around, no changes to the ship herself needed.
Edit2: The only other argument that even approaches logic is the "No ship should be built like a Defiant/Intrepid/Galaxy, and that is inherantly the problem." I can actually see things from that viewpoint. Is it true? Maybe. If all 3 ship types were deemed broken, then yes, change all 3. If the other 2 are not broken, then by default the logic shows the Galaxy is not broken, and the skills are and need to be addressed. Then you are helping other ships and the game as a whole.
i am well aware of the power drain of BO, but once again it seem to me that you don't.
why? your weapons number have nothing to do with the drain that impose you the BO power, meaning BO will not drain more because you got more weapons on the ship.
BO drain 50 weapons power, regardless of your overcapping and numbers of weapons.
when you fire BO there is only 1 weapon that fire and it is the one that is overloaded.
of course if you use it incorectly, like fire bo right after firing you others weapons, here the number of weapons you have will have an effect on the damage dealt by bo.
It has a lot to do with the number of weapons you have when the power level drops and each of the six weapons (less than eight) are each doing significantly less damage after the BO fires, six is less than eight, so the ship is doing even less damage with six, especially considering less opportunity for crits/procs. Stop grabbing at straws to try to say I don't know what I am talking about.
example you were at 125 weapons power, you fire some of your beam, let said 5, so that make aproximately on the "nosemeter" -50 weapons power, so you found yourself at 75.
if you fire a BO at that time, no only the damage dealt by BO will be very crappy du to you power level in weapons power but you will then end up at 25 weapons power in the end, wich will be very to long to recover and ruin your dps afterward.
if you don't use it incorrectly like in the example above, bo will deal more damage and will be less of a burden on weapons drain.
however, unlike what you think, drain is not the problem of bo.
why? well if it were, cruiser pilot with an engie captain would be the king of BO, woudn't you said?
cruiser abilitie: weapons system efficiency
engi captain abilitie: nadion inversion
BO use without abilitie: 125 -50 = 75 weapons power left
BO use with cruiser command weapons efficiency: 125 - ( 50 -25% ) = 85 weapons power left
BO use with nadion inversion: 105 weapons power left
BO use with cruiser command and nadion: 115 weapons power left
and i am even not speaking about auxtobat and leech console, batteries ect that will reduced that even further
however all this will not make a engie captain in a cruiser deal huge amounth of dps with it, even with extremely limited power drain.
the answers is easy to anderstand, the number of tactical bridge officer that allow you to slot some attack pattern with a hight version of BO ( at least version 2 ), your number of tactical console and finally your captain abilitie, like APA, FOMM, tactical fleet ARE the abilitie that will make BO worht the shot if you allow me the expression.
you will not be able to have that damage potential with ship that only got a lt tact slot, 2 tact console and in wich you put an engie captain EVEN with an hypothetical ZERO power drain.
and of course this is better used in pvp, bo is a pvp power, that goes without saying, killing a mob in 1 shot have absolutely no interest and is a waste of your abilitie in the long term.
if the power drain would remain the same, but cryptic suddently decided to give this abilitie 3 time it current dps, would you still said it is not worth it because of the power drain?
i don't think so, and i proove to you above that having limited power drain wil not render that power more valid.
so it not a PITA because of the power drain, but because of the bad combination of ship and captain career and use in pve content.
Ahhhh so I should never have a science character in a science ship use BO in PvP, pure genius. Let me go ahead and just take all of the Tac Boffs from my ships while I am at it. And I guess you have never seen a science ship in PvP.
and i am glad that you finally open your eyes to what i really am, a talented genious with infinite wisdom who is never wrong!
it took you some time tho!
but since i am a forgiven person, it is with great pleasure that i am giving you the privilege to adress to me as "master" from now on.
sht shtttt! don't thank me! i am well aware of how hard it is to inferior people like you to get there in the first place, so it is well deserved.
ok, on a more serious note now, calling me a expert/purist elitist isn't really going to earn you any points in the discussion, you known that don't you?
Shoe... fit... wear it. I'm not gauging your knowledge based purely off of my personal heuristics of what I consider credulous. An "elitist" (in my book) is someone who is so convince of their righteousness that people with opinions not in alignment with theirs are considered to do so because they are inferior (knowledge, experience, upbringing) or that they have an agenda that is opposite of their own, and obviously bad for the cause. Sadly, this is what I have been seeing from you lately, maybe that will change. We shall see.
if you want to criticize a power in this game, you must do it with the full perspective of it potentiality given every combination possible, wich you do not.
all what you said about it is, it is a pita when i use it with my cruiser, never i have seen you give me a comment of how it fare when someone using it on you for example.
it just look like a pve centric view to me, and the fact that you didn't meet or known what a vaper is, is just a confirmation.
you don't informed yourself about new things that are introduced into the game and don't pratice pvp exept with some selected friend of your.
how did you came to the conclusion that you have the full perspective to known how bo should be with that?
it is not about acting like me, it is about your personal involvment and knownledge on the question that make your opinion less relevant because it miss some critical part of the game experience.
You know, there is a saying about assuming. Maybe you should just ask if you want to know what effect I am talking about/experienced if you don't know or aren't sure. Just because something "looks like" something to you, doesn't make it so. Your own assumptions make you less relevant, so how can you even hope to be credulous when you jump to conclusions based off of barely knowing a person?
As far as having a "full perspective", I agree with Kymmie, there is no player who has that knowledge, and those that claim to are kidding themselves.
we are arguing for what 200, 300 pages? i stop counting after a while.
with that in mind i would have thaught that you might at least remember who i am and the ship and weapons i got since we have some long discussion about it.
I know the name, I know your basic point of view, there are far more important things in life than to prioritizing remembrance of your ship and build from 300 page-ish ago, especially since those things do change, especially considering that life has taken a high priority for me this winter. Maybe you don't have pressures and responsibilites that demand increased focus on, diminishing from your "STO gaming experience". Have you ever had a wife that was deathly ill and taking care of your infant at the same time, while juggling the final semester of college and earning TRIBBLE Laude? I honestly hope for you that you haven't and will not (the medical emergency part). So if your ego can excuse me prioritizing life over remember a blurb about your ship, we all can move on.
just like i known for a long time that you fly an exelsior with en engi and a single cannon build, nothing spectacular or very detailled and maybe not accurate anymore.
but i do remember.
You know that one of my ships is an Excelsior captained by an engineer, when I have talked about some of the other ships that I have used as well in this thread, does that mean I should be upset with you?
i found it abnormal or a specific troll manner to completely forget a person with wich you speak and argue with for about 300 pages in a blink of a eyes.
but you might have the Alzheimer desease, who known?
1) 300 pages is far more than a "blink-of-an eye" and If I do remember, your discussion was more of a blurb than an actual, ongoing conversation.
2) When life calls, I answer, and if that means that I should not commit somethings that you said to my longer term memory, that means that I have obviously put my life's priority in its rightful place. I am not going to feel bad about it, nor apologize for it, no matter how much you think its abnormal or trollish.
3) By the way, if you have ever seen someone die from the effects of Alzheimers (I have, my grandmother and its was one of the most drawn-out and painful things that I have ever experienced), you'd be a little more cautious in making comments like that.
*45 years old. and if it doesn't have a right to be in the game, not a single canon ship, thats are all at least 45 to 40 years old, have a right too. all those classes were built to last 100 years and majorly overhauled every 20. some structural limitation that would prevent the incorporation of new technology would be needed to truly obsolete any of those designs. such a limitation is present on ships like the excelsior though, they cant even be equipped with phaser arrays with out half its saucer being rebuilt. they have no excuse for lasting this long
Lets hope that should they ever do a T6 ( I know, I know, they've said they wont) that they can come up with some "Star Trekkie" looking ships that can carry the torch for more "typical" Star Trek ship design and quality game-play features so we can move past the "canon" ships, so we don't have so much emotionally charged feelings when a ship doesn't meet a persons perception/desires of what that ship was like in canon in comparison to the game. I think that both sides of the Crusades were less emotionally drawn than it is here.:D
pvp community doesn't agree on much, and theres a wide variety of ability between its players. the big differences between player tends to be how well they can counter 'cheese', its not possible to paint the entire community as united on its opinion on anything being cheese.
I think alot of this is due to the fact that the PvP content is still lacking in game. My favorite example of my preferred PvP content was SWG's Restus , where it wasn't only one objective and covered a wide diversity of terrain in a large area for mass quantities of players to partake. PvP in STO is still very limited in scope and fairly one dimensional, even with the capture the flag queues. There is no versatility in STO PvP.
beams did suck, in the last 6 to 12 months a lot of power creep has benefited beams, and changed things considerably. cruisers with 4 tac consoles, AtB change, leach and how easy it is to overcap, buff to EPtW's damage its whole duration, nukara console + beam acc, cruiser drain res commands, spire consoles that reduce drain, and extremely powerful versions of FAW latterly. they all add up, and right now rule pvp like they do pve.
im not a DPS parseing jock, but i do know the best numbers the galaxy can generate arent even half of what an avenger can produce, and a fraction of what a scimitar can. if at least double isn't an order of magnitude, i dont know what is.
Not to be a weisenheimer , FYI on Orders of Magnitude:
he problem is, at least in pvp were there is constant heals and regeneration, you need a certain level of DPS, or your not going to even break even with your target's healing
there doesn't need to be a worst ship, theres not a worst escort or sci ship. the aquarius may be down on hitpoints, but its not down on damage dealing compared to any common escort. theres nothing wrong with the defient and intrepid, they dont suffer from crippling system cooldown issues. i have set out in great detail how far behind the ship is, ive yet to see an actual rebutle or an error pointed out in my analysis. other then no, i dont think its that bad.
In peoples minds, theres always going to be a "worst" ship, its an emotional choice according to personal heuristics.
So, if they were to work on cool-down issues for Engi skills and not skew balance, would that be, in your opinion, a help to the ship?
As far as rebuttals to your analysis, my disagreement isn't with (to the most part) your analysis, but your solution. We are both aware to the basics of each others concepts on what a "fix" would look like, so I am going to spare us at this moment.
one issue with the galaxy design i have always wanted to ask? why such a massive saucer shape? :rolleyes:
Federation ships house the crew in the saucer. The Galaxy houses 1,000 plus people plus families and the majority of what those people need for everyday living, the secondary hull is the main engineering and other operational facilities. The equipment in the secondary hull theoretically shouldn't require as much area, per person, as housing them would. Thats why the saucer is so big on the Galaxy.
In peoples minds, theres always going to be a "worst" ship, its an emotional choice according to personal heuristics.
So, if they were to work on cool-down issues for Engi skills and not skew balance, would that be, in your opinion, a help to the ship?
As far as rebuttals to your analysis, my disagreement isn't with (to the most part) your analysis, but your solution. We are both aware to the basics of each others concepts on what a "fix" would look like, so I am going to spare us at this moment.
ah well i have no issue with someone thinking a ship is the worst because it fits their play style least, but thats kind of a different style of worst then what im talking about here. empirically, there is no worst escort or sci ship. empirically, there is a worst cruiser. we can prove it with math and statistics, testing, build theory crafting, and every form of measurement we can apply to a playable ship. dead last by a significant margin for every ship task. i dont say this because i hate the ship though, its my favorite ship from canon. but im not going to let that influence how i present the facts about it, or any ship.
but, just changing eng powers without effecting everything else, thats like saying we need to get rid of the moon because it causes werewolves but we need to do it in a way that doesn't effect the tides
Lets hope that should they ever do a T6 ( I know, I know, they've said they wont) that they can come up with some "Star Trekkie" looking ships that can carry the torch for more "typical" Star Trek ship design and quality game-play features so we can move past the "canon" ships, so we don't have so much emotionally charged feelings when a ship doesn't meet a persons perception/desires of what that ship was like in canon in comparison to the game
The catch being that if you discard all the canon ships, it completely ceases to be a Star Trek game and becomes a Space Trek game. Selling the game on emotional appeal IS a significant part of what makes THIS game successful.
Lets hope that should they ever do a T6 ( I know, I know, they've said they wont) that they can come up with some "Star Trekkie" looking ships that can carry the torch for more "typical" Star Trek ship design and quality game-play features so we can move past the "canon" ships, so we don't have so much emotionally charged feelings when a ship doesn't meet a persons perception/desires of what that ship was like in canon in comparison to the game. I think that both sides of the Crusades were less emotionally drawn than it is here.:D
I sincerely hope this was delivered in the form of joking, as the ":D" at the end of the post would indicate.
But for Star Trek sakes man, don't even joke about these things, have you seen Cryptic's Starfleet designs? :eek:
In peoples minds, theres always going to be a "worst" ship, its an emotional choice according to personal heuristics.
So, if they were to work on cool-down issues for Engi skills and not skew balance, would that be, in your opinion, a help to the ship?
As far as rebuttals to your analysis, my disagreement isn't with (to the most part) your analysis, but your solution. We are both aware to the basics of each others concepts on what a "fix" would look like, so I am going to spare us at this moment.
For as wordy as I can get, this is my sentiment summed up quickly.
I don't disagree entirely with the feelings expressed in this thread, my view is simply that the degree of suck isn't as bad as you read about, and that the problem isn't in the ship it is in the skills she is forced to choose from.
And while my testing is still preliminary, I'm coming to the conclusion that the Gal-R and her clones are the hands down best damage reduction tanks in the game. Period. I just need a couple more expensive doffs to actually prove it.
PvP... I scored a couple more kills, but she isn't ready for prime time. I've been away too long to be PvPing in a gimp ship, I'm still rusty in my *GOOD* PvP ships hehe.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
For as wordy as I can get, this is my sentiment summed up quickly.
I don't disagree entirely with the feelings expressed in this thread, my view is simply that the degree of suck isn't as bad as you read about, and that the problem isn't in the ship it is in the skills she is forced to choose from.
And while my testing is still preliminary, I'm coming to the conclusion that the Gal-R and her clones are the hands down best damage reduction tanks in the game. Period. I just need a couple more expensive doffs to actually prove it.
PvP... I scored a couple more kills, but she isn't ready for prime time. I've been away too long to be PvPing in a gimp ship, I'm still rusty in my *GOOD* PvP ships hehe.
Kymmym, I totally agree with you. The problem is getting both the typical thread participant and Cryptics devs to see that. `
I sincerely hope this was delivered in the form of joking, as the ":D" at the end of the post would indicate.
But for Star Trek sakes man, don't even joke about these things, have you seen Cryptic's Starfleet designs? :eek:
No, I am serious. My statement about having new ships look "more Star Trekkie" was pointed straight at the bad looks of some of Cryptic s homespuns. I agree with you that Cryptic needs to do more work smoothing out the appearance of thier own designs, I would even go as far as doing some "touch up" work on stuff thats already out.My " " was entirely about the comment of this thread being more emotionally charged than the Crusades were.
ah well i have no issue with someone thinking a ship is the worst because it fits their play style least, but thats kind of a different style of worst then what im talking about here. empirically, there is no worst escort or sci ship. empirically, there is a worst cruiser. we can prove it with math and statistics, testing, build theory crafting, and every form of measurement we can apply to a playable ship. dead last by a significant margin for every ship task. i dont say this because i hate the ship though, its my favorite ship from canon. but im not going to let that influence how i present the facts about it, or any ship.
And the last part is perception and expectation, which is entirely emotional, no matter what "facts" you bring up (we know where I stand as far as the quality of Star Trek canon's consistency, so I won't bore us with that), they are based off of emotion. Even if the ship was 95% of the DPS, or whatever KPI you want to examine, the emotional aspect amplifies any downside by a multiplier. Heck even if it was dead even, there would still be a perceived fault in it because of perception.
but, just changing eng powers without effecting everything else, thats like saying we need to get rid of the moon because it causes werewolves but we need to do it in a way that doesn't effect the tides
I wouldn't go so far as to say that, it would require actual effort and though by Cryptic, it is possible, but the problem is the commitment.
The catch being that if you discard all the canon ships, it completely ceases to be a Star Trek game and becomes a Space Trek game. Selling the game on emotional appeal IS a significant part of what makes THIS game successful.
The canon ships would still be there, but not at T6. As far is it ceasing to be a Star Trek game. I don't know if you remember the response certain TOS fans had to the Galaxy when it came out. I know many who said it didn't look like a Star Trek ship and that it would ruin the franchise, just the same as certain TNG fans that just about lost it when the Sovereign came out and wasn't close enough to the Galaxy for their liking.
I vastly prefer canon ships. It is a Star Trek game, I love to fly Star Trek ships.
Every Cryptic design I've seen, I first hated, then was indifferent, then finally had to admit they weren't bad at all, and some are pretty snazzy.
Odyssey? Hated her. Now I love her and miss her lines when I'm flying anything else.
Star Cruiser? WTF is that thing? Now? I notice she really does fit. She looks fine next to any other Fed ship.
Avenger? "LOL! It's a duck!" Now? I put my nacelles down, and I am so close to an Intrepid that I can't complain one bit. Very Star Fleet, and if you really think differently, I'd have to say you are blind. From a distance I can't reliably tell the difference between her and an Intrepid.
Hephaestus class is my absolute favorite FAE skin, I ever so often think I'm going to go canon and fly a Prommie... never sticks past 2 runs... Hephaestus class rocks.
I prefer the Cryptic take on the Golf Ball, hands down, and I'm not one of those people who think she is ugly to start. She is kinda cute.
Dyson ship? The KDF and Rom ones are great. I laughed at the Fed one at first when I saw screenshots, but after the FE, with them describing how it was built to take the conditions so close to the sun... I got on with her. She is fed shaped, with Dyson tech hull to deal with the sun... it fits. I accept it, even if she isn't my favorite design ever.
So yes, while I understand the initial repulsion to something that isn't a canon ship, I can't say that the ship designers are doing it wrong. In fact, I'm very happy with the majority of the ships they have made, even if it takes me a bit to calm my inner nerd.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
The canon ships would still be there, but not at T6. As far is it ceasing to be a Star Trek game. I don't know if you remember the response certain TOS fans had to the Galaxy when it came out. I know many who said it didn't look like a Star Trek ship and that it would ruin the franchise, just the same as certain TNG fans that just about lost it when the Sovereign came out and wasn't close enough to the Galaxy for their liking.
And this would be a fail of epic proportions. Not that it matters, I think we both know this will never happen due to other issues related to Cryptic.
Your example is irrelevant, wheather TOS fans liked the Galaxy, or TNG fans liked the Defiant or whatever doesn't matter because they're all Star Trek ships from Star Trek shows. Something the people that like Star Trek have watched 7 (or 4:() seasons of.
For example, I grew up with TNG so I like the Galaxy, I think that the Sovereign is an ugly misfortune (not because it changed the Galaxy, but because aesthetics), but then I also like the Constitution and the Intrepid. I'm completely indifferent towards the Defiant. However my taste in ship designs doesn't change the fact that they're all Star Trek ships and a reckognizable trademark of the franchise.
Take out the canon ships from being relevant at end game and the game will take a dive. ST fans and people that may not be fans, but liked the shows will come here expecting to command their favourite Star Trek ship. Sure some of them may find some of the new designs appealing after a while and make that "their" ship, but if you have a game where you tell people at the start that this is Star Trek: Online, but all the canon ships they know and love are irrelevant, you basically shot yourself in the foot.
And I personally am not even discussing about, let's say a Galaxy class, not being an end-game ship unless Cryptic takes us to 2509. The ship has average lifespan of 100 years, there's no reason for her not to be an end-game ship even if we go to T6.
Guys? What if they gave a tactical mode ability/gimmick to the Hull Separation console, much like the new mechanic in the Solanae/Dyson ships in the anniversary FE?
It kinda makes sense for your Boff seating to change when you Hull Separate because you are essentially moving to a different bridge (the battle bridge) to command. This will mainly affect the Odyssey, Galaxy, Fleet Galaxy-X (when it comes out), and the Prometheus-class ships.
Devs, This please!
The current mechanics don't make any sense to me, and I want my Engineers to fly a proper powerful Galaxy class ship as seen on TV and movies.
ST fans and people that may not be fans, but liked the shows will come here expecting to command their favourite Star Trek ship.
Which is why there exists every day or so a new T5 Connie thread.
I may just start using your quote everytime someone in one of those threads rages out and asks why that topic has come up again.
Anyways, my beef with the Galaxy, I've TOTALLY forgotten. It's been a year or so. Not even sure I had much beef with it, other than wanting it to not be made a tactical based revamp since every cruiser seems to push things that way. But at this point, I'm just blissfully enjoying watching TNG blue rays with remastered graphics.
Guys? What if they gave a tactical mode ability/gimmick to the Hull Separation console, much like the new mechanic in the Solanae/Dyson ships in the anniversary FE?
It kinda makes sense for your Boff seating to change when you Hull Separate because you are essentially moving to a different bridge (the battle bridge) to command. This will mainly affect the Odyssey, Galaxy, Fleet Galaxy-X (when it comes out), and the Prometheus-class ships.
i thought of this as soon as i started flying the science destroyer. another ship you could retroactively add is the veteran ships. they do not separate but they do transform to a combat mode
For as wordy as I can get, this is my sentiment summed up quickly.
I don't disagree entirely with the feelings expressed in this thread, my view is simply that the degree of suck isn't as bad as you read about, and that the problem isn't in the ship it is in the skills she is forced to choose from.
And while my testing is still preliminary, I'm coming to the conclusion that the Gal-R and her clones are the hands down best damage reduction tanks in the game. Period. I just need a couple more expensive doffs to actually prove it.
PvP... I scored a couple more kills, but she isn't ready for prime time. I've been away too long to be PvPing in a gimp ship, I'm still rusty in my *GOOD* PvP ships hehe.
compare the galaxy to any of the more optimized tac cruisers, and the list gets quite long of what its lacking.
-down 2 tac consoles
-no EPtW3 possible without leaving the ENS station blank
-no attack pattern to go with FAW
-no LTC level FAW or attack pattern
-some of the worst turn rate, or worst durability in exchange for not particularly remarkable for a cruiser turn rate
at the very least, its about 25% less potent at rest, and with all the tac buffs stacked multiplying things and a dps reading gotten, only about half what an optimized tac cruiser can generate. this isn't as important as its issue of creating firepower that doesn't merely break even with its targets regeneration and heal cycling. these optimized tac cruisers, do a few pvp matches till you run into one, they can rip ships apart in seconds, thanks to how broken FAW is.
FAW is so broken a galaxy can actually kill, i was doing it back before FAW wasn't critting for a bit, but its ability to do so is a fraction of what i could do in an avenger, chel, or scimitar. im not seeing any sort of real experienced perspective being cited here in the recent discussion. i doubt theres even a seat the pants idea of just how multiplicative the effects of all those things the galaxy lacks are to end numbers and end results.
And the last part is perception and expectation, which is entirely emotional, no matter what "facts" you bring up (we know where I stand as far as the quality of Star Trek canon's consistency, so I won't bore us with that), they are based off of emotion. Even if the ship was 95% of the DPS, or whatever KPI you want to examine, the emotional aspect amplifies any downside by a multiplier. Heck even if it was dead even, there would still be a perceived fault in it because of perception.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that, it would require actual effort and though by Cryptic, it is possible, but the problem is the commitment.
canon 'fact' have nothing to do with the in game facts ive been talking about. what you think of a ship should have next to no impact on how you play it. when your in a match, your concentration on staying alive and using the tools you have on hand to the greatest effect, not daydreaming about how much i like the ship. if your that unfocused your not, in the zone, and your not going to do well.
In a healer role, she falls behind sci cruisers. And not nearly as far as she falls behind tac cruisers in DPS.
In a pure tank role, she most certainly does not, and if you think so you haven't spent enough time tanking recently.
I fully concede, PvP a heals cruiser trumps a tank cruiser, but that is not a problem that is unique to this game. In PvP with no objectives, raw survivability means far less. That is a content problem and one inherent to the genre. Tanks in PvP are content dependant. The Gal-R will be no exception, and no amount of pointing the finger at her is going to change the fact that in PvP, if you are hard to kill, and I don't have to kill you, I just won't.
A full engineering build cruiser is currently able to take far more damage and make it disappear then any other ship, period, end discussion. Even the almighty healboat cruisers.
I've been working a full on damage mitigation build, working saucer sep, aux to damp, and 4x ep skills leaving many doff slots open. I can fit more doffs to help my damage mitigation now then I can afford to purchase at the moment. They matter. They matter a ton. They are underrated, and people are so stuck in the DCE/A2B mentality that they are under appreciating the ability to not be reliant on them.
Between my speed, raw hps, and the pure absorption awesome I'm literally reducing the amount of damage output that the mobs create. They hurt me less then they hurt anything else.
And the best part? The Gal-R rules the roost. Lockbox/lobi/romulan aside (I can't memorize every ship ever... sorry) she is the best at this out of any Fed cruiser. The Odyssey, while able to mimic it closely, has in inferior saucer separation, and less hull and shield then a fleet Gal-R. Edit: And an Ody has less inertia rating to start anyway, and has a higher crew... again points that work against her)
A star cruiser has to give up something. She can get extra heals or polarize hull or something, but she can never be as maneuverable. That matters. It matters a ton.
And, in cases where I need to have a high hull to deal with one shot mechanics, I have the option to replace saucer separation with a fleet RCS + Struct Int and have the highest hull out of any fed ship instead. I'm a versatile tank at that.
Tanking yes, is an under utilized role in this game, but there are certainly some places where it comes in handy. That is a content issue, not a ship issue. Any tank ship in the game faces this issue, it is not focused on the Gal-R
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Oh, and as a healboat I've been doing some amazing things, as well. Utilizing 2pc MACO + fleet deflector to lower the cooldown a bit on my HE and TSS I'm starting to get to be a pretty amazing heals/tank as well.
It was lack of double covered HE and TSS that always made me groan. Mitigating it even a little bit... I'm in love.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
What's weird about this thread are two things. So many people who are against the Galaxy class being fixed. And the number of people who argue that the ship is fine, even though it is clearly in almost every respect worse than every cruiser out there. No amount of clever arguing changes the fact that you need a pretty tweaked build to get decent performance from the ship, when most others are competitive out of the box. Why anyone would NOT want it fixed is just.......weird. I can understand not caring, but against it? Yet okay with an old Excelsior, Ambassador, Defiant, and some of the older classes being more than competitive. There is no reason the ship should be as underpowered as it s. Doesn't need to be a super battleship that contributes to the power creep, just give it SOMETHING to give it purpose. Should still handle the same, just needs an edge......
What's weird about this thread are two things. So many people who are against the Galaxy class being fixed. And the number of people who argue that the ship is fine, even though it is clearly in almost every respect worse than every cruiser out there. No amount of clever arguing changes the fact that you need a pretty tweaked build to get decent performance from the ship, when most others are competitive out of the box. Why anyone would NOT want it fixed is just.......weird. I can understand not caring, but against it? Yet okay with an old Excelsior, Ambassador, Defiant, and some of the older classes being more than competitive. There is no reason the ship should be as underpowered as it s. Doesn't need to be a super battleship that contributes to the power creep, just give it SOMETHING to give it purpose. Should still handle the same, just needs an edge......
The ship is pretty fine, its the powers that are the problem.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
It has a lot to do with the number of weapons you have when the power level drops and each of the six weapons (less than eight) are each doing significantly less damage after the BO fires, six is less than eight, so the ship is doing even less damage with six, especially considering less opportunity for crits/procs. Stop grabbing at straws to try to say I don't know what I am talking about.
if you have read what i have wrote you would have see that i have explain that consequences of using bo, so i am perfectly aware of that game mechanism
if you fire a BO at that time, no only the damage dealt by BO will be very crappy du to you power level in weapons power but you will then end up at 25 weapons power in the end, wich will be very to long to recover and ruin your dps afterward.
but i beguin to think that all this is just a misanderstanding of eatch other.
saying that BO is a pita for example is not very specific and it hard to really known what you think is wrong with the power even if you speak about power drain and dps cost because BO is a situational power.
so i have try to look at this power in every major use that we can do with it in this game and then try to determine what you want to said by "it a pita" in every situation possible.
so these 2 questions work for both pvp and pve environment.
do you find that BO is a pita because:
1) this power do not deal enought damage to the target in relation to the power drain it impose ( meaning the damage should be higher with the same power drain )
2) the power deal enought damage on it own but the drain it produce cripple your overhaul dps in the long term, especially since this power is only available every 15 sec to the best
i can't see other situations but if i forget something ( an other situation that i would have miss ) tell me.
i will now trying to explain to you why in both case there is nothing wrong with the tunning of the power.
so for the example 1:
they are people capable to do 100k damage with bo, using the right ships and captain career. so do the abilitie need to have more in that area? probably not.
of course if you use it with a cruiser and an engie toon you shoudn't expect to deal crazy number with it, just like no one would do using a shuttle.
but do BO should be reworked so that these ships and career that are not dps oriented in the first place become some? no! especially because this would cause the others combination to be even more deadly.
for the second example:
BO haven't been created to be in competition in term of dps efficiency with the others options that are normal firing and bfaw.
normal firing and bfaw will alway ( except with use of marion and other drain mechanism reduction at specific time ) have a more efficient damage/energy drain ratio than BO, meaning in the long term you will deal more dps with them than with beam overload in a pve environment.
why? because bo is not a pve power, it is a situational power, a perfect pvp power.
this is due to the fact that it is only available every 15 sec to the best, and the best damage dealer in pve didn't make mistake about it.
with marion and dem with auxtobat ( not even speaking about the 2pc proc of borg ) we have the abilitie to be "imune" to drain for 8 sec duration at a moment that we choose.
why don't we see beam overload build to deal damage in pve? the drain isn't a problem here, it is just that the weapons only deal a big damage for a brief period of time,to only 1 target and then nothing for 14 sec.
and took a bridge officer power seat that could have been use for something more efficient in pve.
bo is only really efficient in pvp, where opponent balanced their shield and regenerate themselves or eatch others. even the "overpowered" BFAW can not be as efficient in some situation because it is too slow, how many time do i see players getting away with someone using fire a will on them when they were almost dead by just using their battle cloack or the reputation cloack.
a good BO at the right time wouldn't have giving them time to react and run.
so like these 2 example show, bo in itself didn't need any adjustment, it is the player that need to use it in the correct situation.
as of today with auxtobat build even low tact bridge officer ship have the possibility to not choosing one or the other ( bo or bfaw ), but don't expect huge damage out of it with the wrong combination and use it in the right situation.
Ahhhh so I should never have a science character in a science ship use BO in PvP, pure genius. Let me go ahead and just take all of the Tac Boffs from my ships while I am at it. And I guess you have never seen a science ship in PvP.
well you guess wrong, first where did you see me saying that you should never use a science toon in a science ship?
that make a big chunk of ship not to play with!! all what i was saying is do not expect to be efficient with bo when u use it in a 2 tact console ship with just a lt tact bridge officer like the nebula for example.
not to said that you can't do interesting things with it from time to time especially with a science toon, but that the use of BO feel like a pita shoudn't have come as a surprised with this particular combination, and this one is not the worst, far from it.
and since i do pvp for about 3 years, bielieve me, i have fight a big bunch of scie ships and sci toon, sci in escort, tact in sci ship, there are interesting combinations out there.
a regular pvp players will be confronted to these at one time or an other.
someone that never see a sci ship in pvp don't do pvp.
Shoe... fit... wear it. I'm not gauging your knowledge based purely off of my personal heuristics of what I consider credulous. An "elitist" (in my book) is someone who is so convince of their righteousness that people with opinions not in alignment with theirs are considered to do so because they are inferior (knowledge, experience, upbringing) or that they have an agenda that is opposite of their own, and obviously bad for the cause. Sadly, this is what I have been seeing from you lately, maybe that will change. We shall see.
for now, after reading many of your post on the question, my opinion is that you didn't evaluate bo in all basic combination and situation to be able to discerned it intended purposed. it daesn't mean that you don't have the capacities to do so, just that you don't care at some point.
that is my opinion, it is just an opinion, you have the possibility to change it by showing me where i misanderstood you.
however i do not considered you as inferior, this term is really hard and insulting.
in fact no matter what you bielieve, mr whamhammer, i do have a highly opinion of you.
the way you express yourself here speak for itself, but being an intelligent person is no vaccin to make mistake.
and you are not the only person wich i disagree with but still have highly opinion of, orangeitis is one of them for example, even mrtshead with his strawman arguments.
judging the superiority or inferiority of a person ( even if i hate that term in the first place ) in all it entirety and variety base on a video game would really show a disconection with reality.
You know, there is a saying about assuming. Maybe you should just ask if you want to know what effect I am talking about/experienced if you don't know or aren't sure. Just because something "looks like" something to you, doesn't make it so. Your own assumptions make you less relevant, so how can you even hope to be credulous when you jump to conclusions based off of barely knowing a person?
i have adress that in the posts above
As far as having a "full perspective", I agree with Kymmie, there is no player who has that knowledge, and those that claim to are kidding themselves.
full perspective on the entirety of the game, yes there is no players who can do that, even devs, the possibilities are just too big and they constantly growing.
however you can have a full perspective about one type of power, ships and combination.
it is that perspective that is used to make builds.
if no one would be able to determine what is the best at any given time, there would be no build in this game
I know the name, I know your basic point of view, there are far more important things in life than to prioritizing remembrance of your ship and build from 300 page-ish ago, especially since those things do change, especially considering that life has taken a high priority for me this winter. Maybe you don't have pressures and responsibilites that demand increased focus on, diminishing from your "STO gaming experience". Have you ever had a wife that was deathly ill and taking care of your infant at the same time, while juggling the final semester of college and earning TRIBBLE Laude? I honestly hope for you that you haven't and will not (the medical emergency part). So if your ego can excuse me prioritizing life over remember a blurb about your ship, we all can move on.
You know that one of my ships is an Excelsior captained by an engineer, when I have talked about some of the other ships that I have used as well in this thread, does that mean I should be upset with you?
1) 300 pages is far more than a "blink-of-an eye" and If I do remember, your discussion was more of a blurb than an actual, ongoing conversation.
2) When life calls, I answer, and if that means that I should not commit somethings that you said to my longer term memory, that means that I have obviously put my life's priority in its rightful place. I am not going to feel bad about it, nor apologize for it, no matter how much you think its abnormal or trollish.
i have put all that in the same quote because i am not going to respond to it one by one.
let just said that i am not upset that you forget things about my build but really thaught that you were trolling me at some point.
i don't cry everytime a forum member didn't recognize me, rest assure.
in fact if it wasn't for the galaxy, you woudn't see me in the forum in the first place, i have no plan for a reputation forum of any kind, and the day where the galaxy ships will be fixed you will no longer see me here.
so i agree, we can move on with that.
Comments
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
yup! but there is one thing were you could be sure they agreed: galaxy family suck!
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
nice idea, really.
i really didn't known how to implement it exactly, but this could be one of the solution and could make the one that want this ship to be more tacticaly oriented happy.
it could make the saucer separation really worth the shot in my opinion ( even tho i don't really like the idea to separated the ship to fight ).
maybe drunk got an idea on the subject.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
well, that a matter of taste, i personally love it.
anyway, nice avatar sorpy;)
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
^^ This wholeheartedly
It has a lot to do with the number of weapons you have when the power level drops and each of the six weapons (less than eight) are each doing significantly less damage after the BO fires, six is less than eight, so the ship is doing even less damage with six, especially considering less opportunity for crits/procs. Stop grabbing at straws to try to say I don't know what I am talking about.
Ahhhh so I should never have a science character in a science ship use BO in PvP, pure genius. Let me go ahead and just take all of the Tac Boffs from my ships while I am at it. And I guess you have never seen a science ship in PvP.
Shoe... fit... wear it. I'm not gauging your knowledge based purely off of my personal heuristics of what I consider credulous. An "elitist" (in my book) is someone who is so convince of their righteousness that people with opinions not in alignment with theirs are considered to do so because they are inferior (knowledge, experience, upbringing) or that they have an agenda that is opposite of their own, and obviously bad for the cause. Sadly, this is what I have been seeing from you lately, maybe that will change. We shall see.
You know, there is a saying about assuming. Maybe you should just ask if you want to know what effect I am talking about/experienced if you don't know or aren't sure. Just because something "looks like" something to you, doesn't make it so. Your own assumptions make you less relevant, so how can you even hope to be credulous when you jump to conclusions based off of barely knowing a person?
As far as having a "full perspective", I agree with Kymmie, there is no player who has that knowledge, and those that claim to are kidding themselves.
I know the name, I know your basic point of view, there are far more important things in life than to prioritizing remembrance of your ship and build from 300 page-ish ago, especially since those things do change, especially considering that life has taken a high priority for me this winter. Maybe you don't have pressures and responsibilites that demand increased focus on, diminishing from your "STO gaming experience". Have you ever had a wife that was deathly ill and taking care of your infant at the same time, while juggling the final semester of college and earning TRIBBLE Laude? I honestly hope for you that you haven't and will not (the medical emergency part). So if your ego can excuse me prioritizing life over remember a blurb about your ship, we all can move on.
You know that one of my ships is an Excelsior captained by an engineer, when I have talked about some of the other ships that I have used as well in this thread, does that mean I should be upset with you?
1) 300 pages is far more than a "blink-of-an eye" and If I do remember, your discussion was more of a blurb than an actual, ongoing conversation.
2) When life calls, I answer, and if that means that I should not commit somethings that you said to my longer term memory, that means that I have obviously put my life's priority in its rightful place. I am not going to feel bad about it, nor apologize for it, no matter how much you think its abnormal or trollish.
3) By the way, if you have ever seen someone die from the effects of Alzheimers (I have, my grandmother and its was one of the most drawn-out and painful things that I have ever experienced), you'd be a little more cautious in making comments like that.
4)
Lets hope that should they ever do a T6 ( I know, I know, they've said they wont) that they can come up with some "Star Trekkie" looking ships that can carry the torch for more "typical" Star Trek ship design and quality game-play features so we can move past the "canon" ships, so we don't have so much emotionally charged feelings when a ship doesn't meet a persons perception/desires of what that ship was like in canon in comparison to the game. I think that both sides of the Crusades were less emotionally drawn than it is here.:D
I think alot of this is due to the fact that the PvP content is still lacking in game. My favorite example of my preferred PvP content was SWG's Restus , where it wasn't only one objective and covered a wide diversity of terrain in a large area for mass quantities of players to partake. PvP in STO is still very limited in scope and fairly one dimensional, even with the capture the flag queues. There is no versatility in STO PvP.
Not to be a weisenheimer , FYI on Orders of Magnitude:
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/orders.html
t
In peoples minds, theres always going to be a "worst" ship, its an emotional choice according to personal heuristics.
So, if they were to work on cool-down issues for Engi skills and not skew balance, would that be, in your opinion, a help to the ship?
As far as rebuttals to your analysis, my disagreement isn't with (to the most part) your analysis, but your solution. We are both aware to the basics of each others concepts on what a "fix" would look like, so I am going to spare us at this moment.
Federation ships house the crew in the saucer. The Galaxy houses 1,000 plus people plus families and the majority of what those people need for everyday living, the secondary hull is the main engineering and other operational facilities. The equipment in the secondary hull theoretically shouldn't require as much area, per person, as housing them would. Thats why the saucer is so big on the Galaxy.
ah well i have no issue with someone thinking a ship is the worst because it fits their play style least, but thats kind of a different style of worst then what im talking about here. empirically, there is no worst escort or sci ship. empirically, there is a worst cruiser. we can prove it with math and statistics, testing, build theory crafting, and every form of measurement we can apply to a playable ship. dead last by a significant margin for every ship task. i dont say this because i hate the ship though, its my favorite ship from canon. but im not going to let that influence how i present the facts about it, or any ship.
but, just changing eng powers without effecting everything else, thats like saying we need to get rid of the moon because it causes werewolves but we need to do it in a way that doesn't effect the tides
I sincerely hope this was delivered in the form of joking, as the ":D" at the end of the post would indicate.
But for Star Trek sakes man, don't even joke about these things, have you seen Cryptic's Starfleet designs? :eek:
For as wordy as I can get, this is my sentiment summed up quickly.
I don't disagree entirely with the feelings expressed in this thread, my view is simply that the degree of suck isn't as bad as you read about, and that the problem isn't in the ship it is in the skills she is forced to choose from.
And while my testing is still preliminary, I'm coming to the conclusion that the Gal-R and her clones are the hands down best damage reduction tanks in the game. Period. I just need a couple more expensive doffs to actually prove it.
PvP... I scored a couple more kills, but she isn't ready for prime time. I've been away too long to be PvPing in a gimp ship, I'm still rusty in my *GOOD* PvP ships hehe.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Kymmym, I totally agree with you. The problem is getting both the typical thread participant and Cryptics devs to see that. `
No, I am serious. My statement about having new ships look "more Star Trekkie" was pointed straight at the bad looks of some of Cryptic s homespuns. I agree with you that Cryptic needs to do more work smoothing out the appearance of thier own designs, I would even go as far as doing some "touch up" work on stuff thats already out.My "
And the last part is perception and expectation, which is entirely emotional, no matter what "facts" you bring up (we know where I stand as far as the quality of Star Trek canon's consistency, so I won't bore us with that), they are based off of emotion. Even if the ship was 95% of the DPS, or whatever KPI you want to examine, the emotional aspect amplifies any downside by a multiplier. Heck even if it was dead even, there would still be a perceived fault in it because of perception.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that, it would require actual effort and though by Cryptic, it is possible, but the problem is the commitment.
The canon ships would still be there, but not at T6. As far is it ceasing to be a Star Trek game. I don't know if you remember the response certain TOS fans had to the Galaxy when it came out. I know many who said it didn't look like a Star Trek ship and that it would ruin the franchise, just the same as certain TNG fans that just about lost it when the Sovereign came out and wasn't close enough to the Galaxy for their liking.
I vastly prefer canon ships. It is a Star Trek game, I love to fly Star Trek ships.
Every Cryptic design I've seen, I first hated, then was indifferent, then finally had to admit they weren't bad at all, and some are pretty snazzy.
Odyssey? Hated her. Now I love her and miss her lines when I'm flying anything else.
Star Cruiser? WTF is that thing? Now? I notice she really does fit. She looks fine next to any other Fed ship.
Avenger? "LOL! It's a duck!" Now? I put my nacelles down, and I am so close to an Intrepid that I can't complain one bit. Very Star Fleet, and if you really think differently, I'd have to say you are blind. From a distance I can't reliably tell the difference between her and an Intrepid.
Hephaestus class is my absolute favorite FAE skin, I ever so often think I'm going to go canon and fly a Prommie... never sticks past 2 runs... Hephaestus class rocks.
I prefer the Cryptic take on the Golf Ball, hands down, and I'm not one of those people who think she is ugly to start. She is kinda cute.
Dyson ship? The KDF and Rom ones are great. I laughed at the Fed one at first when I saw screenshots, but after the FE, with them describing how it was built to take the conditions so close to the sun... I got on with her. She is fed shaped, with Dyson tech hull to deal with the sun... it fits. I accept it, even if she isn't my favorite design ever.
So yes, while I understand the initial repulsion to something that isn't a canon ship, I can't say that the ship designers are doing it wrong. In fact, I'm very happy with the majority of the ships they have made, even if it takes me a bit to calm my inner nerd.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
And this would be a fail of epic proportions. Not that it matters, I think we both know this will never happen due to other issues related to Cryptic.
Your example is irrelevant, wheather TOS fans liked the Galaxy, or TNG fans liked the Defiant or whatever doesn't matter because they're all Star Trek ships from Star Trek shows. Something the people that like Star Trek have watched 7 (or 4:() seasons of.
For example, I grew up with TNG so I like the Galaxy, I think that the Sovereign is an ugly misfortune (not because it changed the Galaxy, but because aesthetics), but then I also like the Constitution and the Intrepid. I'm completely indifferent towards the Defiant. However my taste in ship designs doesn't change the fact that they're all Star Trek ships and a reckognizable trademark of the franchise.
Take out the canon ships from being relevant at end game and the game will take a dive. ST fans and people that may not be fans, but liked the shows will come here expecting to command their favourite Star Trek ship. Sure some of them may find some of the new designs appealing after a while and make that "their" ship, but if you have a game where you tell people at the start that this is Star Trek: Online, but all the canon ships they know and love are irrelevant, you basically shot yourself in the foot.
And I personally am not even discussing about, let's say a Galaxy class, not being an end-game ship unless Cryptic takes us to 2509. The ship has average lifespan of 100 years, there's no reason for her not to be an end-game ship even if we go to T6.
Devs, This please!
The current mechanics don't make any sense to me, and I want my Engineers to fly a proper powerful Galaxy class ship as seen on TV and movies.
Which is why there exists every day or so a new T5 Connie thread.
I may just start using your quote everytime someone in one of those threads rages out and asks why that topic has come up again.
Anyways, my beef with the Galaxy, I've TOTALLY forgotten. It's been a year or so. Not even sure I had much beef with it, other than wanting it to not be made a tactical based revamp since every cruiser seems to push things that way. But at this point, I'm just blissfully enjoying watching TNG blue rays with remastered graphics.
i thought of this as soon as i started flying the science destroyer. another ship you could retroactively add is the veteran ships. they do not separate but they do transform to a combat mode
compare the galaxy to any of the more optimized tac cruisers, and the list gets quite long of what its lacking.
-down 2 tac consoles
-no EPtW3 possible without leaving the ENS station blank
-no attack pattern to go with FAW
-no LTC level FAW or attack pattern
-some of the worst turn rate, or worst durability in exchange for not particularly remarkable for a cruiser turn rate
at the very least, its about 25% less potent at rest, and with all the tac buffs stacked multiplying things and a dps reading gotten, only about half what an optimized tac cruiser can generate. this isn't as important as its issue of creating firepower that doesn't merely break even with its targets regeneration and heal cycling. these optimized tac cruisers, do a few pvp matches till you run into one, they can rip ships apart in seconds, thanks to how broken FAW is.
FAW is so broken a galaxy can actually kill, i was doing it back before FAW wasn't critting for a bit, but its ability to do so is a fraction of what i could do in an avenger, chel, or scimitar. im not seeing any sort of real experienced perspective being cited here in the recent discussion. i doubt theres even a seat the pants idea of just how multiplicative the effects of all those things the galaxy lacks are to end numbers and end results.
canon 'fact' have nothing to do with the in game facts ive been talking about. what you think of a ship should have next to no impact on how you play it. when your in a match, your concentration on staying alive and using the tools you have on hand to the greatest effect, not daydreaming about how much i like the ship. if your that unfocused your not, in the zone, and your not going to do well.
There is a reason I compare her to sci cruisers, they are the ones she competes with.
I don't call the hardware store and complain about how badly my hammer washed my windows.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
what am i supposed to compare it too? tanks and healers? its measures up even worse against them!
In a healer role, she falls behind sci cruisers. And not nearly as far as she falls behind tac cruisers in DPS.
In a pure tank role, she most certainly does not, and if you think so you haven't spent enough time tanking recently.
I fully concede, PvP a heals cruiser trumps a tank cruiser, but that is not a problem that is unique to this game. In PvP with no objectives, raw survivability means far less. That is a content problem and one inherent to the genre. Tanks in PvP are content dependant. The Gal-R will be no exception, and no amount of pointing the finger at her is going to change the fact that in PvP, if you are hard to kill, and I don't have to kill you, I just won't.
A full engineering build cruiser is currently able to take far more damage and make it disappear then any other ship, period, end discussion. Even the almighty healboat cruisers.
I've been working a full on damage mitigation build, working saucer sep, aux to damp, and 4x ep skills leaving many doff slots open. I can fit more doffs to help my damage mitigation now then I can afford to purchase at the moment. They matter. They matter a ton. They are underrated, and people are so stuck in the DCE/A2B mentality that they are under appreciating the ability to not be reliant on them.
Between my speed, raw hps, and the pure absorption awesome I'm literally reducing the amount of damage output that the mobs create. They hurt me less then they hurt anything else.
And the best part? The Gal-R rules the roost. Lockbox/lobi/romulan aside (I can't memorize every ship ever... sorry) she is the best at this out of any Fed cruiser. The Odyssey, while able to mimic it closely, has in inferior saucer separation, and less hull and shield then a fleet Gal-R. Edit: And an Ody has less inertia rating to start anyway, and has a higher crew... again points that work against her)
A star cruiser has to give up something. She can get extra heals or polarize hull or something, but she can never be as maneuverable. That matters. It matters a ton.
And, in cases where I need to have a high hull to deal with one shot mechanics, I have the option to replace saucer separation with a fleet RCS + Struct Int and have the highest hull out of any fed ship instead. I'm a versatile tank at that.
Tanking yes, is an under utilized role in this game, but there are certainly some places where it comes in handy. That is a content issue, not a ship issue. Any tank ship in the game faces this issue, it is not focused on the Gal-R
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
It was lack of double covered HE and TSS that always made me groan. Mitigating it even a little bit... I'm in love.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
The ship is pretty fine, its the powers that are the problem.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
if you have read what i have wrote you would have see that i have explain that consequences of using bo, so i am perfectly aware of that game mechanism
but i beguin to think that all this is just a misanderstanding of eatch other.
saying that BO is a pita for example is not very specific and it hard to really known what you think is wrong with the power even if you speak about power drain and dps cost because BO is a situational power.
so i have try to look at this power in every major use that we can do with it in this game and then try to determine what you want to said by "it a pita" in every situation possible.
so these 2 questions work for both pvp and pve environment.
do you find that BO is a pita because:
1) this power do not deal enought damage to the target in relation to the power drain it impose ( meaning the damage should be higher with the same power drain )
2) the power deal enought damage on it own but the drain it produce cripple your overhaul dps in the long term, especially since this power is only available every 15 sec to the best
i can't see other situations but if i forget something ( an other situation that i would have miss ) tell me.
i will now trying to explain to you why in both case there is nothing wrong with the tunning of the power.
so for the example 1:
they are people capable to do 100k damage with bo, using the right ships and captain career. so do the abilitie need to have more in that area? probably not.
of course if you use it with a cruiser and an engie toon you shoudn't expect to deal crazy number with it, just like no one would do using a shuttle.
but do BO should be reworked so that these ships and career that are not dps oriented in the first place become some? no! especially because this would cause the others combination to be even more deadly.
for the second example:
BO haven't been created to be in competition in term of dps efficiency with the others options that are normal firing and bfaw.
normal firing and bfaw will alway ( except with use of marion and other drain mechanism reduction at specific time ) have a more efficient damage/energy drain ratio than BO, meaning in the long term you will deal more dps with them than with beam overload in a pve environment.
why? because bo is not a pve power, it is a situational power, a perfect pvp power.
this is due to the fact that it is only available every 15 sec to the best, and the best damage dealer in pve didn't make mistake about it.
with marion and dem with auxtobat ( not even speaking about the 2pc proc of borg ) we have the abilitie to be "imune" to drain for 8 sec duration at a moment that we choose.
why don't we see beam overload build to deal damage in pve? the drain isn't a problem here, it is just that the weapons only deal a big damage for a brief period of time,to only 1 target and then nothing for 14 sec.
and took a bridge officer power seat that could have been use for something more efficient in pve.
bo is only really efficient in pvp, where opponent balanced their shield and regenerate themselves or eatch others. even the "overpowered" BFAW can not be as efficient in some situation because it is too slow, how many time do i see players getting away with someone using fire a will on them when they were almost dead by just using their battle cloack or the reputation cloack.
a good BO at the right time wouldn't have giving them time to react and run.
so like these 2 example show, bo in itself didn't need any adjustment, it is the player that need to use it in the correct situation.
as of today with auxtobat build even low tact bridge officer ship have the possibility to not choosing one or the other ( bo or bfaw ), but don't expect huge damage out of it with the wrong combination and use it in the right situation.
well you guess wrong, first where did you see me saying that you should never use a science toon in a science ship?
that make a big chunk of ship not to play with!! all what i was saying is do not expect to be efficient with bo when u use it in a 2 tact console ship with just a lt tact bridge officer like the nebula for example.
not to said that you can't do interesting things with it from time to time especially with a science toon, but that the use of BO feel like a pita shoudn't have come as a surprised with this particular combination, and this one is not the worst, far from it.
and since i do pvp for about 3 years, bielieve me, i have fight a big bunch of scie ships and sci toon, sci in escort, tact in sci ship, there are interesting combinations out there.
a regular pvp players will be confronted to these at one time or an other.
someone that never see a sci ship in pvp don't do pvp.
for now, after reading many of your post on the question, my opinion is that you didn't evaluate bo in all basic combination and situation to be able to discerned it intended purposed. it daesn't mean that you don't have the capacities to do so, just that you don't care at some point.
that is my opinion, it is just an opinion, you have the possibility to change it by showing me where i misanderstood you.
however i do not considered you as inferior, this term is really hard and insulting.
in fact no matter what you bielieve, mr whamhammer, i do have a highly opinion of you.
the way you express yourself here speak for itself, but being an intelligent person is no vaccin to make mistake.
and you are not the only person wich i disagree with but still have highly opinion of, orangeitis is one of them for example, even mrtshead with his strawman arguments.
judging the superiority or inferiority of a person ( even if i hate that term in the first place ) in all it entirety and variety base on a video game would really show a disconection with reality.
i have adress that in the posts above
full perspective on the entirety of the game, yes there is no players who can do that, even devs, the possibilities are just too big and they constantly growing.
however you can have a full perspective about one type of power, ships and combination.
it is that perspective that is used to make builds.
if no one would be able to determine what is the best at any given time, there would be no build in this game
i have put all that in the same quote because i am not going to respond to it one by one.
let just said that i am not upset that you forget things about my build but really thaught that you were trolling me at some point.
i don't cry everytime a forum member didn't recognize me, rest assure.
in fact if it wasn't for the galaxy, you woudn't see me in the forum in the first place, i have no plan for a reputation forum of any kind, and the day where the galaxy ships will be fixed you will no longer see me here.
so i agree, we can move on with that.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271