The USS Galaxy takes heavy damage in the initial battle to take Chintoka, however that ship is also present at the relief fleet to aid the Enterprise-E In Nemesis, so it survived the Dominion War. Not sure about the final battle in the series finale, however there doesn't appear to be any Galaxy-class starships shown on screen in the fleet that is destroyed by the Breen at Chintoka, a few Nebula-class starships were there though, so it'd be a little difficult to tell their debris from a Galaxy-class.
Yeah, but since Starfleet did use the Galaxies as heavy support craft and battleships, it is a safe assumption that there were Galaxy class ships in all the engagements I listed, and we all know what happened at the Second Battle of Chintoka. That was TWO alliance fleets destroyed by the Breen (first one was the garrison fleet, second was the assault fleet). Also in the final assault on Cardassia Prime, again, it's safe to assume there were a number of Galaxy Class ships present (shown on screen in the scenes leading up to the battle, a few scenes during the battle, and I believe a Gal or two in the post battle scene). And again, since Admiral Ross did state that they had lost a third of their ships, it's likely that at least one or two Galaxies were destroyed.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Yeah, but since Starfleet did use the Galaxies as heavy support craft and battleships, it is a safe assumption that there were Galaxy class ships in all the engagements I listed, and we all know what happened at the Second Battle of Chintoka. That was TWO alliance fleets destroyed by the Breen (first one was the garrison fleet, second was the assault fleet). Also in the final assault on Cardassia Prime, again, it's safe to assume there were a number of Galaxy Class ships present (shown on screen in the scenes leading up to the battle, a few scenes during the battle, and I believe a Gal or two in the post battle scene). And again, since Admiral Ross did state that they had lost a third of their ships, it's likely that at least one or two Galaxies were destroyed.
Possible, yes. Either way, those potential Galaxy-class starships would have been destroyed by a superior technology and/or enemy forces, in the same manner as the USS Odyssey.
Possible, yes. Either way, those potential Galaxy-class starships would have been destroyed by a superior technology and/or enemy forces, in the same manner as the USS Odyssey.
I would actually go with superior numbers here, since I am pretty sure Dominion tech is on the same level as Starfleet tech, if not SLIGHTLY superior. Actually probably somewhat superior since in STO you have 24th century Dominion forces engaging and being equal to 25th century Starfleet and KDF technology.
But I think the best argument here in favor of the Galaxy is that most Galaxy Class starships were only destroyed by technology that they had never encountered before. Take the USS Odyssey. She was destroyed by Jem'hadar Attack Ships, and that was at a time when the Dominion was still largely a mystery to Starfleet. They had never encountered Dominion ships or Dominion tech before, and as such weren't prepared for it. The USS Yamato was destroyed by Iconian tech. They didn't even know what the Iconians were at the time. And so on and so forth.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I would actually go with superior numbers here, since I am pretty sure Dominion tech is on the same level as Starfleet tech, if not SLIGHTLY superior. Actually probably somewhat superior since in STO you have 24th century Dominion forces engaging and being equal to 25th century Starfleet and KDF technology.
But I think the best argument here in favor of the Galaxy is that most Galaxy Class starships were only destroyed by technology that they had never encountered before. Take the USS Odyssey. She was destroyed by Jem'hadar Attack Ships, and that was at a time when the Dominion was still largely a mystery to Starfleet. They had never encountered Dominion ships or Dominion tech before, and as such weren't prepared for it. The USS Yamato was destroyed by Iconian tech. They didn't even know what the Iconians were at the time. And so on and so forth.
Well, yes, that's what I was referencing; the Odyssey was initially overcome by the phased polaron weapons, that were able to penetrate her shields, before eventually being rammed; the fleet at Chin'toka faced both powerful Cardassian weapon platforms, and then the unknown Breen energy dissipators. It all adds up to a very different playing field than what the Enterprise-D usually had to contend with for many years, one where any ship would succumb to such dangers.
The USS Yamato was destroyed by Iconian tech. They didn't even know what the Iconians were at the time. And so on and so forth.
We still don't know much about the Iconians, and them Romulans bein' abducted too... :P
But yeah, the issues with the Galaxy-class ships being beaten, stem from the fact that Starfleet was first encountering/fighting against these enemies. Any of these crises could have happened to other Starfleet ships.
Take all the Constitution-class ships. USS Defiant? Lost in the Tholian interphasic space. USS Valiant? Lost when its crew had some kind of mutiny. USS Constellation? Badly beaten by the planet killer, the charred hulk sacrificed later on. USS Lexington? Crew killed when fighting the underestimated M5 computer. USS Enterprise? Severely crippled by Khan, leading to a last-resort self destruct - or if you prefer JJ Trek, got the bolts beaten out of it by two hits from the Narada's "Magic Missiles".
There ya go. And I daresay, the Galaxy-class usually fares better than the Constitution-class ships in its heyday. Take the USS Enterprise-D against the Borg, or the USS Galaxy against the OWPs.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
and the D was destroyed by sabotage when the duras sisters got the D's shield frequency from Gordie's visor when they sent him back to the ship and also possible got location of weak areas.
even though if Riker was competent at his job it should have been no threat as you just change the frequency but what ever lol
and data going a bit insane at the time did not make the matter any better haha.... the writers really wanted to kill the D in the most disgracing way possible even after it kills the bird of pray they used stock footage from star trek 6 haha
Let me rephrase it then. The Enterprise was a Galaxy. It was no different than the Yamato, Odyssey, or Challenger. What made it different was its CREW. The caliber of the people on the Enterprise was higher.
The virus destroyed the Yamato because its CREW was not good enough to avoid the destruction. The Enterprise's CREW was good enough to save the ship.
In STO terms the Boffs and Doffs are the CREW. You slot the right Purple Doffs and you can do things you cannot imagine doing with White Doffs. You slot Purple Boffs with the right Traits and you get much better bonuses on your ship beyond just the Boff abilities.
The Enterprise was a Galaxy Class ship, but it had the best CREW in the fleet. IE, they were all Purples. Except maybe Riker. Every time he was in command of the Enterprise it was defeated or captured.
I was refering to gpgtx statement the Yamato where destroyed by a computer virus do to aliens infiltrating starfleet HQ in the season one ender, or something. (which he corrected in the same post )
In my opinion Riker should have been court martialed more than once. His and other officers behavior was more then criminal in several cases.
The Vesta in the novels was a next generation ship (next gen as in next level of technology) designed to deal with the Borg; and I think most people would consider the Vesta build to be weaker then what the books represented.
Of course the Vesta in game is a Science Vessel and only has 6 weapon slots, so unless you really believe 6 weapons are better than 8 I'm beginning to think you don't actually look at ships as a whole. You simply look at tac consoles and tac boffs and make all your decisions from that.
My point was that the devs made the Vesta with much more care and though to the original, then they did the Galaxy.
A Cruiser would need a complete different BOFF layout of course, that's not the question.
I say it a last time, making the Galaxy Class OP is not the point. Making it more true to the original IS however. (which is widely documented, btw)
Btw. the Vesta is from 2380, which is not so new anymore by the time of STO, and yet is is a formidable ship. I see no reason to consider the Galaxy class as obsolete or inferior, even if it's older, on the other hand the Excelsior is almost 130 years old just like the Vesta a great ship.
Why is it so hard to understand that making the Galaxy Class a virtually static brick with the least offensive of all cruisers is not how that ship is supposed to be?
Especially from a game point of view it is just alienating the Star Trek fanbase. Other cruisers are much better and much more fun to fly ships without breaking the Games "balance".
As one of the most iconic ships in Star Trek, the Galaxy Class is not just another ship.
People who start playing STO, especailly look at it and have to reckognize that it is also the most boring ship in the game.
I just can't understand the devs motives behind that, there is no special reason for doing something like that. There is no reason to make one ship the most boring at all.
Every ship can have some special and unique advantage. But to make one of the most popular ships outside STO a mere target practice, just because SOME devs (you know who i mean) like other ships more, is just unprofessional IMO.
and the D was destroyed by sabotage when the duras sisters got the D's shield frequency from Gordie's visor when they sent him back to the ship and also possible got location of weak areas.
even though if Riker was competent at his job it should have been no threat as you just change the frequency but what ever lol
and data going a bit insane at the time did not make the matter any better haha.... the writers really wanted to kill the D in the most disgracing way possible even after it kills the bird of pray they used stock footage from star trek 6 haha
I fully agree.
That whole incident was so stupid, i wish the whole crew was courtmartialed for incompetence (and the movies scriprwriters even more, lol).
They really shouldn't have killed the enterprise at all, they could have updated its appearance like they did with the original Enterprise in TMP.
I think i would have been a much better reason for the Enterprise to be at Earth than the refusal to obey starfleet orders. It would have been much more dramatic if the Enterprise -D would have been in drydock and just a skeleton Crew to start and join the Battle at 001.
Just imagine ST: 8 with an visually completely updated Galaxy class, but still much more reckognizeable than the unfamiliar corridors and ships shape of the sovereign. (well... a man can dream , lol)
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
The Yamato was destroyed by an Iconian virus causing its anti matter storage tanks force fields to fail. Antimatter not contained = boom.
Riker did rotate the shields but with la forge standing right at the screen they instantly knew the new one.
And your point on the vesta is totally valid. The devs took the time and care that ship needed and the galaxy has been ignored from start to finish in this game. The original T4 galaxy was annoying to fly, *remember loot range was much smaller then*, The T5 galaxy didnt exsist.
They finally add a T5 version of our most beloved Intrepid, defiant, and galaxy, with bad boff layout on each. Galaxy gets the bigger kick in the nuts not cause of the same 3rd ensign like the other 2 but the lack of ensign boff powers to use in it, both tac and sci have decently useful skills to place in 3rd one. Galaxy has 3 ensign and 5 powers to chose from, 4 of those share a global, throw in that the 5th option shares the global with Tac and Sci team = problem.
The consoles are a bust as well, intrepid got the generator up time vs down time = not worth it, Defiant got cloak which is useful in pvp not as much in pve but id say the best of the 3. Galaxy got the Saucer sep, while nice, not being toggle is a deal breaker, and who honestly wants to fly their galaxy aka enterpise d as a stardrive section full time? I want to fly a galaxy not a stardrive.
The fleet versions are a lil better off. 5th tac console = +1 for the defiant. 5th sci console = +1 for the intrepid. 5th eng = wtf do i need 5 armor consoles for on a cruiser that wont die with 4 to begin with?!
I get they want them to be purest ships, but honestly who cares what the devs want when it comes to playablity. 5 tac will help you kill faster, 5 sci will help your sci skills/shields. 5 eng on a 6 degree per sec base turn ship is just loli pointless. Be my guest and use an RCS for that staggering 1 degree per sec bonus. I could go on but point is clear.
Fix the gal, give it 7 DPS turn rate. Make the ens eng a uni eng, take the 5th eng console and make it a 3rd tac. You can then make it use ens eng/sci/tac slanting that gal which ever way you choose she was versital and that atleast gives it flexability. 3rd tac gives it decent firepower without over reaching. We have enough 4 tac console cruisers atm.
Its fair and it puts it on par with the KDF place holder the Neg'var.
you are right on the rotating it's been a wile sense i have seen generations... actually any trek movie
interesting thing about first contact and the D found this on google a wile back apparently the model shown over DS9 for the USS Venture had this registry (the one with the phaser bumps). they just filmed it in a way you could not see it on TV. the guys at ILM did this at the end of generations as they where unsure at the time what the E was going to be and they planned on doing a star trek 4 with the next enterprise just being a refitted galaxy like how the A was another constitution.
You do understand that the concept of democracy means that for every person who says they want X someone else has the right to say they do not want X, right?
This game has a LOT of issues; and how powerful the Galaxy should be is well down on the list of things which need fixed. If the ship were unplayable it would be an issue, but saying the ship is not as good as you want it to be is just fan-boyism, IMO. The ship is very playable. One of my VAs flies a Galaxy with a Venture skin. I have no issues using the character in STFs or other end-game content. It's not unplayable - unless you only want to PvP.
Thank you for taking the time to explain to me how a democracy works since I had forgotten. You don't have a valid reason WHY the Galaxy shouldn't get a work over, you are just looking for a fight.
You have expressed opinions let me point out two more opinions you seem to be stating as facts: how powerful the Galaxy is should be well down on the list of things which need fixed. That is your opinion. I have the opinion that something I paid money for and could reasonably expect to perform to a certain standard does not, and I want that fixed. Let this same situation happen with an escort and watch the forums ignite. Here's another:the ship is not 'unplayable' but is no where near the T5 standard of other cruisers. The so called 'level I want' is to be just as good as any other T5 ship, not an outlandish request. Your opinion is otherwise. The majority of people who own the Galaxy disagree with you. Majority. That's a democracy in action. I still fail to see how this in any way harms you. And nice little sideways jab calling me a fanboy. Your fear of having the Galaxy actually become a T5 ship somehow insults your e-peen IMO.
If have a used car lot and I sell you a car, you would have a reasonable expectation that the headlights, the blinkers, the horn, etc. worked. You drive it off the lot and the engine sputters, one of the blinkers is out. You bring the car back and ask me to fix it. I then ask you if you can still drive the car? Yes of course you answer. Well, the car is fine, now go away I say. How would you like that?
OR: said car is a Camaro. A Ford Pinto passes you on the freeway and you cannot catch him. Wouldn't you expect a Camaro to be able to catch (not to mention pass) a Pinto? Of course. Not asking to turn it into a Corvette, just let it perform to the standard already set.
Make the T5 Galaxy an actual T5 ship, no more no less. Arguing against a simple and reasonable request as this is foolish and belies another issue that is outside the realm of the game.
I was refering to gpgtx statement the Yamato where destroyed by a computer virus do to aliens infiltrating starfleet HQ in the season one ender, or something. (which he corrected in the same post )
In my opinion Riker should have been court martialed more than once. His and other officers behavior was more then criminal in several cases.
My point was that the devs made the Vesta with much more care and though to the original, then they did the Galaxy.
A Cruiser would need a complete different BOFF layout of course, that's not the question.
I say it a last time, making the Galaxy Class OP is not the point. Making it more true to the original IS however. (which is widely documented, btw)
Btw. the Vesta is from 2380, which is not so new anymore by the time of STO, and yet is is a formidable ship. I see no reason to consider the Galaxy class as obsolete or inferior, even if it's older, on the other hand the Excelsior is almost 130 years old just like the Vesta a great ship.
Why is it so hard to understand that making the Galaxy Class a virtually static brick with the least offensive of all cruisers is not how that ship is supposed to be?
Especially from a game point of view it is just alienating the Star Trek fanbase. Other cruisers are much better and much more fun to fly ships without breaking the Games "balance".
As one of the most iconic ships in Star Trek, the Galaxy Class is not just another ship.
People who start playing STO, especailly look at it and have to reckognize that it is also the most boring ship in the game.
I just can't understand the devs motives behind that, there is no special reason for doing something like that. There is no reason to make one ship the most boring at all.
Every ship can have some special and unique advantage. But to make one of the most popular ships outside STO a mere target practice, just because SOME devs (you know who i mean) like other ships more, is just unprofessional IMO.
I fully agree.
That whole incident was so stupid, i wish the whole crew was courtmartialed for incompetence (and the movies scriprwriters even more, lol).
They really shouldn't have killed the enterprise at all, they could have updated its appearance like they did with the original Enterprise in TMP.
I think i would have been a much better reason for the Enterprise to be at Earth than the refusal to obey starfleet orders. It would have been much more dramatic if the Enterprise -D would have been in drydock and just a skeleton Crew to start and join the Battle at 001.
Just imagine ST: 8 with an visually completely updated Galaxy class, but still much more reckognizeable than the unfamiliar corridors and ships shape of the sovereign. (well... a man can dream , lol)
It was an early idea of the E-E beijng a Gal X before the Sovereign.
Make the T5 Galaxy an actual T5 ship, no more no less. Arguing against a simple and reasonable request as this is foolish and belies another issue that is outside the realm of the game.
The Galaxy-R is a tier 5 ship. It has 9 consoles, a cmdr station, a ltcmdr station, two lt stations, and an ensign station. It has high hull, and 8 weapons, 4 device slots, etc. It matches all of the requirements of a tier 5 ship. All it's missing is a little more bite.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
The Galaxy-R is a tier 5 ship. It has 9 consoles, a cmdr station, a ltcmdr station, two lt stations, and an ensign station. It has high hull, and 8 weapons, 4 device slots, etc. It matches all of the requirements of a tier 5 ship. All it's missing is a little more bite.
Sure it has everything to qualify to be a T5 ship, but the BOFF slot and Consoles are rather suboptimal IMO.
As almost everyone else i find its extremely low turnrate and the 3 Engineering Ensigns mak that ship fall behind the other two "hero" ships, Intrepid and Defiant.
Having a bit more hull cannot compensate those disadvantages IMO.
True.
Give it a additional tac console in exchange for its 5th engineering console and i think it would be a good compensation for its other disadvantages.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
True, the Oberth is worse.
Or the Excelsior, for example.:D
Seriously, i think the designer of the Sovereign should have continued the design trend that began with the Ambassador was continued with the Galaxy Class. But to return to Constitution and Excelsior proportions and design pattern was just lazy IMO.
It almost looked like they wanted to show the audience a ship that resembles more Kirks ship from the movies, than a next generation enterprise...
But again that's just my personal opinion.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
True, the Oberth is worse.
Or the Excelsior, for example.:D
Seriously, i think the designer of the Sovereign should have continued the design trend that began with the Ambassador was continued with the Galaxy Class. But to return to Constitution and Excelsior proportions and design pattern was just lazy IMO.
It almost looked like they wanted to show the audience a ship that resembles more Kirks ship from the movies, than a next generation enterprise...
But again that's just my personal opinion.
well to each his own I guess. I actually found the Ent-C/D bloated... :P
We still live!!!!! Hahahahahahahahaa! We live and we will conquer!!!!! Hahahahahaaha!
-Roach, when asked about Klingon extinction!
i remember when the ambassador came out in game some one had all the enterprises lined up. the Sov looked like the odd man out the oddy looks more like a progression from the galaxy then the sov does (does not help the in game sov's proportions are wonky)
Seriously, i think the designer of the Sovereign should have continued the design trend that began with the Ambassador was continued with the Galaxy Class. But to return to Constitution and Excelsior proportions and design pattern was just lazy IMO.
It almost looked like they wanted to show the audience a ship that resembles more Kirks ship from the movies, than a next generation enterprise...
But again that's just my personal opinion.
I hear they made it longer instead of wider (thank goodness for that! imagine the space whales we'd have now if they went with that??!!) because they wanted recognition as you mentioned, they also wanted it to look sleeker and cooler, finally they wanted it to better fit a movie theater widescreen (incidentally the Galaxy fits a tv screen pretty well). Or so I hear.
While I am no Galaxy fan (only the Vesta and Ambassador are uglier, bleh!) I do understand wanting to make it a viable ship. When I talk about cruisers offering a genuine different play experience without being useless I'm referring to the more tactical cruisers like the Assault Crusier, Excel, and the Ody families of ships. The Starcrusier and the Galaxy,as well as their lines of ships are largely unsuitable outside of unusual and specialized builds, I would even say the Galaxy is the worse of the pair.
So then why hasn't Cryptic simply changed the ens. engi to an ens. tac or even an ens. uni? Which cruiser niche would it be supplanting? Is it about future sales they plan to make to fill that very same niche? I honestly don't know, I can speculate plenty but that just paints an even grimmer picture for the Galaxy.
I hear they made it longer instead of wider (thank goodness for that! imagine the space whales we'd have now if they went with that??!!) because they wanted recognition as you mentioned, they also wanted it to look sleeker and cooler, finally they wanted it to better fit a movie theater widescreen (incidentally the Galaxy fits a tv screen pretty well). Or so I hear.
While I am no Galaxy fan (only the Vesta and Ambassador are uglier, bleh!) I do understand wanting to make it a viable ship. When I talk about cruisers offering a genuine different play experience without being useless I'm referring to the more tactical cruisers like the Assault Crusier, Excel, and the Ody families of ships. The Starcrusier and the Galaxy,as well as their lines of ships are largely unsuitable outside of unusual and specialized builds, I would even say the Galaxy is the worse of the pair.
So then why hasn't Cryptic simply changed the ens. engi to an ens. tac or even an ens. uni? Which cruiser niche would it be supplanting? Is it about future sales they plan to make to fill that very same niche? I honestly don't know, I can speculate plenty but that just paints an even grimmer picture for the Galaxy.
They're not doing anything for the Galaxy for what I perceive to be the same reasons why they have not made Metreon Gas Consoles available to Mirror Star Cruisers. Interesting how quickly they respond to quash rumours of DHCs getting a nerf, though.
No matter if someone finds the Galaxy or an other ship ugly or not. No ship deserves to be as useless and un-fun as the Galaxy Class is in STO.
I too can't understand why the devs made it that way, maybe because they thought they had to fill that role with SOME ship. So they took a very popular one, so they could get sure SOMEONE would fly it.
But they just haven't thought about that flying such a ship is just frustrating and useless.
Not to speak of that they made the Galaxy Class into a complete differnt ship as it is supposed to be.
I mean MMO or not, all ships should at least resemble their "original" as good as possible. (within the constraints of the games "balance")
But to put it into a "role" which just doesn't suit to it, is just lazy game design IMO.
For the games sake they should have made one of their own designs, like the Typhoon or Jupiter ships a extreme Tank and make the Galaxy Class more like a "jack of all trades" cruiser, capable of filling any Role a cruiser can take in STO.
To archieve that, the Galaxy class should have been fitted with a Lt. Universal and 4/3/3 consoles from the beginning.
Another thing that bothers me is that the devs seem not to acknowledge that a low turnrate is a SERIOUS disadvantage for a ship, especially when it's turnrate is so extreme low as the Galaxys.
I think such a low turnrate qualifies the Galaxy Class (or any other ship that slow) to get some special in exchange.
Like a special console or a ability like sensor scan or something like that as a compensation.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Without checking all 60 pages of this thread does anyone know if the DEVs have made any response either here or elsewhere to a Galaxy revamp?
Have they responded to any concerns regarding cruisers?
The closest I've found to a response was Capt******'s statement that beam arrays are fine. I know I have mentioned this in other threads, but I still can't quite get over just how eager he was to dismiss any notion of dual heavy cannons being nerfed.
Comments
Yeah, but since Starfleet did use the Galaxies as heavy support craft and battleships, it is a safe assumption that there were Galaxy class ships in all the engagements I listed, and we all know what happened at the Second Battle of Chintoka. That was TWO alliance fleets destroyed by the Breen (first one was the garrison fleet, second was the assault fleet). Also in the final assault on Cardassia Prime, again, it's safe to assume there were a number of Galaxy Class ships present (shown on screen in the scenes leading up to the battle, a few scenes during the battle, and I believe a Gal or two in the post battle scene). And again, since Admiral Ross did state that they had lost a third of their ships, it's likely that at least one or two Galaxies were destroyed.
Possible, yes. Either way, those potential Galaxy-class starships would have been destroyed by a superior technology and/or enemy forces, in the same manner as the USS Odyssey.
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
I would actually go with superior numbers here, since I am pretty sure Dominion tech is on the same level as Starfleet tech, if not SLIGHTLY superior. Actually probably somewhat superior since in STO you have 24th century Dominion forces engaging and being equal to 25th century Starfleet and KDF technology.
But I think the best argument here in favor of the Galaxy is that most Galaxy Class starships were only destroyed by technology that they had never encountered before. Take the USS Odyssey. She was destroyed by Jem'hadar Attack Ships, and that was at a time when the Dominion was still largely a mystery to Starfleet. They had never encountered Dominion ships or Dominion tech before, and as such weren't prepared for it. The USS Yamato was destroyed by Iconian tech. They didn't even know what the Iconians were at the time. And so on and so forth.
Well, yes, that's what I was referencing; the Odyssey was initially overcome by the phased polaron weapons, that were able to penetrate her shields, before eventually being rammed; the fleet at Chin'toka faced both powerful Cardassian weapon platforms, and then the unknown Breen energy dissipators. It all adds up to a very different playing field than what the Enterprise-D usually had to contend with for many years, one where any ship would succumb to such dangers.
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
We still don't know much about the Iconians, and them Romulans bein' abducted too... :P
But yeah, the issues with the Galaxy-class ships being beaten, stem from the fact that Starfleet was first encountering/fighting against these enemies. Any of these crises could have happened to other Starfleet ships.
Take all the Constitution-class ships. USS Defiant? Lost in the Tholian interphasic space. USS Valiant? Lost when its crew had some kind of mutiny. USS Constellation? Badly beaten by the planet killer, the charred hulk sacrificed later on. USS Lexington? Crew killed when fighting the underestimated M5 computer. USS Enterprise? Severely crippled by Khan, leading to a last-resort self destruct - or if you prefer JJ Trek, got the bolts beaten out of it by two hits from the Narada's "Magic Missiles".
There ya go. And I daresay, the Galaxy-class usually fares better than the Constitution-class ships in its heyday. Take the USS Enterprise-D against the Borg, or the USS Galaxy against the OWPs.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
even though if Riker was competent at his job it should have been no threat as you just change the frequency but what ever lol
and data going a bit insane at the time did not make the matter any better haha.... the writers really wanted to kill the D in the most disgracing way possible even after it kills the bird of pray they used stock footage from star trek 6 haha
(which he corrected in the same post
In my opinion Riker should have been court martialed more than once. His and other officers behavior was more then criminal in several cases.
My point was that the devs made the Vesta with much more care and though to the original, then they did the Galaxy.
A Cruiser would need a complete different BOFF layout of course, that's not the question.
I say it a last time, making the Galaxy Class OP is not the point. Making it more true to the original IS however.
(which is widely documented, btw)
Btw. the Vesta is from 2380, which is not so new anymore by the time of STO, and yet is is a formidable ship. I see no reason to consider the Galaxy class as obsolete or inferior, even if it's older, on the other hand the Excelsior is almost 130 years old just like the Vesta a great ship.
Why is it so hard to understand that making the Galaxy Class a virtually static brick with the least offensive of all cruisers is not how that ship is supposed to be?
Especially from a game point of view it is just alienating the Star Trek fanbase. Other cruisers are much better and much more fun to fly ships without breaking the Games "balance".
As one of the most iconic ships in Star Trek, the Galaxy Class is not just another ship.
People who start playing STO, especailly look at it and have to reckognize that it is also the most boring ship in the game.
I just can't understand the devs motives behind that, there is no special reason for doing something like that. There is no reason to make one ship the most boring at all.
Every ship can have some special and unique advantage. But to make one of the most popular ships outside STO a mere target practice, just because SOME devs (you know who i mean) like other ships more, is just unprofessional IMO.
I fully agree.
That whole incident was so stupid, i wish the whole crew was courtmartialed for incompetence (and the movies scriprwriters even more, lol).
They really shouldn't have killed the enterprise at all, they could have updated its appearance like they did with the original Enterprise in TMP.
I think i would have been a much better reason for the Enterprise to be at Earth than the refusal to obey starfleet orders. It would have been much more dramatic if the Enterprise -D would have been in drydock and just a skeleton Crew to start and join the Battle at 001.
Just imagine ST: 8 with an visually completely updated Galaxy class, but still much more reckognizeable than the unfamiliar corridors and ships shape of the sovereign.
(well... a man can dream
Riker did rotate the shields but with la forge standing right at the screen they instantly knew the new one.
And your point on the vesta is totally valid. The devs took the time and care that ship needed and the galaxy has been ignored from start to finish in this game. The original T4 galaxy was annoying to fly, *remember loot range was much smaller then*, The T5 galaxy didnt exsist.
They finally add a T5 version of our most beloved Intrepid, defiant, and galaxy, with bad boff layout on each. Galaxy gets the bigger kick in the nuts not cause of the same 3rd ensign like the other 2 but the lack of ensign boff powers to use in it, both tac and sci have decently useful skills to place in 3rd one. Galaxy has 3 ensign and 5 powers to chose from, 4 of those share a global, throw in that the 5th option shares the global with Tac and Sci team = problem.
The consoles are a bust as well, intrepid got the generator up time vs down time = not worth it, Defiant got cloak which is useful in pvp not as much in pve but id say the best of the 3. Galaxy got the Saucer sep, while nice, not being toggle is a deal breaker, and who honestly wants to fly their galaxy aka enterpise d as a stardrive section full time? I want to fly a galaxy not a stardrive.
The fleet versions are a lil better off. 5th tac console = +1 for the defiant. 5th sci console = +1 for the intrepid. 5th eng = wtf do i need 5 armor consoles for on a cruiser that wont die with 4 to begin with?!
I get they want them to be purest ships, but honestly who cares what the devs want when it comes to playablity. 5 tac will help you kill faster, 5 sci will help your sci skills/shields. 5 eng on a 6 degree per sec base turn ship is just loli pointless. Be my guest and use an RCS for that staggering 1 degree per sec bonus. I could go on but point is clear.
Fix the gal, give it 7 DPS turn rate. Make the ens eng a uni eng, take the 5th eng console and make it a 3rd tac. You can then make it use ens eng/sci/tac slanting that gal which ever way you choose she was versital and that atleast gives it flexability. 3rd tac gives it decent firepower without over reaching. We have enough 4 tac console cruisers atm.
Its fair and it puts it on par with the KDF place holder the Neg'var.
interesting thing about first contact and the D found this on google a wile back apparently the model shown over DS9 for the USS Venture had this registry (the one with the phaser bumps). they just filmed it in a way you could not see it on TV. the guys at ILM did this at the end of generations as they where unsure at the time what the E was going to be and they planned on doing a star trek 4 with the next enterprise just being a refitted galaxy like how the A was another constitution.
http://i608.photobucket.com/albums/tt161/01gpgt/Enterprise-E_galaxy_class_zps8af80b44.jpg
Thank you for taking the time to explain to me how a democracy works since I had forgotten. You don't have a valid reason WHY the Galaxy shouldn't get a work over, you are just looking for a fight.
You have expressed opinions let me point out two more opinions you seem to be stating as facts: how powerful the Galaxy is should be well down on the list of things which need fixed. That is your opinion. I have the opinion that something I paid money for and could reasonably expect to perform to a certain standard does not, and I want that fixed. Let this same situation happen with an escort and watch the forums ignite. Here's another:the ship is not 'unplayable' but is no where near the T5 standard of other cruisers. The so called 'level I want' is to be just as good as any other T5 ship, not an outlandish request. Your opinion is otherwise. The majority of people who own the Galaxy disagree with you. Majority. That's a democracy in action. I still fail to see how this in any way harms you. And nice little sideways jab calling me a fanboy. Your fear of having the Galaxy actually become a T5 ship somehow insults your e-peen IMO.
If have a used car lot and I sell you a car, you would have a reasonable expectation that the headlights, the blinkers, the horn, etc. worked. You drive it off the lot and the engine sputters, one of the blinkers is out. You bring the car back and ask me to fix it. I then ask you if you can still drive the car? Yes of course you answer. Well, the car is fine, now go away I say. How would you like that?
OR: said car is a Camaro. A Ford Pinto passes you on the freeway and you cannot catch him. Wouldn't you expect a Camaro to be able to catch (not to mention pass) a Pinto? Of course. Not asking to turn it into a Corvette, just let it perform to the standard already set.
Make the T5 Galaxy an actual T5 ship, no more no less. Arguing against a simple and reasonable request as this is foolish and belies another issue that is outside the realm of the game.
Challenger wasn't lost. ity was Columbia, Yamato, Oddyessy, E-D
It was an early idea of the E-E beijng a Gal X before the Sovereign.
The Galaxy-R is a tier 5 ship. It has 9 consoles, a cmdr station, a ltcmdr station, two lt stations, and an ensign station. It has high hull, and 8 weapons, 4 device slots, etc. It matches all of the requirements of a tier 5 ship. All it's missing is a little more bite.
Designing the Sovereign instead of the ugly Gal-X is not really an improvement IMO, lol.
Sure it has everything to qualify to be a T5 ship, but the BOFF slot and Consoles are rather suboptimal IMO.
As almost everyone else i find its extremely low turnrate and the 3 Engineering Ensigns mak that ship fall behind the other two "hero" ships, Intrepid and Defiant.
Having a bit more hull cannot compensate those disadvantages IMO.
True.
Give it a additional tac console in exchange for its 5th engineering console and i think it would be a good compensation for its other disadvantages.
she's not that ugly, want ugly. Oberth, Defiant.
Or the Excelsior, for example.:D
Seriously, i think the designer of the Sovereign should have continued the design trend that began with the Ambassador was continued with the Galaxy Class. But to return to Constitution and Excelsior proportions and design pattern was just lazy IMO.
It almost looked like they wanted to show the audience a ship that resembles more Kirks ship from the movies, than a next generation enterprise...
But again that's just my personal opinion.
We still live!!!!! Hahahahahahahahaa! We live and we will conquer!!!!! Hahahahahaaha!
-Roach, when asked about Klingon extinction!
I hear they made it longer instead of wider (thank goodness for that! imagine the space whales we'd have now if they went with that??!!) because they wanted recognition as you mentioned, they also wanted it to look sleeker and cooler, finally they wanted it to better fit a movie theater widescreen (incidentally the Galaxy fits a tv screen pretty well). Or so I hear.
While I am no Galaxy fan (only the Vesta and Ambassador are uglier, bleh!) I do understand wanting to make it a viable ship. When I talk about cruisers offering a genuine different play experience without being useless I'm referring to the more tactical cruisers like the Assault Crusier, Excel, and the Ody families of ships. The Starcrusier and the Galaxy,as well as their lines of ships are largely unsuitable outside of unusual and specialized builds, I would even say the Galaxy is the worse of the pair.
So then why hasn't Cryptic simply changed the ens. engi to an ens. tac or even an ens. uni? Which cruiser niche would it be supplanting? Is it about future sales they plan to make to fill that very same niche? I honestly don't know, I can speculate plenty but that just paints an even grimmer picture for the Galaxy.
They're not doing anything for the Galaxy for what I perceive to be the same reasons why they have not made Metreon Gas Consoles available to Mirror Star Cruisers. Interesting how quickly they respond to quash rumours of DHCs getting a nerf, though.
I too can't understand why the devs made it that way, maybe because they thought they had to fill that role with SOME ship. So they took a very popular one, so they could get sure SOMEONE would fly it.
But they just haven't thought about that flying such a ship is just frustrating and useless.
Not to speak of that they made the Galaxy Class into a complete differnt ship as it is supposed to be.
I mean MMO or not, all ships should at least resemble their "original" as good as possible.
(within the constraints of the games "balance")
But to put it into a "role" which just doesn't suit to it, is just lazy game design IMO.
For the games sake they should have made one of their own designs, like the Typhoon or Jupiter ships a extreme Tank and make the Galaxy Class more like a "jack of all trades" cruiser, capable of filling any Role a cruiser can take in STO.
To archieve that, the Galaxy class should have been fitted with a Lt. Universal and 4/3/3 consoles from the beginning.
Another thing that bothers me is that the devs seem not to acknowledge that a low turnrate is a SERIOUS disadvantage for a ship, especially when it's turnrate is so extreme low as the Galaxys.
I think such a low turnrate qualifies the Galaxy Class (or any other ship that slow) to get some special in exchange.
Like a special console or a ability like sensor scan or something like that as a compensation.
Have they responded to any concerns regarding cruisers?
The closest I've found to a response was Capt******'s statement that beam arrays are fine. I know I have mentioned this in other threads, but I still can't quite get over just how eager he was to dismiss any notion of dual heavy cannons being nerfed.