these less vocal players are so far from min maxed to perfection, that they don't even use any of their ship to a high enough percentage of its potential to detect any weaknesses it might have. some don't even use station powers, like they just dont. these players are to busy complaining about how hard the pve story content is to complain about a ship they cant even perceive has a crippling problem.
I'm not that convinced that Cryptic even wants to cater to the min/maxers at the expense of everyone else though. Nerfing the rep system, item sets like the Undine tac console, fused weapons with locked damage types... not to mention that default weapons and equipment on 'mission-only ships(Enterprise-C, Bortasqu', etc), any of which doesn't exactly have optimal equipment synergy. The devs might just look at the 'average' player and see that the Galaxy performs well enough. Now I don't think they have anything wrong with players who push ships to their limits, but they just might not want to build their game around balancing things at the tip-top of efficiency.
Just stating my opinion on some of my observations.
If you dont know how to play Eng base cruisers for as it is, Galaxy R was never meant for players like you or the current or one of your toons you want to play Galaxy R.
present the build that uses an eng cruiser right then, or this is a lot of hot air. guaranty it would work even better on a lowly star cruiser. and thats the point. any way you want to use it, its the worst ship for the role in its class
I'm not that convinced that Cryptic even wants to cater to the min/maxers at the expense of everyone else though. Nerfing the rep system, item sets like the Undine tac console, fused weapons with locked damage types... not to mention that default weapons and equipment on 'mission-only ships(Enterprise-C, Bortasqu', etc), any of which doesn't exactly have optimal equipment synergy. The devs might just look at the 'average' player and see that the Galaxy performs well enough. Now I don't think they have anything wrong with players who push ships to their limits, but they just might not want to build their game around balancing things at the tip-top of efficiency.
Just stating my opinion on some of my observations.
almost all the balance passes have been based on minmaxer and pvper feedback and exploiting to show how grave a problem is. none of that really effects the low hanging fruit, yet they still bother doing it
If you want a ENG heavy Cruiser, the Lv 40, 9 consoled, Assault Cruiser does an equal job while still having a bit more punch than the Fleet Galaxy while not even lagging that far behind the basic core functions of even the Fleet Gal-X.
The Ens ENG station on the Galaxy-R / Fleet Galaxy is pointless. Even Ensign TAC abilities have more options than ENG at the same rank. BO1, BFAW1, TT1, HYT1, TS1, Target Subsys... they're all bonafide Ens level Tac abilities that have use and do not throw the other half into cooldowns. Not so with the Ensign ENG abilities, most of which are Emergency Powers and throw the others into shared CDs. That's why a normal Cmdr & LtCdr ENG Cruiser is way more than enough for the task.
If the Galaxy-R had a Lt & Ens TAC station that would be markedly better. If the Galaxy-X had a LtCdr TAC it would be markedly better... it is still 3 TAC abilities, the same as it currently has, but it means far more options in TAC abilities.
If it had a LtCdr SCI or even Ens & Lt SCI instead, that would be markedly better.
Anything but the Ens ENG station, due to the lack of options at ENG Ensign.
almost all the balance passes have been based on minmaxer and pvper feedback and exploiting to show how grave a problem is. none of that really effects the low hanging fruit, yet they still bother doing it
That is a good point. But then they do things like the examples I listed.
It makes no sense. Unless they're trying to please everyone. And you know as well as I do that won't work.
That is a good point. But then they do things like the examples I listed.
It makes no sense. Unless they're trying to please everyone. And you know as well as I do that won't work.
it makes sense, they hate the galaxy, and want canon ships that aren't even middle age to suck compared to lockbox ships that are even older designs, and their own designs. cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic
it makes sense, they hate the galaxy, and want canon ships that aren't even middle age to suck compared to lockbox ships that are even older designs, and their own designs. cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic
And that assumption is based on what? To me, that seems like the most unlikely thing to be true here. First of all, there are employees coming and going from Cryptic since STO was launched. What are the odds of all of them hating one ship? Second of all, again, they might have perfectly valid reasons to leave the Galaxy how it is that we might not see. And third, I believe I have provided a pretty plausible explanation here before... and you think all of that is less likely than "cryptic just hates the ship"? And adding the "cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic" doesn't make sense and hints of circular logic.
It makes no sense to jump to a conclusion like that on what seems to me to be merely an emotionally-driven agenda. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your position. I too have my own list of things I'd want Cryptic to do differently. But I don't see how jumping to the worst possible conclusions is gonna help the case. You seem to have already done what you can for your cause. I think it's better to continue on the path that still would encourage Cryptic to read your posts, rather than throwing logic out the window which will make Cryptic totally ignore what you or anyone else with this agenda is saying, constructive or not.
You went around the circles. You already answered it. Fleet Galaxy X will outdps Tac odyssey. Tac odyssey is just flexible. I dont know when a ship will outdps a ship with both ships at maximum effect build when you are lacking a tac console and hangar with only a tac flexbility boffs advantage.
re read what i wrote more slowly and you will see that the oddy got 1 or 2 torp power, bfaw3 and attack pattern, while the dreadnought just got bfaw1 and attack pattern.
it could have higher attack pattern power and lower beam power or the reverse.
so it is not just more flexible, it is outright more powerfull
Why would someone on the right mind even use Fleet Galaxy X as an alpha in PVE? In pve, better to use Bfaw than alpha strike build for Fleet galaxy X.
since it wasn't obvious enought for you it seem, i am going to explain it to you.
my statement as " you are aware that some people are able to finish an stf in that time?" was not to show any utility of an alpha strike for pve, but to notified you that 3 minute is a long time, and that some are able to finish an stf in that time.
it point you out the huge waste it would be to have a sniper build on this ship with that much downtime, and of course it is for pvp.
Good luck one shotting pvp ships with your B03 with your fleet avenger.
haha, do you ever use a galaxy x spinal lance?
no seriously?
because your skill have nothing to do with the fact that you can one shot people with it, it is just luck, but... just huge pure luck there.
first you have to have a target in your firing arc, so unless you are fighting carrier ship this is usually not you who force them by your piloting skill to be there.
they will get in your firing arc because they must travel in front of you to reach an other target.
but when it is there, it must stay there! for a minimum of 4 sec ( that the time of the entire charging sequence and the 2 consecutive shot of the lance ), without moving!!!
but that not over! it then have to touch the target ( aka not missing ) and even if the target is perfectly aligned and not moving, your chance of missing it completely is stup
And that assumption is based on what? To me, that seems like the most unlikely thing to be true here. First of all, there are employees coming and going from Cryptic since STO was launched. What are the odds of all of them hating one ship? Second of all, again, they might have perfectly valid reasons to leave the Galaxy how it is that we might not see. And third, I believe I have provided a pretty plausible explanation here before... and you think all of that is less likely than "cryptic just hates the ship"? And adding the "cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic" doesn't make sense and hints of circular logic.
It makes no sense to jump to a conclusion like that on what seems to me to be merely an emotionally-driven agenda. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your position. I too have my own list of things I'd want Cryptic to do differently. But I don't see how jumping to the worst possible conclusions is gonna help the case. You seem to have already done what you can for your cause. I think it's better to continue on the path that still would encourage Cryptic to read your posts, rather than throwing logic out the window which will make Cryptic totally ignore what you or anyone else with this agenda is saying, constructive or not.
yes, it just that after 4 years of "uber" galaxy treatement some of us are really TRIBBLE off, and i suppose that since the constructive way didn't work it just feel good to just split our venom sometime.
i, in my case don't bielieve in hate theory, it just daesn't seem logical to me, i however think that there is a clear intention to leave galaxy ship in a state of inneficiency.
what i really want to known is why, and what are the reasons ( they may be many ).
in any case the way we said it ( politely or rudelessly ) daesn't seem to affect in any way the fate of galaxy class in this game.
but this have no importance anymore, we are not going to succeed anyway, so who care?
i, in my case don't bielieve in hate theory, it just daesn't seem logical to me, i however think that there is a clear intention to leave galaxy ship in a state of inneficiency.
what i really want to known is why, and what are the reasons ( they may be many ).
Well what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the Galaxy to pwn?
And before you say the Galaxy itself, that would be appealing to the argument from ignorance.
And that assumption is based on what? To me, that seems like the most unlikely thing to be true here. First of all, there are employees coming and going from Cryptic since STO was launched. What are the odds of all of them hating one ship? Second of all, again, they might have perfectly valid reasons to leave the Galaxy how it is that we might not see. And third, I believe I have provided a pretty plausible explanation here before... and you think all of that is less likely than "cryptic just hates the ship"? And adding the "cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic" doesn't make sense and hints of circular logic.
It makes no sense to jump to a conclusion like that on what seems to me to be merely an emotionally-driven agenda. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your position. I too have my own list of things I'd want Cryptic to do differently. But I don't see how jumping to the worst possible conclusions is gonna help the case. You seem to have already done what you can for your cause. I think it's better to continue on the path that still would encourage Cryptic to read your posts, rather than throwing logic out the window which will make Cryptic totally ignore what you or anyone else with this agenda is saying, constructive or not.
you haven't been paying attention and are pretty naive to think that they don't hate/literally think it should suck, after they did the galaxy reboot and did nothing to the galaxy R. at best, they really do think it should suck and be the worst ship in the game, and at worst it was a vindictive act because they hate the ship and hate the players in this thread that would like it made ever so more usable. they couldn't even let it have a universal ENS, like the dread got. if it had gotten that, the ship would be twice as good. still the worst cruiser, but twice as good.
it took 1/100 the badgering for cryptic to make a tac heavy sovereign refit, they thought it should be more tac heavy too. galaxy reboot comes along, and we get no reboot. worst ship in game by a huge margin is working as intended. there is nothing but silence from them on this, they wont even try justifying why it is the way it is, because there is nothing reasonable they can say. its ether we think it should suck, or we hate you and your stupid ship.
i can site a mountain of canon evidence proving it doesn't suck, i can even reasonably prove among federation ships it was without peer even tactically. that's what a high percentage of this thread is, going over that. all for nothing, these devs are the most stubborn people ive ever encountered, they think they do no wrong when balancing things, all feedback is handwaved every time.
Well what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the Galaxy to pwn?
And before you say the Galaxy itself, that would be appealing to the argument from ignorance.
Gal R Lt Tac station...period
Thats all the evidence you need.........To not accept that evedience is ignorance itself
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
you haven't been paying attention and are pretty naive to think that they don't hate/literally think it should suck, after they did the galaxy reboot and did nothing to the galaxy R.
Oh, I see. I thought I had merely interpreted their reasons differently than you have. Guess it turns out I wasn't even paying attention.
Could you point out the evidence that they hate the ship now...?
at best, they really do think it should suck and be the worst ship in the game, and at worst it was a vindictive act because they hate the ship and hate the players in this thread that would like it made ever so more usable. they couldn't even let it have a universal ENS, like the dread got. if it had gotten that, the ship would be twice as good. still the worst cruiser, but twice as good.
it took 1/100 the badgering for cryptic to make a tac heavy sovereign refit, they thought it should be more tac heavy too. galaxy reboot comes along, and we get no reboot. worst ship in game by a huge margin is working as intended. there is nothing but silence from them on this, they wont even try justifying why it is the way it is, because there is nothing reasonable they can say. its ether we think it should suck, or we hate you and your stupid ship.
It seems that they want the Galaxy to be more focused on Engineering than any other ship, and have far less tactical ability. They did reboot the Galaxy with improved Saucer Separation functionality and a console set bonus. They probably had no intention on giving it more firepower. Though my guess is of course just more speculation.
i can site a mountain of canon evidence proving it doesn't suck, i can even reasonably prove among federation ships it was without peer even tactically. that's what a high percentage of this thread is, going over that. all for nothing, these devs are the most stubborn people ive ever encountered, they think they do no wrong when balancing things, all feedback is handwaved every time.
I'm not sure that matters to Cryptic, if they hate the Galaxy or not.
Though for what it's worth, even if we disagree on Cryptic's intentions, I do agree that we all deserve some explanation regarding their decisions for the Galaxy reboot. I'll try to get the P1 guys to add that question into a future interview. =D
Thats all the evidence you need.........To not accept that evedience is ignorance itself
Okay then, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt... just how does that count as evidence? And how is not accepting that ignorance?
The fact is, whatever setup they have on any specific ship doesn't necessarily explain the intent Cryptic has for that ship. It is quite reasonable to assume that Cryptic wants certain roles for ships, but doesn't understand how to handle making those roles useful in practice. Therefore, any implications that their intent shows through in their ship designs is flawed reasoning.
Well what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the Galaxy to pwn?
And before you say the Galaxy itself, that would be appealing to the argument from ignorance.
So you want evidence but not the best evidence any player can have, being the Galaxy-X and Galaxy-R. Kinda hard for any player to find more evidence that they want the ship to suck or they don't like it enough to actually try and fix it without going James Bond and spying on them in their work place or setting up some kind of hidden mics to record their conversations.
All you have to really do to know that there is logically a desire/hate factor/lack of interest in fixing the Galaxy-R is look at the thread on making the Fleet dreadnaught. In no post did I see anyone ask for a universal ensign which is something this thread has been asking for the Galaxy-r since its early beginning. Also look at how many asked not to get a hanger and to have something added to the G-X to validate the fact it gets only two cruiser commands instead of all 4 or atleast the plus to turn cruiser command.
Do I believe everyone at Cryptic hates the Galaxy class, no but then again it only takes the highest in the pecking order to hate something to make it where it never gets worked on. Lets face it if the boss doesn't want you to do something then you don't do it.
What we have gotten was work on a Fleet version of the Dreadnaught most of which were so called improvements the majority didn't want added to the ship, and absolutely nothing done to the G-R. So either they hate the Galaxy Class or just don't give two S**** that their customers spent cash on ships and feel their getting boned when it honestly wouldn't take them that long to make the improvements we have asked for.
At the very least put up alternative versions of the Galaxy and G-X as fleet versions and make 5 dollars a pop off ppl that want different styles these ships.
So you want evidence but not the best evidence any player can have, being the Galaxy-X and Galaxy-R. Kinda hard for any player to find more evidence that they want the ship to suck or thy don't like it enough to actually try and fix it without going James Bond and spying on them in their work place or setting up some kind of hidden mics to record their conversations.
All you have to really do to know that there is logically a desire/hate factor/lack of interest in fixing the Galaxy-R is look at the thread on making the FLeet dreadnaught. In no post did I see anyone ask for a universal ensign which is something this thread has been asking for the Galaxy-r since its early beginning. Also look at how many asked not to get a hanger and to have something added to the G-X to validate the fact it gets only two cruiser commands instead of all 4 or atleast the pl;us to turn cruiser command.
Here's the thing. As I have explained before, the configurations of the ships themselves are not evidence of Cryptic hating them. It may not be easy to understand or even accept, but there is a chance that Cryptic thinks that the ships are good, but merely is too incompetent to pull off what they want to do with the ships. Or perhaps they think that the ships are compatible with gameplay and the options that the ship has(BOFF skills, consoles, etc), but they in fact are not.
But honestly, it could very well be that Cryptic hates the ships. But that would need to be demonstrated, rather than asserted, as there are more possibilities. And even if it turns out that Cryptic does in fact hate the ships, any normal player would still be justified in considering those other possibilities.
Here's the thing. As I have explained before, the configurations of the ships themselves are not evidence of Cryptic hating them. It may not be easy to understand or even accept, but there is a chance that Cryptic thinks that the ships are good, but merely is too incompetent to pull off what they want to do with the ships. Or perhaps they think that the ships are compatible with gameplay and the options that the ship has(BOFF skills, consoles, etc), but they in fact are not.
But honestly, it could very well be that Cryptic hates the ships. But that would need to be demonstrated, rather than asserted, as there are more possibilities. And even if it turns out that Cryptic does in fact hate the ships, any normal player would still be justified in considering those other possibilities.
Here is my thing, when you say hey were gonna remake this ship and we got ideas and ask for opinions of the community and then ignore them all either you don't care about the customer or you for some reason don't like the ship enough to make it so that players want to be flying them. Now I can understand your thought process on needing more evidence but as stated we the players are not able to provide it.
If it turns out that they hate the ship then why would anyone look for other reasoning why they have refused to alter or improve this ship. Whatever justification they can give they certainly haven't said what it maybe. They haven't even replied in this thread so far as I've seen and this thread is way over what should have been necessary to invoke a DEV response.
Maybe they do have some greater reasoning that noone here has thought up or considered. But without them actually coming here to defend their decisions for these ships there is not many conclusions ppl are gonna consider other then solely hating the ship itself.
your Trolling pure and simple....................Trolling
Its been proven in this thread over and over again I suggest you read the thread from the begining you may have tuned in late
132 characters ? and you dont know its the worst ship in its class the more boring most underpowered/DPS ship in its class ?..............seriously ? 132 romulans ?wrong number ? lol
1 lt Tac.....total proof right there .........no other proof need to be presented
most star trek fans play pve
Pve is 95% DPS
The Galaxy is one of the most loved and desired ships to star trek fans
The Galaxy is the worst DPS ships in its class
I call it
Troll exposed
I just cant name the Troll can I So the Troll has to expose theirself...Buy the Troll has exposed themself
And the Trool nametag goe's too......Drum Roll.........insert name here...............................)
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Here is my thing, when you say hey were gonna remake this ship and we got ideas and ask for opinions of the community and then ignore them all either you don't care about the customer or you for some reason don't like the ship enough to make it so that players want to be flying them. Now I can understand your thought process on needing more evidence but as stated we the players are not able to provide it.
That's a false dichotomy that appeals to the argument from ignorance. It ignores what else possibly went wrong with that scenario.
If it turns out that they hate the ship then why would anyone look for other reasoning why they have refused to alter or improve this ship. Whatever justification they can give they certainly haven't said what it maybe. They haven't even replied in this thread so far as I've seen and this thread is way over what should have been necessary to invoke a DEV response.
As I stated in my previous post, the very post you have quoted, there is a chance that Cryptic thinks that the ships are good, but merely is too incompetent to pull off what they want to do with the ships. Or perhaps they think that the ships are compatible with gameplay and the options that the ship has(BOFF skills, consoles, etc), but they in fact are not.
Maybe they do have some greater reasoning that noone here has thought up or considered. But without them actually coming here to defend their decisions for these ships there is not many conclusions ppl are gonna consider other then solely hating the ship itself.
Maybe they do. But you could start by not ignoring the possible reasons brought up by others.
Well what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the Galaxy to pwn?
And before you say the Galaxy itself, that would be appealing to the argument from ignorance.
ok, i must first clarified the term " pwn", what do you mean by that?
do you mean that the galaxy should "pwn" like it should have more firepower or something?
i am going to replace this ambiguous term by what i thaught is their intention and reformulate your question.
here it is:
" what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the galaxy to be efficient"
i use this term because let not forget that we are talking about 2 ship here that have 2 different objective in the game, so i prefer to speak about their efficiency in their respective roles ( if i may said so:rolleyes:).
so is there an evidence? like a proof? something like a dev that stated in the forum: the galaxy suck and that good we don't want it to be any better!"
of course there is not!
there is however a deductive proof.
it has been establish that the galaxy retrofit has no particular role in the federation faction, there is nothing that you can do with it that you can not do better with a simple star cruiser.
as of today the only one that dispute that proof are noobs, lets said it bluntly.
and it is a proof, because this is something that can be explained and demonstrate, anytime.
now here come the galaxy reboot, what did cryptic do to remediate to that situation?
to give him something that is unique to it or give him a role in the federation layout to make it a real choice?
nothing! almost litterally nothing, they give it a fantastic 2 piece set bonus! great!!
what can we conclude about it?
well, let review all the possibilities:
1)a dull rumor spread in the office of cryptic ...
the ghost of raymond, this new employee that arrives three years earlier haunt the place in search of revenge.
raymond was a fan of the galaxy and had already had several Rixte with gecko on its representation in sto .
one day , during a call in his office with gecko, the tone rises and degenerate, raymond had the misfortune to said this sentence ; "It is now time that the galaxy class kicks the TRIBBLE of the exelsior ! "
poor him ... gecko jump on him faster than one would have done with a picard maneuver .
he shouted at him , squeezing his throat " NEVER! YOU HEARD ME! NEVEEEEER! THIS WILL NOT HAPPENED WHILE I AM IN CHARGE!!!
in his fit of rage , gecko have not been able to control and just strangle raymond .
fortunately for him , cryptic was undergoing construction of a new room for their new server.
without the worker knownlege he burried raymond corp in the foundation of the room.
the engineer have never really elucidate the mysterious server failures that came regularly thereafter.
some think the spirit of raymond takes control of fan galaxy around the world to scream his displeasure .
the thread "what is your beef with the galaxy" would have been create by one of its controlled fan .
as of today the Machiavellian plan of gecko to limit to the maximum the galaxy capabilitie have woked perfectly.
but somes fear what raymond revenge would do next...
nice story huh? is it neccesary for me to said that i don't bielieve in that possibilitie?
2) the devs really think that the bo layout of the galaxy retrofit allow it to do something even as good as what a simple star cruiser can, if not better.
so there is nothing wrong with it but considering the power creep going on they thaught it was a good idea to give it a 2 piece set bonus.
in short, devs are noob that don't even anderstand how their own game works.
let me said right away that i don't bielieve in that possibilitie.
3) the devs known perfectly how cripple this ship is but just don't care, it is a vanity item, nothing more, a skin, be happy that you got one, but for real ship at end game, we have others plans for you
4) the dev known the ship is an heresy but can't change it because it would then make it as good or better than others ship, who, in their mind should be better.
they have the opportunitie to change it with the galaxy reboot, they have done nothing.
what other proof do you need that they don't want it to be better?
and changing the bo layout of a ship to make it on part with the rest is not something that they can't do, just look at the season 9 devs blog 20 for that.
ok, i must first clarified the term " pwn", what do you mean by that?
do you mean that the galaxy should "pwn" like it should have more firepower or something?
i am going to replace this ambiguous term by what i thaught is their intention and reformulate your question.
here it is:
" what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the galaxy to be efficient"
i use this term because let not forget that we are talking about 2 ship here that have 2 different objective in the game, so i prefer to speak about their efficiency in their respective roles ( if i may said so:rolleyes:).
so is there an evidence? like a proof? something like a dev that stated in the forum: the galaxy suck and that good we don't want it to be any better!"
I do apologize for using such a confusing term. But yes, you were correct in your reformulating of my question.
it has been establish that the galaxy retrofit has no particular role in the federation faction, there is nothing that you can do with it that you can not do better with a simple star cruiser.
as of today the only one that dispute that proof are noobs, lets said it bluntly.
and it is a proof, because this is something that can be explained and demonstrate, anytime.
There is no denying that here. And both newbs and noobs could reasonably deny it. Though I use 'reasonably' more loosely with noobs. But the fact is, the Galaxy's current ability is irrelevant. To put it bluntly, it is weak, but that doesn't mean it's meant to be weak.
2) the devs really think that the bo layout of the galaxy retrofit allow it to do something even as good as what a simple star cruiser can, if not better.
so there is nothing wrong with it but considering the power creep going on they thaught it was a good idea to give it a 2 piece set bonus.
in short, devs are noob that don't even anderstand how their own game works.
let me said right away that i don't bielieve in that possibilitie.
Let me put it this way then: The dev team most likely doesn't playtest their own game, at least not sufficiently enough. This is evidenced by them relying on us to point out various bugs and glitches they might have missed. Also, there are some things they simply can't playtest on their own and NEED us for, like event mechanics breaking apart because of server overload. But that example is irrelevant to this topic.
Because they can't/don't playtest their own game sufficiently enough, they can't know their own game the way we can. Players have been known to push the limits within games far beyond what the devs intended. They have to rely on us, because even if something looks good on paper, on practice it might fail.
Therefore, even if they intended say a tank role to be useful, even if it works good on paper, it simply may not be useful at all in practice. That may have to do with the character's/ship's setup, but it might have to do with gameplay or even the options you have with your character's/ship's equipment.
I don't deny that Cryptic hating the Galaxy is a real possibility. But IMO, I believe that they do think that the Galaxy is useful, but either don't accept that it isn't useful in practice, or do accept it but are wanting to change gameplay to suit it more.
I do apologize for using such a confusing term. But yes, you were correct in your reformulating of my question.
There is no denying that here. And both newbs and noobs could reasonably deny it. Though I use 'reasonably' more loosely with noobs. But the fact is, the Galaxy's current ability is irrelevant. To put it bluntly, it is weak, but that doesn't mean it's meant to be weak.
Let me put it this way then: The dev team most likely doesn't playtest their own game, at least not sufficiently enough. This is evidenced by them relying on us to point out various bugs and glitches they might have missed. Also, there are some things they simply can't playtest on their own and NEED us for, like event mechanics breaking apart because of server overload. But that example is irrelevant to this topic.
Because they can't/don't playtest their own game sufficiently enough, they can't know their own game the way we can. Players have been known to push the limits within games far beyond what the devs intended. They have to rely on us, because even if something looks good on paper, on practice it might fail.
Therefore, even if they intended say a tank role to be useful, even if it works good on paper, it simply may not be useful at all in practice. That may have to do with the character's/ship's setup, but it might have to do with gameplay or even the options you have with your character's/ship's equipment.
I don't deny that Cryptic hating the Galaxy is a real possibility. But IMO, I believe that they do think that the Galaxy is useful, but either don't accept that it isn't useful in practice, or do accept it but are wanting to change gameplay to suit it more.
It keeps coming back to the thing I keep saying about the Gal. R Give it universal Bo slots. it solves the problem with the ship and fairly easy to do. The fact they haven't, heack thefact that with the bundle they didn't even correct the graphic glitches shows they do care about the ship and tried to throw us a bone with the last change.
I do apologize for using such a confusing term. But yes, you were correct in your reformulating of my question.
There is no denying that here. And both newbs and noobs could reasonably deny it. Though I use 'reasonably' more loosely with noobs. But the fact is, the Galaxy's current ability is irrelevant. To put it bluntly, it is weak, but that doesn't mean it's meant to be weak.
Let me put it this way then: The dev team most likely doesn't playtest their own game, at least not sufficiently enough. This is evidenced by them relying on us to point out various bugs and glitches they might have missed. Also, there are some things they simply can't playtest on their own and NEED us for, like event mechanics breaking apart because of server overload. But that example is irrelevant to this topic.
Because they can't/don't playtest their own game sufficiently enough, they can't know their own game the way we can. Players have been known to push the limits within games far beyond what the devs intended. They have to rely on us, because even if something looks good on paper, on practice it might fail.
Therefore, even if they intended say a tank role to be useful, even if it works good on paper, it simply may not be useful at all in practice. That may have to do with the character's/ship's setup, but it might have to do with gameplay or even the options you have with your character's/ship's equipment.
I don't deny that Cryptic hating the Galaxy is a real possibility. But IMO, I believe that they do think that the Galaxy is useful, but either don't accept that it isn't useful in practice, or do accept it but are wanting to change gameplay to suit it more.
Dunno what your trying to prove but frankly you just keep ignoring any good evidence we have. You state that somehow the Devs are just ignorant of their own game mechanics and that while they should know they don't play the game enough to know they have failed the galaxy. You state that they rely on us the players to tell them the facts of how well this game runs yet you ignore that if this is true then here is 670 pages mostly filled with facts about why the galaxy sucks and isn't filling any true role in the game at all.
Maybe the Devs are just this oblivious but if thats true then we certainly need new ones that are able to look at the games they are creating and look at the threads the players are creating and know to fix things. You may not be able to fault a man for not knowing but you can fault a man for not trying to learn when all the facts are laying at his very feet waiting to be seen.
It keeps coming back to the thing I keep saying about the Gal. R Give it universal Bo slots. it solves the problem with the ship and fairly easy to do. The fact they haven't, heack thefact that with the bundle they didn't even correct the graphic glitches shows they do care about the ship and tried to throw us a bone with the last change.
That might very well satisfy Galaxy lovers, but it doesn't address the underlying problems with the game - the fact that Engineering consoles are less desired than Tactical consoles, and BOFF overspecialization(in this case, Eng-heavy) isn't optimal. Not to mention the heavy need for DPSing in PvE.
If there were more focus on playing up every strength rather than just encourage more firepower, then Eng-heavy ships wouldn't be so bad.
Though people ITT do want the Galaxy to be specifically more tactically-capable like in TNG/DS9(while ironically accusing whom they perceive as their opponents as Galaxy apologists, but that's another matter). It is clear to me that Cryptic cares more about classifying ships within standard RPG classes rather than accurately representing each ship to their canon counterparts. And as long as the argument is in favor of abandoning RPG classes, I don't think Cryptic will listen.
Dunno what your trying to prove but frankly you just keep ignoring any good evidence we have. You state that somehow the Devs are just ignorant of their own game mechanics and that while they should know they don't play the game enough to know they have failed the galaxy. You state that they rely on us the players to tell them the facts of how well this game runs yet you ignore that if this is true then here is 670 pages mostly filled with facts about why the galaxy sucks and isn't filling any true role in the game at all.
I'm not trying to 'prove' anything. And I'm definitely not ignoring anything(though if I missed something, please by all means point it out to me), my standard of evidence is just higher than most others ITT, it seems.
Also, I don't think the devs even bother reading this thread any more, as it is just filled with appeals to emotion, accusations of Cryptic merely hating things or being incompetent(though I admit to accusing them of that myself =P), and 'suggestions' that they probably have already deemed incompatible with their own agendas for the Galaxy.
Maybe the Devs are just this oblivious but if thats true then we certainly need new ones that are able to look at the games they are creating and look at the threads the players are creating and know to fix things. You may not be able to fault a man for not knowing but you can fault a man for not trying to learn when all the facts are laying at his very feet waiting to be seen.
Agreed. But we don't yet know their side of the story. All we're doing is speculating.
i however think that there is a clear intention to leave galaxy ship in a state of inneficiency.
what i really want to known is why, and what are the reasons ( they may be many ).
Its probably a case of consistency with All Good Things.
Seeing as Riker is an Admiral, Crusher is captain of the Pasteur, Picard is retired and has Irumodic Syndrome, and federation characters visit the Klingon planet Worf used to be governor of.
So considering the Enterprise-D if it was still around would have been decommissioned had Riker not got it upgraded to a Galaxy-X it seems the Galaxy-class is probably in the same place the Constitution was in the later TOS films i.e. on the way to being phased out.
That might very well satisfy Galaxy lovers, but it doesn't address the underlying problems with the game - the fact that Engineering consoles are less desired than Tactical consoles, and BOFF overspecialization(in this case, Eng-heavy) isn't optimal. Not to mention the heavy need for DPSing in PvE.
If there were more focus on playing up every strength rather than just encourage more firepower, then Eng-heavy ships wouldn't be so bad.
Though people ITT do want the Galaxy to be specifically more tactically-capable like in TNG/DS9(while ironically accusing whom they perceive as their opponents as Galaxy apologists, but that's another matter). It is clear to me that Cryptic cares more about classifying ships within standard RPG classes rather than accurately representing each ship to their canon counterparts. And as long as the argument is in favor of abandoning RPG classes, I don't think Cryptic will listen.
I'm not trying to 'prove' anything. And I'm definitely not ignoring anything(though if I missed something, please by all means point it out to me), my standard of evidence is just higher than most others ITT, it seems.
Also, I don't think the devs even bother reading this thread any more, as it is just filled with appeals to emotion, accusations of Cryptic merely hating things or being incompetent(though I admit to accusing them of that myself =P), and 'suggestions' that they probably have already deemed incompatible with their own agendas for the Galaxy.
Agreed. But we don't yet know their side of the story. All we're doing is speculating.
some might go for more science abilities. the main problem is is that too many eng slots are bad the share cool downs kill. Right now i can make the Galaxy work but she could be better and my suggestion not only makes the ship more canon but would be easy to do.
some might go for more science abilities. the main problem is is that too many eng slots are bad the share cool downs kill. Right now i can make the Galaxy work but she could be better and my suggestion not only makes the ship more canon but would be easy to do.
This is why I think we should push for more BOFF skill variety. For example, right now, 4 out of the 5 Ensign Engineering skills are EP2Xs. But what if there were double the amount of total Ensign Engineering skills? Then there would be 4 out of 10 EP2 skills. Much more variety.
Of course, this would require creativity in developing new BOFF skills...
I have no desire to get pulled into this thread again, but I figured Galaxy pilots would appreciate this, anyway.
The new Viscous Cycle Elite in pugs has been a refreshing experience for tanking. I noticed many people were dying a ton, so I figured WTH and slapped my Gal-R spec on my dread and took her for a few spins.
My pugs death rate has dropped dramatically, and we are finishing faster. So far only 2 deaths in 3 runs. One was me sitting too close to the planet killer when it popped, and the other was somebody being oneshot by the planet killer while I still had agro on it (Nothing I could have done about it)
I'm not going to debate "it could be done Xseconds faster if you did more DPS" arguments because I keep coming in first or second on DPS anyway. I'm still maintaining nearly full uptime on my FAW so losing some of the bonus damage around the edges from dem and ep2w don't really hurt that much. I can feel it, but I'm gaining tons of tankyness. (I was also in my Dread. I love her. We are getting married in Korea later this year... I hear it's legal there... Sure a Gal-R would do less but the point is to tank)
So maybe Cryptic is trying to make tanking more viable. It certainly improved my pugging experience so far. Give it a try. It may not be your thing, but it is at least something different to do, and something you can do in a Galaxy-R and not laugh at yourself.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
I have no desire to get pulled into this thread again, but I figured Galaxy pilots would appreciate this, anyway.
The new Viscous Cycle Elite in pugs has been a refreshing experience for tanking. I noticed many people were dying a ton, so I figured WTH and slapped my Gal-R spec on my dread and took her for a few spins.
My pugs death rate has dropped dramatically, and we are finishing faster. So far only 2 deaths in 3 runs. One was me sitting too close to the planet killer when it popped, and the other was somebody being oneshot by the planet killer while I still had agro on it (Nothing I could have done about it)
I'm not going to debate "it could be done Xseconds faster if you did more DPS" arguments because I keep coming in first or second on DPS anyway. I'm still maintaining nearly full uptime on my FAW so losing some of the bonus damage around the edges from dem and ep2w don't really hurt that much. I can feel it, but I'm gaining tons of tankyness. (I was also in my Dread. I love her. We are getting married in Korea later this year... I hear it's legal there... Sure a Gal-R would do less but the point is to tank)
So maybe Cryptic is trying to make tanking more viable. It certainly improved my pugging experience so far. Give it a try. It may not be your thing, but it is at least something different to do, and something you can do in a Galaxy-R and not laugh at yourself.
Although this story warms my heart, the unfortunate fact for me is that I have rarely died in any new undine STFs or Borg ones (aside from Hive Elite) in any cruiser. The fact is, that the Galaxy-x has a little too much tank for its namesake of "Dreadnought" to the point of really only being the same as other cruisers. The Lt. Cmdr Engineer does open up a few options for the ships' versatility, but it's lack of tactical slots is nevertheless rather painful. It would do better with this layout I think:
Aside from all of that, they need to fix the graphics on the galaxy-x too. It's still ugly.
Then if we really want to fix the problem at its core and make tanks useful again, just make more enemy ships with debilitating debuffs that can only be cleared by engineering team and science team. Then the over abundance of those types of abilities on any of the Galaxy variants, or any heal heavy cruiser won't look so silly, and having at least one tank would be preferable to another Tactical Scimitar.
And another side note; fixing science in PvE is easy too. Just make a global science ability effect multiplier of 5 for all NPCs. Instead of tachyon beam draining 4800 shields for instance, it would drain 24000. I guarantee then that having at least 1 science ship in the party would be again preferable to another Tactical Scimitar.
(No offense meant to Tactical Scimitar drivers, I just used your ship because it happens to be the most capable DPS ship in the game, seeing as how the top 3 DPS records were set by them.)
That might very well satisfy Galaxy lovers, but it doesn't address the underlying problems with the game - the fact that Engineering consoles are less desired than Tactical consoles, and BOFF overspecialization(in this case, Eng-heavy) isn't optimal. Not to mention the heavy need for DPSing in PvE.
If there were more focus on playing up every strength rather than just encourage more firepower, then Eng-heavy ships wouldn't be so bad.
Though people ITT do want the Galaxy to be specifically more tactically-capable like in TNG/DS9(while ironically accusing whom they perceive as their opponents as Galaxy apologists, but that's another matter). It is clear to me that Cryptic cares more about classifying ships within standard RPG classes rather than accurately representing each ship to their canon counterparts. And as long as the argument is in favor of abandoning RPG classes, I don't think Cryptic will listen.
I'm not trying to 'prove' anything. And I'm definitely not ignoring anything(though if I missed something, please by all means point it out to me), my standard of evidence is just higher than most others ITT, it seems.
Also, I don't think the devs even bother reading this thread any more, as it is just filled with appeals to emotion, accusations of Cryptic merely hating things or being incompetent(though I admit to accusing them of that myself =P), and 'suggestions' that they probably have already deemed incompatible with their own agendas for the Galaxy.
Agreed. But we don't yet know their side of the story. All we're doing is speculating.
That is the main problem here and in other threads. We are only left with speculation due to the over whelming silence from them. They don't seem to care to discuss or defend their decisions, they expect us to just live with them. Sorry but as a paying customer I think any place that selling me a product (even if it is an imaginary digital product) should value and respond to customer issues.
It comes down to the fact we have to just speculate what their thinking or their reasoning. All posters here doing that falls on their lack of communication.
That is the main problem here and in other threads. We are only left with speculation due to the over whelming silence from them. They don't seem to care to discuss or defend their decisions, they expect us to just live with them. Sorry but as a paying customer I think any place that selling me a product (even if it is an imaginary digital product) should value and respond to customer issues.
It comes down to the fact we have to just speculate what their thinking or their reasoning. All posters here doing that falls on their lack of communication.
I would rather think of it as they're providing us with a service, which is what online games actually are. But I admit that's kind of nitpicky. =p
But yes, they do at least owe us some kind of explanation. I admit to making a whole thread myself asking why they made the choices they did in the Galaxy Reboot, and what exactly their agenda with the Galaxy truly is. No response.
Comments
Just stating my opinion on some of my observations.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
present the build that uses an eng cruiser right then, or this is a lot of hot air. guaranty it would work even better on a lowly star cruiser. and thats the point. any way you want to use it, its the worst ship for the role in its class
almost all the balance passes have been based on minmaxer and pvper feedback and exploiting to show how grave a problem is. none of that really effects the low hanging fruit, yet they still bother doing it
The Ens ENG station on the Galaxy-R / Fleet Galaxy is pointless. Even Ensign TAC abilities have more options than ENG at the same rank. BO1, BFAW1, TT1, HYT1, TS1, Target Subsys... they're all bonafide Ens level Tac abilities that have use and do not throw the other half into cooldowns. Not so with the Ensign ENG abilities, most of which are Emergency Powers and throw the others into shared CDs. That's why a normal Cmdr & LtCdr ENG Cruiser is way more than enough for the task.
If the Galaxy-R had a Lt & Ens TAC station that would be markedly better. If the Galaxy-X had a LtCdr TAC it would be markedly better... it is still 3 TAC abilities, the same as it currently has, but it means far more options in TAC abilities.
If it had a LtCdr SCI or even Ens & Lt SCI instead, that would be markedly better.
Anything but the Ens ENG station, due to the lack of options at ENG Ensign.
It makes no sense. Unless they're trying to please everyone. And you know as well as I do that won't work.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
it makes sense, they hate the galaxy, and want canon ships that aren't even middle age to suck compared to lockbox ships that are even older designs, and their own designs. cryptic logic does not work like traditional logic
It makes no sense to jump to a conclusion like that on what seems to me to be merely an emotionally-driven agenda. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your position. I too have my own list of things I'd want Cryptic to do differently. But I don't see how jumping to the worst possible conclusions is gonna help the case. You seem to have already done what you can for your cause. I think it's better to continue on the path that still would encourage Cryptic to read your posts, rather than throwing logic out the window which will make Cryptic totally ignore what you or anyone else with this agenda is saying, constructive or not.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
re read what i wrote more slowly and you will see that the oddy got 1 or 2 torp power, bfaw3 and attack pattern, while the dreadnought just got bfaw1 and attack pattern.
it could have higher attack pattern power and lower beam power or the reverse.
so it is not just more flexible, it is outright more powerfull
since it wasn't obvious enought for you it seem, i am going to explain it to you.
my statement as " you are aware that some people are able to finish an stf in that time?" was not to show any utility of an alpha strike for pve, but to notified you that 3 minute is a long time, and that some are able to finish an stf in that time.
it point you out the huge waste it would be to have a sniper build on this ship with that much downtime, and of course it is for pvp.
haha, do you ever use a galaxy x spinal lance?
no seriously?
because your skill have nothing to do with the fact that you can one shot people with it, it is just luck, but... just huge pure luck there.
first you have to have a target in your firing arc, so unless you are fighting carrier ship this is usually not you who force them by your piloting skill to be there.
they will get in your firing arc because they must travel in front of you to reach an other target.
but when it is there, it must stay there! for a minimum of 4 sec ( that the time of the entire charging sequence and the 2 consecutive shot of the lance ), without moving!!!
but that not over! it then have to touch the target ( aka not missing ) and even if the target is perfectly aligned and not moving, your chance of missing it completely is stup
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
yes, it just that after 4 years of "uber" galaxy treatement some of us are really TRIBBLE off, and i suppose that since the constructive way didn't work it just feel good to just split our venom sometime.
i, in my case don't bielieve in hate theory, it just daesn't seem logical to me, i however think that there is a clear intention to leave galaxy ship in a state of inneficiency.
what i really want to known is why, and what are the reasons ( they may be many ).
in any case the way we said it ( politely or rudelessly ) daesn't seem to affect in any way the fate of galaxy class in this game.
but this have no importance anymore, we are not going to succeed anyway, so who care?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
And before you say the Galaxy itself, that would be appealing to the argument from ignorance.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
you haven't been paying attention and are pretty naive to think that they don't hate/literally think it should suck, after they did the galaxy reboot and did nothing to the galaxy R. at best, they really do think it should suck and be the worst ship in the game, and at worst it was a vindictive act because they hate the ship and hate the players in this thread that would like it made ever so more usable. they couldn't even let it have a universal ENS, like the dread got. if it had gotten that, the ship would be twice as good. still the worst cruiser, but twice as good.
it took 1/100 the badgering for cryptic to make a tac heavy sovereign refit, they thought it should be more tac heavy too. galaxy reboot comes along, and we get no reboot. worst ship in game by a huge margin is working as intended. there is nothing but silence from them on this, they wont even try justifying why it is the way it is, because there is nothing reasonable they can say. its ether we think it should suck, or we hate you and your stupid ship.
i can site a mountain of canon evidence proving it doesn't suck, i can even reasonably prove among federation ships it was without peer even tactically. that's what a high percentage of this thread is, going over that. all for nothing, these devs are the most stubborn people ive ever encountered, they think they do no wrong when balancing things, all feedback is handwaved every time.
Gal R Lt Tac station...period
Thats all the evidence you need.........To not accept that evedience is ignorance itself
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Could you point out the evidence that they hate the ship now...?
Still only seeing claims from you. No evidence.
It seems that they want the Galaxy to be more focused on Engineering than any other ship, and have far less tactical ability. They did reboot the Galaxy with improved Saucer Separation functionality and a console set bonus. They probably had no intention on giving it more firepower. Though my guess is of course just more speculation.
I'm not sure that matters to Cryptic, if they hate the Galaxy or not.
Though for what it's worth, even if we disagree on Cryptic's intentions, I do agree that we all deserve some explanation regarding their decisions for the Galaxy reboot. I'll try to get the P1 guys to add that question into a future interview. =D
Okay then, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt... just how does that count as evidence? And how is not accepting that ignorance?
The fact is, whatever setup they have on any specific ship doesn't necessarily explain the intent Cryptic has for that ship. It is quite reasonable to assume that Cryptic wants certain roles for ships, but doesn't understand how to handle making those roles useful in practice. Therefore, any implications that their intent shows through in their ship designs is flawed reasoning.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
So you want evidence but not the best evidence any player can have, being the Galaxy-X and Galaxy-R. Kinda hard for any player to find more evidence that they want the ship to suck or they don't like it enough to actually try and fix it without going James Bond and spying on them in their work place or setting up some kind of hidden mics to record their conversations.
All you have to really do to know that there is logically a desire/hate factor/lack of interest in fixing the Galaxy-R is look at the thread on making the Fleet dreadnaught. In no post did I see anyone ask for a universal ensign which is something this thread has been asking for the Galaxy-r since its early beginning. Also look at how many asked not to get a hanger and to have something added to the G-X to validate the fact it gets only two cruiser commands instead of all 4 or atleast the plus to turn cruiser command.
Do I believe everyone at Cryptic hates the Galaxy class, no but then again it only takes the highest in the pecking order to hate something to make it where it never gets worked on. Lets face it if the boss doesn't want you to do something then you don't do it.
What we have gotten was work on a Fleet version of the Dreadnaught most of which were so called improvements the majority didn't want added to the ship, and absolutely nothing done to the G-R. So either they hate the Galaxy Class or just don't give two S**** that their customers spent cash on ships and feel their getting boned when it honestly wouldn't take them that long to make the improvements we have asked for.
At the very least put up alternative versions of the Galaxy and G-X as fleet versions and make 5 dollars a pop off ppl that want different styles these ships.
But honestly, it could very well be that Cryptic hates the ships. But that would need to be demonstrated, rather than asserted, as there are more possibilities. And even if it turns out that Cryptic does in fact hate the ships, any normal player would still be justified in considering those other possibilities.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Here is my thing, when you say hey were gonna remake this ship and we got ideas and ask for opinions of the community and then ignore them all either you don't care about the customer or you for some reason don't like the ship enough to make it so that players want to be flying them. Now I can understand your thought process on needing more evidence but as stated we the players are not able to provide it.
If it turns out that they hate the ship then why would anyone look for other reasoning why they have refused to alter or improve this ship. Whatever justification they can give they certainly haven't said what it maybe. They haven't even replied in this thread so far as I've seen and this thread is way over what should have been necessary to invoke a DEV response.
Maybe they do have some greater reasoning that noone here has thought up or considered. But without them actually coming here to defend their decisions for these ships there is not many conclusions ppl are gonna consider other then solely hating the ship itself.
Its been proven in this thread over and over again I suggest you read the thread from the begining you may have tuned in late
132 characters ? and you dont know its the worst ship in its class the more boring most underpowered/DPS ship in its class ?..............seriously ? 132 romulans ?wrong number ? lol
1 lt Tac.....total proof right there .........no other proof need to be presented
most star trek fans play pve
Pve is 95% DPS
The Galaxy is one of the most loved and desired ships to star trek fans
The Galaxy is the worst DPS ships in its class
I call it
Troll exposed
I just cant name the Troll can I So the Troll has to expose theirself...Buy the Troll has exposed themself
And the Trool nametag goe's too......Drum Roll.........insert name here...............................)
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
As I stated in my previous post, the very post you have quoted, there is a chance that Cryptic thinks that the ships are good, but merely is too incompetent to pull off what they want to do with the ships. Or perhaps they think that the ships are compatible with gameplay and the options that the ship has(BOFF skills, consoles, etc), but they in fact are not.
Maybe they do. But you could start by not ignoring the possible reasons brought up by others.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
ok, i must first clarified the term " pwn", what do you mean by that?
do you mean that the galaxy should "pwn" like it should have more firepower or something?
i am going to replace this ambiguous term by what i thaught is their intention and reformulate your question.
here it is:
" what evidence is there exactly that they don't want the galaxy to be efficient"
i use this term because let not forget that we are talking about 2 ship here that have 2 different objective in the game, so i prefer to speak about their efficiency in their respective roles ( if i may said so:rolleyes:).
so is there an evidence? like a proof? something like a dev that stated in the forum: the galaxy suck and that good we don't want it to be any better!"
of course there is not!
there is however a deductive proof.
it has been establish that the galaxy retrofit has no particular role in the federation faction, there is nothing that you can do with it that you can not do better with a simple star cruiser.
as of today the only one that dispute that proof are noobs, lets said it bluntly.
and it is a proof, because this is something that can be explained and demonstrate, anytime.
now here come the galaxy reboot, what did cryptic do to remediate to that situation?
to give him something that is unique to it or give him a role in the federation layout to make it a real choice?
nothing! almost litterally nothing, they give it a fantastic 2 piece set bonus! great!!
what can we conclude about it?
well, let review all the possibilities:
1)a dull rumor spread in the office of cryptic ...
the ghost of raymond, this new employee that arrives three years earlier haunt the place in search of revenge.
raymond was a fan of the galaxy and had already had several Rixte with gecko on its representation in sto .
one day , during a call in his office with gecko, the tone rises and degenerate, raymond had the misfortune to said this sentence ; "It is now time that the galaxy class kicks the TRIBBLE of the exelsior ! "
poor him ... gecko jump on him faster than one would have done with a picard maneuver .
he shouted at him , squeezing his throat " NEVER! YOU HEARD ME! NEVEEEEER! THIS WILL NOT HAPPENED WHILE I AM IN CHARGE!!!
in his fit of rage , gecko have not been able to control and just strangle raymond .
fortunately for him , cryptic was undergoing construction of a new room for their new server.
without the worker knownlege he burried raymond corp in the foundation of the room.
the engineer have never really elucidate the mysterious server failures that came regularly thereafter.
some think the spirit of raymond takes control of fan galaxy around the world to scream his displeasure .
the thread "what is your beef with the galaxy" would have been create by one of its controlled fan .
as of today the Machiavellian plan of gecko to limit to the maximum the galaxy capabilitie have woked perfectly.
but somes fear what raymond revenge would do next...
nice story huh? is it neccesary for me to said that i don't bielieve in that possibilitie?
2) the devs really think that the bo layout of the galaxy retrofit allow it to do something even as good as what a simple star cruiser can, if not better.
so there is nothing wrong with it but considering the power creep going on they thaught it was a good idea to give it a 2 piece set bonus.
in short, devs are noob that don't even anderstand how their own game works.
let me said right away that i don't bielieve in that possibilitie.
3) the devs known perfectly how cripple this ship is but just don't care, it is a vanity item, nothing more, a skin, be happy that you got one, but for real ship at end game, we have others plans for you
4) the dev known the ship is an heresy but can't change it because it would then make it as good or better than others ship, who, in their mind should be better.
they have the opportunitie to change it with the galaxy reboot, they have done nothing.
what other proof do you need that they don't want it to be better?
and changing the bo layout of a ship to make it on part with the rest is not something that they can't do, just look at the season 9 devs blog 20 for that.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
There is no denying that here. And both newbs and noobs could reasonably deny it. Though I use 'reasonably' more loosely with noobs. But the fact is, the Galaxy's current ability is irrelevant. To put it bluntly, it is weak, but that doesn't mean it's meant to be weak.
Let me put it this way then: The dev team most likely doesn't playtest their own game, at least not sufficiently enough. This is evidenced by them relying on us to point out various bugs and glitches they might have missed. Also, there are some things they simply can't playtest on their own and NEED us for, like event mechanics breaking apart because of server overload. But that example is irrelevant to this topic.
Because they can't/don't playtest their own game sufficiently enough, they can't know their own game the way we can. Players have been known to push the limits within games far beyond what the devs intended. They have to rely on us, because even if something looks good on paper, on practice it might fail.
Therefore, even if they intended say a tank role to be useful, even if it works good on paper, it simply may not be useful at all in practice. That may have to do with the character's/ship's setup, but it might have to do with gameplay or even the options you have with your character's/ship's equipment.
I don't deny that Cryptic hating the Galaxy is a real possibility. But IMO, I believe that they do think that the Galaxy is useful, but either don't accept that it isn't useful in practice, or do accept it but are wanting to change gameplay to suit it more.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
It keeps coming back to the thing I keep saying about the Gal. R Give it universal Bo slots. it solves the problem with the ship and fairly easy to do. The fact they haven't, heack thefact that with the bundle they didn't even correct the graphic glitches shows they do care about the ship and tried to throw us a bone with the last change.
Dunno what your trying to prove but frankly you just keep ignoring any good evidence we have. You state that somehow the Devs are just ignorant of their own game mechanics and that while they should know they don't play the game enough to know they have failed the galaxy. You state that they rely on us the players to tell them the facts of how well this game runs yet you ignore that if this is true then here is 670 pages mostly filled with facts about why the galaxy sucks and isn't filling any true role in the game at all.
Maybe the Devs are just this oblivious but if thats true then we certainly need new ones that are able to look at the games they are creating and look at the threads the players are creating and know to fix things. You may not be able to fault a man for not knowing but you can fault a man for not trying to learn when all the facts are laying at his very feet waiting to be seen.
If there were more focus on playing up every strength rather than just encourage more firepower, then Eng-heavy ships wouldn't be so bad.
Though people ITT do want the Galaxy to be specifically more tactically-capable like in TNG/DS9(while ironically accusing whom they perceive as their opponents as Galaxy apologists, but that's another matter). It is clear to me that Cryptic cares more about classifying ships within standard RPG classes rather than accurately representing each ship to their canon counterparts. And as long as the argument is in favor of abandoning RPG classes, I don't think Cryptic will listen.
I'm not trying to 'prove' anything. And I'm definitely not ignoring anything(though if I missed something, please by all means point it out to me), my standard of evidence is just higher than most others ITT, it seems.
Also, I don't think the devs even bother reading this thread any more, as it is just filled with appeals to emotion, accusations of Cryptic merely hating things or being incompetent(though I admit to accusing them of that myself =P), and 'suggestions' that they probably have already deemed incompatible with their own agendas for the Galaxy.
Agreed. But we don't yet know their side of the story. All we're doing is speculating.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Its probably a case of consistency with All Good Things.
Seeing as Riker is an Admiral, Crusher is captain of the Pasteur, Picard is retired and has Irumodic Syndrome, and federation characters visit the Klingon planet Worf used to be governor of.
So considering the Enterprise-D if it was still around would have been decommissioned had Riker not got it upgraded to a Galaxy-X it seems the Galaxy-class is probably in the same place the Constitution was in the later TOS films i.e. on the way to being phased out.
some might go for more science abilities. the main problem is is that too many eng slots are bad the share cool downs kill. Right now i can make the Galaxy work but she could be better and my suggestion not only makes the ship more canon but would be easy to do.
Of course, this would require creativity in developing new BOFF skills...
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
The new Viscous Cycle Elite in pugs has been a refreshing experience for tanking. I noticed many people were dying a ton, so I figured WTH and slapped my Gal-R spec on my dread and took her for a few spins.
My pugs death rate has dropped dramatically, and we are finishing faster. So far only 2 deaths in 3 runs. One was me sitting too close to the planet killer when it popped, and the other was somebody being oneshot by the planet killer while I still had agro on it (Nothing I could have done about it)
I'm not going to debate "it could be done Xseconds faster if you did more DPS" arguments because I keep coming in first or second on DPS anyway. I'm still maintaining nearly full uptime on my FAW so losing some of the bonus damage around the edges from dem and ep2w don't really hurt that much. I can feel it, but I'm gaining tons of tankyness. (I was also in my Dread. I love her. We are getting married in Korea later this year... I hear it's legal there... Sure a Gal-R would do less but the point is to tank)
So maybe Cryptic is trying to make tanking more viable. It certainly improved my pugging experience so far. Give it a try. It may not be your thing, but it is at least something different to do, and something you can do in a Galaxy-R and not laugh at yourself.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Although this story warms my heart, the unfortunate fact for me is that I have rarely died in any new undine STFs or Borg ones (aside from Hive Elite) in any cruiser. The fact is, that the Galaxy-x has a little too much tank for its namesake of "Dreadnought" to the point of really only being the same as other cruisers. The Lt. Cmdr Engineer does open up a few options for the ships' versatility, but it's lack of tactical slots is nevertheless rather painful. It would do better with this layout I think:
CMDR Engineer
Lt. CMDR Engineer
Lt. Tac
Lt. Universal
Ens. Universal
Aside from all of that, they need to fix the graphics on the galaxy-x too. It's still ugly.
Then if we really want to fix the problem at its core and make tanks useful again, just make more enemy ships with debilitating debuffs that can only be cleared by engineering team and science team. Then the over abundance of those types of abilities on any of the Galaxy variants, or any heal heavy cruiser won't look so silly, and having at least one tank would be preferable to another Tactical Scimitar.
And another side note; fixing science in PvE is easy too. Just make a global science ability effect multiplier of 5 for all NPCs. Instead of tachyon beam draining 4800 shields for instance, it would drain 24000. I guarantee then that having at least 1 science ship in the party would be again preferable to another Tactical Scimitar.
(No offense meant to Tactical Scimitar drivers, I just used your ship because it happens to be the most capable DPS ship in the game, seeing as how the top 3 DPS records were set by them.)
That is the main problem here and in other threads. We are only left with speculation due to the over whelming silence from them. They don't seem to care to discuss or defend their decisions, they expect us to just live with them. Sorry but as a paying customer I think any place that selling me a product (even if it is an imaginary digital product) should value and respond to customer issues.
It comes down to the fact we have to just speculate what their thinking or their reasoning. All posters here doing that falls on their lack of communication.
But yes, they do at least owe us some kind of explanation. I admit to making a whole thread myself asking why they made the choices they did in the Galaxy Reboot, and what exactly their agenda with the Galaxy truly is. No response.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
We all must accept how and why certain things are the way they are.
Learn to accept you, and you will learn to accept the half thing Galaxy you have to fly.
And now if you excuse me, I hear something like bombs falling down from the sky onto my house. I hereby accept your rage