If you want to fix the current layout to not suck, that would require new eng skills, reducing cannon skills from Cmd Ltc and LT, to Ens LT LTC, then adding a beam rapid fire skill to mimic single target fire at will aka beam rapid fire. A new cannon skill cannon overcharge, similar to beam overload but not as powerful as the kumari console. Then rebalance some of the sci skills to be worth it at end game, like tac beam 1, mask energy sig, etc.
Then once youve done all those improvements, then you get to realize EVERY other ship got those same boff buffs and galaxy remains dead last. Thats not even going into fixing consoles so that 5 eng consoles and 2 tac consoles isnt a handy cap.
Youd have to make energy tac consoles have diminishing returns, that way the gap between 2 and 5 tac console ships is lessened. Better eng consoles since a lot of them are junk +3 power etc. Add in sci consoles that have 2 stats with stats weaker then the single counter parts. Also fix their diminishing return formula with consoles.
Sadly all that stuff needs done, not that all that is pleasant for us players as in some cases its a nerf in others its a buff.
Again though what your asking is waaaayyyy more work then giving the Galaxy new console/boff layout.
I bet people who read all that think wow doing all that would be dumb but there is very good reasons for all of it, and it needs done, quite badly in some cases. But Cryptic hasnt added new Boff abilities since just after the game launched, they seem to not care about consoles or boff layouts and just slap whatever they feel like on a ship and balance be damned.
Shame if they cared about balance in any meaningful way these issues would be long gone. It is possible to balance escorts, science, and cruiser class ships to one another, and to balance all the ships in a tier to one another. Its not like these are real fighter planes and we are trying to balance a P51 mustang against a F-18 Super Hornet. This is a game where stats are all just numbers changes with a few keystrokes. But it takes the willingness and the care to make those changes. Cryptic doesnt have that, they have shown it time and time again.
So in cryptics true half a$$ed style which is more likely to happen? Full redesign of boff/consoles/ships/doffs orrrr changing the exsisting layout to something useful within their already exsisting mess that they call "balance"?
Because it doesn't work this way and I bolded the main reason why.
A raider pays for the all universal layout because it is a RAIDER, a very fragile ship with less boff abilities than any ship in the game, it is completely reliant on it's cloak to stay alive. Unless you are willing to sacrifice from the same downsides there will be no full uni ship for Starfleet ever. The Galaxy is a cruiser. Cruisers need to have a fixed CMDR ENG and everyhing else is chosen so it doesn't copy another ship's layout, because this game generates revenue on ship sales. If you want layout X you need to buy ship Y. Giving such an amount of uni stations to a ship cuts ship saes because with an all or almost uni cruiser you are making all other ships obsolete. And the 2 tac consoles aren't much of a trade-off anymore if you can slot so many different boffs. Your suggestion violates the basic rules of the game that are, despite everything, still in place.
Again you are talking an entire LINE of ships I'm talking two ships max. and being Raider mean s jack for Bo slots. The simple fact is my solution can work and it solves the main gripe about the GCS if a very easy way for the devs to do. The Uni Bo slots allows the most versitility which cannon wise is what the Galaxy does best. In series she could be: Studying a nebula, running verious science experiments, hold a conference or two, and fend off an attack by an enemy all at the SAME time.
If you want to fix the current layout to not suck, that would require new eng skills, reducing cannon skills from Cmd Ltc and LT, to Ens LT LTC, then adding a beam rapid fire skill to mimic single target fire at will aka beam rapid fire. A new cannon skill cannon overcharge, similar to beam overload but not as powerful as the kumari console. Then rebalance some of the sci skills to be worth it at end game, like tac beam 1, mask energy sig, etc.
Then once youve done all those improvements, then you get to realize EVERY other ship got those same boff buffs and galaxy remains dead last. Thats not even going into fixing consoles so that 5 eng consoles and 2 tac consoles isnt a handy cap.
Of course if you assume we have to do what wouldn't balance things, then point out that it didn't work, you're gonna think it can't be done. But the list of things you think needs to be changed isn't all the BOFF ability improvements that is possible to make.
You seem to imply that we need certain Tactical and Science abilities present on the Galaxy - Tactical and Science abilities aren't its strong point. Its strong point(and yes it has one despite what anything thinks) is Engineering abilities. All we need to do is give it some worthwhile Engineering abilities. Abilities that are actually worth loading it down with. Abilities that play into its strengths.
Give the thing Eng BOFF abilities that take advantage of its saucer sep, or hefty HP/resistance, or hell even the fact that it isn't very tactically capable.
And yes, I do believe that there should be additions to BOFF skills that not every ship can take advantage of. Saucer/chevron/vector-related BOFF skills, carrier pet skills, cloak-related skills(aside from cloak-enabling skills like Mask Energy Signature), etc. This would increase usefulness of otherwise noncompetitive aspects of ships.
We can make the Galaxy's current setup work - we just need to think outside the box. Really, really far outside. Is it way more work than just changing the Galaxy's setup? Sure, I'll give you that. But adding more BOFF skills won't only give the Galaxy more oomph, it'll help out other undesirable ships as well, like the Star Cruiser or the Intrepid. And it'll spice already-competitively viable ships up. Not to mention, it'll increase the competitively viable BOFF configuration amount as well, which will in turn please the players that want more variety, which will make for a much healthier game.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Getting rid of BOFF/console configurations altogether is bad for the health of the game.
Because it doesn't work this way and I bolded the main reason why.
A raider pays for the all universal layout because it is a RAIDER, a very fragile ship with less boff abilities than any ship in the game, it is completely reliant on it's cloak to stay alive. Unless you are willing to sacrifice from the same downsides there will be no full uni ship for Starfleet ever. The Galaxy is a cruiser. Cruisers need to have a fixed CMDR ENG and everyhing else is chosen so it doesn't copy another ship's layout, because this game generates revenue on ship sales. If you want layout X you need to buy ship Y. Giving such an amount of uni stations to a ship cuts ship saes because with an all or almost uni cruiser you are making all other ships obsolete. And the 2 tac consoles aren't much of a trade-off anymore if you can slot so many different boffs. Your suggestion violates the basic rules of the game that are, despite everything, still in place.
What does a raider have to do with a cruiser ?
Nothing at all...........The Galaxy r is the weakest ship in the game in its class with 2 ships the excelsior and ambassador better than it is when they both are much older
If the Gal R was made into a decent ship they could sell it as a mark 2 with no upgrades to other models
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
This is actually an argument for your opposition. Raiders don't have anything to do with Cruisers... why try to give a Cruiser one of the traits of Raiders?
Its simple, fixing the stock layout means fixing the ranks and abilities of said boff skills. Same goes with the consoles. Its a problem that runs deeper then just the galaxy, aka cannon abilities being different tier then beam abilities messing up peoples all cannon builds aka defiant and other 3 tac ens layouts and science 3 ensign layouts.
If your fixing the stock layout, you do the god damn work to fix ALL the problems inherent to that aspect of the game. Cause half measures get you where we are. "For the health of the game", yall said that. If your going that far you need to fix the reason that layout is so god awful and those are the roots of that problem that affect the intrepid, the galaxy, defiant, and many other ships.
If it was all up to me id do more then just change the layout of the galaxy, as its just a glaring sign of whats wrong with the whole system. But that would take that massive amount of work that I outlined. And as I said in my post every single item I outlined had damn good reasons why it needed to be done, but unless you want another 10 pages of thread solely on me explaining why, i'm gonna skip the details.
Unlike cryptic I don't just slap a bandaid over a crack in a dam and walk off thinking I did my job. Fixing those issues isn't quick as it takes a lot of testing to balance stuff, and fine tune it.
I like many others have waited since launch for a galaxy class we can really love at end game, one that reflects the show. I'm trying to work in the confines of what this half baked company is actually WILLING to do. And if they were willing to fix all that TRIBBLE, itd been done by now, they have had 4 years. And thats part of what irks most of us, 4 years and they can't be bothered to fix the once proud flag ship we all loved from TNG.
When swapping layouts is SIMPLE, 5 mins of work! Vs what some of you are asking which is months of balancing. Like I said, balancing that needs done, but will never be done cause 'cryptic'.
Its simple, fixing the stock layout means fixing the ranks and abilities of said boff skills. Same goes with the consoles. Its a problem that runs deeper then just the galaxy, aka cannon abilities being different tier then beam abilities messing up peoples all cannon builds aka defiant and other 3 tac ens layouts and science 3 ensign layouts.
If your fixing the stock layout, you do the god damn work to fix ALL the problems inherent to that aspect of the game. Cause half measures get you where we are. "For the health of the game", yall said that. If your going that far you need to fix the reason that layout is so god awful and those are the roots of that problem that affect the intrepid, the galaxy, defiant, and many other ships.
If it was all up to me id do more then just change the layout of the galaxy, as its just a glaring sign of whats wrong with the whole system. But that would take that massive amount of work that I outlined. And as I said in my post every single item I outlined had damn good reasons why it needed to be done, but unless you want another 10 pages of thread solely on me explaining why, i'm gonna skip the details.
Unlike cryptic I don't just slap a bandaid over a crack in a dam and walk off thinking I did my job. Fixing those issues isn't quick as it takes a lot of testing to balance stuff, and fine tune it.
I like many others have waited since launch for a galaxy class we can really love at end game, one that reflects the show. I'm trying to work in the confines of what this half baked company is actually WILLING to do. And if they were willing to fix all that TRIBBLE, itd been done by now, they have had 4 years. And thats part of what irks most of us, 4 years and they can't be bothered to fix the once proud flag ship we all loved from TNG.
When swapping layouts is SIMPLE, 5 mins of work! Vs what some of you are asking which is months of balancing. Like I said, balancing that needs done, but will never be done cause 'cryptic'.
Or they have other plans. We know a level cap is coming. With that is bound to carry with it drastic changes to what we define as 'balance' right now.
Consider this scenario. They raise the level cap from 50 to 60. Our Bridge Officers are not only allowed to be promoted to Captain, but we can choose a "First Officer" that can be of any career to be a permanent BOFF on every 'tier 6' ship we fly... with tier 6 ships being nothing but our tier 5 ships with upgrades via the new crafting system.
If this scenario were to happen, not only would every ship get a free Universal Commander BOFF position, but it would throw another variable into the mix: Captain-level BOFF skills. Not to mention that there's a possibility of them expanding the current skill selection in the process.
Would the Galaxy be as bad then? We wouldn't know till we test everything out. Hell, maybe the Galaxy would be top-tier and ships like the Nicor or the Tempest would be low-tier scrap. That change would be too drastic to speculate about - if it were even to come to pass.
Sure, the scenario is just one of many possibilities. Maybe it's likely, maybe it's unlikely. But that's not the point. My point is that Crypic's refusal to balance our ships yet may be because they have a bigger picture in mind for them.
But even if not, we should still strive to knock some sense into Cryptic to balance all configurations rather than a 'quick fix' to the Galaxy that'll still leave the inherent problems there. Whether or not we deem it as 'plausible' for Cryptic management to even consider at this point. After all, revolutions don't come to people who are just willing to settle.
Clearly, you guys havent played Fleet Galaxy R recently in its most recent patch on an optimal tanking build. Yes, Star Cruiser contributes more on a premade team as Sci Support than Fleet Galaxy R. Fleet Galaxy R's strength has never been the premade teams as tanking and self healing does not equate being good in premade teams. I concur with Fleet Galaxy R's weakness on premade teams compared to specific roles occupied Recluse healer or a Scimitar tac dps or a vape escort.
The only thing comparable to Fleet Galaxy R in Fed Fleet line is the Odyssey Operations Cruiser. As they have the same console slots, with only the Odyssey having uni boffs being its strength.
If you havent really hard tank Borg Queen on Hive Onslaught Elite inside 5km with a good group on a well made well played on a 100k+ hull and shield buffer tank Fleet Galaxy R that can do 10k dps on ISE without dying, you havent optimized the ship and spent more time complaining here than actually playing the ship.
Thats what those extra eng boffs are for, to bring your hull or shields back to 100% after being alphad by a mob in a sec or 2 as certain mobs especially the Borg queen hits fast and hard and spams viral matrix.
so the role of the galaxy is to be played on hive onslaught elite only?
it took them some time to bring in game a content for that ship:rolleyes:
in any case what is that build of your that can not be reproduced with better efficiency by a star cruiser?
no because the difference between a star cruiser and a galaxy is basically just 1 ensign engie in less for the star cruiser.
they are other little difference, like the console layout and turnrate but you known...
show us that build that make the galaxy a real choice in face of a star cruiser
. But adding more BOFF skills won't only give the Galaxy more oomph, it'll help out other undesirable ships as well, like the Star Cruiser or the Intrepid. .
but, do cryptic want that?
i mean make "older" ship competitive again.
i think not, they want us to buy new ship, they don't care that older cstore ship are not choice anymore, they serve their purpose, now the money must come for the new ship they will designed.
it is not a star trek simulation but a game that is designed to make money.
but, do cryptic want that?
i mean make "older" ship competitive again.
i think not, they want us to buy new ship, they don't care that older cstore ship are not choice anymore, they serve their purpose, now the money must come for the new ship they will designed.
it is not a star trek simulation but a game that is designed to make money.
*shrug* I'd rather not jump to that conclusion. I find the claims that Cryptic don't care about 'this' or 'that' to usually be pretty illogical.
And why point out that STO is a game designed to make money? It has to be. Money is what not only gives us more content, but it puts dinner on the tables of the dev's families. Granted, as someone that for quite a few years have been advocating for more sandbox MMOs and 'non-combat' options, I too would rather STO be more of a "Star Trek simulator", but it is what it is. And frankly, I think it's a lot better than any MMO I've played over the past decade.
I am optimistic that Cryptic will make the Galaxy better in relation to the other ships eventually. I'd of course prefer some methods to others, but I'm prepared to be disappointed. But I definitely don't think that our words are falling on deaf ears.
*shrug* I'd rather not jump to that conclusion. I find the claims that Cryptic don't care about 'this' or 'that' to usually be pretty illogical.
And why point out that STO is a game designed to make money? It has to be. Money is what not only gives us more content, but it puts dinner on the tables of the dev's families. Granted, as someone that for quite a few years have been advocating for more sandbox MMOs and 'non-combat' options, I too would rather STO be more of a "Star Trek simulator", but it is what it is. And frankly, I think it's a lot better than any MMO I've played over the past decade.
I am optimistic that Cryptic will make the Galaxy better in relation to the other ships eventually. I'd of course prefer some methods to others, but I'm prepared to be disappointed. But I definitely don't think that our words are falling on deaf ears.
this was not a critic to the fact that cryptic is making money and someking of implie idea that they should feel bad about it. not at all.
it was just to show you that, as a business compagny, they can't go back indefinitely to older designed to make them as good as their new top shinie.
it is a lost of their time and money, for ship that have already bring their part of revenu, and would if that happened enter in direct competition with the new one they made.
they can do it for 1, 2 or maybe 3 , but they will not go over all the ship in this game that have been left behind.
this was not a critic to the fact that cryptic is making money and someking of implie idea that they should feel bad about it. not at all.
it was just to show you that, as a business compagny, they can't go back indefinitely to older designed to make them as good as their new top shinie.
it is a lost of their time and money, for ship that have already bring their part of revenu, and would if that happened enter in direct competition with the new one they made.
they can do it for 1, 2 or maybe 3 , but they will not go over all the ship in this game that have been left behind.
But... they already revamped the Galaxy once. It's hard to believe your claim when there is already an existing example to the contrary.
But... they already revamped the Galaxy once. It's hard to believe your claim when there is already an existing example to the contrary.
like i said, they will do it for 1, 2 or 3 ship, but they hardly going to revamp every ship that have been left behind in this game.
and beside i hardly call the galaxy reboot a "revamp ".
But... they already revamped the Galaxy once. It's hard to believe your claim when there is already an existing example to the contrary.
I
I hate to break it to you but the Galaxy was not revamped in the Galaxy revamp
adding the option for a cheese console isnt a revamp
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
But... they already revamped the Galaxy once. It's hard to believe your claim when there is already an existing example to the contrary.
They didn't touch the Galaxy R so far as I can see or heard. They only redid the Galaxy-X and out of that we got things that I don't remember anyone asking for besides the option to seperate the Saucer section. Quite a few of people thought that shouldn't be added along with the hanger most didn't want and don't remember anyone asking for and a uni ensign that was asked for multiply times for the G-R but not for the X at all. one of the things everyone been wanting them to correct for the Galaxy-R was put on the G-X which was highly stupid since most Galaxy-X pilots want more Tactical Boff slots not an option of less. To top it all off since they classified it as a Dreadnaught it got less cruiser commands then any other ships with no real perks or explaination as to why. Add to that one of the two cruiser commands we did get adds aggro (most would have been more accepting had we got the turn bonus something the Galaxy needs since its set at 6 turn rate) which a ship that is trying to dps doesn't usually want.
Will say that the G-X is a ship that can both give and get when it comes to damage and it can manage the tank job quite well but since most wanted it set up more leaning towards the damage dealer like a scimatar dreadnaught (since both have Dreadnaught for their names thought it make sense they lean more towards somewhat copying it).
In any event think the direction the devs did take with the revamp was hardly successful since most what they gave us seemed to be what they wanted instead of want we asked for and the fact the Galaxy-R was completely ignored adds to the belief of most I've talked to that they are only doing things they themselves want instead of what the community is asking for.
All this could be solved by allowing players to pick ship skins and then allowing us to assign appropriate boff, console, and power bonuses according to what the player wants the ship to do. If they added in or revamped the ship system like this like many other players have described much more cleverly then I'd care to or trouble myself to then most ship issues including those like ships falling behind in power creeps would be handled. Maybe even add in the weapons placements some of our newer ships have brought like 5,3 instead of 4,4 and 5,2 instead of 4,3. Seems to me if you let the players fly what they wanted and sell ships more so for their unique slots you'd not only get people buying ships for their Boff, consoles, weapons placements but you'd get the bonus of having ppl buy older ships they want for just it looks.
Are you trying to convince me of your position? Or trying to make a point? Because either way, your opinion doesn't hold much weight on either.
the galaxy retrofit is as bad as it was before that "revamp", that is not a revamp btw, but a reboot, nothing change, not even the graphical model, nothing.
this is not a revamp or reboot but a farce.
or you could call it a "galaxy touch" revamp if you like but i certainly don't put it at the same level as the escort patrol refit revamp.
Give me one good reason their revamp number is hard capped like that.
there is no "hard cap" in the sense of "we are only allowed to do x revamp this year" for example.
but it is just logical that not all ship are good candidat for a revamp.
some ship sell better than other, as a business compagny cryptic will not revamp a ship that don't have a good selling potential in the first place.
and just like the escort patrol refit proove it, this revamp is not free.
people that have the older ship still have to buy the new one, with no discount.
so this is closely tie to what it would bring to cryptic as revenu, and not what it would bring to the game on the balanced side.
this is also clearly not in favor of an hypothetical skill and power revamp that would have as a side effect to bring older design up to part.... for free!
The Galaxy revamp was really a Dreadnought revamp.
Even I don't support the state of the Gal-R anymore (Tho based solely on how she performs compared to the Dreadnought. Trade my 2 personally least used cruiser commands for a universal ensign, built in "superweapon", DHC and cloak capabilities, with a more tactically oriented console layout to boot? And a hangar bay? Yeah... I'll get right back into my Gal-R... :rolleyes:)
Funny, after the revamp the Gal-R loses ground in viability... Read into that what you will...
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
They didn't touch the Galaxy R so far as I can see or heard.
I'd count the 2-piece console set bonus, as it applies to the Galaxy as well as the Dread. Also, the whole Antimatter Spread on the saucer section, despite it being functionally useless.
And sorry, I just woke up. Not reading tl;dr posts yet. X_x
the galaxy retrofit is as bad as it was before that "revamp", that is not a revamp btw, but a reboot, nothing change, not even the graphical model, nothing.
this is not a revamp or reboot but a farce.
or you could call it a "galaxy touch" revamp if you like but i certainly don't put it at the same level as the escort patrol refit revamp.
Sounds a lot like just your personal opinion on the matter, rather than any facts. So what?
The fact is, they went back, examined the Galaxy, and modified it. That is my point. It is irrelevant how much or how little the modification actually was.
there is no "hard cap" in the sense of "we are only allowed to do x revamp this year" for example.
but it is just logical that not all ship are good candidat for a revamp.
But isn't your opinion that the Galaxy is a ship that needs a revamp? Isn't that the whole point in your posts here?
some ship sell better than other, as a business compagny cryptic will not revamp a ship that don't have a good selling potential in the first place.
and just like the escort patrol refit proove it, this revamp is not free.
people that have the older ship still have to buy the new one, with no discount.
so this is closely tie to what it would bring to cryptic as revenu, and not what it would bring to the game on the balanced side.
this is also clearly not in favor of an hypothetical skill and power revamp that would have as a side effect to bring older design up to part.... for free!
i do not bielieve in santas claus anymore.
No good selling potential? Do you know what the Galaxy-class is? It was the Enterprise for a good chunk of a decade in-continuity. Arguably the most iconic. (not getting into a Kirk vs Picard debate, just pointing something out)
No matter how many existing players own the ship, iconic ships like the Galaxy will still be a big seller, despite how optimal its configuration is. The only logical path for the devs is to make sure that the ship also sells to the competitive crowd too.
But isn't your opinion that the Galaxy is a ship that needs a revamp? Isn't that the whole point in your posts here?
the galaxy retrofit need a bo layout change, yes.
but i am not talking about my desire here, but about how cryptic could decide who will get a revamp and who will not
No good selling potential? Do you know what the Galaxy-class is? It was the Enterprise for a good chunk of a decade in-continuity. Arguably the most iconic. (not getting into a Kirk vs Picard debate, just pointing something out)
No matter how many existing players own the ship, iconic ships like the Galaxy will still be a big seller, despite how optimal its configuration is. The only logical path for the devs is to make sure that the ship also sells to the competitive crowd too.
but what you fail to anderstand is that i am not talking about the galaxy retrofit here, who already got a "revamp" if i may said so:rolleyes:
but about all the other "undesirable" ship that could use a revamp.
the point is that they will not going back to EVERY ship that have been left behind because some of them will not make significant revenu.
unless they change their business model and remove the old bo layout of these ship and make us paid for a new one with the same skin, just like the patrol escort refit.
otherwhise it will be new cstore and lockbox ship, and there is also the new faction ship that are comming
the galaxy retrofit need a bo layout change, yes.
but i am not talking about my desire here, but about how cryptic could decide who will get a revamp and who will not
but what you fail to anderstand is that i am not talking about the galaxy retrofit here, who already got a "revamp" if i may said so:rolleyes:
but about all the other "undesirable" ship that could use a revamp.
the point is that they will not going back to EVERY ship that have been left behind because some of them will not make significant revenu.
unless they change their business model and remove the old bo layout of these ship and make us paid for a new one with the same skin, just like the patrol escort refit.
otherwhise it will be new cstore and lockbox ship, and there is also the new faction ship that are comming
What revamp are you tallking about ? The Galaxy class did not get a revmp .....The Galaxy X did and it is not the point of this thread
It was the Galaxy X reboot not the Galaxy reboot
Undesirable ship ? you mean the Galaxy..........I rolleyes at your ignorance the Galaxy with a proper equal layout compared to ships like the avenger would outsell any ship in the game
And thats the reason it is so substandard it would be so popular they would take a big hit on there alien TRIBBLE ships because a huge number of players would be in there competive galaxy and would not be interested in the least in whatever ship was in the current lock box
imo thats why we will never see a competitive Galaxy class ........It would dominate and take a huge chunk of lock box ship sales away from cryptic
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
What revamp are you tallking about ? The Galaxy class did not get a revmp .....The Galaxy X did and it is not the point of this thread
It was the Galaxy X reboot not the Galaxy reboot
Undesirable ship ? you mean the Galaxy..........I rolleyes at your ignorance the Galaxy with a proper equal layout compared to ships like the avenger would outsell any ship in the game
And thats the reason it is so substandard it would be so popular they would take a big hit on there alien TRIBBLE ships because a huge number of players would be in there competive galaxy and would not be interested in the least in whatever ship was in the current lock box
imo thats why we will never see a competitive Galaxy class ........It would dominate and take a huge chunk of lock box ship sales away from cryptic
We all went around circles. It was already discussed many posts ago that they have made up their minds on the boff layouts.
It is also personal imagination those who complained that they refuse to accept that the Galaxy X is the dps version of the Galaxy R. Like I keep saying, if you want the dps version of the Galaxy go get the Galaxy X. In STO universe, it is bundled with Gal R and the 2pc set can be used by both ships.
Based on my experience on this ship, those who think they have maximized this ship on dps min/max route builds, People made a total mistake.
For example, I am going to spec the Fleet Gal R like an avenger/Fleet assault cruiser and build it like an avenger dps style, Dem3,EptW3, BFAW, dual Aux2b, Plasma weapon build with 3 romulan plasma consoles with combining dps traits. You will literally have the same tank as a fleet assault/avenger but lesser dps at around 14k dps ISE due to the fact that it has severe limitations on tac boffs and tac consoles.
However, if go the other way in go the tanking build, I get more of the ship simply because I focused on its role rather than wasting my time doing a dps build. Using tanking traits as well as Field generators, fleet neutroniums and boff eng heal abilities,Using the same toon, You will lose around 4k dps, but get 3 more burst heals, 20k more hull, 10k more shields, 20% more hull allres, 12% more shield res.
As a baseline, when hard tanking Hive Queen at Hive Onslaught Elite, a buffer tank Gal R when taking the burst damage of the Queen from 100% everything will be brought down to 15% hull. That is around 70k+ hull and 20k shields. You can actually hard tank it till it dies without dying as long as you have the heals to support you like an Eng toon.
When you bring the dps version to the same mission, the Fleet Gal R or any Fleet avenger or fleet assault will be shredded in 1 or 2 secs due to those tank stats revolving around 60k hulls 10k shields with less resistance.
On Pvp, a well built and well played the Fleet Galaxy R will not have the dps to compete with tac cruiser ships but will have the tank to take alpha strikes or vapes. So the only thing I could think of is a bait ship on premades. On PvP PuGs, you can actually get #1 damage once in a blue moon. But most of the time you will be at #2 or #3 due to the staying power of the ship. However, it is very easy to get #1 damage with Galaxy X using the same toon compared to Gal R.
To answer your question, yes from a dps or sci support stand point, Gal R aint competitive when you base it on maximum potential on those respective roles mentioned.
Ill have to disagree on some of that. Just cause as ship is awesome or our fav doesnt stop us from buying/getting new ships.
If thats their real logic behind it, then they are more bonkers then I thought. All you need to sell new ships is a few very simple things.
1) Make it cool looking, like the kumari etc
2) Make it intresting, something unique about it like a useful console.
3) Make it useful and not a paper weight
What really ruins ship sales is things like the FPER, 1 ship that can do almost everything every other ship of its class can do. Even then, so long as you follow step 1 2 and 3 you will still make good sales.
Even if they made the galaxy have a great layout, like many have suggested. Even though its one of the most iconic starships. People would still fly other things. Not everyone loves the galaxy, there is plenty of people who fly escorts, and assault cruisers, avengers etc.
What would happen if they gave the galaxy a sweet boff and console layout? Large increase in galaxy sales. 2 months later when new ship comes out people would STILL buy the new ship, same with lockboxes. People gravitate to the new shiny, anyone who thinks other wise apparently hasnt been watching STO for the last 4 years everytime a new ship/lockbox is released.
And the Galaxy X isnt the dps version of the galaxy, its a diff ship. Unlike the assault cruiser/assault cruiser refit. And as I said several posts ago some of us want to fly the GALAXY not 1/2 or it, not a galaxy with lots of stuff glued to the model, just a galaxy like in TNG/DS9. As such thats why this thread exsists. Though id love if when they redid the galaxy they made it where we could use the bumped necells the venture had in DS9. Those are part of the galaxy x model so easy to add it to the R. Sad truth is no matter how you spec the Galaxy R, its inferior to all the other T5+ cruisers.
Including its older sisters, the ambassador and excel. Not saying the Galaxy should be better then them, but it shouldn't be worse. The neg'var the klingon version of the galaxy isnt considered junk. But stop and look why. Better turnrate, can use DHC, gets a uni ens, has 3 tac consoles, can cloak. Just those few minor differances keeps people from denouncing it like the galaxy.
Now ask yourself why did the galaxy r not get a uni ens and 3 tac consoles, and the negvar did when before that they were perfect mirrors boff wise. Ask yourself why the D'D, and Neg'var are good solid ships, and why the galaxy is the worst of the 3 main faction ships meant to balance each other out. Or simply ask yourself, why is the Galor, widely considered almost a garbage scowl in TNG, is in STO out gunning galaxys by a mile. Like i said, I dont want a super galaxy with all uni stations. I just want to to be on par, and atm the R isnt on par with a galor let alone an fleet excel.
And in PVP if your an unkillable zombie cruiser, people will just ignore a galaxy r. They know it lacks firepower to matter, so they will just focus on those they can kill. In PVE being an unkillable tank would be great if an escort couldnt just speed tank as well as a Galaxy R. In a "Tank" role the Galaxy R is a moot point when escorts can lolz their way through the exact same content while blowing the Sh*t out of everything. Now the galaxy as a support healer in pvp isnt to bad, but again an excel can do that job just as good and do dmg that matters.
Frankly speaking, if you want to go pvp, use the avenger/assault cruiser/excel or pretty much any other cruiser. Same with PVE. The Galaxy R just doesnt have enough of anything else to matter, its overly eng stacked to the point it losses out to much on everything else, leaving all the other cruisers free to just walk by it.
Why did the D'Deridex initially have the Galaxy's layout but was changed so drastically before release of LoR?
Cause everyone on the test forum went OH GOD NO NOT THAT LAYOUT!!!!! BAM! Devs - /Changed.
Then we all screamed NOW GIVE THE GALAXY THE D'D LAYOUT TOO!!!! Devs - /Ignored.
Stupid move on their part, as usual.
PS, i love my fleet D'd and my Fleet Negvar cant wait for the new neg'var refit.
But my fleet R i take out from time to time to do STFs with, but i know i wont be able to carry as hard with it as I can any of my other cruisers. Don't get me wrong I can do 15k dps easy in my Fleet R, but thats p*ss easy with a2b faw. My fleet ambassador is a better ship, it can heal, tank, deal better dmg. Or my FACR can tank like a beast, and shread anything, but weak on heals.
Taking out my Gal R is for iconic fun, not to be compeditive sadly.
I'm pretty sure it's been said before but I'll toss in my 2 cents.
I think the Gal-R should of been a fed carrier. Yes I have argued blue in the face but this is the only way I can think of to get the Gal-R up to snuff.
Drop the weapons down to 3/3 give it two hangar bays. No Frigate pets though I would revamp the Peregrins a bit to have a bit bigger punch. Quad phaser cannons and quantum torps.
Anyhoo saucer sep would work. Here's how, when you separate you get command of the saucer section and all 6 weapons and you can command the fighters. The bottom section is basically been converted to the carrier bay and warp drive in the neck. The Carrier section drops back to a safe distance and merely sends in fighters as you call for them.
It has shields, but is not armed unless you re connect the saucer section.
IDK, just something off beat and a fresh approach to how to buff the Gal-R. I am sure I will be ridiculed for it but hey tossing out an idea.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
I'm pretty sure it's been said before but I'll toss in my 2 cents.
I think the Gal-R should of been a fed carrier. Yes I have argued blue in the face but this is the only way I can think of to get the Gal-R up to snuff.
Drop the weapons down to 3/3 give it two hangar bays. No Frigate pets though I would revamp the Peregrins a bit to have a bit bigger punch. Quad phaser cannons and quantum torps.
Anyhoo saucer sep would work. Here's how, when you separate you get command of the saucer section and all 6 weapons and you can command the fighters. The bottom section is basically been converted to the carrier bay and warp drive in the neck. The Carrier section drops back to a safe distance and merely sends in fighters as you call for them.
It has shields, but is not armed unless you re connect the saucer section.
IDK, just something off beat and a fresh approach to how to buff the Gal-R. I am sure I will be ridiculed for it but hey tossing out an idea.
Hell no, im not going to mock you. But if I want to play a carrier Ill play a carrier. The Galaxy was never shown to be a carrier, none of the fed ships were. Id love a true fed style carrier with venture class scout ships/aquairious frigates, but not a galaxy.
I want the galaxy to be what it was onscreen. A hard hitting exploration science cruiser. Same thing the D'D was on screen. D'd should have weaker shields, more hull, and lower turnrate then the galaxy. Galaxy should have more shields less hull and more turnrate then the D'd. Why? Cause thats how the show appeared. Other then that they were mirrors in their roles as deep space exploration battleships. It explains why the Enterprise D ran into D'D on lots of its missions. Both were similar ships and were sent on similar missions.
What revamp are you tallking about ? The Galaxy class did not get a revmp .....The Galaxy X did and it is not the point of this thread
It was the Galaxy X reboot not the Galaxy reboot
Undesirable ship ? you mean the Galaxy..........I rolleyes at your ignorance the Galaxy with a proper equal layout compared to ships like the avenger would outsell any ship in the game
And thats the reason it is so substandard it would be so popular they would take a big hit on there alien TRIBBLE ships because a huge number of players would be in there competive galaxy and would not be interested in the least in whatever ship was in the current lock box
imo thats why we will never see a competitive Galaxy class ........It would dominate and take a huge chunk of lock box ship sales away from cryptic
hehehe, calm down and read carrefully what i wrote, i am not speaking about the galaxy here, and if you read 1 or 2 post above ( and even the one that you quote ) you will see that i have a big trouble calling the reboot of the galaxy a revamp
We all went around circles. It was already discussed many posts ago that they have made up their minds on the boff layouts.
It is also personal imagination those who complained that they refuse to accept that the Galaxy X is the dps version of the Galaxy R. Like I keep saying, if you want the dps version of the Galaxy go get the Galaxy X. In STO universe, it is bundled with Gal R and the 2pc set can be used by both ships.
Based on my experience on this ship, those who think they have maximized this ship on dps min/max route builds, People made a total mistake.
For example, I am going to spec the Fleet Gal R like an avenger/Fleet assault cruiser and build it like an avenger dps style, Dem3,EptW3, BFAW, dual Aux2b, Plasma weapon build with 3 romulan plasma consoles with combining dps traits. You will literally have the same tank as a fleet assault/avenger but lesser dps at around 14k dps ISE due to the fact that it has severe limitations on tac boffs and tac consoles.
However, if go the other way in go the tanking build, I get more of the ship simply because I focused on its role rather than wasting my time doing a dps build. Using tanking traits as well as Field generators, fleet neutroniums and boff eng heal abilities,Using the same toon, You will lose around 4k dps, but get 3 more burst heals, 20k more hull, 10k more shields, 20% more hull allres, 12% more shield res.
As a baseline, when hard tanking Hive Queen at Hive Onslaught Elite, a buffer tank Gal R when taking the burst damage of the Queen from 100% everything will be brought down to 15% hull. That is around 70k+ hull and 20k shields. You can actually hard tank it till it dies without dying as long as you have the heals to support you like an Eng toon.
When you bring the dps version to the same mission, the Fleet Gal R or any Fleet avenger or fleet assault will be shredded in 1 or 2 secs due to those tank stats revolving around 60k hulls 10k shields with less resistance.
On Pvp, a well built and well played the Fleet Galaxy R will not have the dps to compete with tac cruiser ships but will have the tank to take alpha strikes or vapes. So the only thing I could think of is a bait ship on premades. On PvP PuGs, you can actually get #1 damage once in a blue moon. But most of the time you will be at #2 or #3 due to the staying power of the ship. However, it is very easy to get #1 damage with Galaxy X using the same toon compared to Gal R.
To answer your question, yes from a dps or sci support stand point, Gal R aint competitive when you base it on maximum potential on those respective roles mentioned.
but that same build will be better in a star cruiser... a ship that was out at tier 5 before the galaxy.
so still the last cruiser in any role you could think of.
Comments
Then once youve done all those improvements, then you get to realize EVERY other ship got those same boff buffs and galaxy remains dead last. Thats not even going into fixing consoles so that 5 eng consoles and 2 tac consoles isnt a handy cap.
Youd have to make energy tac consoles have diminishing returns, that way the gap between 2 and 5 tac console ships is lessened. Better eng consoles since a lot of them are junk +3 power etc. Add in sci consoles that have 2 stats with stats weaker then the single counter parts. Also fix their diminishing return formula with consoles.
Sadly all that stuff needs done, not that all that is pleasant for us players as in some cases its a nerf in others its a buff.
Again though what your asking is waaaayyyy more work then giving the Galaxy new console/boff layout.
I bet people who read all that think wow doing all that would be dumb but there is very good reasons for all of it, and it needs done, quite badly in some cases. But Cryptic hasnt added new Boff abilities since just after the game launched, they seem to not care about consoles or boff layouts and just slap whatever they feel like on a ship and balance be damned.
Shame if they cared about balance in any meaningful way these issues would be long gone. It is possible to balance escorts, science, and cruiser class ships to one another, and to balance all the ships in a tier to one another. Its not like these are real fighter planes and we are trying to balance a P51 mustang against a F-18 Super Hornet. This is a game where stats are all just numbers changes with a few keystrokes. But it takes the willingness and the care to make those changes. Cryptic doesnt have that, they have shown it time and time again.
So in cryptics true half a$$ed style which is more likely to happen? Full redesign of boff/consoles/ships/doffs orrrr changing the exsisting layout to something useful within their already exsisting mess that they call "balance"?
Again you are talking an entire LINE of ships I'm talking two ships max. and being Raider mean s jack for Bo slots. The simple fact is my solution can work and it solves the main gripe about the GCS if a very easy way for the devs to do. The Uni Bo slots allows the most versitility which cannon wise is what the Galaxy does best. In series she could be: Studying a nebula, running verious science experiments, hold a conference or two, and fend off an attack by an enemy all at the SAME time.
You seem to imply that we need certain Tactical and Science abilities present on the Galaxy - Tactical and Science abilities aren't its strong point. Its strong point(and yes it has one despite what anything thinks) is Engineering abilities. All we need to do is give it some worthwhile Engineering abilities. Abilities that are actually worth loading it down with. Abilities that play into its strengths.
Give the thing Eng BOFF abilities that take advantage of its saucer sep, or hefty HP/resistance, or hell even the fact that it isn't very tactically capable.
And yes, I do believe that there should be additions to BOFF skills that not every ship can take advantage of. Saucer/chevron/vector-related BOFF skills, carrier pet skills, cloak-related skills(aside from cloak-enabling skills like Mask Energy Signature), etc. This would increase usefulness of otherwise noncompetitive aspects of ships.
We can make the Galaxy's current setup work - we just need to think outside the box. Really, really far outside. Is it way more work than just changing the Galaxy's setup? Sure, I'll give you that. But adding more BOFF skills won't only give the Galaxy more oomph, it'll help out other undesirable ships as well, like the Star Cruiser or the Intrepid. And it'll spice already-competitively viable ships up. Not to mention, it'll increase the competitively viable BOFF configuration amount as well, which will in turn please the players that want more variety, which will make for a much healthier game.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Getting rid of BOFF/console configurations altogether is bad for the health of the game.
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
What does a raider have to do with a cruiser ?
Nothing at all...........The Galaxy r is the weakest ship in the game in its class with 2 ships the excelsior and ambassador better than it is when they both are much older
If the Gal R was made into a decent ship they could sell it as a mark 2 with no upgrades to other models
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
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
If your fixing the stock layout, you do the god damn work to fix ALL the problems inherent to that aspect of the game. Cause half measures get you where we are. "For the health of the game", yall said that. If your going that far you need to fix the reason that layout is so god awful and those are the roots of that problem that affect the intrepid, the galaxy, defiant, and many other ships.
If it was all up to me id do more then just change the layout of the galaxy, as its just a glaring sign of whats wrong with the whole system. But that would take that massive amount of work that I outlined. And as I said in my post every single item I outlined had damn good reasons why it needed to be done, but unless you want another 10 pages of thread solely on me explaining why, i'm gonna skip the details.
Unlike cryptic I don't just slap a bandaid over a crack in a dam and walk off thinking I did my job. Fixing those issues isn't quick as it takes a lot of testing to balance stuff, and fine tune it.
I like many others have waited since launch for a galaxy class we can really love at end game, one that reflects the show. I'm trying to work in the confines of what this half baked company is actually WILLING to do. And if they were willing to fix all that TRIBBLE, itd been done by now, they have had 4 years. And thats part of what irks most of us, 4 years and they can't be bothered to fix the once proud flag ship we all loved from TNG.
When swapping layouts is SIMPLE, 5 mins of work! Vs what some of you are asking which is months of balancing. Like I said, balancing that needs done, but will never be done cause 'cryptic'.
Consider this scenario. They raise the level cap from 50 to 60. Our Bridge Officers are not only allowed to be promoted to Captain, but we can choose a "First Officer" that can be of any career to be a permanent BOFF on every 'tier 6' ship we fly... with tier 6 ships being nothing but our tier 5 ships with upgrades via the new crafting system.
If this scenario were to happen, not only would every ship get a free Universal Commander BOFF position, but it would throw another variable into the mix: Captain-level BOFF skills. Not to mention that there's a possibility of them expanding the current skill selection in the process.
Would the Galaxy be as bad then? We wouldn't know till we test everything out. Hell, maybe the Galaxy would be top-tier and ships like the Nicor or the Tempest would be low-tier scrap. That change would be too drastic to speculate about - if it were even to come to pass.
Sure, the scenario is just one of many possibilities. Maybe it's likely, maybe it's unlikely. But that's not the point. My point is that Crypic's refusal to balance our ships yet may be because they have a bigger picture in mind for them.
But even if not, we should still strive to knock some sense into Cryptic to balance all configurations rather than a 'quick fix' to the Galaxy that'll still leave the inherent problems there. Whether or not we deem it as 'plausible' for Cryptic management to even consider at this point. After all, revolutions don't come to people who are just willing to settle.
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 the role of the galaxy is to be played on hive onslaught elite only?
it took them some time to bring in game a content for that ship:rolleyes:
in any case what is that build of your that can not be reproduced with better efficiency by a star cruiser?
no because the difference between a star cruiser and a galaxy is basically just 1 ensign engie in less for the star cruiser.
they are other little difference, like the console layout and turnrate but you known...
show us that build that make the galaxy a real choice in face of a star cruiser
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
but, do cryptic want that?
i mean make "older" ship competitive again.
i think not, they want us to buy new ship, they don't care that older cstore ship are not choice anymore, they serve their purpose, now the money must come for the new ship they will designed.
it is not a star trek simulation but a game that is designed to make money.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
And why point out that STO is a game designed to make money? It has to be. Money is what not only gives us more content, but it puts dinner on the tables of the dev's families. Granted, as someone that for quite a few years have been advocating for more sandbox MMOs and 'non-combat' options, I too would rather STO be more of a "Star Trek simulator", but it is what it is. And frankly, I think it's a lot better than any MMO I've played over the past decade.
I am optimistic that Cryptic will make the Galaxy better in relation to the other ships eventually. I'd of course prefer some methods to others, but I'm prepared to be disappointed. But I definitely don't think that our words are falling on deaf ears.
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
this was not a critic to the fact that cryptic is making money and someking of implie idea that they should feel bad about it. not at all.
it was just to show you that, as a business compagny, they can't go back indefinitely to older designed to make them as good as their new top shinie.
it is a lost of their time and money, for ship that have already bring their part of revenu, and would if that happened enter in direct competition with the new one they made.
they can do it for 1, 2 or maybe 3 , but they will not go over all the ship in this game that have been left behind.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
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
like i said, they will do it for 1, 2 or 3 ship, but they hardly going to revamp every ship that have been left behind in this game.
and beside i hardly call the galaxy reboot a "revamp ".
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
...so what?
Are you trying to convince me of your position? Or trying to make a point? Because either way, your opinion doesn't hold much weight on either.
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
I
I hate to break it to you but the Galaxy was not revamped in the Galaxy revamp
adding the option for a cheese console isnt a revamp
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
They didn't touch the Galaxy R so far as I can see or heard. They only redid the Galaxy-X and out of that we got things that I don't remember anyone asking for besides the option to seperate the Saucer section. Quite a few of people thought that shouldn't be added along with the hanger most didn't want and don't remember anyone asking for and a uni ensign that was asked for multiply times for the G-R but not for the X at all. one of the things everyone been wanting them to correct for the Galaxy-R was put on the G-X which was highly stupid since most Galaxy-X pilots want more Tactical Boff slots not an option of less. To top it all off since they classified it as a Dreadnaught it got less cruiser commands then any other ships with no real perks or explaination as to why. Add to that one of the two cruiser commands we did get adds aggro (most would have been more accepting had we got the turn bonus something the Galaxy needs since its set at 6 turn rate) which a ship that is trying to dps doesn't usually want.
Will say that the G-X is a ship that can both give and get when it comes to damage and it can manage the tank job quite well but since most wanted it set up more leaning towards the damage dealer like a scimatar dreadnaught (since both have Dreadnaught for their names thought it make sense they lean more towards somewhat copying it).
In any event think the direction the devs did take with the revamp was hardly successful since most what they gave us seemed to be what they wanted instead of want we asked for and the fact the Galaxy-R was completely ignored adds to the belief of most I've talked to that they are only doing things they themselves want instead of what the community is asking for.
All this could be solved by allowing players to pick ship skins and then allowing us to assign appropriate boff, console, and power bonuses according to what the player wants the ship to do. If they added in or revamped the ship system like this like many other players have described much more cleverly then I'd care to or trouble myself to then most ship issues including those like ships falling behind in power creeps would be handled. Maybe even add in the weapons placements some of our newer ships have brought like 5,3 instead of 4,4 and 5,2 instead of 4,3. Seems to me if you let the players fly what they wanted and sell ships more so for their unique slots you'd not only get people buying ships for their Boff, consoles, weapons placements but you'd get the bonus of having ppl buy older ships they want for just it looks.
the galaxy retrofit is as bad as it was before that "revamp", that is not a revamp btw, but a reboot, nothing change, not even the graphical model, nothing.
this is not a revamp or reboot but a farce.
or you could call it a "galaxy touch" revamp if you like but i certainly don't put it at the same level as the escort patrol refit revamp.
there is no "hard cap" in the sense of "we are only allowed to do x revamp this year" for example.
but it is just logical that not all ship are good candidat for a revamp.
some ship sell better than other, as a business compagny cryptic will not revamp a ship that don't have a good selling potential in the first place.
and just like the escort patrol refit proove it, this revamp is not free.
people that have the older ship still have to buy the new one, with no discount.
so this is closely tie to what it would bring to cryptic as revenu, and not what it would bring to the game on the balanced side.
this is also clearly not in favor of an hypothetical skill and power revamp that would have as a side effect to bring older design up to part.... for free!
i do not bielieve in santas claus anymore.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Even I don't support the state of the Gal-R anymore (Tho based solely on how she performs compared to the Dreadnought. Trade my 2 personally least used cruiser commands for a universal ensign, built in "superweapon", DHC and cloak capabilities, with a more tactically oriented console layout to boot? And a hangar bay? Yeah... I'll get right back into my Gal-R... :rolleyes:)
Funny, after the revamp the Gal-R loses ground in viability... Read into that what you will...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
And sorry, I just woke up. Not reading tl;dr posts yet. X_x
Sounds a lot like just your personal opinion on the matter, rather than any facts. So what?
The fact is, they went back, examined the Galaxy, and modified it. That is my point. It is irrelevant how much or how little the modification actually was.
But isn't your opinion that the Galaxy is a ship that needs a revamp? Isn't that the whole point in your posts here?
No good selling potential? Do you know what the Galaxy-class is? It was the Enterprise for a good chunk of a decade in-continuity. Arguably the most iconic. (not getting into a Kirk vs Picard debate, just pointing something out)
No matter how many existing players own the ship, iconic ships like the Galaxy will still be a big seller, despite how optimal its configuration is. The only logical path for the devs is to make sure that the ship also sells to the competitive crowd too.
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 galaxy retrofit need a bo layout change, yes.
but i am not talking about my desire here, but about how cryptic could decide who will get a revamp and who will not
but what you fail to anderstand is that i am not talking about the galaxy retrofit here, who already got a "revamp" if i may said so:rolleyes:
but about all the other "undesirable" ship that could use a revamp.
the point is that they will not going back to EVERY ship that have been left behind because some of them will not make significant revenu.
unless they change their business model and remove the old bo layout of these ship and make us paid for a new one with the same skin, just like the patrol escort refit.
otherwhise it will be new cstore and lockbox ship, and there is also the new faction ship that are comming
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
What revamp are you tallking about ? The Galaxy class did not get a revmp .....The Galaxy X did and it is not the point of this thread
It was the Galaxy X reboot not the Galaxy reboot
Undesirable ship ? you mean the Galaxy..........I rolleyes at your ignorance the Galaxy with a proper equal layout compared to ships like the avenger would outsell any ship in the game
And thats the reason it is so substandard it would be so popular they would take a big hit on there alien TRIBBLE ships because a huge number of players would be in there competive galaxy and would not be interested in the least in whatever ship was in the current lock box
imo thats why we will never see a competitive Galaxy class ........It would dominate and take a huge chunk of lock box ship sales away from cryptic
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
We all went around circles. It was already discussed many posts ago that they have made up their minds on the boff layouts.
It is also personal imagination those who complained that they refuse to accept that the Galaxy X is the dps version of the Galaxy R. Like I keep saying, if you want the dps version of the Galaxy go get the Galaxy X. In STO universe, it is bundled with Gal R and the 2pc set can be used by both ships.
Based on my experience on this ship, those who think they have maximized this ship on dps min/max route builds, People made a total mistake.
For example, I am going to spec the Fleet Gal R like an avenger/Fleet assault cruiser and build it like an avenger dps style, Dem3,EptW3, BFAW, dual Aux2b, Plasma weapon build with 3 romulan plasma consoles with combining dps traits. You will literally have the same tank as a fleet assault/avenger but lesser dps at around 14k dps ISE due to the fact that it has severe limitations on tac boffs and tac consoles.
However, if go the other way in go the tanking build, I get more of the ship simply because I focused on its role rather than wasting my time doing a dps build. Using tanking traits as well as Field generators, fleet neutroniums and boff eng heal abilities,Using the same toon, You will lose around 4k dps, but get 3 more burst heals, 20k more hull, 10k more shields, 20% more hull allres, 12% more shield res.
As a baseline, when hard tanking Hive Queen at Hive Onslaught Elite, a buffer tank Gal R when taking the burst damage of the Queen from 100% everything will be brought down to 15% hull. That is around 70k+ hull and 20k shields. You can actually hard tank it till it dies without dying as long as you have the heals to support you like an Eng toon.
When you bring the dps version to the same mission, the Fleet Gal R or any Fleet avenger or fleet assault will be shredded in 1 or 2 secs due to those tank stats revolving around 60k hulls 10k shields with less resistance.
On Pvp, a well built and well played the Fleet Galaxy R will not have the dps to compete with tac cruiser ships but will have the tank to take alpha strikes or vapes. So the only thing I could think of is a bait ship on premades. On PvP PuGs, you can actually get #1 damage once in a blue moon. But most of the time you will be at #2 or #3 due to the staying power of the ship. However, it is very easy to get #1 damage with Galaxy X using the same toon compared to Gal R.
To answer your question, yes from a dps or sci support stand point, Gal R aint competitive when you base it on maximum potential on those respective roles mentioned.
If thats their real logic behind it, then they are more bonkers then I thought. All you need to sell new ships is a few very simple things.
1) Make it cool looking, like the kumari etc
2) Make it intresting, something unique about it like a useful console.
3) Make it useful and not a paper weight
What really ruins ship sales is things like the FPER, 1 ship that can do almost everything every other ship of its class can do. Even then, so long as you follow step 1 2 and 3 you will still make good sales.
Even if they made the galaxy have a great layout, like many have suggested. Even though its one of the most iconic starships. People would still fly other things. Not everyone loves the galaxy, there is plenty of people who fly escorts, and assault cruisers, avengers etc.
What would happen if they gave the galaxy a sweet boff and console layout? Large increase in galaxy sales. 2 months later when new ship comes out people would STILL buy the new ship, same with lockboxes. People gravitate to the new shiny, anyone who thinks other wise apparently hasnt been watching STO for the last 4 years everytime a new ship/lockbox is released.
And the Galaxy X isnt the dps version of the galaxy, its a diff ship. Unlike the assault cruiser/assault cruiser refit. And as I said several posts ago some of us want to fly the GALAXY not 1/2 or it, not a galaxy with lots of stuff glued to the model, just a galaxy like in TNG/DS9. As such thats why this thread exsists. Though id love if when they redid the galaxy they made it where we could use the bumped necells the venture had in DS9. Those are part of the galaxy x model so easy to add it to the R. Sad truth is no matter how you spec the Galaxy R, its inferior to all the other T5+ cruisers.
Including its older sisters, the ambassador and excel. Not saying the Galaxy should be better then them, but it shouldn't be worse. The neg'var the klingon version of the galaxy isnt considered junk. But stop and look why. Better turnrate, can use DHC, gets a uni ens, has 3 tac consoles, can cloak. Just those few minor differances keeps people from denouncing it like the galaxy.
Now ask yourself why did the galaxy r not get a uni ens and 3 tac consoles, and the negvar did when before that they were perfect mirrors boff wise. Ask yourself why the D'D, and Neg'var are good solid ships, and why the galaxy is the worst of the 3 main faction ships meant to balance each other out. Or simply ask yourself, why is the Galor, widely considered almost a garbage scowl in TNG, is in STO out gunning galaxys by a mile. Like i said, I dont want a super galaxy with all uni stations. I just want to to be on par, and atm the R isnt on par with a galor let alone an fleet excel.
And in PVP if your an unkillable zombie cruiser, people will just ignore a galaxy r. They know it lacks firepower to matter, so they will just focus on those they can kill. In PVE being an unkillable tank would be great if an escort couldnt just speed tank as well as a Galaxy R. In a "Tank" role the Galaxy R is a moot point when escorts can lolz their way through the exact same content while blowing the Sh*t out of everything. Now the galaxy as a support healer in pvp isnt to bad, but again an excel can do that job just as good and do dmg that matters.
Frankly speaking, if you want to go pvp, use the avenger/assault cruiser/excel or pretty much any other cruiser. Same with PVE. The Galaxy R just doesnt have enough of anything else to matter, its overly eng stacked to the point it losses out to much on everything else, leaving all the other cruisers free to just walk by it.
Cause everyone on the test forum went OH GOD NO NOT THAT LAYOUT!!!!! BAM! Devs - /Changed.
Then we all screamed NOW GIVE THE GALAXY THE D'D LAYOUT TOO!!!! Devs - /Ignored.
Stupid move on their part, as usual.
PS, i love my fleet D'd and my Fleet Negvar cant wait for the new neg'var refit.
But my fleet R i take out from time to time to do STFs with, but i know i wont be able to carry as hard with it as I can any of my other cruisers. Don't get me wrong I can do 15k dps easy in my Fleet R, but thats p*ss easy with a2b faw. My fleet ambassador is a better ship, it can heal, tank, deal better dmg. Or my FACR can tank like a beast, and shread anything, but weak on heals.
Taking out my Gal R is for iconic fun, not to be compeditive sadly.
I think the Gal-R should of been a fed carrier. Yes I have argued blue in the face but this is the only way I can think of to get the Gal-R up to snuff.
Drop the weapons down to 3/3 give it two hangar bays. No Frigate pets though I would revamp the Peregrins a bit to have a bit bigger punch. Quad phaser cannons and quantum torps.
Anyhoo saucer sep would work. Here's how, when you separate you get command of the saucer section and all 6 weapons and you can command the fighters. The bottom section is basically been converted to the carrier bay and warp drive in the neck. The Carrier section drops back to a safe distance and merely sends in fighters as you call for them.
It has shields, but is not armed unless you re connect the saucer section.
IDK, just something off beat and a fresh approach to how to buff the Gal-R. I am sure I will be ridiculed for it but hey tossing out an idea.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Hell no, im not going to mock you. But if I want to play a carrier Ill play a carrier. The Galaxy was never shown to be a carrier, none of the fed ships were. Id love a true fed style carrier with venture class scout ships/aquairious frigates, but not a galaxy.
I want the galaxy to be what it was onscreen. A hard hitting exploration science cruiser. Same thing the D'D was on screen. D'd should have weaker shields, more hull, and lower turnrate then the galaxy. Galaxy should have more shields less hull and more turnrate then the D'd. Why? Cause thats how the show appeared. Other then that they were mirrors in their roles as deep space exploration battleships. It explains why the Enterprise D ran into D'D on lots of its missions. Both were similar ships and were sent on similar missions.
hehehe, calm down and read carrefully what i wrote, i am not speaking about the galaxy here, and if you read 1 or 2 post above ( and even the one that you quote ) you will see that i have a big trouble calling the reboot of the galaxy a revamp
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
but that same build will be better in a star cruiser... a ship that was out at tier 5 before the galaxy.
so still the last cruiser in any role you could think of.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271