how is anyone supposed to take you seriously when you want a fricking connie set up the exact same way that your now bashing? this could not be more ironic. us wanting the galaxy like that compared to what you want makes us look totally sane.
and no body in this thread said they wanted a regent clone, though with a setup like that the saucer separation would actually be beneficial, instead of irreverent to it
eh, id want ether a 3 pack like thing thats in that thread in my sig, or the galor setup without the universal station. thats a counterpart to the ambassador setup. or the d'deridex setup, with a LT eng instead of those 2 ENS stations
Sounds to me like you want basically what equates to the three pack of the Odyssey, why not just use that?
Sounds to me like you want basically what equates to the three pack of the Odyssey, why not just use that?
on a cruiser im not found of the uni LTC when used for non eng resulting in a LTC and LT of ether tac or sci station type. LTC and LT tac on a beam boat like that is a total waste, way to much tac, or its ether got to much sci, and not enough tac, or eng. unless you want almost the best healer, then a TLC sci ody is perfect for that.
im more fond of what excelsior or ambassador has. compared to the ambassador, swapping the LTC and ENS stations would be a good fit for the galaxy's station setup. at least the fleet galaxy should come that way, with 4/3/3 console setup, the fleet galaxyX should proboly be a regent station clone, maybe even a fleet vorcha clone
Im still waiting for a cruiser with the following setup:
LTC Tac
LT Uni
Cmdr Eng
LT Eng
ENS Sci
I think that would be nice for the Galaxy. Tacticly much better than what we have now and flexible enough to play with some science or to needlessly go over the Top with tac abilities.
Add a 5/2/3 console setup and voila. A tanking oriented cruiser (up to 8! possible Eng powers) with a bite and flexibility.
IT would still be less nimble than the excelsior, less science oriented than the Ambassador, and less powerfull in Firepower than the Sovereign or Excelsior. But with the Flexibility to adapt to the roles it needs to fullfill.
This is the 1557th post in this threat. Cryptic please listen to us. Please show some love for the Galaxy - we love it, well pay for it, come on, wich threat has more than 1500 posts and nearly 50000 views.
Give us some heads up please
i don't see where you see that the star cruiser is an assault cruiser?
So flying a star cruiser isn't an option?
i don't want the galaxy retrofit to be an assault cruiser but something slighty or even equal at tanking than an star cruiser.
I'm pretty sure that in my own testing of the two ships (which is you know a couple years worth of comparing them on test server), the Galaxy Retrofit does tank as well or slightly better than a Star Cruiser.
So I don't know what it is you're looking for out of the ship.
how is anyone supposed to take you seriously when you want a fricking connie set up the exact same way that your now bashing?
Ah, that's easy to explain. The ship in my sig is a ship I fully realize will never exist in this game. Ever. It's not relevant to this thread at all. And trying to draw attention to it is veering off topic. But, to reiterate the ship in my sig? Pure fantasy that I know will never exist.
So, back to the topic at hand?
and no body in this thread said they wanted a regent clone, though with a setup like that the saucer separation would actually be beneficial, instead of irreverent to it
Asking for +2 to its base turn rate.
Asking for added tactical console slots.
Asking for more Tactical BOFF representation.
Hey! Guess what that turns the ship into?
Yup. An assault cruiser with a Galaxy Skin.
People throughout this thread have been asking for that. Repeatedly. It's something I don't see them doing since those ship specs already exist. Geko has already said cruisers don't sell well. So trying to cash in on another cruiser that ends up being redundant with the cruisers that already exist? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it. Tweaking ships that they've already sold? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it.
So the solutions don't really fit Geko's design protocols. Or really offer Cryptic something they can cash in on.
I could see adding an Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin or some such silliness to a new Mirror Universe LOCKBOX. Which means you all would have to go out and chase a new ship. Which would make them money.
That's a solution I could see them doing.
But just making changes to its BOFF seating? I mean think about it. Folks keep bringing up the D'Deridex's changes. You know why those got done?
1- The ship hadn't made it live yet.
2- The ship is something you purchase and was new. So all purchases had yet to be made.
3- It's part of the Legacy of Romulus expansion that was bringing in a lot of new and old players all willing to buy something.
NONE of that applies to the Galaxy. It's been live the longest of all c-store ships. It's something you all have already purchased (and going back really far some folks with tokens never actually did purchase). And is not part of a new expansion.
If you all really want to find a solution Geko would enact, come up with one that makes Cryptic money. Not just something that would make you individually happy.
Oh and a 3-pack probably isn't it either, going by what Geko's said about Fed cruiser sales. At least that's a little more productive a solution than "MOAR TACTICAL CONSOLES PLZ."
But still falls short of what I see them needing to enact change.
Speaking of Locboxes ... here, I'll do the hard work for you all:
YESTERDAY'S ENTERPRISE LOCKBOX
Containing a whole bunch of stuff related to that episode. Like maybe the rest of the uniform that didn't come with the event stuff. And I don't know some sort of Guinan DOFF that does something silly. And a Castillo DOFF. And some other knick knacks.
AND ... two chase ships:
1- A variant on the Ambassador. So folks who don't buy the fleet version, and who missed out on the event one, can still get a version of it.
2- A BRAND SPANKING NEW TACTICAL ARMED TO THE TEETH GALAXY CLASS SHIP. Which is a representation of the alternate universe one that the Ent-D crew was in during that episode.
Viola.
You have you tactical galaxy, and it's in a format that Cryptic may actually be responsive to doing.
To all those about to say "I hate lockboxes" ... suck it up. That's what this game does now. And that's not changing.
Roddenberry wan't able to truly articulate Star Treks human portion of the universe as a "Utopian Society", they could barely accommodate the bottom two parts of Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, which is the minimum required to attempt to start a Utopian Society.
roddenberry didn't need to articulate it or explain it, it a vision, an idea, there is nothing concrete about it.
if he has a ideal model society that work he would have give it to humanity and we woulb be better already, don't you think?.
what he said didn't have to be coherent with maslows hieracgy of need or any other for that matter, that not his role.
it an utopia, some people going to explain it to you better than i would, i have use google to translate this text who explain it very well.
Into the current language, "utopian" means impossible, a utopia is a chimera, a purely imaginary construction whose realization is, a priori, out of our reach. Paradoxically, the author who created the word, and then illustrated the literary genre invented by Thomas More in 1516, had rather aims to broaden the scope of the possible, and first to explore. While utopia is characterized by the use of fiction, a literary device of describing an ideal society in an imaginary geography, often in the context of a purely fictional account of trip. But imaginary or fictional does not mean impossible: dream is not all fantasy. Utopias under political literature from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, part of a critique of the existing order and a willingness to reform in depth, the use of fiction is a process that allows to distance relation to this perspective and to better describe, as concretely as possible, what could be. And development of the utopian genre is a time when we think rightly, that rather than waiting for a better world beyond a providential men, we should build other forms of political and social organization to overcome the defects, wars and misery. In this sense, the descriptions they offer, where they are happy to see well-governed cities, aim to convince their readers that other forms of life are possible.
that is the intend of gene, not to show a reproductible and coherent model of a perfect society.
Also, if TOS's universe didn't have value in profit, why were there guys like Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones running around trading with other humans for profit, risking their safety and lives for accumulation of wealth?
so in a cohalition of multiple planet that count more than a trillion billion zitizen and i may forget some, you find me 2 people that are supposely drive by profit, and that your argument to said that all the others i mentioned before are also like that?
no society, utopian or not can have 100% of it population that share the exact same value, you will still find even in the most uniform one a tiny percentage like 0.1% that will do exactly the opposite.
1% of trillion billion zitizen, that make a good bunch of people, but it certainly not the majority.
As far as less awareness in a Utopia, there a period in any society, where the people believe that they are living in the pinnacle of human societal evolution and drop their guard because they believe there can not be any relevant external threat to their way of life. The Romans were a perfect example of this towards their end. The Harrapan (of Indus Valley, modern day India) society pre-conquest (circa 1500 BC) was an extremely well planned society that had all needs of food, shelter and medicine (at that times standards) and bountiful trade with other societies in Mesopotamia. They experienced a time of peace and tranquility that they enjoyed so much that barely even maintained a military to defend itself. It was then overrun by the Aryans
There also has been "Utopian" societies attempted in the U.S., they collapsed upon themselves because, after time members became too fixated on attaining self actualization and not upon ensuring the day to day survival of the "society", crippling it from the inside by lack of productivity or externally by failing to defend it by allowing in new members that weren't as committed as they were.
yes but, like i said here
since the human race as of today never achieve an utopian society with theses criterias
the society you describe didn't share the same criteria as gene vision.
there is slavery, second citizen categorie, search of power, profit, religious totalitarian ect....
so, like spok would said, it daes not qualify
If you want something that tanks like a Star Cruiser, use a Star Cruiser. Sounds to me like the only difference of what you want is a different skin.
that sound to me like a typical troll response, but, i will take the time to explain to you in detail then where the problem is.
it is not about having the same bo layout as the star cruiser, i could have said the ambassador it would have fit perfectly too.
the galaxy is a cstore ship, one should expect that these kind of ship be better than free one ( a star cruiser can be baught for what? 200000 ec in exchange with the mirror version?)
since tactical is not is orientation, the only other that is left is tanking/healing, in that aera it is outperformed by the 2 ship i mentioned, who are not cstore ship, one can be obtain by a fistfull of EC and the other one has been literaly given by doing just a mission.
what would the regent owner would said if the ship they buy was inferior ( note here, i said inferior, not equal ) to the free sovereign or to the Heavy Cruiser Retrofit? http://sto.gamepedia.com/Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit
you won't find that normal, the regent didn't sell well but if this scenario have happened it would have sell almost none.
yet we are in the exact same position with the galaxy retrofit and the ambassador/star cruiser but every naysayer find that perfectly normal.
i wonder if you would have told to the regent owner that what they want is a sovereign with a regent skin?
I'm pretty sure that in my own testing of the two ships (which is you know a couple years worth of comparing them on test server), the Galaxy Retrofit does tank as well or slightly better than a Star Cruiser.
if you don't known how to tank better with a star cruiser than with a galaxy retrofit, i can't help you there.
Speaking of Locboxes ... here, I'll do the hard work for you all:
YESTERDAY'S ENTERPRISE LOCKBOX
Containing a whole bunch of stuff related to that episode. Like maybe the rest of the uniform that didn't come with the event stuff. And I don't know some sort of Guinan DOFF that does something silly. And a Castillo DOFF. And some other knick knacks.
AND ... two chase ships:
1- A variant on the Ambassador. So folks who don't buy the fleet version, and who missed out on the event one, can still get a version of it.
2- A BRAND SPANKING NEW TACTICAL ARMED TO THE TEETH GALAXY CLASS SHIP. Which is a representation of the alternate universe one that the Ent-D crew was in during that episode.
Viola.
You have you tactical galaxy, and it's in a format that Cryptic may actually be responsive to doing.
To all those about to say "I hate lockboxes" ... suck it up. That's what this game does now. And that's not changing.
1) As soon as you said this, I got excited. If they would add the Andrew Probert Ambassador into the game as a skin, that would be VERY cool!
2) Alternatively, a flexible boff station Galaxy-class with the U.S.S. Venture nacelle phaser strips would be interesting to have as well.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
if you don't known how to tank better with a star cruiser than with a galaxy retrofit, i can't help you there.
Conversely, if you don't know how to tank with a galaxy retrofit, I'm not sure I can help you much. And oddly enough, you're in a very strange thread if you can't really harness that ship's ability to tank. Then again, there really hasn't been any chatter about the Star Cruiser in ages, so, I guess that's something.
Why is it that people like you come to a thread like this and tell us what we really need and want?
I've just taken the feedback people like you have given, and put it into an idea that is far more probable to actually happen in STO. A lockbox ship.
What gives you the right to speak for other people?
The internet. It's very empowering.
What makes you think I want you to do "the hard work" for me or others for them?
Well mainly because "The Galaxy needs buffed!" is a lazy approach that doesn't take the big picture of STO development into account?
All the variants of the Galaxy suck, they sucked when they were made and they suck even more now.
Then don't fly the ship?
You talk about making Cryptic money but there are still new players joining STO every day and many of them can't wait to fly the Galaxy.
That goes against what Cryptic's data was reported to have been. Essentially they're not getting a lot of sales from cruisers. And thus they have been working on new ships that sell better. So my idea, a Yesterday's Enterprise Lockbox, that pretty much allows you to have the better Galaxy that you desire, while working within the framework of STO's development, is a bad idea to you. Instead, you want Cryptic to go in and tinker with a ship you already bought, and buff you up for free?
That about the size of it? Cause if it is, well, I think you'll be waiting a very long time for that.
If you don't want to fly the Galaxy then fine
Now hold on just a sec. Who here really doesn't want to fly the Galaxy? Me? Or you?
The person that has offered feedback such as:
- The Galaxy just needs the devs to make the game less about DPS so that it's current makeup has a more satisfying role in gameplay.
- The Galaxy doesn't need to be turned into an Excelsior to work in this game.
And other assorted variations of that.
Or the person who wrote this:
"All the variants of the Galaxy suck, they sucked when they were made and they suck even more now."
Oh yeah. It's definitely me right? I'm the one who doesn't want the Galaxy playable.
People throughout this thread have been asking for that. Repeatedly. It's something I don't see them doing since those ship specs already exist. Geko has already said cruisers don't sell well. So trying to cash in on another cruiser that ends up being redundant with the cruisers that already exist? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it. Tweaking ships that they've already sold? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it.
So the solutions don't really fit Geko's design protocols. Or really offer Cryptic something they can cash in on.
I could see adding an Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin or some such silliness to a new Mirror Universe LOCKBOX. Which means you all would have to go out and chase a new ship. Which would make them money.
it sounds like you think nearly every description of a cruiser is the assault cruiser. id rather the galaxy have a slightly unique niche of stations then be just a regent copy. the only way the turn rates getting buff is if the turn rate floor is lifted for all fed cruisers.
they got it wrong even putting the galaxy X in the game, that stupid thing should not exist, partly because they could only make the galaxy R suck by comparison. then the stupid excelsior got to be the premier tactical cruiser, and still is, when it shouldn't even be in the game. they chose it for that, over the federations largest battleship. if the excelsior was going to be in the game at all, and at end game, that eng heavy setup made a lot more sense on it then it did on the galaxy R. old ship, of marginal use, a crummy station setup is a better fit, at least it would have its turn rate.
theres still enough wiggle room left to give the galaxy R a not carbon copy regent/assault cruiser station layout. if they did my 3 pack idea, they could do it so cheap. no new ship art is needed, just some effect work. the galaxy is a popular ship, and every new player thats a fan of it all get to go through the disappointment of finding out how much the ship sucks in game.
Why is it that people like you come to a thread like this and tell us what we really need and want? What gives you the right to speak for other people?
You talk about making Cryptic money but there are still new players joining STO every day and many of them can't wait to fly the Galaxy. Problem is by the time they reach level 50 they have probably learnt how much it sucks. If Cryptic were to release a 3 pack with all the goodies like a proper TNG bridge pack and associated goodies of course it would sell. It would sell to the thousands of people with mothballed Galaxys and to the new player who is still levelling up.
these two paragraphs contradict each other...you get mad at him for speaking up for other people and then you do the very same thing....I'd like to see your research numbers on the number of people waiting to get a Galaxy and the people that would buy a 3 pack.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Well, the 1 extra turn that one person suggested would give it a turn rate of 8. Making it more like the Excelsior. (YEAH, that's going to happen! Heh. The poster child for slow turning cruisers turned into the quickest turning cruiser in the game. Totally convinced that will happen just because this thread hits 100+ pages).
The tactical boff setup changed?
I mean, you're dealing with a fleet cruiser here. Some things you can't get around are:
Low turn rate. So between 5 and 9 if you really want to push each end of the extremes, though 6 to 8 is where it all usually sits.
8 weapons. This is offset by the turn rate.
ENGINEERING FOCUS. So you have to concede 4 engineering consoles out of 10, most likely. Especially for the Galaxy, the ship that the devs want to be the front runner for engineering focus. And you also have to carry a Commander Engineering BOFF.
There's not really a whole lot of wiggle room. And most of the variations you come up with net you something that looks like one of these ships that already exist:
So yeah, maybe I'm simplifying the discussion a bit by harping on the Assault Cruiser. It's cumbersome to type that really the ship people want already exists, be it an Odyssey, a Sovereign, or an Excelsior.
But I don't see that wiggle room you see. Not with what already is available.
they got it wrong even putting the galaxy X in the game,
So you want an 8 turn rate. More tactical consoles and a better tactical BOFF layout?
In other words, you want to fly the Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin?
Fair point.
In all fairness though, you do pay for one of them and not the other.
If they are willing to revamp or redo current engineering and science skills into something useful that would allow for a far more flexible layout as tactical abilities have. I think I'd be ok with the current set-up.
Then again, this would also hinge on PvE actually requiring something more than dps to accomplish.
I can admit it. I wasn't aware of it at first but I am now.
I would like an assault cruiser in a Galaxy skin.
With the obvious, and seemingly permanent, slant towards dps I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that a ship that comes from the C-Store to be competitive or at the very least, relevant in the game as it is currently designed.
No being a tank in PvP doesn't count.
PvP is a joke and literally non-existent.
PvE end-game is in a similar situation where you can complete an Elite STF with less than a full group of geared Escorts and come out no worse for wear and get the secondary objective.
I really am curious as to why people are so opposed to this idea.
How does it threaten your game play?
You don't want a Regent or eXCEL CLONE FINE. DO WHAT i SUGGESTED. MAKE HER THE FED VERSION OF A bop WITH ALL uNIVERSAL bo SLOTS. IT WILL MAKE THE SHIP THE MOST VERSITILE SHIP FED SIDE AND MAKE IT CLOSER TO CANNON. (sorry caps was on there) Oh and add the Venture phaser strips, if your gonna name it after the Venture it should have the most imporant detail of the Venture in it.
As i said a few posts back, lets not fix the Galaxy as the Galaxy isn't broken according to many on here, Its the game for giving a Tact, Sci and Engineering trinity but not keeping to that model. I say lets fix all the other cruisers as they are the one's that are broken, so they have only one role they can perform in. And thats hull tank and heal team mates. There we go every bodies even and treated fairly.
Give every other cruiser the same console layout as the Galaxy, The boff seating and the same turn rate and watch the mass extinction of cruisers from this game immediately.
Or Cryptic realise you broke away from the standard mmo trinity and left the Galaxy way way behind with that break. Hell the Nebula only has 2 tact consoles but she can out dps a Galaxy without breaking a sweat. She's supposed to be a scaled down version of her.
As i said a few posts back, lets not fix the Galaxy as the Galaxy isn't broken according to many on here, Its the game for giving a Tact, Sci and Engineering trinity but not keeping to that model. I say lets fix all the other cruisers as they are the one's that are broken, so they have only one role they can perform in. And thats hull tank and heal team mates. There we go every bodies even and treated fairly.
Give every other cruiser the same console layout as the Galaxy, The boff seating and the same turn rate and watch the mass extinction of cruisers from this game immediately.
Or Cryptic realise you broke away from the standard mmo trinity and left the Galaxy way way behind with that break. Hell the Nebula only has 2 tact consoles but she can out dps a Galaxy without breaking a sweat. She's supposed to be a scaled down version of her.
Um......NO. My solution is beter and more likely for it requires less work
As i said a few posts back, lets not fix the Galaxy as the Galaxy isn't broken according to many on here, Its the game for giving a Tact, Sci and Engineering trinity but not keeping to that model. I say lets fix all the other cruisers as they are the one's that are broken, so they have only one role they can perform in. And thats hull tank and heal team mates. There we go every bodies even and treated fairly.
Give every other cruiser the same console layout as the Galaxy, The boff seating and the same turn rate and watch the mass extinction of cruisers from this game immediately.
Or Cryptic realise you broke away from the standard mmo trinity and left the Galaxy way way behind with that break. Hell the Nebula only has 2 tact consoles but she can out dps a Galaxy without breaking a sweat. She's supposed to be a scaled down version of her.
Cryptic never broke away from standard trinity as standard trinity was never part of the game.
All they need to do to fix to the galaxy is to simply redesign engineering boffs so that 3 ensigns arent all sharing cds with each other.
more abilities from ether tac or sci would be much more useful. at tac and sci ens, there are several essential skills, and the galaxy can have the least of them
I guess there are just 2 solutions to the obivous problems at hand:
1: Re arrange eng skills so one can put something usefull in that 3rd eng ens slot
2: Add universal slot. I would prefer the Lt Cmdr, as the an Ens uni slot would step on the toes of Assault and Star Cruiser (only on fleet Galaxy, cryptic needs to make a profit for a 10 sec work, right ?)
Or just let me use the Galaxy skin on the Ambassador, and I'll become a happy fleet Ambassador owner.
more abilities from ether tac or sci would be much more useful. at tac and sci ens, there are several essential skills, and the galaxy can have the least of them
Agreed - I don't think it needs to be made an Assault Cruiser clone; I would have been more than happy if it had received the setup that the Ambassador received.
I would have to agree as well. The Ens Engineering boff seat is redundant on this ship. IF Cryptic were to update the Galaxy-class, turning that seat into a Universal seat would be the least they could do.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
The galaxy should not be a ac clone, then what is the point of an ac exactly?
-1tac +1 sci compared to a ac would put the galaxy about where it should be console wise.
And lt com universal plus maybe an ensign uni to fix the bo layout. it should have a hard coded sci station unlike the ac refits, eng the same as ac. drop down the tac stations compared to the ac.
It does not take much to fix the galaxy compared to other t4 t5 cruisers, but turning it into a ac is silly and not warranted.
And if they ever do fix it i would be happy to dig my retro galaxy out of drydock for a spin. Turn rate is fine as is, yea its slow but it is a slow turning ship, and the rcs booting, mining consoles will help it turn even more.
ambassador stations, just swapping the LTC and ENS, is sounding better and better to me. the fleet galaxyX could have the regent setup, that would only be an ENS swap from that. or something like the d'deridex setup. the saucer separation is truly wasted on the ship if its totally inept tactically.
Conversely, if you don't know how to tank with a galaxy retrofit, I'm not sure I can help you much. And oddly enough, you're in a very strange thread if you can't really harness that ship's ability to tank. Then again, there really hasn't been any chatter about the Star Cruiser in ages, so, I guess that's something.
who said that i can't tank in a galaxy retrofit?
i said i can do it better in a star cruiser.
and you are right, there hasn't been any chatter about the star cruiser in ages, so that a cstore ship is less efficient than this ship definitly IS something!.
you known, i am sorry that you think that the ship in your sign is something that never happen in this game but please do not bring your defeatism and your negativity in this thread.
from what i have seen from you lately your only goal is to give this thread some false solution that will only leave this ship to a status quo.
but i known you won't listen.
this thread will go on for 40 years and cryptic will never fix the galaxy class, but we will still be here arguing about this, hehe.
maybe it's not the destination that matters. Maybe it's the journey like hary kim would said, so, see you out there
ambassador stations, just swapping the LTC and ENS, is sounding better and better to me. the fleet galaxyX could have the regent setup, that would only be an ENS swap from that. or something like the d'deridex setup. the saucer separation is truly wasted on the ship if its totally inept tactically.
I completely agree with the last point. The saucer separation ability is hardly worth the console slot, even with the changes Cryptic made to separation ability across the game within the last month. You lose a great deal of hull points, and your offensive improvements consist of +5 weapons power. And that's it. Sure, you turn faster, but your hull is cut in half, and you get no real advantage in terms of offensive capabilities.
this thread will go on for 40 years and cryptic will never fix the galaxy class
That is the statement that I have been waiting to hear from you for the past 20 pages.
Bing Bing! Correct!
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
It's not just the Galaxy. It's cruisers in general. They're being phased out. You can see it if you look carefully at what the devs have done over the past two seasons. The rep systems give great additional survivability. The newer equipment adds to it. Add on the new eng consoles coming out with the dil mines, and all of a sudden you have the ability to tank just as well, if not better than even the strongest cruisers could tank before.
Cruisers are being phased out, and being replaced by destroyers and escorts. The slower survival based combat is being replaced by faster paced dakka fests.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
It's not just the Galaxy. It's cruisers in general. They're being phased out. You can see it if you look carefully at what the devs have done over the past two seasons. The rep systems give great additional survivability. The newer equipment adds to it. Add on the new eng consoles coming out with the dil mines, and all of a sudden you have the ability to tank just as well, if not better than even the strongest cruisers could tank before.
Cruisers are being phased out, and being replaced by destroyers and escorts. The slower survival based combat is being replaced by faster paced dakka fests.
I would agree that the old concept of the cruiser tank is gone forever, and personally I prefer it that way. But I get that more traditional tank players (sword and board fantasy types mostly) would prefer it to remain as it was, tanking in an relatively slow moving ship without having to worry about doing appreciable damage. While that style of tanking has never interested me I am very excited by what an Aux2Batt FAC can do to both tank and kill enemies.
When I see the new rep (rom beam and nukara console come to mind right away), and Dil mine gear I really see Cryptic pushing for cruisers to be more like a brawler battleships than the often seen 9.9 KM hero plinking away at enemy targets from just under max range with beam arrays. They want you to take your cruiser and dive right into masses of NPC baddies, agro everything and not die while still doing significant DPS. I already use two RCS consoles and no armor consoles on my FAC, now I will be able to replace the two RCS consoles with these new upgraded versions, making my FAC even tankier.
I guess what you say about dakka fests is true, but in my view space combat SHOULD be about doing damage to your opponent, everything else a ship can do (in battle at least) should in some way support its damage dealing capabilities. Admittedly, most non carrier sci vessels are in a pretty bad position but the new cores should help alleviate that somewhat... at least I remain optimistic, my own torpedo sci boat not being incredibly successful yet.
This new damage centric meta does leave behind a lot of the older ships but I think its a better way for things to be, rather than a forced trinity with space ships.
It's not just the Galaxy. It's cruisers in general. They're being phased out. You can see it if you look carefully at what the devs have done over the past two seasons. The rep systems give great additional survivability. The newer equipment adds to it. Add on the new eng consoles coming out with the dil mines, and all of a sudden you have the ability to tank just as well, if not better than even the strongest cruisers could tank before.
Cruisers are being phased out, and being replaced by destroyers and escorts. The slower survival based combat is being replaced by faster paced dakka fests.
we can only hope that before long cruiser weapons get a buff in response. making beam arrays and single cannons fire 2 shots per cycle like DHCs, without even changing DPS, alone would make a huge difference just in effective damage. theres too many shots, and its to gradual, for them to outpace all the anti pressure power creep thats been added.
It's not just the Galaxy. It's cruisers in general. They're being phased out. You can see it if you look carefully at what the devs have done over the past two seasons. The rep systems give great additional survivability. The newer equipment adds to it. Add on the new eng consoles coming out with the dil mines, and all of a sudden you have the ability to tank just as well, if not better than even the strongest cruisers could tank before.
Cruisers are being phased out, and being replaced by destroyers and escorts. The slower survival based combat is being replaced by faster paced dakka fests.
Are cruisers limited from using these consoles?
This will not change anything from where cruisers and escorts are today.
Compared to eachother before these consoles will be slotted on the ships, and in between the different ship types, not much will change.
It will probably be more or less like it has been the whole time.
Escorts, fast, hard hitting, lower survivability.
Cruisers, slow, damage over distance, high survivability.
So untill they do something with the cruisers to improve their weapon power output, or change how beams work on cruisers nothing will change how cruisers compare to escorts.
Comments
Sounds to me like you want basically what equates to the three pack of the Odyssey, why not just use that?
on a cruiser im not found of the uni LTC when used for non eng resulting in a LTC and LT of ether tac or sci station type. LTC and LT tac on a beam boat like that is a total waste, way to much tac, or its ether got to much sci, and not enough tac, or eng. unless you want almost the best healer, then a TLC sci ody is perfect for that.
im more fond of what excelsior or ambassador has. compared to the ambassador, swapping the LTC and ENS stations would be a good fit for the galaxy's station setup. at least the fleet galaxy should come that way, with 4/3/3 console setup, the fleet galaxyX should proboly be a regent station clone, maybe even a fleet vorcha clone
LTC Tac
LT Uni
Cmdr Eng
LT Eng
ENS Sci
I think that would be nice for the Galaxy. Tacticly much better than what we have now and flexible enough to play with some science or to needlessly go over the Top with tac abilities.
Add a 5/2/3 console setup and voila. A tanking oriented cruiser (up to 8! possible Eng powers) with a bite and flexibility.
IT would still be less nimble than the excelsior, less science oriented than the Ambassador, and less powerfull in Firepower than the Sovereign or Excelsior. But with the Flexibility to adapt to the roles it needs to fullfill.
This is the 1557th post in this threat. Cryptic please listen to us. Please show some love for the Galaxy - we love it, well pay for it, come on, wich threat has more than 1500 posts and nearly 50000 views.
Give us some heads up please
So flying a star cruiser isn't an option?
I'm pretty sure that in my own testing of the two ships (which is you know a couple years worth of comparing them on test server), the Galaxy Retrofit does tank as well or slightly better than a Star Cruiser.
So I don't know what it is you're looking for out of the ship.
Ah, that's easy to explain. The ship in my sig is a ship I fully realize will never exist in this game. Ever. It's not relevant to this thread at all. And trying to draw attention to it is veering off topic. But, to reiterate the ship in my sig? Pure fantasy that I know will never exist.
So, back to the topic at hand?
Asking for +2 to its base turn rate.
Asking for added tactical console slots.
Asking for more Tactical BOFF representation.
Hey! Guess what that turns the ship into?
Yup. An assault cruiser with a Galaxy Skin.
People throughout this thread have been asking for that. Repeatedly. It's something I don't see them doing since those ship specs already exist. Geko has already said cruisers don't sell well. So trying to cash in on another cruiser that ends up being redundant with the cruisers that already exist? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it. Tweaking ships that they've already sold? Not going to make them enough money to bother doing it.
So the solutions don't really fit Geko's design protocols. Or really offer Cryptic something they can cash in on.
I could see adding an Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin or some such silliness to a new Mirror Universe LOCKBOX. Which means you all would have to go out and chase a new ship. Which would make them money.
That's a solution I could see them doing.
But just making changes to its BOFF seating? I mean think about it. Folks keep bringing up the D'Deridex's changes. You know why those got done?
1- The ship hadn't made it live yet.
2- The ship is something you purchase and was new. So all purchases had yet to be made.
3- It's part of the Legacy of Romulus expansion that was bringing in a lot of new and old players all willing to buy something.
NONE of that applies to the Galaxy. It's been live the longest of all c-store ships. It's something you all have already purchased (and going back really far some folks with tokens never actually did purchase). And is not part of a new expansion.
If you all really want to find a solution Geko would enact, come up with one that makes Cryptic money. Not just something that would make you individually happy.
Oh and a 3-pack probably isn't it either, going by what Geko's said about Fed cruiser sales. At least that's a little more productive a solution than "MOAR TACTICAL CONSOLES PLZ."
But still falls short of what I see them needing to enact change.
YESTERDAY'S ENTERPRISE LOCKBOX
Containing a whole bunch of stuff related to that episode. Like maybe the rest of the uniform that didn't come with the event stuff. And I don't know some sort of Guinan DOFF that does something silly. And a Castillo DOFF. And some other knick knacks.
AND ... two chase ships:
1- A variant on the Ambassador. So folks who don't buy the fleet version, and who missed out on the event one, can still get a version of it.
2- A BRAND SPANKING NEW TACTICAL ARMED TO THE TEETH GALAXY CLASS SHIP. Which is a representation of the alternate universe one that the Ent-D crew was in during that episode.
Viola.
You have you tactical galaxy, and it's in a format that Cryptic may actually be responsive to doing.
To all those about to say "I hate lockboxes" ... suck it up. That's what this game does now. And that's not changing.
roddenberry didn't need to articulate it or explain it, it a vision, an idea, there is nothing concrete about it.
if he has a ideal model society that work he would have give it to humanity and we woulb be better already, don't you think?.
what he said didn't have to be coherent with maslows hieracgy of need or any other for that matter, that not his role.
it an utopia, some people going to explain it to you better than i would, i have use google to translate this text who explain it very well.
that is the intend of gene, not to show a reproductible and coherent model of a perfect society.
so in a cohalition of multiple planet that count more than a trillion billion zitizen and i may forget some, you find me 2 people that are supposely drive by profit, and that your argument to said that all the others i mentioned before are also like that?
no society, utopian or not can have 100% of it population that share the exact same value, you will still find even in the most uniform one a tiny percentage like 0.1% that will do exactly the opposite.
1% of trillion billion zitizen, that make a good bunch of people, but it certainly not the majority.
yes but, like i said here
the society you describe didn't share the same criteria as gene vision.
there is slavery, second citizen categorie, search of power, profit, religious totalitarian ect....
so, like spok would said, it daes not qualify
that sound to me like a typical troll response, but, i will take the time to explain to you in detail then where the problem is.
it is not about having the same bo layout as the star cruiser, i could have said the ambassador it would have fit perfectly too.
the galaxy is a cstore ship, one should expect that these kind of ship be better than free one ( a star cruiser can be baught for what? 200000 ec in exchange with the mirror version?)
since tactical is not is orientation, the only other that is left is tanking/healing, in that aera it is outperformed by the 2 ship i mentioned, who are not cstore ship, one can be obtain by a fistfull of EC and the other one has been literaly given by doing just a mission.
what would the regent owner would said if the ship they buy was inferior ( note here, i said inferior, not equal ) to the free sovereign or to the Heavy Cruiser Retrofit?
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit
you won't find that normal, the regent didn't sell well but if this scenario have happened it would have sell almost none.
yet we are in the exact same position with the galaxy retrofit and the ambassador/star cruiser but every naysayer find that perfectly normal.
i wonder if you would have told to the regent owner that what they want is a sovereign with a regent skin?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
if you don't known how to tank better with a star cruiser than with a galaxy retrofit, i can't help you there.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
1) As soon as you said this, I got excited. If they would add the Andrew Probert Ambassador into the game as a skin, that would be VERY cool!
2) Alternatively, a flexible boff station Galaxy-class with the U.S.S. Venture nacelle phaser strips would be interesting to have as well.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Conversely, if you don't know how to tank with a galaxy retrofit, I'm not sure I can help you much. And oddly enough, you're in a very strange thread if you can't really harness that ship's ability to tank. Then again, there really hasn't been any chatter about the Star Cruiser in ages, so, I guess that's something.
I've just taken the feedback people like you have given, and put it into an idea that is far more probable to actually happen in STO. A lockbox ship.
The internet. It's very empowering.
Well mainly because "The Galaxy needs buffed!" is a lazy approach that doesn't take the big picture of STO development into account?
Then don't fly the ship?
That goes against what Cryptic's data was reported to have been. Essentially they're not getting a lot of sales from cruisers. And thus they have been working on new ships that sell better. So my idea, a Yesterday's Enterprise Lockbox, that pretty much allows you to have the better Galaxy that you desire, while working within the framework of STO's development, is a bad idea to you. Instead, you want Cryptic to go in and tinker with a ship you already bought, and buff you up for free?
That about the size of it? Cause if it is, well, I think you'll be waiting a very long time for that.
Now hold on just a sec. Who here really doesn't want to fly the Galaxy? Me? Or you?
The person that has offered feedback such as:
- The Galaxy just needs the devs to make the game less about DPS so that it's current makeup has a more satisfying role in gameplay.
- The Galaxy doesn't need to be turned into an Excelsior to work in this game.
And other assorted variations of that.
Or the person who wrote this:
"All the variants of the Galaxy suck, they sucked when they were made and they suck even more now."
Oh yeah. It's definitely me right? I'm the one who doesn't want the Galaxy playable.
it sounds like you think nearly every description of a cruiser is the assault cruiser. id rather the galaxy have a slightly unique niche of stations then be just a regent copy. the only way the turn rates getting buff is if the turn rate floor is lifted for all fed cruisers.
they got it wrong even putting the galaxy X in the game, that stupid thing should not exist, partly because they could only make the galaxy R suck by comparison. then the stupid excelsior got to be the premier tactical cruiser, and still is, when it shouldn't even be in the game. they chose it for that, over the federations largest battleship. if the excelsior was going to be in the game at all, and at end game, that eng heavy setup made a lot more sense on it then it did on the galaxy R. old ship, of marginal use, a crummy station setup is a better fit, at least it would have its turn rate.
theres still enough wiggle room left to give the galaxy R a not carbon copy regent/assault cruiser station layout. if they did my 3 pack idea, they could do it so cheap. no new ship art is needed, just some effect work. the galaxy is a popular ship, and every new player thats a fan of it all get to go through the disappointment of finding out how much the ship sucks in game.
these two paragraphs contradict each other...you get mad at him for speaking up for other people and then you do the very same thing....I'd like to see your research numbers on the number of people waiting to get a Galaxy and the people that would buy a 3 pack.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Boosted turn rate, boosting tactical consoles, and adding more tactical boffs turns it into ...
Not an assault cruiser?
Here's the Fleet AC:
Turn Rate of 7.
4 tactical consoles. 4 engineering consoles. 2 science consoles.
Lt. Commander Tactical. Ensign Tactical. Commander Engineering. Lt. Engineering. Lt. Universal.
So what exactly is the wiggle room?
Well, the 1 extra turn that one person suggested would give it a turn rate of 8. Making it more like the Excelsior. (YEAH, that's going to happen! Heh. The poster child for slow turning cruisers turned into the quickest turning cruiser in the game. Totally convinced that will happen just because this thread hits 100+ pages).
The tactical boff setup changed?
I mean, you're dealing with a fleet cruiser here. Some things you can't get around are:
Low turn rate. So between 5 and 9 if you really want to push each end of the extremes, though 6 to 8 is where it all usually sits.
8 weapons. This is offset by the turn rate.
ENGINEERING FOCUS. So you have to concede 4 engineering consoles out of 10, most likely. Especially for the Galaxy, the ship that the devs want to be the front runner for engineering focus. And you also have to carry a Commander Engineering BOFF.
There's not really a whole lot of wiggle room. And most of the variations you come up with net you something that looks like one of these ships that already exist:
- Fleet Assault Cruiser
- Fleet Excelsior
- Tactical Odyssey
So yeah, maybe I'm simplifying the discussion a bit by harping on the Assault Cruiser. It's cumbersome to type that really the ship people want already exists, be it an Odyssey, a Sovereign, or an Excelsior.
But I don't see that wiggle room you see. Not with what already is available.
Pandora's Box. There's no going back. It exists.
Fair point.
In all fairness though, you do pay for one of them and not the other.
If they are willing to revamp or redo current engineering and science skills into something useful that would allow for a far more flexible layout as tactical abilities have. I think I'd be ok with the current set-up.
Then again, this would also hinge on PvE actually requiring something more than dps to accomplish.
I can admit it. I wasn't aware of it at first but I am now.
I would like an assault cruiser in a Galaxy skin.
With the obvious, and seemingly permanent, slant towards dps I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that a ship that comes from the C-Store to be competitive or at the very least, relevant in the game as it is currently designed.
No being a tank in PvP doesn't count.
PvP is a joke and literally non-existent.
PvE end-game is in a similar situation where you can complete an Elite STF with less than a full group of geared Escorts and come out no worse for wear and get the secondary objective.
I really am curious as to why people are so opposed to this idea.
How does it threaten your game play?
Give every other cruiser the same console layout as the Galaxy, The boff seating and the same turn rate and watch the mass extinction of cruisers from this game immediately.
Or Cryptic realise you broke away from the standard mmo trinity and left the Galaxy way way behind with that break. Hell the Nebula only has 2 tact consoles but she can out dps a Galaxy without breaking a sweat. She's supposed to be a scaled down version of her.
Um......NO. My solution is beter and more likely for it requires less work
Cryptic never broke away from standard trinity as standard trinity was never part of the game.
All they need to do to fix to the galaxy is to simply redesign engineering boffs so that 3 ensigns arent all sharing cds with each other.
I guess there are just 2 solutions to the obivous problems at hand:
1: Re arrange eng skills so one can put something usefull in that 3rd eng ens slot
2: Add universal slot. I would prefer the Lt Cmdr, as the an Ens uni slot would step on the toes of Assault and Star Cruiser (only on fleet Galaxy, cryptic needs to make a profit for a 10 sec work, right ?)
Or just let me use the Galaxy skin on the Ambassador, and I'll become a happy fleet Ambassador owner.
I would have to agree as well. The Ens Engineering boff seat is redundant on this ship. IF Cryptic were to update the Galaxy-class, turning that seat into a Universal seat would be the least they could do.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
-1tac +1 sci compared to a ac would put the galaxy about where it should be console wise.
And lt com universal plus maybe an ensign uni to fix the bo layout. it should have a hard coded sci station unlike the ac refits, eng the same as ac. drop down the tac stations compared to the ac.
It does not take much to fix the galaxy compared to other t4 t5 cruisers, but turning it into a ac is silly and not warranted.
And if they ever do fix it i would be happy to dig my retro galaxy out of drydock for a spin. Turn rate is fine as is, yea its slow but it is a slow turning ship, and the rcs booting, mining consoles will help it turn even more.
who said that i can't tank in a galaxy retrofit?
i said i can do it better in a star cruiser.
and you are right, there hasn't been any chatter about the star cruiser in ages, so that a cstore ship is less efficient than this ship definitly IS something!.
you known, i am sorry that you think that the ship in your sign is something that never happen in this game but please do not bring your defeatism and your negativity in this thread.
from what i have seen from you lately your only goal is to give this thread some false solution that will only leave this ship to a status quo.
but i known you won't listen.
this thread will go on for 40 years and cryptic will never fix the galaxy class, but we will still be here arguing about this, hehe.
maybe it's not the destination that matters. Maybe it's the journey like hary kim would said, so, see you out there
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I completely agree with the last point. The saucer separation ability is hardly worth the console slot, even with the changes Cryptic made to separation ability across the game within the last month. You lose a great deal of hull points, and your offensive improvements consist of +5 weapons power. And that's it. Sure, you turn faster, but your hull is cut in half, and you get no real advantage in terms of offensive capabilities.
That is the statement that I have been waiting to hear from you for the past 20 pages.
Bing Bing! Correct!
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
It's not just the Galaxy. It's cruisers in general. They're being phased out. You can see it if you look carefully at what the devs have done over the past two seasons. The rep systems give great additional survivability. The newer equipment adds to it. Add on the new eng consoles coming out with the dil mines, and all of a sudden you have the ability to tank just as well, if not better than even the strongest cruisers could tank before.
Cruisers are being phased out, and being replaced by destroyers and escorts. The slower survival based combat is being replaced by faster paced dakka fests.
I would agree that the old concept of the cruiser tank is gone forever, and personally I prefer it that way. But I get that more traditional tank players (sword and board fantasy types mostly) would prefer it to remain as it was, tanking in an relatively slow moving ship without having to worry about doing appreciable damage. While that style of tanking has never interested me I am very excited by what an Aux2Batt FAC can do to both tank and kill enemies.
When I see the new rep (rom beam and nukara console come to mind right away), and Dil mine gear I really see Cryptic pushing for cruisers to be more like a brawler battleships than the often seen 9.9 KM hero plinking away at enemy targets from just under max range with beam arrays. They want you to take your cruiser and dive right into masses of NPC baddies, agro everything and not die while still doing significant DPS. I already use two RCS consoles and no armor consoles on my FAC, now I will be able to replace the two RCS consoles with these new upgraded versions, making my FAC even tankier.
I guess what you say about dakka fests is true, but in my view space combat SHOULD be about doing damage to your opponent, everything else a ship can do (in battle at least) should in some way support its damage dealing capabilities. Admittedly, most non carrier sci vessels are in a pretty bad position but the new cores should help alleviate that somewhat... at least I remain optimistic, my own torpedo sci boat not being incredibly successful yet.
This new damage centric meta does leave behind a lot of the older ships but I think its a better way for things to be, rather than a forced trinity with space ships.
we can only hope that before long cruiser weapons get a buff in response. making beam arrays and single cannons fire 2 shots per cycle like DHCs, without even changing DPS, alone would make a huge difference just in effective damage. theres too many shots, and its to gradual, for them to outpace all the anti pressure power creep thats been added.
Are cruisers limited from using these consoles?
This will not change anything from where cruisers and escorts are today.
Compared to eachother before these consoles will be slotted on the ships, and in between the different ship types, not much will change.
It will probably be more or less like it has been the whole time.
Escorts, fast, hard hitting, lower survivability.
Cruisers, slow, damage over distance, high survivability.
So untill they do something with the cruisers to improve their weapon power output, or change how beams work on cruisers nothing will change how cruisers compare to escorts.