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.
That's not the point. The point is that even with these consoles, due to how extreme the diminishing returns are on eng consoles, it won't make much of a difference at all to cruisers in general. At most they will gain maybe 5% additional tank. But if you put these new consoles on ships with fewer eng slots, they will gain a huge bonus. I took a look at the elite fleet consoles, and I determined after a lot of math and headaches that your average cruiser with it's 4 eng consoles will at most gain 3% additional resistances with 4 of these new updated consoles. However, you put these same consoles on a ship with only 2 or 3 slots, you gain a good 8-11% bonus over what you had before. That's huge.
It will change things up drastically. Bleedthrough (one of the main weapons that eng-cruisers had before with DEM3) will suddenly be not as much of an issue, if at all with those boosts. Add in rep passives, and you suddenly get ships that don't have to worry about anything until their shields drop (and when they fix superior shield regen, if they bother at all, that won't even matter).
The whole point is that like what I and skyranger said. Older ships are getting phased out (namely cruisers, but older escorts (aquarius, sabre) and sci ships (nova, trident) are also getting shafted). And based off of what I've seen, cruisers in general are soon to be relegated to show-pieces only, with mostly RPers and stubborn people flying them.
These new consoles may look like they're good for cruisers, especially the ones with turn bonuses, but look at the flip side. They will benefit cruisers slightly, and at the same time, benefit non-cruisers MASSIVELY.
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.
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.
I completely agree with this point. They fire too many shots, which drains the weapons tank far too quickly. Especially in the case of broadsiding cruisers, where most people slot 6 beams and expect to do a lot of drawn out damage.
Beam weapons in the shows have consistently been seen to be firing either a steady, high-damage beam, or two beams in rapid succession.
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!
At most they will gain maybe 5% additional tank. But if you put these new consoles on ships with fewer eng slots, they will gain a huge bonus. I took a look at the elite fleet consoles, and I determined after a lot of math and headaches that your average cruiser with it's 4 eng consoles will at most gain 3% additional resistances with 4 of these new updated consoles. However, you put these same consoles on a ship with only 2 or 3 slots, you gain a good 8-11% bonus over what you had before. That's huge.
Yes, that is much for a ship that doesn't have the same built in shield and hull bonus as cruisers already have.
And because of that, i dont think there will be much of a difference really, because a lower percentage on large number will still give more than a high percentage on a lower number.
Or in this case, it will be rather equal...
It will change things up drastically. Bleedthrough (one of the main weapons that eng-cruisers had before with DEM3) will suddenly be not as much of an issue, if at all with those boosts. Add in rep passives, and you suddenly get ships that don't have to worry about anything until their shields drop (and when they fix superior shield regen, if they bother at all, that won't even matter).
There are reps that are good for cruisers aswell, and consoles that will help them alot, like the Nukara Particle Converter.
I doubt that the bleedtrough just will disapear or have no affect after these reps.
The whole point is that like what I and skyranger said. Older ships are getting phased out (namely cruisers, but older escorts (aquarius, sabre) and sci ships (nova, trident) are also getting shafted). And based off of what I've seen, cruisers in general are soon to be relegated to show-pieces only, with mostly RPers and stubborn people flying them.
Yeah, that is probably what is happening.
Too bad though, cruisers are also fun to fly, in a different way.
I guess, there are those who dont like them however, and wish them gone.
I wouldn't worry too much about the new reps and consoles that this will be a cruiser killing blow.
This is something that has been discussed for a very long time, but they are still out there, people are flying them, and apparantly having fun doing so.
The few cruisers that can take down my escort 1on1 will still probably be able to do so after these reps and consoles.
These new consoles may look like they're good for cruisers, especially the ones with turn bonuses, but look at the flip side. They will benefit cruisers slightly, and at the same time, benefit non-cruisers MASSIVELY.
It sounds like you're using more than one armor console on a ship?
I realize I may have a turn rate fetish but none of my ships even have an armor console at all, its all RCS. Maybe i'm just forgetting and I have a single armor console on my FAC, but even then its a big maybe and I would never use more than one. With all the universal consoles that a ship REALLY wants to slot I just don't see how more than one armor console can be fit into ta ship.
Its like you say, diminishing returns hit armor consoles so you are discouraged from using more than 1 or maybe even 2. Its pretty clear ships with more than 2 eng console slots are better off using those slots for universal consoles or RCS. From where I stand my overuse of RCS will now net me a nice amount of resistances.
I know that RCS on cruisers was considered inefficient by most, but my ships were already tanky enough, so why use up valuable console slots with more armor consoles? Far more fun (and DPS effective) to fly a ship with decent turning and be where I want to be in a timely manner.... besides, the more you turn, the more you can keep moving without stopping or slowing down, the higher your bonus defense.
mining consoles allow you tank with your turn rate increase now.
romulan beam array no drain cruiser help.
to my eye it seems they are trying to do little things to make cruisers more viable.
the game is already escorts online, not much more they can do to marginalize cruisers, so the whole they are dead jim thing is overblow in light of recent moves.
and still the problems with the galaxy itself is the simple fact that every other t4 cruiser in game is better than it. its sister ship on the klink side had a uni slot and the galaxy does not, and the ded lest gets a cloak with its ineria and turn rate.
No it does not you can balance the galaxy now by just looking it how it fairs vs all the other "worthless" cruisers in game that are all better than the galaxy at their percieved roles.
Its not even balanced vs other cruisers, nevermind balancing the whole class of cruisers vs the whole of escorts online, speed tanking ftw, power creep we got now.
only get one romulan beam, and outside its set bonus power, its as gimped as any other tickle stick beam.
cruisers suck because .....
No. To many cruisers will always seem to suck because they do not want to bother with proven builds that do NOT in fact, suck.
Sometimes I don't have a clue as to what some cruiser pilots want. Get an Aux2Batt build and your damage improves, while still being able to tank better than any escort. Think I'm wrong? How does having RSP practically on CD sound to you?
Yes, some of the older ship designs are not as good as newer models. The design meta has changed. Back then the model was for people to hang on to ships for months or years without changing and for money to come from a sub. These days that's no longer the case.
It personally irks me that the Fleet Defiant is as weak as it is, its MY favorite ship. I understand where the Galaxy fanboys are coming from (even if I personally hate the Galaxy). But short of a boff station changing token I don't see how the older designs will ever be competitive with the current hybridization most of the more successful ships use.
To me it really sounds like you're just bitter and refuse to acknowledge how piloting cruisers has improved lately. I get being bitter, I think we all have something that we are bitter at Cryptic for, but cruiser pilots need to learn how to use what they ahve instead of assuming its an anti cruiser conspiracy.
That is the statement that I have been waiting to hear from you for the past 20 pages.
Bing Bing! Correct!
make no mistake, even if what i said could easily been seen by somes like what will actually happen, it will not stop me to continue the fight on that matter.
i am more in the sisko spirit than the one of bashir on that subject if you known what i mean.
No. To many cruisers will always seem to suck because they do not want to bother with proven builds that do NOT in fact, suck.
Sometimes I don't have a clue as to what some cruiser pilots want. Get an Aux2Batt build and your damage improves, while still being able to tank better than any escort. Think I'm wrong? How does having RSP practically on CD sound to you?
Yes, some of the older ship designs are not as good as newer models. The design meta has changed. Back then the model was for people to hang on to ships for months or years without changing and for money to come from a sub. These days that's no longer the case.
It personally irks me that the Fleet Defiant is as weak as it is, its MY favorite ship. I understand where the Galaxy fanboys are coming from (even if I personally hate the Galaxy). But short of a boff station changing token I don't see how the older designs will ever be competitive with the current hybridization most of the more successful ships use.
To me it really sounds like you're just bitter and refuse to acknowledge how piloting cruisers has improved lately. I get being bitter, I think we all have something that we are bitter at Cryptic for, but cruiser pilots need to learn how to use what they ahve instead of assuming its an anti cruiser conspiracy.
yep i agree with that, there is no cruiser conspiracy, and cruiser have been made better by all the gear, doff system and reputation.
i am able to do things with my galaxy x that i would only dream for 2 years ago...
but it the same on escort, and the change seem to favor them more than the cruiser
"proven builds" is the issue. its the simple fact you are forced into being the gimp just for taking this class of ship just because the available powers are scrappy.
Do you think escorts all get to have special customized builds? I can tell you the exact powers your average non cloaking escort will have. The reason they seem so powerful is because the NEED to use certain standard techniques or they pop like balloons. Cruisers are no different.
The real difference lies in the fact that a cruiser pilot is never forced to learn these techniques to get by because cruisers are so durable from the get go. What they instead need to learn is how to do good DPS, but since they are never forced to... they never do.
Conversely, escort pilots are forced to learn survival techniques or pop every other minute. That's one of the reasons why there is as much anger as there is, because cruiser pilots suddenly realize that the way they played is useless when faced against any opponent that provides a challenge.
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
But pretty much everything you just said is that you want it to be another ship. Why have two ships that are essentially the same? If you want what the Excelsior, Ambassador etc has, they are there for you to have. Doesn't making a "me too" ship out of the Galaxy serve to remove any uniqueness from it?
But pretty much everything you just said is that you want it to be another ship. Why have two ships that are essentially the same? If you want what the Excelsior, Ambassador etc has, they are there for you to have. Doesn't making a "me too" ship out of the Galaxy serve to remove any uniqueness from it?
An argument can certainly be made out of making the Amby, Galaxy, and even a theoretical Fleet Exeter all skins for the AC line of ships.
It'd make everyone happier and it would serve to make up for the design meta moving away from what was planned back in pre launch and even pre F2p. Just make it so that to get the extra skins you have to own the retrofit version of the ship whose skin you wanted to have on your AC. ANd just like that, problem solved.
An argument can certainly be made out of making the Amby, Galaxy, and even a theoretical Fleet Exeter all skins for the AC line of ships.
It'd make everyone happier and it would serve to make up for the design meta moving away from what was planned back in pre launch and even pre F2p. Just make it so that to get the extra skins you have to own the retrofit version of the ship whose skin you wanted to have on your AC. ANd just like that, problem solved.
Useless uniqueness is useless.
The answer to all Cruiser captain prayers:
Fleet Tor'kaht Battlecruiser.
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.
If only the Galaxy-X was like a KDF battlecruiser!
Its the ONE way I like the Galaxy, but alas.....
Well like you spent how much time telling me, if you don't like the way your cruiser flies, switch to a KDF Battlecruiser. You have damage. You have tank. You have maneuverability (seriously, at 25 engine power my Tor'kaht has something insane like a 24 degree turn rate), and you have healing/survivability.
AND you have Orion BOffs. All that's missing is the smoothie machine.
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.
ttx2 / atXx2 / cannon spam x2 / power of choice
doesnt change that such is stupid.
doesnt change that dakka fits the game better since dead **** cant keep shooting you.
doesnt change that there are FAR fewer content competitive options from the engie boff powers pool which does in fact, make the invented out of the darkest part of some well worn plumb-smugglers 'escort class' more survivable than a cruiser. at least until the current season where there was at least some redress.
simple thing i learned real quick in this game, 2 epts, he2 & tss1 is all the healing you need on an escort against anything except getting jumped by another escort, and will keep you alive much better against pve content since you can actually get out of the way where a cruiser is too much a lame gimped duck.
this is so patently obvious, that anyone getting the galaxy rather than the defiant, is either a blatant tryhard or just not paying attention to how the game works first few levels.
Funny, but having run all three vessel classifications in PvE, I've had equal success with all of them. Even with the often maligned Galaxy class.
And I don't just hang around the fringes. I'm there in the fight, shooting bad guys and supporting my team mates in a PvE instance. I have no problem doing both.
I look at the controversy surrounding the Galaxy/Exploration Cruisers in the context of the hated grind in this game. And the consensus on cruisers in general.
Even if "tanking" is obsolete and engineer skills are not as potent in space venues, cruisers (in general) can still get the job done. That includes the Exploration Cruiser.
The problem is, that without expensive, top-of-the-line weapons and equipment, and not approaching this game like a science instead of a past time (numbers crunching versus pure fun),cruisers don't kill as fast as escorts. They are geared for longer fights (hence the inherent survivability aspect of cruisers). And when players have limited time or patience, they tend to want to get through matches as fast as possible when tackling the sometimes ridiculous amounts of grind in Star Trek Online. Escorts allow for that, with their bias toward high DPS.
Turning cruisers into cannon packing, over sized escorts isn't the solution. Increasing turn ratings and console changes are not absolutely necessary. The real solution is to quit treating the game like work or a numbers crunching exercise and HAVE FUN. Not to mention, thinking you have to have the best gear in the shortest amount of time while in pursuit of the grind.
Just my thoughts and opinions. Others will differ.
Turning cruisers into cannon packing, over sized escorts isn't the solution. Increasing turn ratings and console changes are not absolutely necessary. The real solution is to quit treating the game like work or a numbers crunching exercise and HAVE FUN. Not to mention, thinking you have to have the best gear in the shortest amount of time while in pursuit of the grind.
Probably the most logical and sensible advice ever given in this entire thread. Also the least likely to be followed. Am I the only one that finds that to be funny?
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.
Well like you spent how much time telling me, if you don't like the way your cruiser flies, switch to a KDF Battlecruiser. You have damage. You have tank. You have maneuverability (seriously, at 25 engine power my Tor'kaht has something insane like a 24 degree turn rate), and you have healing/survivability.
AND you have Orion BOffs. All that's missing is the smoothie machine.
I would have given the KDF ships a try, but ultimately, I did get a fed cruiser build I liked. Also, my escort already kills things directly in front of it, I like using my fed engi cruiser to wade into masses of baddie NPCs and throw lots of FAW around and make a big mess of things.
However, I get the feeling a LOT of players do want to have a big ship with forward firing weapons, for the, the KDF is really the only way to go.
I agree cruisers are not killers, quick killers at least, what is sad is STO is made to be a game about killing ships and grinding gear. Why not be able to disable or immobilize for the win? Why do we have to cut a ship in half in every stinking battle and pvp. there should be multiple ways to win, but it might be too early in gaming to have such multidimensional game play.
Instead of adding depth to the game in diversity, length is added in grinds of rep and fleet holdings requiring the same missions to be replayed over and again. The Atmospheric mission is nice, but every time i switch to my shuttle, it messes up my tray and stations on my primary ship.
PvE Jem'Hadar motto:Participation Ribbonsare life.
The Tork is a cruiser in name only. In layout, it's really just an overly fat escort. The only real difference between it and an escort is a swap of the LtC and Cdr slots. It has been so Escort-ified that you can't really run cruiser builds on it.
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.
In fairness, while I love the cruiser designs, what need does Starfleet have for them?
For the war with the Klingons/Borg/ and every other mother in the galaxy, we have the Escorts; the Defiants and the AKiras.
For the mission of exploration, we have the science vessels like the Olympic and Intrepid Classes (and if you want to go big, you can use the Vesta).
For support ships, you have the Armitage and Caitian carriers.
There simply isn't a need for big sitting ducks any more, it's the same in really world navies; for example, the US Navy has no battleships, and has only 10 Aircraft carriers. In contrast, they have 72 submarines, 62 destroyers and 22 cruisers.
The nature of war has changed, it's not about showing off any more, it's about who can dish out the most damage. To quote Lieutenant Hopper from Battleship, "battleships are designed to take hits, kinda like a floating punching bag, whereas destroyers are just AWESOME!!!"
Fleet Admiral Robert Leece
USS Silverburn NX-150996-B
Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit [T5-U]
The real solution is to quit treating the game like work or a numbers crunching exercise and HAVE FUN. Not to mention, thinking you have to have the best gear in the shortest amount of time while in pursuit of the grind.
Just my thoughts and opinions. Others will differ.
I agree. We're here to have fun, not turn the game into a needy obsession and replacement for our real lives.
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!
In fairness, while I love the cruiser designs, what need does Starfleet have for them?
For the war with the Klingons/Borg/ and every other mother in the galaxy, we have the Escorts; the Defiants and the AKiras.
For the mission of exploration, we have the science vessels like the Olympic and Intrepid Classes (and if you want to go big, you can use the Vesta).
For support ships, you have the Armitage and Caitian carriers.
There simply isn't a need for big sitting ducks any more, it's the same in really world navies; for example, the US Navy has no battleships, and has only 10 Aircraft carriers. In contrast, they have 72 submarines, 62 destroyers and 22 cruisers.
The nature of war has changed, it's not about showing off any more, it's about who can dish out the most damage. To quote Lieutenant Hopper from Battleship, "battleships are designed to take hits, kinda like a floating punching bag, whereas destroyers are just AWESOME!!!"
Turning cruisers into cannon packing, over sized escorts isn't the solution. Increasing turn ratings and console changes are not absolutely necessary. The real solution is to quit treating the game like work or a numbers crunching exercise and HAVE FUN. Not to mention, thinking you have to have the best gear in the shortest amount of time while in pursuit of the grind.
Just my thoughts and opinions. Others will differ.
This attitude work well with pve however it a different story with pvp.
That an escort do more damage number in ACT than a cruiser in pve is really not a big deal and don't have much consequence.
A well build cruiser ( even a none pve focus one ) can do any pve content with relative ease.
In pvp however, if you don't pack a minimum firepower you are a threat to anyone, the problem is that this minimum is raising with eatch season, with eatch reputation.
And that force the tactical cruiser to go into dangerous build to keep up.
Tanking cruiser are not much affected, but at that point they could only be considered as the 9 weapons slot of the escort they support.
In fairness, while I love the cruiser designs, what need does Starfleet have for them?
For the war with the Klingons/Borg/ and every other mother in the galaxy, we have the Escorts; the Defiants and the AKiras.
For the mission of exploration, we have the science vessels like the Olympic and Intrepid Classes (and if you want to go big, you can use the Vesta).
For support ships, you have the Armitage and Caitian carriers.
There simply isn't a need for big sitting ducks any more, it's the same in really world navies; for example, the US Navy has no battleships, and has only 10 Aircraft carriers. In contrast, they have 72 submarines, 62 destroyers and 22 cruisers.
The nature of war has changed, it's not about showing off any more, it's about who can dish out the most damage. To quote Lieutenant Hopper from Battleship, "battleships are designed to take hits, kinda like a floating punching bag, whereas destroyers are just AWESOME!!!"
limited amount of torp storage. In an extended battle the Defiant class will be down to it's phaser in a hurry. And Cruisers are the aircraft carriers in the fleet. Originally only 3 Galaxys were operational.
Comments
That's not the point. The point is that even with these consoles, due to how extreme the diminishing returns are on eng consoles, it won't make much of a difference at all to cruisers in general. At most they will gain maybe 5% additional tank. But if you put these new consoles on ships with fewer eng slots, they will gain a huge bonus. I took a look at the elite fleet consoles, and I determined after a lot of math and headaches that your average cruiser with it's 4 eng consoles will at most gain 3% additional resistances with 4 of these new updated consoles. However, you put these same consoles on a ship with only 2 or 3 slots, you gain a good 8-11% bonus over what you had before. That's huge.
It will change things up drastically. Bleedthrough (one of the main weapons that eng-cruisers had before with DEM3) will suddenly be not as much of an issue, if at all with those boosts. Add in rep passives, and you suddenly get ships that don't have to worry about anything until their shields drop (and when they fix superior shield regen, if they bother at all, that won't even matter).
The whole point is that like what I and skyranger said. Older ships are getting phased out (namely cruisers, but older escorts (aquarius, sabre) and sci ships (nova, trident) are also getting shafted). And based off of what I've seen, cruisers in general are soon to be relegated to show-pieces only, with mostly RPers and stubborn people flying them.
These new consoles may look like they're good for cruisers, especially the ones with turn bonuses, but look at the flip side. They will benefit cruisers slightly, and at the same time, benefit non-cruisers MASSIVELY.
I completely agree with this point. They fire too many shots, which drains the weapons tank far too quickly. Especially in the case of broadsiding cruisers, where most people slot 6 beams and expect to do a lot of drawn out damage.
Beam weapons in the shows have consistently been seen to be firing either a steady, high-damage beam, or two beams in rapid succession.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Yes, that is much for a ship that doesn't have the same built in shield and hull bonus as cruisers already have.
And because of that, i dont think there will be much of a difference really, because a lower percentage on large number will still give more than a high percentage on a lower number.
Or in this case, it will be rather equal...
There are reps that are good for cruisers aswell, and consoles that will help them alot, like the Nukara Particle Converter.
I doubt that the bleedtrough just will disapear or have no affect after these reps.
Yeah, that is probably what is happening.
Too bad though, cruisers are also fun to fly, in a different way.
I guess, there are those who dont like them however, and wish them gone.
I wouldn't worry too much about the new reps and consoles that this will be a cruiser killing blow.
This is something that has been discussed for a very long time, but they are still out there, people are flying them, and apparantly having fun doing so.
The few cruisers that can take down my escort 1on1 will still probably be able to do so after these reps and consoles.
But we will see, either i am wrong or... :-)
It sounds like you're using more than one armor console on a ship?
I realize I may have a turn rate fetish but none of my ships even have an armor console at all, its all RCS. Maybe i'm just forgetting and I have a single armor console on my FAC, but even then its a big maybe and I would never use more than one. With all the universal consoles that a ship REALLY wants to slot I just don't see how more than one armor console can be fit into ta ship.
Its like you say, diminishing returns hit armor consoles so you are discouraged from using more than 1 or maybe even 2. Its pretty clear ships with more than 2 eng console slots are better off using those slots for universal consoles or RCS. From where I stand my overuse of RCS will now net me a nice amount of resistances.
I know that RCS on cruisers was considered inefficient by most, but my ships were already tanky enough, so why use up valuable console slots with more armor consoles? Far more fun (and DPS effective) to fly a ship with decent turning and be where I want to be in a timely manner.... besides, the more you turn, the more you can keep moving without stopping or slowing down, the higher your bonus defense.
rcs changes help cruisers more than escorts.
mining consoles allow you tank with your turn rate increase now.
romulan beam array no drain cruiser help.
to my eye it seems they are trying to do little things to make cruisers more viable.
the game is already escorts online, not much more they can do to marginalize cruisers, so the whole they are dead jim thing is overblow in light of recent moves.
and still the problems with the galaxy itself is the simple fact that every other t4 cruiser in game is better than it. its sister ship on the klink side had a uni slot and the galaxy does not, and the ded lest gets a cloak with its ineria and turn rate.
Its not even balanced vs other cruisers, nevermind balancing the whole class of cruisers vs the whole of escorts online, speed tanking ftw, power creep we got now.
No. To many cruisers will always seem to suck because they do not want to bother with proven builds that do NOT in fact, suck.
Sometimes I don't have a clue as to what some cruiser pilots want. Get an Aux2Batt build and your damage improves, while still being able to tank better than any escort. Think I'm wrong? How does having RSP practically on CD sound to you?
Yes, some of the older ship designs are not as good as newer models. The design meta has changed. Back then the model was for people to hang on to ships for months or years without changing and for money to come from a sub. These days that's no longer the case.
It personally irks me that the Fleet Defiant is as weak as it is, its MY favorite ship. I understand where the Galaxy fanboys are coming from (even if I personally hate the Galaxy). But short of a boff station changing token I don't see how the older designs will ever be competitive with the current hybridization most of the more successful ships use.
To me it really sounds like you're just bitter and refuse to acknowledge how piloting cruisers has improved lately. I get being bitter, I think we all have something that we are bitter at Cryptic for, but cruiser pilots need to learn how to use what they ahve instead of assuming its an anti cruiser conspiracy.
make no mistake, even if what i said could easily been seen by somes like what will actually happen, it will not stop me to continue the fight on that matter.
i am more in the sisko spirit than the one of bashir on that subject if you known what i mean.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
yep i agree with that, there is no cruiser conspiracy, and cruiser have been made better by all the gear, doff system and reputation.
i am able to do things with my galaxy x that i would only dream for 2 years ago...
but it the same on escort, and the change seem to favor them more than the cruiser
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Do you think escorts all get to have special customized builds? I can tell you the exact powers your average non cloaking escort will have. The reason they seem so powerful is because the NEED to use certain standard techniques or they pop like balloons. Cruisers are no different.
The real difference lies in the fact that a cruiser pilot is never forced to learn these techniques to get by because cruisers are so durable from the get go. What they instead need to learn is how to do good DPS, but since they are never forced to... they never do.
Conversely, escort pilots are forced to learn survival techniques or pop every other minute. That's one of the reasons why there is as much anger as there is, because cruiser pilots suddenly realize that the way they played is useless when faced against any opponent that provides a challenge.
But pretty much everything you just said is that you want it to be another ship. Why have two ships that are essentially the same? If you want what the Excelsior, Ambassador etc has, they are there for you to have. Doesn't making a "me too" ship out of the Galaxy serve to remove any uniqueness from it?
An argument can certainly be made out of making the Amby, Galaxy, and even a theoretical Fleet Exeter all skins for the AC line of ships.
It'd make everyone happier and it would serve to make up for the design meta moving away from what was planned back in pre launch and even pre F2p. Just make it so that to get the extra skins you have to own the retrofit version of the ship whose skin you wanted to have on your AC. ANd just like that, problem solved.
Useless uniqueness is useless.
The answer to all Cruiser captain prayers:
Fleet Tor'kaht Battlecruiser.
If only the Galaxy-X was like a KDF battlecruiser!
Its the ONE way I like the Galaxy, but alas.....
Well like you spent how much time telling me, if you don't like the way your cruiser flies, switch to a KDF Battlecruiser. You have damage. You have tank. You have maneuverability (seriously, at 25 engine power my Tor'kaht has something insane like a 24 degree turn rate), and you have healing/survivability.
AND you have Orion BOffs. All that's missing is the smoothie machine.
Funny, but having run all three vessel classifications in PvE, I've had equal success with all of them. Even with the often maligned Galaxy class.
And I don't just hang around the fringes. I'm there in the fight, shooting bad guys and supporting my team mates in a PvE instance. I have no problem doing both.
I look at the controversy surrounding the Galaxy/Exploration Cruisers in the context of the hated grind in this game. And the consensus on cruisers in general.
Even if "tanking" is obsolete and engineer skills are not as potent in space venues, cruisers (in general) can still get the job done. That includes the Exploration Cruiser.
The problem is, that without expensive, top-of-the-line weapons and equipment, and not approaching this game like a science instead of a past time (numbers crunching versus pure fun),cruisers don't kill as fast as escorts. They are geared for longer fights (hence the inherent survivability aspect of cruisers). And when players have limited time or patience, they tend to want to get through matches as fast as possible when tackling the sometimes ridiculous amounts of grind in Star Trek Online. Escorts allow for that, with their bias toward high DPS.
Turning cruisers into cannon packing, over sized escorts isn't the solution. Increasing turn ratings and console changes are not absolutely necessary. The real solution is to quit treating the game like work or a numbers crunching exercise and HAVE FUN. Not to mention, thinking you have to have the best gear in the shortest amount of time while in pursuit of the grind.
Just my thoughts and opinions. Others will differ.
Probably the most logical and sensible advice ever given in this entire thread. Also the least likely to be followed. Am I the only one that finds that to be funny?
I would have given the KDF ships a try, but ultimately, I did get a fed cruiser build I liked. Also, my escort already kills things directly in front of it, I like using my fed engi cruiser to wade into masses of baddie NPCs and throw lots of FAW around and make a big mess of things.
However, I get the feeling a LOT of players do want to have a big ship with forward firing weapons, for the, the KDF is really the only way to go.
Instead of adding depth to the game in diversity, length is added in grinds of rep and fleet holdings requiring the same missions to be replayed over and again. The Atmospheric mission is nice, but every time i switch to my shuttle, it messes up my tray and stations on my primary ship.
In fairness, while I love the cruiser designs, what need does Starfleet have for them?
For the war with the Klingons/Borg/ and every other mother in the galaxy, we have the Escorts; the Defiants and the AKiras.
For the mission of exploration, we have the science vessels like the Olympic and Intrepid Classes (and if you want to go big, you can use the Vesta).
For support ships, you have the Armitage and Caitian carriers.
There simply isn't a need for big sitting ducks any more, it's the same in really world navies; for example, the US Navy has no battleships, and has only 10 Aircraft carriers. In contrast, they have 72 submarines, 62 destroyers and 22 cruisers.
The nature of war has changed, it's not about showing off any more, it's about who can dish out the most damage. To quote Lieutenant Hopper from Battleship, "battleships are designed to take hits, kinda like a floating punching bag, whereas destroyers are just AWESOME!!!"
USS Silverburn NX-150996-B
Fleet Tactical Escort Retrofit [T5-U]
I agree. We're here to have fun, not turn the game into a needy obsession and replacement for our real lives.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Not all the escort are true escorts.
This attitude work well with pve however it a different story with pvp.
That an escort do more damage number in ACT than a cruiser in pve is really not a big deal and don't have much consequence.
A well build cruiser ( even a none pve focus one ) can do any pve content with relative ease.
In pvp however, if you don't pack a minimum firepower you are a threat to anyone, the problem is that this minimum is raising with eatch season, with eatch reputation.
And that force the tactical cruiser to go into dangerous build to keep up.
Tanking cruiser are not much affected, but at that point they could only be considered as the 9 weapons slot of the escort they support.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
limited amount of torp storage. In an extended battle the Defiant class will be down to it's phaser in a hurry. And Cruisers are the aircraft carriers in the fleet. Originally only 3 Galaxys were operational.