Don't bother - he's too irrational. Note how he continues to yell baseless accusations in regards to my comments, yet has completely failed to address the evidence that I gave that the Defiant wasn't the uber-ship that he thinks it was either. Granted, as dontdrunkimshoot stated, the Defiant was more consistent, but the point remains that it rarely tackled anything that was significantly larger than itself.
Neither has he bothered addressing the fact that he quoted the infamous USS Odyssey incident from 'The Jem'Hadar' - a terrible example, since firstly, the Odyssey had withstood numerous direct hits to her hull, through her ineffective shields, prior to attempting retreat (okay, she was damaged, but she was still capable of defending herself AND attempting retreat), and more importantly, there is NO trek ship that could survive the impact of another ship ramming it's deflector array.
Anyway, you can't reason with someone who simply yells at anyone who disagress with their viewpoint
This had been gone over Ad Naseum that OFFENSIVELY the Odyssey sucked too. Even after its shield power had been transferred to weapons AND with the tactical help of TWO runabouts, there was no evidence that a single Jem'Haddar ship had been destroyed. It just couldn't get the job done. But when this point is brought up, you Galaxy fanboys run to your weak mantra "It's the writer's fault". This is why that outside your little "Galaxy fanboy's self affirmation club" that no one, including Cryptic/CBS takes your "arguments" seriously.
CBS/Paramount has LONG since decreed that the Ent-E will be portrayed as a SUPERIOR successor to the Ent-D, which is why there has NEVER EVER been a Star Trek game in which the Galaxy Class Vessel came even close in firepower to the Sovereign class vessels.
Could you apply your same flawless logic to the situation with the Excelsior and the Sovereign then?
Indeed. As much as we would all like for this game to adhere to canon, there has to be a line drawn by the game developers as to how canon a game should be. They drew the line, they made the game, and they make money each day off of over 2 million players.
Cryptic has no obligation to those of us in this thread. Absolutely NO obligation, no matter how much money, or persuasive arguments, we give. It's a nice thing they do on their part if they listen to us, but in no way does Cryptic answer to a small group of dissatisfied Galaxy-class fans.
The Galaxy-class stats haven't changed in the past three years, or so I'm told (excluding changes made to all cruisers, all ships, etc.). I sincerely believe they will not change. We might as well get accustomed to the starship that will be here until this game grows old and dies.
Yep. That's it in a nutshell. Cryptic is not forcing ANYONE to play this game and they free to leave anytime, INCLUDING you Galaxy fanboys. If the thought of a JHAS being the most powerful escort/ship greatly disgusts you as a player and makes you have sleepless nights, then guess what? YOU CAN STOP PLAYNG THE GAME. It's that simple.
Could you apply your same flawless logic to the situation with the Excelsior and the Sovereign then?
I don't have to. I don't own the intellectual property rights to the entity known as "Star Trek". If I did, quite frankly, I could use or DICTATE how the IP rights could be used or portrayed ANY WAY I WOULD WANT TO, which is clearly the case with STO and Cryptic/CBS approach with this game. So, if at some point Cryptic decides that a "flying marshmallow" will now be the best "warship" in the game, then it will be, and all your references to the TNG "Tech Manual", or "phaser emitters/arrays" will be just as irrelevant then as it has been for the last three years.
What I DON"T hear you Galaxy fanboys doing is getting together and gathering enough support or will to contact CBS DIRECTLY and letting them know of your displeasure with the ship and the game mechanics. Your strategy is CLEARLY not working and you don't seem to have the will or determination to try anything else.
polaronbeam1, what's your problem with a bit bantering of Star Trek nerds discussing how a better representation of the ship at hand could look like in this game? Why do you need the feel to yell constantly? Just calm down, dude. Don't raise your blood pressure over a bit harmless bantering people have in a online games' forum over a fictional starship
I for example know that nothing will change but I still enjoy the indepth discussion of the fictional matter at hand and the ideas how it could be implemented into the frame of this game. But there's really no reason to rage as much as you do
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
polaronbeam1, what's your problem with a bit bantering of Star Trek nerds discussing how a better representation of the ship at hand could look like in this game? Why do you need the feel to yell constantly? Just calm down, dude. Don't raise your blood pressure over a bit harmless bantering people have in a online games' forum over a fictional starship
I for example know that nothing will change but I still enjoy the indepth discussion of the fictional matter at hand and the ideas how it could be implemented into the frame of this game. But there's really no reason to rage as much as you do
Rage is purely a subjective term and has been ONLY applied towards people who disagree with you Galaxy fanboys. When your fellow member have preemptively engaged in the same behaviors, NONE of you Galaxy fanboys steped in to police each other, and instead, just sat back and silent cheered them on while hypocritically crying "fowl" when those same tactics have been used against you. I didn't hear you tell the person who claimed that they had "blacklisted" me to "calm down". Why is that?
Even my use of the term "fanboy" originally came from several of you guys on this thread who had no problem with dishing the term out, but were NOT man/woman enough to take what they were dishing out. Again, if you guys won't police yourselves and be consistent with your "code of conduct", then maybe the moderators should come on this thread and establish behaviors that are applicable to ALL and not just those who disagree with you.
Well, we all know that threads that go 30 days without posting are locked.
Thank you polaronbeam1 for your selfless contribution to keep this thread expressing the Galaxy's fans concerns allive and 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!
Rage is purely a subjective term and has been ONLY applied towards people who disagree with you Galaxy fanboys. When your fellow member have preemptively engaged in the same behaviors, NONE of you Galaxy fanboys steped in to police each other, and instead, just sat back and silent cheered them on while hypocritically crying "fowl" when those same tactics have been used against you. I didn't hear you tell the person who claimed that they had "blacklisted" me to "calm down". Why is that?
Even my use of the term "fanboy" originally came from several of you guys on this thread who had no problem with dishing the term out, but were NOT man/woman enough to take what they were dishing out. Again, if you guys won't police yourselves and be consistent with your "code of conduct", then maybe the moderators should come on this thread and establish behaviors that are applicable to ALL and not just those who disagree with you.
Dude i have been defending my stance ever time so polaronbeam SHUT UP ABOUT THAT. I have been consitent from the begining. THe problem with YOU is you've made this personal.
I didn't hear you tell the person who claimed that they had "blacklisted" me to "calm down". Why is that?
I really don't know about that, I'm just here to discuss Star Trek starships If you have a problem with a certain user it's either the moderation team or the two of you to settle the matter, isn't it?
Even my use of the term "fanboy" originally came from several of you guys on this thread who had no problem with dishing the term out, but were NOT man/woman enough to take what they were dishing out. Again, if you guys won't police yourselves and be consistent with your "code of conduct", then maybe the moderators should come on this thread and establish behaviors that are applicable to ALL and not just those who disagree with you.
I'm honest here, I don't know what the matter at hand is. I don't even know what code of conduct you are referring to. I was just talking about starships in a videogame...
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Dude i have been defending my stance ever time so polaronbeam SHUT UP ABOUT THAT. I have been consitent from the begining. THe problem with YOU is you've made this personal.
As if you Galaxy fanboys haven't mad it personal, so stop with you pseudo-sanctimonious posturing. Again, you guys don't bother to refute my irrefutable points because you can't. It's clear that beyond whining that you Galaxy fanboys are basically powerless to have any real changes made to your beloved "space hotel" and are just to ashamed to admit it.
So, please vent away at me if it makes your utter failure for the last three years easier to digest. Again, it still doesn't erase your failure but maybe it can help you sleep better at night.
Well, we all know that threads that go 30 days without posting are locked.
Thank you polaronbeam1 for your selfless contribution to keep this thread expressing the Galaxy's fans concerns allive and well.
My pleasure, since it illustrates the absolute failure that your "cause" has been for the last three years. The fact that even a ship from a pleasure planet such as Risa, has better tactical stats than your "space hotel" shows what Cryptic (with CBS's permission") thinks of your "arguments".
So when this thread is at 400 pages and it STILL has NOT changed the stats for your beloved "space hotel", your failure can at least illustrate to others that simply whining without any other action(s) will get them NOWHWHERE.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I think the issue I have with this game is that Captains should have a MMO trinity slant to them but ship's shouldn't. I believe every ship should be able to be a top dps'er, top science or top engineer based on how the player equips the ship....if this was the case then no one would have an issue with this game
Now granted there should be some ships like the defiant that get a tactical advantage....because its only good for one thing...going pew pew but other than that I should be able to take the equipment off my defiant and put it on my cruiser with and be able to do the same things
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, you are half right. the tech shouldnt be shoehorned into the stupid not fit for perpose and obsolete "rpg trinity"
but then, neither should the 'captains', trying the force them into the rediculously out of place and outdated rpg trinity model is just as rediculous too.
not to say a player shouldnt be able to specialise in how they go about destroying targets, every shooter on the market has distinct playable classes.
but I think having Captains with a slant in the trinity is close to the cannon.
Kirk was very tactically minded and left the sciencey - wiency stuff to Spock
Picard is very science minded while having tactical aspects
Janeway is more science than tactical
Sisko is tactical with a slight engineer slant
so what I'd like to see happen in this game is that all the tac, sci, eng powers are unlocked for your Captain and then you pick and choose what you want on your toon.
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.
Nope, he was in an excel. for why show up to the Enterprise in an excel only to switch later. That script is incorrect.
So, you are saying that your supposition and extrapolation is correct, but a final draft of an official script, used by the people on the team who put the episode together, is incorrect?
Yeah, right. Hello.
Sorry, but just like in the thread regarding the Tier 5 Exeter , your arguments and points are based on guesswork and what little is actually shown on screen. In other words, on the aforementioned extrapolation and supposition on your part.
If an official final draft says that Hanson commanded the task force from a Galaxy, then it's (damn me for using this term) "canon". There was a Galaxy class starship at Wolf 359. Just like there was a Constitution "refit" at Wolf 359.
On another note, this shouldn't factor in any of the screen to game arguments regarding the bias of the ship toward engineering in this game (pro or con). Wolf 359 is a poor example. Many of Starfleet's best ship classes were involved in that failed operation, not just 80-100 year old designs built/refitted with modern technology. What cost Starfleet was the intimate knowledge gained from an assimilated Picard. Starfleet fleet tactics, formations, upgrades, anti-Borg countermeasures, etc. The Borg had that knowledge, adapted, and played their Picard trump card for all it was worth. The Enterprise fared better because it was necessary for the story. Thus, it's "hero ship" plot armor.
Anyway, I'm out of this thread. Circular arguments are not my cup of tea.
So, you are saying that your supposition and extrapolation is correct, but a final draft of an official script, used by the people on the team who put the episode together, is incorrect?
Yeah, right. Hello.
Sorry, but just like in the thread regarding the Tier 5 Exeter , your arguments and points are based on guesswork and what little is actually shown on screen. In other words, on the aforementioned extrapolation and supposition on your part.
If an official final draft says that Hanson commanded the task force from a Galaxy, then it's (damn me for using this term) "canon". There was a Galaxy class starship at Wolf 359. Just like there was a Constitution "refit" at Wolf 359.
On another note, this shouldn't factor in any of the screen to game arguments regarding the bias of the ship toward engineering in this game (pro or con). Wolf 359 is a poor example. Many of Starfleet's best ship classes were involved in that failed operation, not just 80-100 year old designs built/refitted with modern technology. What cost Starfleet was the intimate knowledge gained from an assimilated Picard. Starfleet fleet tactics, formations, upgrades, anti-Borg countermeasures, etc. The Borg had that knowledge, adapted, and played their Picard trump card for all it was worth. The Enterprise fared better because it was necessary for the story. Thus, it's "hero ship" plot armor.
Anyway, I'm out of this thread. Circular arguments are not my cup of tea.
Then why did Hanson show up to the Enterprise on an EXCELSIOR? Note the battle bridge for a gal is the TMP bridge redressed so it stood in for many ships and also note the Hanson bridge did not look like E-D's Battle Bridge in that episode.
Also we must consider the layout of Starfleet at the time AND the fact they had only a few days but assemble a fleet. what's going to be close to Earth? the older designs. so I saw 60-40 layout of older ships and new.
Wow 174 pages of debate on whether to redo or keep the Galaxy Class a gimped brick. If Cryptic don't see the potential in making a vast sum of money out of changing the Galaxy class on this thread alone they need a dam good glove slap.
No other ship in the game raises such debate and feeling about being presented wrong than this ship.
Cryptic give the Galaxy class piloits what they want, the demand is there and god knows the potential to make money is there. Do it so this game can be financed for further years to come
Wow 174 pages of debate on whether to redo or keep the Galaxy Class a gimped brick. If Cryptic don't see the potential in making a vast sum of money out of changing the Galaxy class on this thread alone they need a dam good glove slap.
No other ship in the game raises such debate and feeling about being presented wrong than this ship.
Cryptic give the Galaxy class piloits what they want, the demand is there and god knows the potential to make money is there. Do it so this game can be financed for further years to come
no mater how badly this fact chaps polaronbeams TRIBBLE, this is simply a fact. there is not some fringe movement that wants a none suck galaxy class.
all the information about if from canon and tech manuals is just gravy. the way he attacks that stuff, you would think that the galaxy is the only ship that has to pass some canon power litmus test before it can be good in game too.
no mater how badly this fact chaps polaronbeams TRIBBLE, this is simply a fact. there is not some fringe movement that wants a none suck galaxy class.
all the information about if from canon and tech manuals is just gravy. the way he attacks that stuff, you would think that the galaxy is the only ship that has to pass some canon power litmus test before it can be good in game too.
Hugs and kisses for you to.
X
Also i'm not looking for the Galaxy to be the uber king cruiser in this game. What i'm asking for is for the Galaxy to be put in its rightful place within the Federation cruiser line, specifically the ships we have seen on screen. Cryptic can do and place their own designs wherever they want as there's no TV/Book/Movie or other media reference to those ships so if Cryptic say a Star Cruiser is more powerful than a Galaxy i'll except it.
I cannot accept a Ambassador, Excelsior, Fleet Cheyenne being more powerful than the Galaxy given what we have seen on screen.
Now it is difficult due to lack of TV/Movie footage to get a decent idea of a ships combat capabilities. Only Voyager and the Defiant have decent footage thanks to CGI.
However summing up the cannon ships shown during TNG-VOY and this is cruisers in this game only
Galaxy - Her capabilities were very inconsistent, Capable of disabling a Galor with one shot, to destroying a huge chunk of a Borg cubes hull before adaption. To being unable to scratch a bop's shields in Generations. In fact excuse the reference here, but she is the Martian Manhunter of Star Fleet. Talked up as a power house and used as a benchmark to show how powerful and threatening a new enemy is and takes the dive to show how badass this new threat is. (In way am i saying MMH is not a DC powerhouse i have a toon in game designed to look like him)
Sovereign - Show capable of destroying a unshielded Borg Sphere with a Quantum Torpedo salvo. Able to disable a Sona battleship one on one. Took a lot of punishment during Nemesis and spat torps out for fun and a high rate of phaser fire. Although we know Shinzon was trying to disable her not destroy her so this can't be set as a benchmark for her tanking ability.
Ambassador - Seen only during TNG and not in combat. Know to be capable of fighting 3 Romulan warbirds for a short while before being overwhelmed hinting at a high shield grid and tough hull. BOBW Clip from Emissary doesn't show us anything else
Excelsior - During her TNG run was a oversized ferry for Admirals and Diplomats. During the Dominion war appeared to be used as cannon fodder. Lakota refit appeared capable of fighting the Defiant to a standstill but were both really trying to destroy the other ?.
Cheyenne - Only seen as a burnt out husk in the BOBW graveyard scene. Combat capabilities unknown as a active vessel was never shown on screen.
So my view is the Galaxy does need a refit only to place her within her rightful place within the cannon Federation cruiser line
The only problem is that there are 174 pages, but it's mostly the same people posting. Therefore size doesn't necessarily matter here.
and not all of it has been in support of fixing the Galaxy...quite a few pages were dedicated to the 'D' vs 'E' debate
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.
As if you Galaxy fanboys haven't mad it personal, so stop with you pseudo-sanctimonious posturing. Again, you guys don't bother to refute my irrefutable points because you can't. It's clear that beyond whining that you Galaxy fanboys are basically powerless to have any real changes made to your beloved "space hotel" and are just to ashamed to admit it.
So, please vent away at me if it makes your utter failure for the last three years easier to digest. Again, it still doesn't erase your failure but maybe it can help you sleep better at night.
It's not that they "failed". They just haven't been heard by the Devs; or the Devs don't care about the opinions of a few select people. Which is perfectly within their rights as the designers of this successful video game.
Wow 174 pages of debate on whether to redo or keep the Galaxy Class a gimped brick. If Cryptic don't see the potential in making a vast sum of money out of changing the Galaxy class on this thread alone they need a dam good glove slap.
No other ship in the game raises such debate and feeling about being presented wrong than this ship.
Cryptic give the Galaxy class piloits what they want, the demand is there and god knows the potential to make money is there. Do it so this game can be financed for further years to come
Hypothetical scenario. Say the Devs actually care about changing the ship. They publicly apologize for the ship we have had for the past 3 years, and vow to change it.
The Devs decide to swap the Ambassador and Galaxy. Ambassador owners now have the ship stats of the Galaxy. Galaxy owners now have their ships with the stats of the Ambassador.
Imagine how disappointed, enraged, furious the Ambassador and Fleet Ambassador owners would be. Their ship has effectively been hit by the hardest ship nerf in the history of this game! Their ships now have TRIBBLE turn rates, bad BOFF seating, etc., and it even doesn't have any special console to go with it, to at least try and make up for the shortcomings of the nerfed Ambassador. Complaints issue forth on this forum and to Customer Service about how their ship, which some have paid real money for (FSMs via C-Store), has been sharply decreased in effectiveness.
This is precisely why Cryptic's Devs can't just say "Well let's just swap the ship looks/stats!", because no matter what change they make, it affects a great deal of customers in their game. And they can't change the current Galaxy layout, because they need something to fill that setup, just like the Defiant and Intrepid have virtually the same type of layout (Cmdr/LtCmdr/Ens X | Lt Y | Lt Z), just in a different form.
I just wanted to put that hypothetical scenario out there, as any change that the Devs make affects a great deal of players. Be careful what you wish for; you may find a lot of hate coming your way from a group of people negatively affected by a change you requested.
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!
Comments
This had been gone over Ad Naseum that OFFENSIVELY the Odyssey sucked too. Even after its shield power had been transferred to weapons AND with the tactical help of TWO runabouts, there was no evidence that a single Jem'Haddar ship had been destroyed. It just couldn't get the job done. But when this point is brought up, you Galaxy fanboys run to your weak mantra "It's the writer's fault". This is why that outside your little "Galaxy fanboy's self affirmation club" that no one, including Cryptic/CBS takes your "arguments" seriously.
Could you apply your same flawless logic to the situation with the Excelsior and the Sovereign then?
Yep. That's it in a nutshell. Cryptic is not forcing ANYONE to play this game and they free to leave anytime, INCLUDING you Galaxy fanboys. If the thought of a JHAS being the most powerful escort/ship greatly disgusts you as a player and makes you have sleepless nights, then guess what? YOU CAN STOP PLAYNG THE GAME. It's that simple.
I don't have to. I don't own the intellectual property rights to the entity known as "Star Trek". If I did, quite frankly, I could use or DICTATE how the IP rights could be used or portrayed ANY WAY I WOULD WANT TO, which is clearly the case with STO and Cryptic/CBS approach with this game. So, if at some point Cryptic decides that a "flying marshmallow" will now be the best "warship" in the game, then it will be, and all your references to the TNG "Tech Manual", or "phaser emitters/arrays" will be just as irrelevant then as it has been for the last three years.
What I DON"T hear you Galaxy fanboys doing is getting together and gathering enough support or will to contact CBS DIRECTLY and letting them know of your displeasure with the ship and the game mechanics. Your strategy is CLEARLY not working and you don't seem to have the will or determination to try anything else.
I for example know that nothing will change but I still enjoy the indepth discussion of the fictional matter at hand and the ideas how it could be implemented into the frame of this game. But there's really no reason to rage as much as you do
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Rage is purely a subjective term and has been ONLY applied towards people who disagree with you Galaxy fanboys. When your fellow member have preemptively engaged in the same behaviors, NONE of you Galaxy fanboys steped in to police each other, and instead, just sat back and silent cheered them on while hypocritically crying "fowl" when those same tactics have been used against you. I didn't hear you tell the person who claimed that they had "blacklisted" me to "calm down". Why is that?
Even my use of the term "fanboy" originally came from several of you guys on this thread who had no problem with dishing the term out, but were NOT man/woman enough to take what they were dishing out. Again, if you guys won't police yourselves and be consistent with your "code of conduct", then maybe the moderators should come on this thread and establish behaviors that are applicable to ALL and not just those who disagree with you.
Thank you polaronbeam1 for your selfless contribution to keep this thread expressing the Galaxy's fans concerns allive and well.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Dude i have been defending my stance ever time so polaronbeam SHUT UP ABOUT THAT. I have been consitent from the begining. THe problem with YOU is you've made this personal.
I really don't know about that, I'm just here to discuss Star Trek starships
I'm honest here, I don't know what the matter at hand is. I don't even know what code of conduct you are referring to. I was just talking about starships in a videogame...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
As if you Galaxy fanboys haven't mad it personal, so stop with you pseudo-sanctimonious posturing. Again, you guys don't bother to refute my irrefutable points because you can't. It's clear that beyond whining that you Galaxy fanboys are basically powerless to have any real changes made to your beloved "space hotel" and are just to ashamed to admit it.
So, please vent away at me if it makes your utter failure for the last three years easier to digest. Again, it still doesn't erase your failure but maybe it can help you sleep better at night.
My pleasure, since it illustrates the absolute failure that your "cause" has been for the last three years. The fact that even a ship from a pleasure planet such as Risa, has better tactical stats than your "space hotel" shows what Cryptic (with CBS's permission") thinks of your "arguments".
So when this thread is at 400 pages and it STILL has NOT changed the stats for your beloved "space hotel", your failure can at least illustrate to others that simply whining without any other action(s) will get them NOWHWHERE.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Now granted there should be some ships like the defiant that get a tactical advantage....because its only good for one thing...going pew pew but other than that I should be able to take the equipment off my defiant and put it on my cruiser with and be able to do the same things
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.
but I think having Captains with a slant in the trinity is close to the cannon.
Kirk was very tactically minded and left the sciencey - wiency stuff to Spock
Picard is very science minded while having tactical aspects
Janeway is more science than tactical
Sisko is tactical with a slight engineer slant
so what I'd like to see happen in this game is that all the tac, sci, eng powers are unlocked for your Captain and then you pick and choose what you want on your toon.
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.
So, you are saying that your supposition and extrapolation is correct, but a final draft of an official script, used by the people on the team who put the episode together, is incorrect?
Yeah, right. Hello.
Sorry, but just like in the thread regarding the Tier 5 Exeter , your arguments and points are based on guesswork and what little is actually shown on screen. In other words, on the aforementioned extrapolation and supposition on your part.
If an official final draft says that Hanson commanded the task force from a Galaxy, then it's (damn me for using this term) "canon". There was a Galaxy class starship at Wolf 359. Just like there was a Constitution "refit" at Wolf 359.
On another note, this shouldn't factor in any of the screen to game arguments regarding the bias of the ship toward engineering in this game (pro or con). Wolf 359 is a poor example. Many of Starfleet's best ship classes were involved in that failed operation, not just 80-100 year old designs built/refitted with modern technology. What cost Starfleet was the intimate knowledge gained from an assimilated Picard. Starfleet fleet tactics, formations, upgrades, anti-Borg countermeasures, etc. The Borg had that knowledge, adapted, and played their Picard trump card for all it was worth. The Enterprise fared better because it was necessary for the story. Thus, it's "hero ship" plot armor.
Anyway, I'm out of this thread. Circular arguments are not my cup of tea.
Then why did Hanson show up to the Enterprise on an EXCELSIOR? Note the battle bridge for a gal is the TMP bridge redressed so it stood in for many ships and also note the Hanson bridge did not look like E-D's Battle Bridge in that episode.
No other ship in the game raises such debate and feeling about being presented wrong than this ship.
Cryptic give the Galaxy class piloits what they want, the demand is there and god knows the potential to make money is there. Do it so this game can be financed for further years to come
no mater how badly this fact chaps polaronbeams TRIBBLE, this is simply a fact. there is not some fringe movement that wants a none suck galaxy class.
all the information about if from canon and tech manuals is just gravy. the way he attacks that stuff, you would think that the galaxy is the only ship that has to pass some canon power litmus test before it can be good in game too.
Hugs and kisses for you to.
X
Also i'm not looking for the Galaxy to be the uber king cruiser in this game. What i'm asking for is for the Galaxy to be put in its rightful place within the Federation cruiser line, specifically the ships we have seen on screen. Cryptic can do and place their own designs wherever they want as there's no TV/Book/Movie or other media reference to those ships so if Cryptic say a Star Cruiser is more powerful than a Galaxy i'll except it.
I cannot accept a Ambassador, Excelsior, Fleet Cheyenne being more powerful than the Galaxy given what we have seen on screen.
Now it is difficult due to lack of TV/Movie footage to get a decent idea of a ships combat capabilities. Only Voyager and the Defiant have decent footage thanks to CGI.
However summing up the cannon ships shown during TNG-VOY and this is cruisers in this game only
Galaxy - Her capabilities were very inconsistent, Capable of disabling a Galor with one shot, to destroying a huge chunk of a Borg cubes hull before adaption. To being unable to scratch a bop's shields in Generations. In fact excuse the reference here, but she is the Martian Manhunter of Star Fleet. Talked up as a power house and used as a benchmark to show how powerful and threatening a new enemy is and takes the dive to show how badass this new threat is. (In way am i saying MMH is not a DC powerhouse i have a toon in game designed to look like him)
Sovereign - Show capable of destroying a unshielded Borg Sphere with a Quantum Torpedo salvo. Able to disable a Sona battleship one on one. Took a lot of punishment during Nemesis and spat torps out for fun and a high rate of phaser fire. Although we know Shinzon was trying to disable her not destroy her so this can't be set as a benchmark for her tanking ability.
Ambassador - Seen only during TNG and not in combat. Know to be capable of fighting 3 Romulan warbirds for a short while before being overwhelmed hinting at a high shield grid and tough hull. BOBW Clip from Emissary doesn't show us anything else
Excelsior - During her TNG run was a oversized ferry for Admirals and Diplomats. During the Dominion war appeared to be used as cannon fodder. Lakota refit appeared capable of fighting the Defiant to a standstill but were both really trying to destroy the other ?.
Cheyenne - Only seen as a burnt out husk in the BOBW graveyard scene. Combat capabilities unknown as a active vessel was never shown on screen.
So my view is the Galaxy does need a refit only to place her within her rightful place within the cannon Federation cruiser line
Sovereign
Galaxy
Ambassador
Excelsior
Cheyenne
Not
Sovereign
Excelsior
Ambassador
Cheyenne
Galaxy
and not all of it has been in support of fixing the Galaxy...quite a few pages were dedicated to the 'D' vs 'E' debate
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.
It's not that they "failed". They just haven't been heard by the Devs; or the Devs don't care about the opinions of a few select people. Which is perfectly within their rights as the designers of this successful video game.
Hypothetical scenario. Say the Devs actually care about changing the ship. They publicly apologize for the ship we have had for the past 3 years, and vow to change it.
The Devs decide to swap the Ambassador and Galaxy. Ambassador owners now have the ship stats of the Galaxy. Galaxy owners now have their ships with the stats of the Ambassador.
Imagine how disappointed, enraged, furious the Ambassador and Fleet Ambassador owners would be. Their ship has effectively been hit by the hardest ship nerf in the history of this game! Their ships now have TRIBBLE turn rates, bad BOFF seating, etc., and it even doesn't have any special console to go with it, to at least try and make up for the shortcomings of the nerfed Ambassador. Complaints issue forth on this forum and to Customer Service about how their ship, which some have paid real money for (FSMs via C-Store), has been sharply decreased in effectiveness.
This is precisely why Cryptic's Devs can't just say "Well let's just swap the ship looks/stats!", because no matter what change they make, it affects a great deal of customers in their game. And they can't change the current Galaxy layout, because they need something to fill that setup, just like the Defiant and Intrepid have virtually the same type of layout (Cmdr/LtCmdr/Ens X | Lt Y | Lt Z), just in a different form.
I just wanted to put that hypothetical scenario out there, as any change that the Devs make affects a great deal of players. Be careful what you wish for; you may find a lot of hate coming your way from a group of people negatively affected by a change you requested.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!