What is your beef with the Galaxy Cryptic?

stardestroyer001

I think this signature will suffice.

If you would quote this post, I will create a banner with your name on it.

(Feel free to request a colour. RGB, colour index or just plain "Red!!" will suffice.)




Remember, this isn't about a protest. It's a silent encouragement for Cryptic to take a second look at the Galaxy-class in STO.

Instructions:
Changing the signature picture:
Once I've created your own signature banner, download it to the desktop and do the following:

1. Go to the STO Forums User Control Panel.
2. Click on "Edit Signature".
3. Scroll down to the section about uploading a custom banner. Click "Browse" and look for your banner on the hard drive. Click OK.
4. Click Upload.
5. The page will refresh with the new banner. Click "Save Signature" to confirm changes. And that's it!

For those who want to have the signature picture "clickable", do this:

(URL="YOUR URL HERE")(SIGPIC)(/SIGPIC)(/URL)
Replace ( and ) with /B] and [B.

ehgato

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

I think this signature will suffice.

If you would quote this post, I will create a banner with your name on it.

(Feel free to request a colour. RGB, colour index or just plain "Red!!" will suffice.)




Remember, this isn't about a protest. It's a silent encouragement for Cryptic to take a second look at the Galaxy-class in STO.

Instructions:
Changing the signature picture:
Once I've created your own signature banner, download it to the desktop and do the following:

1. Go to the STO Forums User Control Panel.
2. Click on "Edit Signature".
3. Scroll down to the section about uploading a custom banner. Click "Browse" and look for your banner on the hard drive. Click OK.
4. Click Upload.
5. The page will refresh with the new banner. Click "Save Signature" to confirm changes. And that's it!

For those who want to have the signature picture "clickable", do this:

(URL="YOUR URL HERE")(SIGPIC)(/SIGPIC)(/URL)
Replace ( and ) with /B] and [B.

im in bro i will change mi signature for suport this

angrytarg

So the freebie wasn't the Gal but another sci ship. Hadn't thought they'd do that. But I'm very happy that they give away the Nebula, I wanted her for a long time

Still doesn't reveal cryptics plans regarding the Gal, though

alexvecci

angrytarg wrote: »

So the freebie wasn't the Gal but another sci ship. Hadn't thought they'd do that. But I'm very happy that they give away the Nebula, I wanted her for a long time

Still doesn't reveal cryptics plans regarding the Gal, though

The Nebula is still in the Galaxy's family of ships, thus it's still a step forward.

yreodred

angrytarg wrote: »

So the freebie wasn't the Gal but another sci ship. Hadn't thought they'd do that. But I'm very happy that they give away the Nebula, I wanted her for a long time

Still doesn't reveal cryptics plans regarding the Gal, though

As if they really had a plan for the GCS.

Maybe it's just me, but i get the feeling as if there where someone telling them to forgo the Galaxy Class, so they released the T5 Excelsior, the T5 Ambassador (both with a much better BOFF/console Layout) and now they release the T5 Nebula for free.
Literary every other Cruiser has a bigger potential for firepower. Not that the GCS was all about firepower, but to deny it's huge offensive power is like to make a Defiant as nimble as a Death star, lol.

I just try to understand what's going on with cryptics devs.


About the T5 Nebula,
i think they did a much better job with its BOFF/Console Layout than with the Galaxy -R.
If they just had changed the T5 Nebulas Science to engineering BOFFs and vice versa, i think the GCS would have been awesome.

It would look like this:
Tac: Lt.
Engineering: Cmdr., Ensign
Science: Lt.Cmdr.
Universal: Lt.

I think with such a BOFF Layout the GCS in STO would have been much better and first and foremost much more true to its original.

neo1nx

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

I think this signature will suffice.

If you would quote this post, I will create a banner with your name on it.

(Feel free to request a colour. RGB, colour index or just plain "Red!!" will suffice.)




Remember, this isn't about a protest. It's a silent encouragement for Cryptic to take a second look at the Galaxy-class in STO.

Instructions:
Changing the signature picture:
Once I've created your own signature banner, download it to the desktop and do the following:

1. Go to the STO Forums User Control Panel.
2. Click on "Edit Signature".
3. Scroll down to the section about uploading a custom banner. Click "Browse" and look for your banner on the hard drive. Click OK.
4. Click Upload.
5. The page will refresh with the new banner. Click "Save Signature" to confirm changes. And that's it!

For those who want to have the signature picture "clickable", do this:

(URL="YOUR URL HERE")(SIGPIC)(/SIGPIC)(/URL)
Replace ( and ) with /B] and [B.

i am in for this too, make it so:)

dontdrunkimshoot

its worth mentioning that the monbosh, or whatever, wile really ugly, is the best cruiser so far for those that want to use a cruiser for more then just healing. it might not have 42k+ hull, but in every other way its the best. it couldn't be farther removed from the galaxy R lol. i just wish it looked like a galaxy, its properly powerful like it should be. pretty close to the tac version of the galaxy in my 3 pack proposal, only with DHC use and an immensely better turn rate.

stardestroyer001

Ehgato: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerehgato_zpsc50a1ec6.png

Neo1nx: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerneo1nx_zpscc9539a4.png

Yreodred: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbanneryreodred_zpsdeb4a1f0.png

darthconnor1701

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

I think this signature will suffice.

If you would quote this post, I will create a banner with your name on it.

(Feel free to request a colour. RGB, colour index or just plain "Red!!" will suffice.)




Remember, this isn't about a protest. It's a silent encouragement for Cryptic to take a second look at the Galaxy-class in STO.

Instructions:
Changing the signature picture:
Once I've created your own signature banner, download it to the desktop and do the following:

1. Go to the STO Forums User Control Panel.
2. Click on "Edit Signature".
3. Scroll down to the section about uploading a custom banner. Click "Browse" and look for your banner on the hard drive. Click OK.
4. Click Upload.
5. The page will refresh with the new banner. Click "Save Signature" to confirm changes. And that's it!

For those who want to have the signature picture "clickable", do this:

(URL="YOUR URL HERE")(SIGPIC)(/SIGPIC)(/URL)
Replace ( and ) with /B] and [B.

Ill take one thanks for doing this. Any color will do.

micadog5

I don't know if this has already brought up, but my main complaint of the Galaxy is how the standard captain level Exploration Cruiser is the only ship I've seen that loses the proper texture when you zoom out abit too much.

Like i mean, it doesn't look too bad here
http://i.imgur.com/HbcIJR8.jpg

But then you get too far away and it just..
http://i.imgur.com/m413dFB.jpg

It becomes this windowless, ugly, broken textured thing. The impulse trails don't even match up with the engines when it gets this weird look. I wouldn't mind seeing the Galaxy skin getting a little work on it, especially the deflector and the -X's lance position, but at least get rid of this ugly texture switch.

The -R and -X don't do this, and I have no idea why this happens. I've only seen it on the Galaxy, Celestial and Envoy skins (at least on the saucers), yet to see a Venture turn.
Anyone else getting this problem, or is it just a glitch on my end?

yreodred

dontdrunkimshoot wrote: »

its worth mentioning that the monbosh, or whatever, wile really ugly, is the best cruiser so far for those that want to use a cruiser for more then just healing. it might not have 42k+ hull, but in every other way its the best. it couldn't be farther removed from the galaxy R lol. i just wish it looked like a galaxy, its properly powerful like it should be. pretty close to the tac version of the galaxy in my 3 pack proposal, only with DHC use and an immensely better turn rate.

I'm just thinking, for most players the ship itself (appearance, meaning and so on) isn't really important, so maybe the devs are thinking they do us a favour when releasing a ship with almost perfect GCS BOFF/Console layout.

I have noticed many people only flying a ship because of its BOFF Layout, no matter what ship it is. I think its a sad habit many MMO players have.
I mean most people would fly a steamy pile of **** if it had 2x Cmdr Tac stations and 5 forward DHC slots, lol.


I think all ships should be equal strong, just with different focus or different special abilities, but not classified into "roles" like tank (victim), Escort (Super OP cannon destroyer) or Science (impotent wizard) like in STO.
In my personal opinion such a "mechanic" in STO clearly favours Escorts above all other ships, while the ships like Cruisers are rated as third rate ships.

As i have already said, the GCS has drawn the short straw on so many levels, it just cannot be a coincidence IMO. Someone at Cryptic/PWE/Devs obviously dislikes the GCS and refuses and kills any attempt to improve it.
If you consider the iconic status and the importance of this ship for the history of Star Trek (its revival in the 90s and start of the TNG timeline), Cryptic has done a awful job in implementing it into their game.
In fact i have never seen ANY game where the GCS was made such a bad ship.
It's almost as if they didn't want people to fly it. Nothin about the stats and the BOFF/console Layout of this keeps someone using it, the only reason ANYONE is flying it is because it is the GCS, not because its a good ship in STO (it's not even a acceptable one).



@ Stardestroyer001: Thanks for the Sig
(you should make one for many more people )

micadog5 wrote: »

I don't know if this has already brought up, but my main complaint of the Galaxy is how the standard captain level Exploration Cruiser is the only ship I've seen that loses the proper texture when you zoom out abit too much.

Like i mean, it doesn't look too bad here
http://i.imgur.com/HbcIJR8.jpg

But then you get too far away and it just..
http://i.imgur.com/m413dFB.jpg

It becomes this windowless, ugly, broken textured thing. The impulse trails don't even match up with the engines when it gets this weird look. I wouldn't mind seeing the Galaxy skin getting a little work on it, especially the deflector and the -X's lance position, but at least get rid of this ugly texture switch.

The -R and -X don't do this, and I have no idea why this happens. I've only seen it on the Galaxy, Celestial and Envoy skins (at least on the saucers), yet to see a Venture turn.
Anyone else getting this problem, or is it just a glitch on my end?

I have problems myself, especially at the Tailor when selecting different windows, they just don't get displayed.
Color pattern also don't get displayed, and choosing a specific color is also impossible.

But for me all this is only secondarily, as long as this ship has such a lame and passive BOFF/Console Layout it wouldn't help if they would make the model itself completely perfect.



sorry for typos

talzerotwo

Well I've seen it pop up a lot in a couple of posts already. The galaxy suffers from the fact that it is too much engineering focused.

So the fix is not fixing the ships boff layout, but rather


Fixing the engineer Bo abilities.

yreodred

skollulfr wrote: »

yup. not even a joke how bad eng powers are, sci, not so bad, but ops abilities? lol past et1+epts2 or epts1+aux2s1 they are the absolute worst abilities in the game. and utterly useless.

aceton beam would be a poster child of that.
narrow arc ability for a class of ships with stunted agility meaning they cant turn to use it. and to add to that, despite having a good premise, it does no damage has no effect and had a massive cd timer attached to it.

Yeah, it's a tool to annoy people in PvP at best, but certainly NOT worth a lt.cmdr or higher slot.
For me aceton beam is a prime example of how useless most Engineering Powers are.
If it where a tactical BOFF power, would anyone seriously consider to use it?
(the sam for DEM btw.)


I see more and more threads about buffing Science powers, while i agree that science is too weak, Engineering is beyond good and evil. Compared to Science and Tactical it is just TRIBBLE to be blunt.

silverashes1

yreodred wrote: »

Yeah, it's a tool to annoy people in PvP at best, but certainly NOT worth a lt.cmdr or higher slot.
For me aceton beam is a prime example of how useless most Engineering Powers are.
If it where a tactical BOFF power, would anyone seriously consider to use it?
(the sam for DEM btw.)


I see more and more threads about buffing Science powers, while i agree that science is too weak, Engineering is beyond good and evil. Compared to Science and Tactical it is just TRIBBLE to be blunt.

i think TRIBBLE is a understatement there isnt a single effective offensive enge power in the game that cant be cleared by a low lvl tac or sci power

silverashes1

darthconnor1701 wrote: »

Ill take one thanks for doing this. Any color will do.

il take one green pls

shpoks

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

I think this signature will suffice.

If you would quote this post, I will create a banner with your name on it.

(Feel free to request a colour. RGB, colour index or just plain "Red!!" will suffice.)




Remember, this isn't about a protest. It's a silent encouragement for Cryptic to take a second look at the Galaxy-class in STO.

Instructions:
Changing the signature picture:
Once I've created your own signature banner, download it to the desktop and do the following:

1. Go to the STO Forums User Control Panel.
2. Click on "Edit Signature".
3. Scroll down to the section about uploading a custom banner. Click "Browse" and look for your banner on the hard drive. Click OK.
4. Click Upload.
5. The page will refresh with the new banner. Click "Save Signature" to confirm changes. And that's it!

For those who want to have the signature picture "clickable", do this:

(URL="YOUR URL HERE")(SIGPIC)(/SIGPIC)(/URL)
Replace ( and ) with /B] and [B.

I support anything that promotes the Galaxy in STO and her revamp and restoration to her rightfull place in the cruiser lineup. I'd like mine in any variation of GREEN if possible, please.

yreodred

All this wouldn't be a problem if STO where a singleplayer sandbox like game, so we could mod it ourselves to be much more like "real" trek.

stardestroyer001

shpoks: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannershpoks_zpsed040444.png

darthconnor1701: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerdarthconnor1701_zpsb398ba0a.png

silverashes1: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannersilverashes1_zpsc6cc9f37.png

shpoks

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

shpoks: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannershpoks_zpsed040444.png

Awesome! Thanks!
Let's hope these start raising some eyebrows at Cryptic Studios when we post on the forum.

veraticus

shpoks wrote: »

Awesome! Thanks!
Let's hope these start raising some eyebrows at Cryptic Studios when we post on the forum.

While I remain doubtful that it will.
I too hope that they will.

amosov78

talzerotwo wrote: »

Well I've seen it pop up a lot in a couple of posts already. The galaxy suffers from the fact that it is too much engineering focused.

So the fix is not fixing the ships boff layout, but rather


Fixing the engineer Bo abilities.

Pretty much, but the likelihood of us getting new or drastically altered BOFF abilities is near zero. If it can't be shoved into a lockbox, or attached to a ship you have to buy, you probably aren't going to get any new "abilities" for free.

feiqa

I was thinking on something. Can anyone check me on this?

At each tier the ships all have the same weapon slots. (C-store and lockbox compared in their categories)

Now shields. Does a base tier 5 shield give the same bonus to escorts, cruisers, and science vessels?

If so I think the issue is they forgot that escorts are tiny. A cruiser has a bigger power plant, more stations to do more things, and should carry bigger shields. If they want to give escorts more guns for their size, make cruiser shields and engine power significantly boosted as the payment for the sheer size of a cruiser. Otherwise this is having a dirigible in a dogfight.

Alternately, keep escorts exactly as they are, and increase the sheer number of weapon slots and warpcore slots on a cruiser. This gives them more of the beams they are supposed to be using and the power to actually fire them.

yreodred

feiqa wrote: »

I was thinking on something. Can anyone check me on this?

At each tier the ships all have the same weapon slots. (C-store and lockbox compared in their categories)

Now shields. Does a base tier 5 shield give the same bonus to escorts, cruisers, and science vessels?

If so I think the issue is they forgot that escorts are tiny. A cruiser has a bigger power plant, more stations to do more things, and should carry bigger shields. If they want to give escorts more guns for their size, make cruiser shields and engine power significantly boosted as the payment for the sheer size of a cruiser. Otherwise this is having a dirigible in a dogfight.

Alternately, keep escorts exactly as they are, and increase the sheer number of weapon slots and warpcore slots on a cruiser. This gives them more of the beams they are supposed to be using and the power to actually fire them.

Ships have different shield modifier, Crusiers get around 1, science a bit more and escorts less.


I think i know what point you are trying to make.

I think Cryptic missed the chance to give each type of ship a unique kind of Warp Core.
NOW, every ship gets the same bonus, no matter how big it is.

If they would have made different kind of Warp cores, like Cruiser Warp Cores, Science Warp Cores and so on, they could have given each type of ship more or less energy to use.



Sorry for typos but i am awake for 40 hours, i think i should go to sleep now.

darthconnor1701

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

shpoks: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannershpoks_zpsed040444.png

darthconnor1701: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerdarthconnor1701_zpsb398ba0a.png

silverashes1: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannersilverashes1_zpsc6cc9f37.png

Thanks for sig looks great

ehgato

Tks bro for the signature now lets put this all over the forums

neo1nx

stardestroyer001 wrote: »

Ehgato: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerehgato_zpsc50a1ec6.png

Neo1nx: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbannerneo1nx_zpscc9539a4.png

Yreodred: http://i770.photobucket.com/albums/xx345/stardestroyer001/Star%20Trek%20Online%20Photos/Banners%20and%20Posters/galaxyadvocationbanneryreodred_zpsdeb4a1f0.png

thank, i just got time to do it just now, i hope many more will come

capnshadow27

I am a huge proponent of fixing the galaxy class, while she makes a phenominal tank, i would like to have better crowd control in it. Excessive Engineering powers and all, it isnt an AWFUL ship but it could really benefit from a little flexibility.

stardestroyer001

Thanks everyone for the positive support! The more people adopt this banner, the more likely someone will notice!

capnshadow27

I would also like to get a fancy banner for the galaxy class, with my name in a nice shade of tactical red!

capnshadow27

And while i do greatly wish for this ship to have a little more flexibility, oh dear lord the fleet version can take a beating!