what the fleet dreadnought should be

neo1nx

here we go again, since it is sure now that a fleet version of the galaxy x is comming out, let me repost here my proposals for this ship in term of bo layout design for tactical cruiser:

_1lt commander tactical
_1 commander engineer
_1lt commander engineer
_1 ensign science
_1 ensign science

power level: +10w/ +5s/ +5e/ 0aux

+0.5 base turn rate, +2.5 inertia

1 more tact console slot

lance: cooldown reduce from 3min to 2min, +1acc modifier ( this should have been done since beguining )

it up to you now, gecko or other, even borticus if you feel it good:)

lianthelia

neo1nx wrote: »

here we go again, since it is sure now that a fleet version of the galaxy x is comming out, let me repost here my proposals for this ship in term of bo layout design for tactical cruiser:

_1lt commander tactical
_1 commander engineer
_1lt commander engineer
_1 ensign science
_1 ensign science

power level: +10w/ +5s/ +5e/ 0aux

+0.5 base turn rate, +2.5 inertia

1 more tact console slot

lance: cooldown reduce from 3min to 2min, +1acc modifier ( this should have been done since beguining )

it up to you now, gecko or other, even borticus if you feel it good:)

Why does the dread deserve a unique boff layout that only the tholian ships have?

blitzy4

I would say BO wise, give it the equiv of the Vesta's BO layout.

caio492

neo1nx wrote: »

here we go again, since it is sure now that a fleet version of the galaxy x is comming out, let me repost here my proposals for this ship in term of bo layout design for tactical cruise:

Not wanting to put your affirmation to the test, but, where did you saw that there`s is an fleet Gal-x comming ?

Do not get me wrong, I really want a Fleet a Gal-X , just wanted a confirmation.


thx

khayuung

Dstahl said in an interview that the Gal-X is coming in the waves of fleet ships to be released this year.

Just keep it as it is. I like having 2 EPtX skills, 1 Aux2batt, and is still able to fit in EWP, DEM, RSP, and Eng team.

Just +10% hull and shield, +1 tac console and +3 turn is enough for me.

smokeybacon90

No federation fleet ship has ever has a different boff layout to its Tier 5 counterpart, (except the upcoming Yamaguchi which has a minor lt engi -> lt uni change). Why would the Fleet Galaxy X be any different?

I predict simply a 4th tactical console, a shield modifier increase to 1.1 and hull HP increase to around 43,000. One can hope for a turn rate buff, but no fleet ship on either side has ever had such an improvement.

disposeableh3r0

smokeybacon90 wrote: »

No federation fleet ship has ever has a different boff layout to its Tier 5 counterpart, except the upcoming Yamaguchi which has a very minor ensign sci -> ensign uni change. Why would the Fleet Galaxy X be any different?

I predict simply a 4th tactical console, a shield modifier increase to 1.1 and hull HP increase to around 43,000. One can hope for a turn rate buff, but no fleet ship on either side has ever had such an improvement.

Actualy its prety common. usualy the lower tier versions tho.

The fleet patroll escort gets a universal station, and the fleet science vessel is onr of the only science vessels with a LTC tac.

Those are the only two I remember off the top of my head tho.

neo1nx

Why does the dread deserve a unique boff layout that only the tholian ships have?

i don't known what you talking about, my bo proposal is anyway near what the tolian ships have.
this is the recluse:http://www.stowiki.org/Tholian_Recluse_Carrier

as you can see he got 1 ensign tact,1 commander engineer, 1 ensign science,1 commander science, 1 lt.commander universal

this is the tholian orb weaver:http://www.stowiki.org/Tholian_Orb_Weaver

here it is 1 ensign tact,1commander engineer,1 ensign science, 1 lt.commander science,1 commander universal

so, again nothing that come close to these ship, but even if it were the case, what the problem? don't tell me that this game daesn't accept that a ship got the same bo layout that an other ship, because it is already the case.

this one for example:http://www.stowiki.org/Fleet_Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit
it the exact bo layout as the galaxy in it current state

neo1nx

Not wanting to put your affirmation to the test, but, where did you saw that there`s is an fleet Gal-x comming ?

Do not get me wrong, I really want a Fleet a Gal-X , just wanted a confirmation.


thx

let me give you joy my friend.
this is the lastest interview of priorityone with al rivera, where he clearly explain that they overcome the problem that they have with these ship to have fleet version ( gal x and gurumba )
http://priorityonepodcast.com/priority-one-episode-113-interview-with-al-rivera-part-one/

so yes, definitly a reliable source if i may said;)

neo1nx

Just keep it as it is. I like having 2 EPtX skills, 1 Aux2batt, and is still able to fit in EWP, DEM, RSP, and Eng team.

Just +10% hull and shield, +1 tac console and +3 turn is enough for me.

i would advice you to re read my post, because i fail to see where you see me remove ANY engineer bo.
i too, want to keep them, all of the engi bo in it current state, i need EWP1, AUXTOSIF3, EPTS3, and other power that can not be remove from my build without destroying it.

what i have done here, is remove 1 tact ensign, and downgrade the lt science in 2 ensign science, but in return i have a lt commander tact.
auxto batt is an engineer power, you will still be able to use it.

btw, +3 to turn rate is completely unrealistic if its done for that ship alone.
heck even my +0.5 turn rate is out of the question for them to accept i am sure.

neo1nx

No federation fleet ship has ever has a different boff layout to its Tier 5 counterpart, (except the upcoming Yamaguchi which has a minor lt engi -> lt uni change). Why would the Fleet Galaxy X be any different?

this change is not to make it better than the other.
but to correct it illogical design bo layout that indeed make it weaker than other tact cruiser.
by weaker i mean less potential sustain firepower.
since the dev would not change the bo layout of a ship that is in the cstore for more than 2 years, the release of the fleet version would give them the opportunity to correct that.

and that not a request from someone that just buy the ship 2 day ago and don't known how to handle it, heck look what i found yesterday in the stowiki
http://www.stowiki.org/Dreadnought_Cruiser

The Federation Dreadnought Cruiser features a little more hull strength compared to the other cruisers, as well as the same large amount of crew that the Star Cruiser does, allowing for excellent repair rates. However, the ship has the same bridge officer layout as the Assault Cruiser. It has the same turn rate as an Exploration Cruiser, which leads to comparatively lower maneuverability to other cruisers in its tier.

Distinguishing itself from other Federation cruisers is its ability to equip dual cannons, its Phaser Spinal Lance, and a cloaking device console. This gives it the element of surprise and ability to do large amounts of damage to a fore target, if it is within a narrow firing range. Also, due to the number of tactical consoles and bridge officer positions, it has the potential to deal significant amounts of damage over sustained periods of combat, if equipped and used correctly

until there you might think that this ship is not that bad after all, but this is what follow

While the Dreadnought Cruiser would appear to be highly suitable for a high DPS combat oriented role, it is unfortunately let down by a number of weaknesses. The ship's low turn rate makes bringing the forward 45-degree firing arc to bear very difficult, and prevents effective use of any equipped Dual Cannons, Dual Heavy Cannons, or Quad Cannons. This poor maneuverability, coupled with the 3 minute cool down time of the Phaser Spinal Lance, makes it an ineffective source of DPS. The lack of high rank bridge officer slots further exacerbates the Dreadnought Cruiser's shortcomings. However if a tactical player was to fly the Dreadnought Cruiser, using evasive maneuvers and attack pattern's: alpha, delta or omega together, the user would be able to fire Dual Cannons, Dual Heavy Cannons, or Quad Cannons and the Phaser Lance for a short remainder of time on the foe if they manage to keep the front of the ship facing the enemy.

Players should instead focus on the Dreadnought Cruiser's engineering consoles as its main asset. It is ideally suited as a tank, with good potential offensive capabilities due to its number of tactical bridge officer positions, and great defensive capabilities due to its number of engineering bridge officer positions and consoles. The Phaser Spinal Lance should only be considered a supplement to the player's equipped weapons. Also, heavy use of beam weapons with supplementary torpedo launchers is encouraged over cannons.

and there not just them, you rarely see a dreadnought cruiser in pvp, it tell a lot about it.

neo1nx

To me, in order to convert a galaxy to a dreadnought it would involve significantly improving the warp core to provide power to the lance and 3rd nacelle. Removing unnecessary science stations as this is no longer a ship whose primary mission is exploration but sector patrol/combat tactical missions

this idea is good however what you propose ( even if i will not complain if that happened;) ) is completely overpowered.
you haven't touch the bo layout and just add a ltcommander tact, without removing something, somewhere else.
furthemore a ship in this game can't have +30 to power level.
+15 to weapons and +15 to engine give you +30.
you can't have more than +20, you can have less, but not more!
unless there are some new power distribution i am not aware of.

neo1nx

i knew i was missing something

I predict simply a 4th tactical console, a shield modifier increase to 1.1 and hull HP increase to around 43,000

i can predict better, all what you said but 44000 hull hp will be it, just like the fleet version of the exploration cruiser retrofit:
http://www.stowiki.org/Fleet_Exploration_Cruiser_Retrofit

a simple copy and paste, how lame cryptic...

ho yes,cryptic, proove me that i am wrong, please

neo1nx

Overpowered!? That's what a dreadnought implies!!!!!!! How is a turn rate of 6 OP.???

As for +30, its just a number in the programing code.

a dreadnought should have a big firepower, yes, but in a game regulate by balance it should not have unexplained advantage against other ship.

what would the carrier would have then with their 5.5 turn rate then? +60? 4 commander slot bo?
the galaxy x turn rate is low, but one should not compensate with power that are not available to other ship in the game.
they are other way, and the one you propose is certainly not the one cryptic will choose, otherwise they can said goodbye to their game when thousand of people will quit the game when they realize they favor 1 type of ship.

sander233

*Yawn*

Wake me up when the saucer-sep console works on this thing.

neo1nx

Balance? They don't favor one ship type? Are you sure you PvP in STO?

hehehe, yes , sometime one can think that they favor 1 or some ship over others, but i sincerely don't think it is true, no matter how much i love to be sacastic sometimes.
achieving perfect balance is impossible, but what you propose before clearly break the rules.

lianthelia

neo1nx wrote: »

i don't known what you talking about, my bo proposal is anyway near what the tolian ships have.
this is the recluse:http://www.stowiki.org/Tholian_Recluse_Carrier

as you can see he got 1 ensign tact,1 commander engineer, 1 ensign science,1 commander science, 1 lt.commander universal

this is the tholian orb weaver:http://www.stowiki.org/Tholian_Orb_Weaver

here it is 1 ensign tact,1commander engineer,1 ensign science, 1 lt.commander science,1 commander universal

so, again nothing that come close to these ship, but even if it were the case, what the problem? don't tell me that this game daesn't accept that a ship got the same bo layout that an other ship, because it is already the case.

this one for example:http://www.stowiki.org/Fleet_Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit
it the exact bo layout as the galaxy in it current state

Hmm let me look...how many fed ships have dual lt cmdrs and ensigns...oh look that number is 0...so yes its a tholian like boff layout.

You haven't really given me a good reason why the dread deserves such a layout?

dalnar83

lianthelia wrote: »

Hmm let me look...how many fed ships have dual lt cmdrs and ensigns...oh look that number is 0...so yes its a tholian like boff layout.

You haven't really given me a good reason why the dread deserves such a layout?

Because its one of the most expensive ships, and originally it was reward for people who recruited many people to STO ?

neo1nx

Hmm let me look...how many fed ships have dual lt cmdrs and ensigns...oh look that number is 0...so yes its a tholian like boff layout.

You haven't really given me a good reason why the dread deserves such a layout?

hmm, you want me to explain why this ship deserve this change?
i am a little tired of repeating myself over and over in many thread so that why i did not explain it in this one, so i can understand your question.
so... for you, i explain.

this ship is a tactical design ship, it is meant for war, it is meant to do damage.
it have the abilitie to mount dual heavy canon, got a powerfull lance and a cloack, you don't give a ship this kind of thing if your goal is to tank or heal even if you can do some.
you do it to make damage, plain and simple.
but even if that look good on paper, in action these options are reduce to be very inefective to the least.
having only 1 lt tactical will give you just 1 rapid fire power ( the less powerfull one ) and that it, no cycle of 2 power like this, just like a simple and decent cannon build should be.
just like what the odyseey, regent, dkora, galor, exelsior can ALREADY do.
yes you can virtually have for a short period of time the equivalent of 2 rapid fire1 with the power of tact captain, but just for a short period of time, so your TRIBBLE anyway.
and cannon without buff power is just laughable.

that the idea behing the change, give this ship the abiliti to have a real cannon build, and the only effective way to have it, is to have a lt commander tact.
to have a lt commander tact without touching the engineer bo and still have 2 science bo power i have to do that kind of bo configuration.
i have proposed an other layout before, wich was 2lt tact, but that was a bad idea, it was reducing too much it survivability in science and render completely useless tactical initiative of tact captain.
a lt commander tact give acces to more variety in tactical build, either in beam or canon build, and allow this ship generate more consistent firepower, and removing the unecessary ensign tac to transfert it to science allow it to stay survivable for a short periode of time.
because playing with a 6 base turn rate with 25 inertia and canon, you definitly need a little survivabiliti in pvp.
the change i propose won't make it the beast in the cruiser world as some can fear, anyone that have try to play a tact in a 6base turn rate ship with similar design known the true, and that even harder with cannon.so still ,just like today, not everyone will be able to handle it correctly.
the problem of it current bo layout is that it daesn't known what it want, it is not set to be the potential best tank( like a star cruiser or odyssey ), and not set to be the potential best dps cruiser( like the regent or other i haven't think about), it is stuck in the middle, just like a simple assault cruiser with a cloack and lance gimmick less the turn rate.
i would like to known what cryptic opinion about the role of the galaxy x, what can he do best than an other cruiser? ( appart from the short ambush cloack role every 3 minute at best ).
it bo layout need to be redesign period.
i hope that shed some light into why i came to this kind of bo layout for this particular ship.

and if what you really mean by "You haven't really given me a good reason why the dread deserves such a layout" was, the dread or any other ship are not allowed to receive a similar bo layout distribution than the tholian ship.
i will answer you, why do you think the tolian ship have some kind of exclusivity to that parlicular bo layout distribution in the first place?
because we don't speak about the exact same bo layout here, just the same kind of distribution.

marc8219

khayuung wrote: »

+3 turn is enough for me.

Well this ship won't be enough for you as no fleet ship has ever received a turn rate boost over its regular t5 counterpart.

lianthelia

I suppose your one of the people who wants all fed ships to cloak and asked for fed carriers, because you have no consideration for uniqueness.

You just want the dread to be op...to tank as good as any other cruiser and the damage potential of any more attack oriented cruiser without losing anything in return.

Would make the Assault Cruiser inferior...the Excelsior might be okay since it has a nice turn rate for a cruiser.

buddha1369

A fleet Gal-X would be like a Bortasqu' Command Cruiser with +0.5 turn rate and needing to use a console slot to have a cloak. Dont see what the problem is.

neo1nx

lianthelia wrote: »

I suppose your one of the people who wants all fed ships to cloak and asked for fed carriers, because you have no consideration for uniqueness.

You just want the dread to be op...to tank as good as any other cruiser and the damage potential of any more attack oriented cruiser without losing anything in return.

Would make the Assault Cruiser inferior...the Excelsior might be okay since it has a nice turn rate for a cruiser.

you "suppose" wrong.
i think you speak about that thread?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=547051

well just for your information, take a look at post number 4.

in case you don't want to search i do you a copy and paste of what I wrote here:

No, no, no and no, you stop right there!
The federation should not have cloack, not because it would make them overpowered, but because in the serie, the federation don't use cloack.
The only exeption is the defiant ( cloack that is given by romulan ) and the galaxy dread from the alternate timeline.
I don't like to said this usualy but here, if you really want a cloak that bad, go to klingons side, or find a ship where you can optimize mask energy signature3, at more than 4km it is exactly like a cloack.
cbs will never allow this anyway, so stop waisting your time.

and i don't want the dread to be OP, i want it to be effective, there is a slight difference.
you can't argue with me that this ship in it current state is effective.
any serious pvper known that it isn't.

the exelsior is not going to be okay JUST because he got +2 in turnrate, otherwise the assault cruiser would do just fine since he have + 1 turnrate and 30inertia compared to the gal x ( and that for the free ship , ship we all known cryptic decided that they will be outclassed by cstore ship).
and i don't even speak about the regent, better potential dps with his commander tact, and his universal lt.

but since you seem to known better, i heard you, give me you build for that ship.
a build that is not a copy of an existing ship, a build that don't transform this one into a new breen ship.
maybe i break some kind of rule in BO repartition, i don't known, any input will be apreciate.
let hear what you non OP galaxy x would be

lianthelia

I really don't know what your talking about with the Regent, it doesn't have a commander tac.

I don't know what kind of layout I would give it, I never really thought about it before because the game already has so many cruisers that we don't need more...we have a cruiser to fit every role already.

Why does the Dread deserve any special treatment? Pretty much every single ship has kept its same stats except for the boost of shields, hull, and tenth console.

There are people who has been able to use the Dreadnought well, Hakaishin is known for it. I'm not saying the Dread shouldn't get a forth tac console and even the lance should get some type of buff...but I don't see why it should get special treatment.

admgreer

The Fleet Galaxy X:

TAC: LT CMDR
UNIVERSAL: LT CMDR
ENG: CMDR
ENG: LT CMDR
SCI: LT

Consoles:
TAC: 4
ENG:5
SCI: 1
-or-
T = 4
E = 4
S = 2

Hull 43,000
Crew 1200
Standard Shields: 6,225 (Mk X)
Base Turn: 10
Inertia rating:25
Impulse Modifier:0.25
Bonus Power: + 10 all systems
Shield Mod 1.2
Cloak
Can use cannons, Can equip point defence consoles. Cooldown on lance 2 min and increase lance damge to 12k on lance with spike upto 20k can get boosted with Phaser Tac consoles and other factors.

(My Dream would be to 1st have Photon torps buffed back into usefulness and have the 2 point def consoles consoles be able to be equiped on this ship. My role would be for a Fleet Anchor. With the PD systems and the Lance and more Hull and Shields it would be a good PV ship to use to Buff the teams Escourts and still have enough offensive abilities to keep from getting ganged up on)

nikephorus

The ship as is doesn't make sense. It can load dual heavy cannon, but doesn't have the tac stations nor the turn rate to support them. So in essence that ability is useless.

dan6526

admgreer wrote: »

The Fleet Galaxy X:

TAC: LT CMDR
UNIVERSAL: LT CMDR
ENG: CMDR
ENG: LT CMDR
SCI: LT

Consoles:
TAC: 4
ENG:5
SCI: 1
-or-
T = 4
E = 4
S = 2

Hull 43,000
Crew 1200
Standard Shields: 6,225 (Mk X)
Base Turn: 10
Inertia rating:25
Impulse Modifier:0.25
Bonus Power: + 10 all systems
Shield Mod 1.2
Cloak
Can use cannons, Can equip point defence consoles. Cooldown on lance 2 min and increase lance damge to 12k on lance with spike upto 20k can get boosted with Phaser Tac consoles and other factors.

(My Dream would be to 1st have Photon torps buffed back into usefulness and have the 2 point def consoles consoles be able to be equiped on this ship. My role would be for a Fleet Anchor. With the PD systems and the Lance and more Hull and Shields it would be a good PV ship to use to Buff the teams Escourts and still have enough offensive abilities to keep from getting ganged up on)

Do what? Thank God I wasn't drinking anything right then.

Stop asking for the moon, ask for something real:

Phaser Lance get [Acc]
Commander Engineer
Lt Cmdr Tactical
Lieutenant Engineer
Lieutenant Tactical
Ensign Science

Hull up 10%
Shield modifier 1.15
Turn 5

4 Engineering Console Slots
2 Science Console Slots
4 Tactical Console Slots

That would be a realistic request. That is not my suggestion, Cryptic can do whatever they want. But if you honestly think this ship deserves +5 Turn or +3 Turn, then accept -25% Hull (not + 10%), the same shield modifier, and more balancing affect to this ship to make it more mid-ground than cruiser.

admgreer

The layout I posted above is almost the same as the current stats except taking the turn rate from 6 to 10, all the other stats are only slightly higher that the current build. except for the console and Boff layout.