test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Feedback› Federation Discussion
Options

And the Galaxy Class gets left in the dust....

jamesdaxjamesdax Member Posts: 159 Arc User
edited February 2013 in Federation Discussion
So, the new RA level Ambassador Class has already proven to be a better ship then the VA level Galaxy Class and now the new Fleet Tier 3 Yamaguchi(Ambassador) is a better ship then the Fleet Tier 4 Galaxy. What a sad day for the Enterprise D.

In case you haven't seen them here are the specs for the new Tier 3 Fleet ship:

?Faction: Federation
?Rank Required: Vice Admiral
?Availability: Fleet Shipyard
?Hull Strength: 43,450
?Shield Modifier: 1.1
?Crew: 700
?Weapons: 4 Fore, 4 Aft
?Device Slots: 4
?Bridge Officer Stations: 1 Lieutenant Tactical, 1 Ensign Tactical, 1 Commander Engineering, 1 Lieutenant Commander Science, 1 Lieutenant Universal
?Console Modifications: 3 Tactical, 4 Engineering, 3 Science
?Base Turn Rate: 7 degrees per second
?Impulse Modifier: 0.15
?+5 to All Subsystem Power

RIP Galaxy.
Post edited by jamesdax on
«13

Comments

  • Options
    lordmalak1lordmalak1 Member Posts: 4,681 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Flushhhhhhhh

    Galaxy has been retconned into mediocrity. So much for it being the flagship of the fleet.
    :)
    The Vorcha has also been marginalized by an older design, so we all suffer equally.
    KBF Lord MalaK
    Awoken Dead
    giphy.gif

    Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
  • Options
    gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    the galaxy was a killed a wile back this is just them mutilating the remains LOL
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • Options
    khayuungkhayuung Member Posts: 1,876 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    The game killed the Galaxy.

    If this were another game, all that 5-console eng tank, bonus doffing abilities, extra power to all subsystems and high sector speeds would've had people whining that their escorts can't do what the Galaxy can.

    "Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.

    Support the "Armored Unicorn" vehicle initiative today!

    Thanks for Harajuku. Now let's get a real "Magical Girl" costume!
  • Options
    mustafatennickmustafatennick Member Posts: 868 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I have to admit I picked up the ambassador took it out and loved it

    I then though to myself it can e that much better than the galaxy

    Got my fleet galaxy out and the difference is unbelievable even though on paper it doesn't look much different that extra turn and tac console have made a free ship put a ship which I've spent 3000zen on look like a lvl30 ship

    Although the excelsior and regent still look like better ships for damage fleetlevel wise
    ----=====This is my opinion you don't have to listen and no one else has to read them these "OPINIONS" are based on my exploits and my learning other people will have their opinions and that's fine just don't knock my way of doing things thanks=====---- :cool:
  • Options
    farmallmfarmallm Member Posts: 4,630 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I still have plans on having a Refit Galaxy myself. But that is a much later purchase. Since I decided on the Excelsior first.

    Granted back in the day it was the best ship in the game. But over time, better stuff put it back. It happens to everything.
    Enterprise%20C_zpsrdrf3v8d.jpg

    USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
    Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
  • Options
    cptrichardson12cptrichardson12 Member Posts: 143 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Actually, you can bring the galaxy back from mediocracy. It turns out that the Galaxy is the perfect cruiser to pull a DBB/Hyperplasma build on, thanks to the saucer sep.
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    farmallm wrote: »
    Granted back in the day it was the best ship in the game.

    Back in what day? When the game launched, it was a T4 ship.

    When the retrofit launched, saucer sep was bugged.

    Then the excelsior came out and owned the top of the game for cruisers.

    The Galaxy has never been the best ship in the game.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    lordmalak1 wrote: »
    So much for it being the flagship of the fleet.

    The flagship? When the game launched, the Enterprise-E was the flagship, captained by Data. That was a sovereign.

    Then last year they released the new flagship, the Odyssey, with Captain Shon as captain.

    The Galaxy class cruiser hasn't been the Starfleet flagship in a long, long time.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    snoggymack22 wrote: »
    The flagship? When the game launched, the Enterprise-E was the flagship, captained by Data. That was a sovereign.

    Then last year they released the new flagship, the Odyssey, with Captain Shon as captain.

    The Galaxy class cruiser hasn't been the Starfleet flagship in a long, long time.
    The point is, it's a newer in-universe flagship than two of the most bandied-about cruisers in the game, the Odyssey is also mediocre, and the Sovereign has hardly any advantages over the Excelsior. The three classes to most recently bear the name Enterprise are overshadowed by their next two predecessors in-game even though the opposite was what happened up until 2409.

    At this rate, I think that if CBS ever changed their mind about allowing a T5 Connie, we would see nothing but Connies flying around because they'd be the best Fed-cruisers... :(
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    mandoknight89 wrote: »
    The point is, it's a newer in-universe flagship than two of the most bandied-about cruisers in the game, the Odyssey is also mediocre, and the Sovereign has hardly any advantages over the Excelsior.


    I don't understand your point since the Galaxy itself is also a much older flagship than the flagship at the game's launch and the current flagship. So what if the Odyssey is mediocre. It's the flagship. The Enterprise-F is the flagship of Starfleet. And the Enterprise D is long since crashed and burned by the Duras sisters.
    The three classes to most recently bear the name Enterprise are overshadowed by their next two predecessors in-game even though the opposite was what happened up until 2409.

    That's been a problem with this game for a long time. The development team bears the brunt of the blame for their bias towards some ships over others and their inability to stick to the ship tier system they created.
    At this rate, I think that if CBS ever changed their mind about allowing a T5 Connie, we would see nothing but Connies flying around because they'd be the best Fed-cruisers... :(

    Only till the T5 NX Ent came out and everyone would be getting their Porthos on!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    twg042370twg042370 Member Posts: 2,312 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    At this rate, I think that if CBS ever changed their mind about allowing a T5 Connie, we would see nothing but Connies flying around because they'd be the best Fed-cruisers...

    That'd be awesome.
    <3
  • Options
    mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    snoggymack22 wrote: »
    Only till the T5 NX Ent came out and everyone would be getting their Porthos on!

    And then the T5 Orbiter comes out, and everyone's rocking a Space Shuttle... :P
  • Options
    neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    mandoknight89 wrote: »
    And then the T5 Orbiter comes out, and everyone's rocking a Space Shuttle... :P

    I would like to call it out early that the Orbiter is OP, and needs a nerf
    GwaoHAD.png
  • Options
    jellico1jellico1 Member Posts: 2,719
    edited February 2013
    Fleet Excelsior 4 Tactical consoles should be 2

    Enterprise C 3 Tactical Consoles should be 3

    Fleet Galaxy 2 Tactical consoles should be 4

    Fleet Sovereign 4 Tactical consoles should be 5


    The Galaxys bridge officer Tactical stations is also laffable to go with the equally comic Tac consoles

    It is quit clear the Devs hate the next generation and the flagship of that series there is no other answer

    Common sense is not something i expect from this game anyway just look at the Bug

    Nuff said
    Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
    Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
    Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

    JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
  • Options
    misterde3misterde3 Member Posts: 4,195 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    snoggymack22 wrote: »
    That's been a problem with this game for a long time. The development team bears the brunt of the blame for their bias towards some ships over others and their inability to stick to the ship tier system they created.

    Hardly a surprise when you give interviews

    http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=4073785&postcount=1

    and say:

    but I don't really care about the Ambassador-class because it's an older ship right. I can't make a tier 5 Ambassador! Yeah we made a tier 5 Excelsior, but the Excelsior was so much cooler, so much more desired, so many more people wanted it and that's why we made a tier 3 & 5 version of it.
  • Options
    thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    jellico1 wrote: »
    Fleet Excelsior 4 Tactical consoles should be 2

    Enterprise C 3 Tactical Consoles should be 3

    Fleet Galaxy 2 Tactical consoles should be 4

    Fleet Sovereign 4 Tactical consoles should be 5


    The Galaxys bridge officer Tactical stations is also laffable to go with the equally comic Tac consoles

    It is quit clear the Devs hate the next generation and the flagship of that series there is no other answer

    Common sense is not something i expect from this game anyway just look at the Bug

    Nuff said

    I don't think any ship should have less than 3 Tac consoles... and I also think 5 tac consoles should be rare.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    erhardgrunderhardgrund Member Posts: 167 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    C`mon Cryptic,

    How hard can it be to make at least that Ensign slot Universal and to switch one Console from Science to Tactical.
    That way it is definitly not overpowered and at least gets some Value in combat.

    Personly id vote for 1 less Eng Console and 3 tac consoles and that Eng LTC should be Universal.
    Then it would raly be a flexible ship with some teeth in combat.
    Although a LT Universal slot would probably be more reasonable.

    Alot of people love the good old Galaxy Class myself included. You have 4 versions of it ingame of wich 3 require either a purchase in the Zen-store or the use of ship modules.
    I bought the retrofit and the dreadnought. We are willing to spend money for a combat capable version of the Galaxy!
    Sure in its current state (talking about the fleet version) it is not a ship worth considering for other purposes than healing and tanking. Wich would be fine and dandy if this game would reward that type of gameplay acordingly.
    It doesnt. No one knows better than you guys that turning around the game balance of an entire game over such issues is way harder and prone to cause problems than just updatig the ships to compete in the current setting.
    I have no doubt at all that all those galaxy class fans would buy a more capable version in a heartbeat.
    Cruisers ftw!
  • Options
    danquellerdanqueller Member Posts: 506 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Well, to be fair, the Galaxy class was an experiment in making extremely long-duration mission explorers that could support a good sized civilian population along with the Starfleet crew, so a good percentage of the ship was devoted towards facilities not seen on any other class of starship, before or after. Even the Odyssey class do not have these facilities, as the idea of having families aboard Starfleet ships was mostly abandoned shortly after the Galaxy class were introduced (the large size of the Odyssey is there because the wide range of mission abilities requires a large Starfleet crew). What that translates to is much of the ship is devoted to systems that simply have no tactical value and don't improve the ship's performance at all. For this reason, it makes sense the class would seem to be behind others of its level. It should be noted that this ability to support a large population for decades is still a unique feature of Galaxy class that no other Starfleet ship shares (only the Odyssey comes close, and that with greater hardship on the crews).

    What it does have is the best Engineering capabilities of any ship in Starfleet (even the Odyssey can only match it, not exceed it), and while others feel this doesn't matter, if you want your Engineer to have the best ship for his/her skills, you can't get better. Indeed, the Fleet Galaxy has the most Hull Points of any ship on the Fed side, which is interesting considering how many people cry about new construction ships built on old concepts needing to be inferior to new construction ships built on new concepts when talking about any other class.

    I think alot of the disappointment from players who want the Galaxy changed are those who only think Tactical abilities matter in this game, and so see all cruisers in terms of their DPS ability. I don't agree with this, and am quite happy that my Galaxy-R can support any team I am with the most hull repair of any ship out there (this is the role of cruisers, after all). In addition, I would note that the Galaxy-X exists for those who want a more Tactically-focused version.

    Finally, the fact is that the Galaxy class is an old design that does a job well, but it is not the 'most powerful ship in Starfleet', and players have to get out of the mindset that this is TNG Season One. The Galaxy class was surpassed in 'power' by the Sovereign class even before the movies left the time around TNG, and STO is further than that. In the current timeframe, this class has been relegated to support duties and exploration work (oddly, what the class was supposed to be doing all along), and is -not- the frontline ship. While it's true new Galaxy class ships are built and others updated on an individual basis, as a whole, Starfleet has switched its focus on Odyssey class starships, and trying to insist Galaxy class ships should surpass any other ship is like saying the Constitution II class should leave the Sovereigns in the dust.

    I'm not against a tweek to the Galaxy stats, but let's keep things in perspective here.
  • Options
    nikephorusnikephorus Member Posts: 2,744 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    sophlogimo wrote: »
    So what is it that makes the Galaxy underperform in your opinion?

    In my opinion, it is simply the lack of useful, competitive engineer boff abilities. If they fix that, everything will be fine.

    What makes it "underperform" is that it's overkill on the engineering abilities and lackluster everywhere else. STO end game content is all about how much damage you can do and the Galaxy fails miserably at doing damage. It has an Lt tac officer spot which is very limiting. Has only two tac console slots to boot damage. Now add in the fact that it has a dismal turn rate of 6 and it's basically a fail all-round. It's (imo) one of the worst cruisers in the game.
    Tza0PEl.png
  • Options
    thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I think the biggest thing holding the Galaxy back is its place in the "Captain ship Retrofit" trinity. Cryptic seems very hesitant to upset its place in that trinity, where at present it's basically an Engineering version of the other two ships (Intrepid and Defiant).

    They need to wake up and realize that preserving this trinity isn't as important as making sure the ships actually work right.

    I honestly don't know how TNG fans stick with this game. If Cryptic made the Defiant nigh-unplayable, either with nerfs or simple obsolescence, I'd probably drop the game entirely. I could not play without flying my favorite ship.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    eraserfisheraserfish Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I would favor making Saucer Separation built into the ship so as to free up the console slot, but that wouldn't really come close to making the Galaxy retrofit viable...
    sophlogimo wrote: »
    That wouldn't be a problem if abilities like Acetone Beam, Boarding Party, Emergncy Power to-anything-but-shields, and so on, were actually good for something.

    If, for example, Emergency Power To Weapons was a complete counter to Emergency Power To Shields, that wouldn't be a problem at all.

    Fix engineering boff abilities, and thus fix the Galaxy. ^^

    Even if BOFF abilities were to be improved, the Galaxy would still be outclassed by other cruisers at its tier. Galaxy is not only less flexible than other cruisers, but also made completely redundant in its intended role by the Odyssey.
  • Options
    smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    The ship is not broken, it is the game content, which demands DPS as the priority. Since the Gals trade off so much damage potential for a very strong engineering focus, they lose out immensely compared to the less specialized or tactical leaning cruisers (Excelsior, Regent, Tac Ody, Galor).

    However, since a radical overhaul of game content to allow more tank and support specialized roles to excel in PvE and PvP is quite an unlikely prospect, it would be easier to change the ships themselves, and (Cryptic's chosen option) even easier to just leave them alone and hope a proportion of players don't even notice until it is too late.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • Options
    dracounguisdracounguis Member Posts: 5,358 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    IMO, all T5 ships should have at least a LtCom Tac station. It's much more useful than an Ensign+Lt station combo since many powers don't even show up at ensign level.
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    I honestly don't know how TNG fans stick with this game. If Cryptic made the Defiant nigh-unplayable, either with nerfs or simple obsolescence, I'd probably drop the game entirely. I could not play without flying my favorite ship.

    Meh. My favorite ship is the Constitution, yet I do ok trudging on playing the game flying other stuff at T5.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    jamesdaxjamesdax Member Posts: 159 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    mattjohnsonva wrote: »
    As it stands the Fleet Galaxy with saucer sep is the best you can get and yet the C Store Ambassador trumps it, hell the RA Ambassador is a better ship in many ways.

    My suspicion is as follows:

    They are saving the Galaxy for a new ship available to LvL 60 Admirals. This will be the Enterprise G (G for Galaxy?)

    It will be similar to the Galaxy with the Venture skin with perhaps a few cosmetic tweaks.

    It will have:

    11 console slots- 4 TAC, 5 ENG, 2 SCI
    10 weapon slots
    Saucer Sep
    Spinal lance
    +15 to all subsystems
    1.2 Shield mod
    Aux to Inertial Dampners built in ability for turn rate boost
    50,000 hull (base)
    8 turn rate
    Advanced Quantum Slipstream

    Universal Commander Station
    Universal LtCmd Station
    Ensign Eng
    Lt Sci
    LtCmd Eng

    And a special console (insert your wish here)

    In addition it will have Fleet Control systems, this will enable you to operate two other ships from your own collection in much the same way carriers control pets.

    The ship will be so awesome that new 20 man Elite STFs will be created for it.

    In addition to the above, the Galaxy G will have a full ship pack like the Belfast pack only far better, new uniforms, a few pet shuttles, conference room, new ready room, the bridge will be based on a similar bridge to the last Ent-E from Nemesis but brought up to date.

    Price for all this awesomeness will be 8000 -15000 Zen and my credit card is sitting waiting.

    WOW!!!

    I want that ship. Too bad it's a fantasy. :(
  • Options
    lordmalak1lordmalak1 Member Posts: 4,681 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    snoggymack22 wrote: »
    The flagship? When the game launched, the Enterprise-E was the flagship, captained by Data. That was a sovereign.

    Then last year they released the new flagship, the Odyssey, with Captain Shon as captain.

    The Galaxy class cruiser hasn't been the Starfleet flagship in a long, long time.

    True, but it was at one time. With the this Ent-C now retconned into the Enterprise lineage the Galaxy class never was and never will be 'the flagship of the Federation' -Picard (ST:Generations)
    KBF Lord MalaK
    Awoken Dead
    giphy.gif

    Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
  • Options
    jamesdaxjamesdax Member Posts: 159 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    danqueller wrote: »
    Well, to be fair, the Galaxy class was an experiment in making extremely long-duration mission explorers that could support a good sized civilian population along with the Starfleet crew, so a good percentage of the ship was devoted towards facilities not seen on any other class of starship, before or after. Even the Odyssey class do not have these facilities, as the idea of having families aboard Starfleet ships was mostly abandoned shortly after the Galaxy class were introduced (the large size of the Odyssey is there because the wide range of mission abilities requires a large Starfleet crew). What that translates to is much of the ship is devoted to systems that simply have no tactical value and don't improve the ship's performance at all. For this reason, it makes sense the class would seem to be behind others of its level. It should be noted that this ability to support a large population for decades is still a unique feature of Galaxy class that no other Starfleet ship shares (only the Odyssey comes close, and that with greater hardship on the crews).

    What it does have is the best Engineering capabilities of any ship in Starfleet (even the Odyssey can only match it, not exceed it), and while others feel this doesn't matter, if you want your Engineer to have the best ship for his/her skills, you can't get better. Indeed, the Fleet Galaxy has the most Hull Points of any ship on the Fed side, which is interesting considering how many people cry about new construction ships built on old concepts needing to be inferior to new construction ships built on new concepts when talking about any other class.

    I think alot of the disappointment from players who want the Galaxy changed are those who only think Tactical abilities matter in this game, and so see all cruisers in terms of their DPS ability. I don't agree with this, and am quite happy that my Galaxy-R can support any team I am with the most hull repair of any ship out there (this is the role of cruisers, after all). In addition, I would note that the Galaxy-X exists for those who want a more Tactically-focused version.

    Finally, the fact is that the Galaxy class is an old design that does a job well, but it is not the 'most powerful ship in Starfleet', and players have to get out of the mindset that this is TNG Season One. The Galaxy class was surpassed in 'power' by the Sovereign class even before the movies left the time around TNG, and STO is further than that. In the current timeframe, this class has been relegated to support duties and exploration work (oddly, what the class was supposed to be doing all along), and is -not- the frontline ship. While it's true new Galaxy class ships are built and others updated on an individual basis, as a whole, Starfleet has switched its focus on Odyssey class starships, and trying to insist Galaxy class ships should surpass any other ship is like saying the Constitution II class should leave the Sovereigns in the dust.

    I'm not against a tweek to the Galaxy stats, but let's keep things in perspective here.

    I really hate this argument and I'm tired of seeing it. In "Yesterdays Enterprise" the Galaxy was a WAR SHIP! Do you really think in that Universe the Excelsior and Ambassador Class ships were more powerful? How about the Mirror Universe? You really think those two older ships out classed the Galaxy ships? In this game the only ships I care about the Galaxy out classing are the Excelsior and Ambassador. They should not be more powerful then the Galaxy any more then the Galaxy being more powerful then the Sovereign and Odyssey.

    How's that for perspective?
Sign In or Register to comment.