I might have missed it but the Fleet Avenger requires a T4 shipyard??
For the fleet version yes.
I for one think that there should not be a fleet version, the only reason to get the C-Store version is for the console. Besides that the fleet variation is better.
Are you proposing they upgrade the older cruisers to be equivalent to the current and future cruisers? Is there a point to even releasing new ships if they are not better or am I missing your point? I have fought for cruisers to get more relevance without just pumping up the dps, and this is not exactly what I had in mind, but an honest effort. I still don't expect any ship based mechanics to be too retroactive or it will hurt new ship release motivation.
That's exactly what I would suggest because what you consider perfectly acceptable is called "power creep" and that's what basically ruins this game. Each new ship that gets released basically invalidates every current ship in it's niche. I know this is how they make money in F2P land but that's a gruesome business model that is driving this game against a brick wall.
^ 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
That's exactly what I would suggest because what you consider perfectly acceptable is called "power creep" and that's what basically ruins this game. Each new ship that gets released basically invalidates every current ship in it's niche. I know this is how they make money in F2P land but that's a gruesome business model that is driving this game against a brick wall.
So...the choice is between "ruining" the game (quotations because every new ship has "ruined" the game when it came out) and depriving it of its main source of revenue, which would pretty much mean turning it off.
Sure.
Addendum: And "power creep" isn't necessarily exclusive to F2P games. Look at WoW, the quintessential subscriber MMO. Most of the new, paid-for expansions have introduced "power creep" in the form of higher level caps, new gear, and so on.
This isn't eSports (though it could be if PvP were fixed), so "balance" isn't as important as keeping the content taps flowing for this kind of game.
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot that's wrong with STO, and I'd love it if the Gal-X , the KDF and everything else got the love they deserve, but power creep isn't nearly as much of problem a lot of folks make it out to be.
So...the choice is between "ruining" the game (quotations because every new ship has "ruined" the game when it came out) and depriving it of its main source of revenue, which would pretty much mean turning it off.
Sure.
You're taking it to the extreme there don't you think? Everyone here realizes that the game doesn't run on air and cryptic need to make a profit. What people are saying is that they need to find a way to make it so that you can upgrade your favorite ship(s) so that it can stay on par with the stuff they continue to release. Make the "ship upgrades" part of the z-store so they can make money off that, but they should allow people to fly the ship they enjoy and not hinder their team with an under-performing ship. Now this Avenger ship is hardly game breaking, but looking at it's early stats you can tell that it's just a little bit better then the best we have available to us at the moment.
So...the choice is between "ruining" the game (quotations because every new ship has "ruined" the game when it came out) and depriving it of its main source of revenue, which would pretty much mean turning it off.
Sure.
Addendum: And "power creep" isn't necessarily exclusive to F2P games. Look at WoW, the quintessential subscriber MMO. Most of the new, paid-for expansions have introduced "power creep" in the form of higher level caps, new gear, and so on.
This isn't eSports (though it could be if PvP were fixed), so "balance" isn't as important as keeping the content taps flowing for this kind of game.
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot that's wrong with STO, and I'd love it if the Gal-X , the KDF and everything else got the love they deserve, but power creep isn't nearly as much of problem a lot of folks make it out to be.
I know what you are saying but if those are the only options it's not a very good game. I have the rather antiquated imagination of playing new content with my old ship and crew instead of playing the same content over and over again and just switch my starships in a STAR TREK game like I switch my underpants. This way I just don't see the game going anywhere except in a dead-end. The next ship that comes out needs at lest 4 tac consoles and probably 5/4 or 6/2 weapons or else it's not feasible for anything since the old content we have is purely dps centric. And that goes on and on while old ships, that we also paid for btw, get worse and worse. If the advanced comm array for example would be a feature exclusive to cruisers with 2 tac consoles those would have a purpose again, INCREASING diversity instead of streamlining everything to the one best ship.
^ 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
They just had to do this yes they did they just had to do this. :mad:
They had to give it more turn then all other Starfleet Cruisers.
They had to give it the ability to make it use Dual Cannons.
They had to allow it to use a Cloaking Device.
Why couldn't they of had it with a reduced turn of -1.5 and no ability to use a Cloaking device?
Just allowing it to use Dual Cannons and having a turn of 7.5 and having some new console would of been fine and people would of still purchased it but no they have to do this. :mad:
Even with a 7.5 turn rate, being able to use DCs/DHCs would still be frivolous. My Dreadnought has 4 Blue Mk XI RCS consoles on it, and I still wouldn't use DC/DHCs on it.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
You're taking it to the extreme there don't you think? Everyone here realizes that the game doesn't run on air and cryptic need to make a profit. What people are saying is that they need to find a way to make it so that you can upgrade your favorite ship(s) so that it can stay on par with the stuff they continue to release. Make the "ship upgrades" part of the z-store so they can make money off that, but they should allow people to fly the ship they enjoy and not hinder their team with an under-performing ship. Now this Avenger ship is hardly game breaking, but looking at it's early stats you can tell that it's just a little bit better then the best we have available to us at the moment.
I know what you are saying but if those are the only options it's not a very good game. I have the rather antiquated imagination of playing new content with my old ship and crew instead of playing the same content over and over again and just switch my starships in a STAR TREK game like I switch my underpants. This way I just don't see the game going anywhere except in a dead-end. The next ship that comes out needs at lest 4 tac consoles and probably 5/4 or 6/2 weapons or else it's not feasible for anything since the old content we have is purely dps centric. And that goes on and on while old ships, that we also paid for btw, get worse and worse. If the advanced comm array for example would be a feature exclusive to cruisers with 2 tac consoles those would have a purpose again, INCREASING diversity instead of streamlining everything to the one best ship.
See, this is where we're all (all of us!) operating on a series of assumptions that need to be examined.
It's late in the evening here and I don't feel like getting into much detail, but you lot really have to ask yourself how important "staying competitive" is, and what that even MEANS in a game where the only content that matters (to the majority of players, at least) is not competitive at all.
Because last I checked, you could still run nearly ALL the content in STO, STFs included, reasonably well, without paying ANYTHING except time. And that's just "time" in the sense of, say, grinding rep. I'm not even factoring in converting dilithium to Zen and paying for things that way.
Like you said, ships in this game are like underpants. Just change 'em if you want to feel different. The content is so "uncompetitive" (being largely PvE), that balance really doesn't matter in the long run, unless you're into PvP. And even then, history has largely shown (though not without notable and shameful exceptions, like the Gal-R etc), that skill and dedication carries more weight than money even in that competitive field. I can't even count the number of times my snazzy Temporal Destroyer with hundreds of lobi worth of gear was trounced by a well-practiced captain in a Patrol Escort.
As for new content, look at it this way:
You have never once paid for new missions, modes, characters, or locations in STO.
This game has made a very deliberate choice as to how its money will be made, and that has shifted the balance accordingly. STO makes its money through ships, so ships are the things that get made.
But would you rather they make like, say, the pre-F2P Champions Online (or SWTOR) and instead charged for each season like it were an expansion pack? How much would you pay for that?
And, all things considered, making new missions and locations is a LOT more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than making new "items" (i.e. ships). I don't know about you, but I'd much rather pay for a Scimitar Dreadnought, than pay for New Romulus, if you get my meaning.
Even with a 7.5 turn rate, being able to use DCs/DHCs would still be frivolous. My Dreadnought has 4 Blue Mk XI RCS consoles on it, and I still wouldn't use DC/DHCs on it.
This new ship if it had 7.5 Turn and Fleet Engineering consoles can use Dual Heavy Cannons and do a lot of damage in PvE content. Only in PvP would it not be advised to use Dual Heavy Cannons.
i wondervif the vatas system armament will take up 2 weapon slots or be console based because if its a console then i would load out with 2 dhc one quad canno, 1 dualbeam bankn and one quantum torpedo front and either 2 turrets and 1 kinetic kill beam in back i believe combing that with a cloak would give you plenty of forward fire power.
They just had to do this yes they did they just had to do this. :mad:
They had to give it more turn then all other Starfleet Cruisers.
Yes, because the turnrate of fed cruisers has been a particular complaint. Even though this has the highest turnrate for a fed cruiser, it's still less than the rather old vorcha. I wouldn't be surprised if the KDF release will get even more turn.
They had to give it the ability to make it use Dual Cannons.
Yes, to give them the much needed damage they were lacking which was a consistent moan.
They had to allow it to use a Cloaking Device.
Given the other two factions have it as an innate ability, with the Romulans having the battlecloak option, this seems more than fair.
Why couldn't they of had it with a reduced turn of -1.5 and no ability to use a Cloaking device?
Just allowing it to use Dual Cannons and having a turn of 7.5 and having some new console would of been fine and people would of still purchased it but no they have to do this. :mad:
No it wouldn't. Turnrate is more than just about getting a target into a firing arc, it's about tanking and not having huge turn circles. The poor turnrate has been a major thorn in the side of fed cruiser tanking in pvp.
Yes, because the turnrate of fed cruisers has been a particular complaint. Even though this has the highest turnrate for a fed cruiser, it's still less than the rather old vorcha. I wouldn't be surprised if the KDF release will get even more turn.
Yes, to give them the much needed damage they were lacking which was a consistent moan.
Given the other two factions have it as an innate ability, with the Romulans having the battlecloak option, this seems more than fair.
No it wouldn't. Turnrate is more than just about getting a target into a firing arc, it's about tanking and not having huge turn circles. The poor turnrate has been a major thorn in the side of fed cruiser tanking in pvp.
You don't get it do you?
This new ship is just to dam good compared to all other Starfleet Cruisers. The Galaxy X is now almost totally obsolete only thing Galaxy X can do that this new ship can't is use the Lance that is crappy.
This ship should not be able to use a cloak at all.
At most it should be equal in turn to a Excelsior not better then all other Starfleet Cruisers.
I have no problem with it using Dual Cannons but not with all the other things it can do as well.
This new ship if it had 7.5 Turn and Fleet Engineering consoles can use Dual Heavy Cannons and do a lot of damage in PvE content. Only in PvP would it not be advised to use Dual Heavy Cannons.
The cloak is a non-issue for most as the console slot can be FAR better utilised by slotting just about anything else. I certainly won't bother with it - aside from allowing one alpha-strike, it's next to useless.
And it may be able to use DHC's, but that doesn't mean that one HAS to use DHC's.
It is a issue because now the Galaxy X loses something it had that no other Starfleet Cruiser has regardless of how much someone would want to use it.
Edit: I so wish the Galaxy X had the Bridge Layout of this new ship.
It is a issue because now the Galaxy X loses something it had that no other Starfleet Cruiser has regardless of how much someone would want to use it.
Edit: I so wish the Galaxy X had the Bridge Layout of this new ship.
I'm hoping when galaxy x gets fleet version it will get 5 forward weapons. 3 aft and tac commander engi lt com tac lt and sci or engi lt engi or sci ensign.
I'm hoping when galaxy x gets fleet version it will get 5 forward weapons. 3 aft and tac commander engi lt com tac lt and sci or engi lt engi or sci ensign.
If they ever release a Fleet version it won't have such a difference to its C-Store version. All that can be hoped is they make changes to the C-Store version to make it better and then have the Fleet version have 10% more hull and shields with +1 console.
I am dreading the day that all actual STAR TREK ships are totally obsolete with nothing special and unique about them compared to new ships designed for just this game.
If they ever release a Fleet version it won't have such a difference to its C-Store version. All that can be hoped is they make changes to the C-Store version to make it better and then have the Fleet version have 10% more hull and shields with +1 console.
They have changed layouts before, when it comes to fleet ships. But i suspect they are waiting for the tech to do boff layout swaps for ships of a line.
The fleet version of it sure is badass:
4 eng consoles, 4 tac consoles and 2 sci consoles
Now add a turn rate of 9 and a base hull comparable to the Oddy and you've got one hell of a ship to fly
My idea of a loadout you don't wanna deal with:
Front guns:
1 Advanced fleet quantum torpedo
3 Elite fleet dual heavy phasers
1 Quad phaser cannon (for moar dps), but another elite fleet phaser can do as well
Back:
2x Elite fleet phaser turrets
1x kinetic cutting beam (again, replace with turret if you don't have/like)
Console slots:
Engineering:
4x Advanced neutronium Alloy Mk XII (turn) (gives 21.2% to damage resist, kinetic resist and turn rate each, making RCS accelerators obsolete)
Tactical:
4x Phaser damage tactical consoles mk XII (rare or uncommon)
Science:
The universal console of this ship and additionally the cloaking console from the Galaxy-X or the cloak-Defiant
Shield/Engine/Deflector/Warp core:
All Mk XII elite fleet stuff of your choice
Now put that onto a tactical character and go wild
Sure, I miss a commander tactical BOFF slot, but a "Aceton beam III" as engineering ability gives your opponent a surprise too, especially considering your high alpha after decloaking and activating every damage buff/enemy debuff ability you have
marshalericdavid:
It is a issue because now the Galaxy X loses something it had that no other Starfleet Cruiser has regardless of how much someone would want to use it.
Edit: I so wish the Galaxy X had the Bridge Layout of this new ship.
Here, here! I was 1v1ing with a couple fleet buddies of mine, and while I wasn't very effective at anything other than thinning out their shields, my cloaking right off the bat did get on their nerves.
The first time the guy was circling the map at full impulse with his little aquarius trying to keep up. I just watched him pass by me a couple times before I uncloaked and opened fire on him. In a straight up brawl with my engie boffs, I can last a fair amount longer than I can in an escort, the only difference was in my Dreadnought, all my hull damage was bleedthrough, whereas my escort could punch through the shields and knock about 20% of his hull before he killed me.
My dread kept his shields pretty low, though...
Anyway, I feel a little less special, knowing that people might buy a dread or defiant only for the cloaking device for their Avenger. Yes, it's not battle cloak, but it still has its uses, and comes with some decent buffs.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Here, here! I was 1v1ing with a couple fleet buddies of mine, and while I wasn't very effective at anything other than thinning out their shields, my cloaking right off the bat did get on their nerves.
The first time the guy was circling the map at full impulse with his little aquarius trying to keep up. I just watched him pass by me a couple times before I uncloaked and opened fire on him. In a straight up brawl with my engie boffs, I can last a fair amount longer than I can in an escort, the only difference was in my Dreadnought, all my hull damage was bleedthrough, whereas my escort could punch through the shields and knock about 20% of his hull before he killed me.
My dread kept his shields pretty low, though...
Anyway, I feel a little less special, knowing that people might buy a dread or defiant only for the cloaking device for their Avenger. Yes, it's not battle cloak, but it still has its uses, and comes with some decent buffs.
Agreed, especially 1 on 1 fights are where this cloak can truly shine
The dread sadly has a painfully slow turn rate while the new cruiser will have a turn rate of 9 (I checked on the test server) what is insanely fast for a cruiser, especially for a cruiser with these forward weapons
Now add 4 "Enchanced neutronium alloy (Turn)" consoles and you got a powerhouse that will turn around in no time
(this engineering console provides decent protection against both kinetic and any energy damage, but also gives a bonus to the turn rate, so you don't have to sacrifice a slot for a RCS accelerator)
But what is REALLY scary is the combination of 5 forward guns and these insane tanking abilities plus the turn rate, especially the fleet version, because you can put in both the cloak console AND the Avanger console into the science slots so you won't need to give up on a tac/eng slot
In a one on one against a scimitar, the Avenger would probably be the winner (yes, I have a 3-set Scimitar with fleet stuff)
horrible looking ship even the vesta with its space whale look is more attractive.
Thanks but no thanks.
Lol who cares about looks?
I mean after a week or so you wouldn't care at all no matter how good-looking/ugly your ship is
Didn't u read the Devblog?
This ship was made to be more leaned towards combat so of course it is going to be a bit less "good- looking"
It isn't a ship made 100% for combat like the USS Vengeance from Star trek: Into darkness, but still it is MOSTLY made for blowing stuff up
Kumari also looks like a dark blue piece of s*** but it still is one of the best escorts in game and a lot of people use it
Don't be fooled in regards to this new ship, its essentialy the tier 5 VA Whale class version, revamped in a new skin that resembles Bellerophon sci vessel skin
Its the whale in disguised, using a mixture of Vanguard Class using the Imperial Lobster looking cosmetic skin, and the Rainmaker sci ship style.
I am quite disappointed, I was expecting an entirely new and fresh design, its just a horrible re-skin job.
are there any more Canon vessels left to include in this game?
Don't be fooled in regards to this new ship, its essentialy the tier 5 VA Whale class version, revamped in a new skin that resembles Bellerophon sci vessel skin
Its the whale in disguised, using a mixture of Vanguard Class using the Imperial Lobster looking cosmetic skin, and the Rainmaker sci ship style.
I am quite disappointed, I was expecting an entirely new and fresh design, its just a horrible re-skin job.
are there any more Canon vessels left to include in this game?
You forgot about the split neck and saucer hull integration it got from the Oddy
And I don't think the design is the issue here at all
What makes me interested in that ship is its fleet version and the firepower it has, I couldn't care less about whether it'd be bulky as the Enterprise C or if it was an exact copy of the Oddy class
The people will buy it because it will have the tank of the oddy and a firepower comparable to the Kumari, nothing else
I did a bit of research into the Vengeance... Not a huge fan of the nacelles, but I do like it, and the ominous casket shaped hole in the saucer... I'd fly it.
But we won't see it here. It would only be a T3 Dreadnought anyway.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Well unfortunately; the type 6 skin only sticks when you use the default look. Otherwise customizing it is the way to go, just wish it allow for type 6 skin job when you mix and match.
Yet it is still an ugly @ss beast, LOL. Then again all Whale Class were PUGLY
Well unfortunately; the type 6 skin only sticks when you use the default look. Otherwise customizing it is the way to go, just wish it allow for type 6 skin job when you mix and match.
Yet it is still an ugly @ss beast, LOL. Then again all Whale Class were PUGLY
Jamjamz fixed the Type 6 material so it now works with all compatible parts on a ship.
Comments
For the fleet version yes.
I for one think that there should not be a fleet version, the only reason to get the C-Store version is for the console. Besides that the fleet variation is better.
That's exactly what I would suggest because what you consider perfectly acceptable is called "power creep" and that's what basically ruins this game. Each new ship that gets released basically invalidates every current ship in it's niche. I know this is how they make money in F2P land but that's a gruesome business model that is driving this game against a brick wall.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
So...the choice is between "ruining" the game (quotations because every new ship has "ruined" the game when it came out) and depriving it of its main source of revenue, which would pretty much mean turning it off.
Sure.
Addendum: And "power creep" isn't necessarily exclusive to F2P games. Look at WoW, the quintessential subscriber MMO. Most of the new, paid-for expansions have introduced "power creep" in the form of higher level caps, new gear, and so on.
This isn't eSports (though it could be if PvP were fixed), so "balance" isn't as important as keeping the content taps flowing for this kind of game.
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot that's wrong with STO, and I'd love it if the Gal-X , the KDF and everything else got the love they deserve, but power creep isn't nearly as much of problem a lot of folks make it out to be.
You're taking it to the extreme there don't you think? Everyone here realizes that the game doesn't run on air and cryptic need to make a profit. What people are saying is that they need to find a way to make it so that you can upgrade your favorite ship(s) so that it can stay on par with the stuff they continue to release. Make the "ship upgrades" part of the z-store so they can make money off that, but they should allow people to fly the ship they enjoy and not hinder their team with an under-performing ship. Now this Avenger ship is hardly game breaking, but looking at it's early stats you can tell that it's just a little bit better then the best we have available to us at the moment.
I know what you are saying but if those are the only options it's not a very good game. I have the rather antiquated imagination of playing new content with my old ship and crew instead of playing the same content over and over again and just switch my starships in a STAR TREK game like I switch my underpants. This way I just don't see the game going anywhere except in a dead-end. The next ship that comes out needs at lest 4 tac consoles and probably 5/4 or 6/2 weapons or else it's not feasible for anything since the old content we have is purely dps centric. And that goes on and on while old ships, that we also paid for btw, get worse and worse. If the advanced comm array for example would be a feature exclusive to cruisers with 2 tac consoles those would have a purpose again, INCREASING diversity instead of streamlining everything to the one best ship.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
They had to give it more turn then all other Starfleet Cruisers.
They had to give it the ability to make it use Dual Cannons.
They had to allow it to use a Cloaking Device.
Why couldn't they of had it with a reduced turn of -1.5 and no ability to use a Cloaking device?
Just allowing it to use Dual Cannons and having a turn of 7.5 and having some new console would of been fine and people would of still purchased it but no they have to do this. :mad:
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
See, this is where we're all (all of us!) operating on a series of assumptions that need to be examined.
It's late in the evening here and I don't feel like getting into much detail, but you lot really have to ask yourself how important "staying competitive" is, and what that even MEANS in a game where the only content that matters (to the majority of players, at least) is not competitive at all.
Because last I checked, you could still run nearly ALL the content in STO, STFs included, reasonably well, without paying ANYTHING except time. And that's just "time" in the sense of, say, grinding rep. I'm not even factoring in converting dilithium to Zen and paying for things that way.
Like you said, ships in this game are like underpants. Just change 'em if you want to feel different. The content is so "uncompetitive" (being largely PvE), that balance really doesn't matter in the long run, unless you're into PvP. And even then, history has largely shown (though not without notable and shameful exceptions, like the Gal-R etc), that skill and dedication carries more weight than money even in that competitive field. I can't even count the number of times my snazzy Temporal Destroyer with hundreds of lobi worth of gear was trounced by a well-practiced captain in a Patrol Escort.
As for new content, look at it this way:
You have never once paid for new missions, modes, characters, or locations in STO.
This game has made a very deliberate choice as to how its money will be made, and that has shifted the balance accordingly. STO makes its money through ships, so ships are the things that get made.
But would you rather they make like, say, the pre-F2P Champions Online (or SWTOR) and instead charged for each season like it were an expansion pack? How much would you pay for that?
And, all things considered, making new missions and locations is a LOT more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than making new "items" (i.e. ships). I don't know about you, but I'd much rather pay for a Scimitar Dreadnought, than pay for New Romulus, if you get my meaning.
This new ship if it had 7.5 Turn and Fleet Engineering consoles can use Dual Heavy Cannons and do a lot of damage in PvE content. Only in PvP would it not be advised to use Dual Heavy Cannons.
Yes, because the turnrate of fed cruisers has been a particular complaint. Even though this has the highest turnrate for a fed cruiser, it's still less than the rather old vorcha. I wouldn't be surprised if the KDF release will get even more turn.
Yes, to give them the much needed damage they were lacking which was a consistent moan.
Given the other two factions have it as an innate ability, with the Romulans having the battlecloak option, this seems more than fair.
No it wouldn't. Turnrate is more than just about getting a target into a firing arc, it's about tanking and not having huge turn circles. The poor turnrate has been a major thorn in the side of fed cruiser tanking in pvp.
Daizen - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
Selia - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
You don't get it do you?
This new ship is just to dam good compared to all other Starfleet Cruisers. The Galaxy X is now almost totally obsolete only thing Galaxy X can do that this new ship can't is use the Lance that is crappy.
This ship should not be able to use a cloak at all.
At most it should be equal in turn to a Excelsior not better then all other Starfleet Cruisers.
I have no problem with it using Dual Cannons but not with all the other things it can do as well.
This new ship if it had 7.5 Turn and Fleet Engineering consoles can use Dual Heavy Cannons and do a lot of damage in PvE content. Only in PvP would it not be advised to use Dual Heavy Cannons.
It is a issue because now the Galaxy X loses something it had that no other Starfleet Cruiser has regardless of how much someone would want to use it.
Edit: I so wish the Galaxy X had the Bridge Layout of this new ship.
I'm hoping when galaxy x gets fleet version it will get 5 forward weapons. 3 aft and tac commander engi lt com tac lt and sci or engi lt engi or sci ensign.
If they ever release a Fleet version it won't have such a difference to its C-Store version. All that can be hoped is they make changes to the C-Store version to make it better and then have the Fleet version have 10% more hull and shields with +1 console.
I am dreading the day that all actual STAR TREK ships are totally obsolete with nothing special and unique about them compared to new ships designed for just this game.
They have changed layouts before, when it comes to fleet ships. But i suspect they are waiting for the tech to do boff layout swaps for ships of a line.
Only slight changes.
4 eng consoles, 4 tac consoles and 2 sci consoles
Now add a turn rate of 9 and a base hull comparable to the Oddy and you've got one hell of a ship to fly
My idea of a loadout you don't wanna deal with:
Front guns:
1 Advanced fleet quantum torpedo
3 Elite fleet dual heavy phasers
1 Quad phaser cannon (for moar dps), but another elite fleet phaser can do as well
Back:
2x Elite fleet phaser turrets
1x kinetic cutting beam (again, replace with turret if you don't have/like)
Console slots:
Engineering:
4x Advanced neutronium Alloy Mk XII (turn) (gives 21.2% to damage resist, kinetic resist and turn rate each, making RCS accelerators obsolete)
Tactical:
4x Phaser damage tactical consoles mk XII (rare or uncommon)
Science:
The universal console of this ship and additionally the cloaking console from the Galaxy-X or the cloak-Defiant
Shield/Engine/Deflector/Warp core:
All Mk XII elite fleet stuff of your choice
Now put that onto a tactical character and go wild
Sure, I miss a commander tactical BOFF slot, but a "Aceton beam III" as engineering ability gives your opponent a surprise too, especially considering your high alpha after decloaking and activating every damage buff/enemy debuff ability you have
Here, here! I was 1v1ing with a couple fleet buddies of mine, and while I wasn't very effective at anything other than thinning out their shields, my cloaking right off the bat did get on their nerves.
The first time the guy was circling the map at full impulse with his little aquarius trying to keep up. I just watched him pass by me a couple times before I uncloaked and opened fire on him. In a straight up brawl with my engie boffs, I can last a fair amount longer than I can in an escort, the only difference was in my Dreadnought, all my hull damage was bleedthrough, whereas my escort could punch through the shields and knock about 20% of his hull before he killed me.
My dread kept his shields pretty low, though...
Anyway, I feel a little less special, knowing that people might buy a dread or defiant only for the cloaking device for their Avenger. Yes, it's not battle cloak, but it still has its uses, and comes with some decent buffs.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Agreed, especially 1 on 1 fights are where this cloak can truly shine
The dread sadly has a painfully slow turn rate while the new cruiser will have a turn rate of 9 (I checked on the test server) what is insanely fast for a cruiser, especially for a cruiser with these forward weapons
Now add 4 "Enchanced neutronium alloy (Turn)" consoles and you got a powerhouse that will turn around in no time
(this engineering console provides decent protection against both kinetic and any energy damage, but also gives a bonus to the turn rate, so you don't have to sacrifice a slot for a RCS accelerator)
But what is REALLY scary is the combination of 5 forward guns and these insane tanking abilities plus the turn rate, especially the fleet version, because you can put in both the cloak console AND the Avanger console into the science slots so you won't need to give up on a tac/eng slot
In a one on one against a scimitar, the Avenger would probably be the winner (yes, I have a 3-set Scimitar with fleet stuff)
horrible looking ship even the vesta with its space whale look is more attractive.
Thanks but no thanks.
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
Lol who cares about looks?
I mean after a week or so you wouldn't care at all no matter how good-looking/ugly your ship is
Didn't u read the Devblog?
This ship was made to be more leaned towards combat so of course it is going to be a bit less "good- looking"
It isn't a ship made 100% for combat like the USS Vengeance from Star trek: Into darkness, but still it is MOSTLY made for blowing stuff up
Kumari also looks like a dark blue piece of s*** but it still is one of the best escorts in game and a lot of people use it
Its the whale in disguised, using a mixture of Vanguard Class using the Imperial Lobster looking cosmetic skin, and the Rainmaker sci ship style.
I am quite disappointed, I was expecting an entirely new and fresh design, its just a horrible re-skin job.
are there any more Canon vessels left to include in this game?
You forgot about the split neck and saucer hull integration it got from the Oddy
And I don't think the design is the issue here at all
What makes me interested in that ship is its fleet version and the firepower it has, I couldn't care less about whether it'd be bulky as the Enterprise C or if it was an exact copy of the Oddy class
The people will buy it because it will have the tank of the oddy and a firepower comparable to the Kumari, nothing else
But we won't see it here. It would only be a T3 Dreadnought anyway.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Yet it is still an ugly @ss beast, LOL. Then again all Whale Class were PUGLY
Jamjamz fixed the Type 6 material so it now works with all compatible parts on a ship.