To be blunt i could live with every single problem the Galaxy X has if they just cut the Cmdr Engineering Boff Slot down to Lt Cmdr and upgrade the Lt Tactical to Lt Cmdr. Or maybe even a Cmdr Tactical; it's a Warship, after all. When i reach 50 and unpack my Dreadnought i know full well that i have way better ships at my disposal, but i love the ship and want to use it. And i do, but i'd really like to do something else than an insanely expensive a2b Marion build that needs uberpowerful gear and perfect skill points spent to do AVERAGE damage and maybe break 10k if we're lucky while the 40k dps club seems to be Scimitar-exclusive and the Avenger gets everything we want for the Galaxy X. What makes it worse is this seemingly complete lack of interest on Cryptic's part. I mean look at this forum, it's full of Galaxy X-threads and there's not a single response, what the hell? People are yelling at them to let them take their money for an improved ship and all we get is a two year old screenshot of a long promised, never seen Fleet Galaxy X that comes with a feature nobody really wants that would not fix anything - and probably would require a Galaxy R for the Seperation Console anyway.
(my current Engineer main pilots a Dreadnought A2B Heavy Tank without Marion, but at least she's using three purple Technicians. She tanks like a mother****er and can take hell unless the Borg start trolling her with invisible High Yield Plasma Torpedos, but i have never, not once, managed to break 7k dps.)
I understand what youre getting at, but Fed (and KDF) cruiser hulls (of which the Gal-X belongs) have an archtypical CMDR Engineer. The whole thing with some of the Romulan Warbird layouts, not being tied to a hull type, as the Fed/KDF are, are somewhat insane but the whole CMDR tac or 2 LTCMDRS is also a bit off too.
As a Gal-X owner/user, regarding the Avenger getting what the "Gal-X guys wanted" sounds a tad irrational. For one thing, what would the ship give up to have that tactical layout? Pretty much all of its ability to soak damage? The lance? While the Avenger is faster and has a better turn rate (which is a pipe-dream if you wanted that for the Gal-X), it cant soak a hit like the Gal-X could/should. I could see a lone LTCMDR Tac slot or two Lt Tacs, but going "Avenger" would hurt it as well, both ships that have that layout (Avenger/Regent) give up a lot in the soaking territory doing so, thats why the Excelsior is still a viable choice of ship, even including the Avenger, because it can soak better. Going too far in the tactical will make it too soft of a target.
As far as the tac consoles, I could see three on the Gal-X and four on the Fleet while keeping 4 engie and two sci', but not five because its a revision of the Explorer hull.
BTW I am all for it having all four (or at least three) cruiser commands because its not a dreadnought-from-the-ground-up design.
I understand what youre getting at, but Fed (and KDF) cruiser hulls (of which the Gal-X belongs) have an archtypical CMDR Engineer. The whole thing with some of the Romulan Warbird layouts, not being tied to a hull type, as the Fed/KDF are, are somewhat insane but the whole CMDR tac or 2 LTCMDRS is also a bit off too.
As a Gal-X owner/user, regarding the Avenger getting what the "Gal-X guys wanted" sounds a tad irrational. For one thing, what would the ship give up to have that tactical layout? Pretty much all of its ability to soak damage? The lance? While the Avenger is faster and has a better turn rate (which is a pipe-dream if you wanted that for the Gal-X), it cant soak a hit like the Gal-X could/should. I could see a lone LTCMDR Tac slot or two Lt Tacs, but going "Avenger" would hurt it as well, both ships that have that layout (Avenger/Regent) give up a lot in the soaking territory doing so, thats why the Excelsior is still a viable choice of ship, even including the Avenger, because it can soak better. Going too far in the tactical will make it too soft of a target.
As far as the tac consoles, I could see three on the Gal-X and four on the Fleet while keeping 4 engie and two sci', but not five because its a revision of the Explorer hull.
BTW I am all for it having all four (or at least three) cruiser commands because its not a dreadnought-from-the-ground-up design.
So to appease the BOFF problem if they release a fleet Gal-X: Cmdr Tac, Cmdr Engi, Lt Sci, Lt Universal.
I understand what youre getting at, but Fed (and KDF) cruiser hulls (of which the Gal-X belongs) have an archtypical CMDR Engineer. The whole thing with some of the Romulan Warbird layouts, not being tied to a hull type, as the Fed/KDF are, are somewhat insane but the whole CMDR tac or 2 LTCMDRS is also a bit off too.
I never looked at romulan ships because i don't play one; taking something away in order to balance out what i want to see added. The Galaxy is already an unusual ship with it's cloak and inbuilt Phaser Lance.
For one thing, what would the ship give up to have that tactical layout?
I'm not sure it has to give up too much. It's already so underperforming due to it's ancient design i highly doubt giving it a bit of an improvement would make it OP.
Going too far in the tactical will make it too soft of a target.
That's why i'd be completely satisfied with polishing the Dreadnought's Boff layout - the ship itself isn't all THAT bad (it's great for tanking, but outside from really bad random groups, how often do you need a tank these days?), but if you take apart the Avenger (meant as an example) you come across all those little things that it's got to hypothetically "fix" the Galaxy X:
-) 5 fore weapon bays. Either fixing the Lance or make it replaceable / it's energytype changeable comes up regularly. Giving the Dreadnought five weapons slots and a unique Phaser Lance (edit: to fit into the fifth fore weapon slot, to make that clear, i don't mean 5 slots PLUS Lance) would be a nice idea, even at the expense of taking away one from the aft.
-) It's Boff Layout. The Dreadnought's layout is terrible. Other ships can at least upgrade to a Fleet or C-Store variant; the Galaxy's only got it's engineering Boff slots to compensate, and that one doesn't give you the delicious, delicious Lt Cmdr Tactical Buffs.
-) Personally i don't have a big problem with the turn rate, but it's just one more thing the Avenger has and the Dreadnought not. Also: inertia and speed.
-) The Avenger may not be able to take as many hits as a Dreadnought but it's by no means squishy, plus due to power creep Damage is pretty much equal to defense these days.
-) Console slots
-) While we're at it let's add tac consoles
-) Cruiser commands
By no means do i want my Galaxy X to be turned into the Avenger and just giving it all those improvements on top of the existing ones without tradeoff would be a bit on the insane side - but the Avenger has goodies that the Galaxy could really use and sacrifices almost nothing for it except for the fact that it's ugly as hell.
As far as the tac consoles, I could see three on the Gal-X and four on the Fleet while keeping 4 engie and two sci', but not five because its a revision of the Explorer hull.
I really don't need more, everything above 2 is serviceable for me, but i also don't see why a tactical warship like the Galaxy X shouldn't have it; with the current layout it certainly wouldn't make the ship OP.
Shall we include an enhanced battle cloak and an "I win" console too? I really hope your being sarcastic.
If you aren't being sarcastic, with ideas like those, do you really wonder why Cryptic doesn't listen to players requests about the ship?
I was being sarcastic with the idea, I tried to make my original boff set up as balanced as possible, but nooooo buff it some more, so i got fed up and just posted that. Lol
You misunderstand. We want a dreadnought that's actually worth being called a dreadnought. Not saying OP. But at least on the lines of the Excel refit or oddy tac.
Updating the existing dread generates no revenue from those who already have it, and others probably have already bought the avenger.
So there will never be an update.
IF there ever is one, it should focus on exactly 2 things:
- get a ltcom tac.
- turn the lance into an integrated weapon with high dps. No more of this 3 minute cd. TRIBBLE. if you park in front of this ship, you are getting hurt. period.
Thats all thats needed. No riping of romulans, or klingons.
FOCUS on the one gimmik this ship is supposed to sport: A huge gun around 200 meter in length shooting stuff.
Also upgrade tbe bortasqu auto turret to an integrated gun.
And stop the cloack TRIBBLE, its a hero dread not a scrummy romulan coward wagon.
For the Galaxy-X, I'd like to see it get some of the Avenger's perks. Most likely in a Fleet variant. I know they were working on an upgrade with saucer separation, but honestly? The Saucer separation was sacrificed for the sake of the BFG. The saucer was supposed to separate to provide the families and non-combatants an avenue to escape in the event that the ship needed to engage in combat. They didn't show this much on television because of time constraints and budgetary concerns.
That said, the GX is a warship. The entire point of it is to go into harms way, breaking off the saucer serves no purpose. Especially when it has a BFG strapped to the underside. If we could sacrifice the fourth weapon slot on the aft and transfer it forward, with a Lt. Commander tactical slot like the Avenger, we'd probably have a winner. That lance weapon may or may not need damage boost, to bring it more in line with the Avenger's VATA. Keep the same turn rate to even out the extra forward gun slot and call it done.
IMO, players want more Star Trek in their Star Trek Online, not less. We want to see more of the ships we loved from television, and less of these cryptic designs. Don't get me wrong, some of Cryptic's ships have been really nice as of late- but... without the Defiant, Galaxy, Sovereign, Intrepid, etc... this may as well be Space Adventures Online. Granted, it's 30 years later and the Galaxy is showing her age a little, but she needs to remain competitive with some of the other (newer) designs, for game-play purposes.
Shall we include an enhanced battle cloak and an "I win" console too? I really hope your being sarcastic.
If you aren't being sarcastic, with ideas like those, do you really wonder why Cryptic doesn't listen to players requests about the ship?
To be honest you could give the dread 3 uni com as bo layout and it still wouldnt be as op as the scim by far so i dont really get your comment. The scim is so op that it kind of raises the limit of whats okay and whats op by a large margin. So no i dont get why roms can have a 5/3 + com tac + battle cloak + 5 tac console + hangar + crazy shields while cloaked and turn rate buff and secondary shiel console and all that stuff in one ship but it would be op to have a unique bo-layout on the dread?
No sir it wouldnt. Not saying it should have that but if it did it still wouldnt be as powerful as the scim
Updating the existing dread generates no revenue from those who already have it, and others probably have already bought the avenger.
So there will never be an update.
IF there ever is one, it should focus on exactly 2 things:
- get a ltcom tac.
- turn the lance into an integrated weapon with high dps. No more of this 3 minute cd. TRIBBLE. if you park in front of this ship, you are getting hurt. period.
Thats all thats needed. No riping of romulans, or klingons.
FOCUS on the one gimmik this ship is supposed to sport: A huge gun around 200 meter in length shooting stuff.
Also upgrade tbe bortasqu auto turret to an integrated gun.
And stop the cloack TRIBBLE, its a hero dread not a scrummy romulan coward wagon.
If you had read my first post in detail, you would have noticed that I'm not saying buff the existing Gal-X, create a fleet version
If you had read my first post in detail, you would have noticed that I'm not saying buff the existing Gal-X, create a fleet version
A fleet. version would impart aminor stat upgrade that would leave the fleet gal x still lacking the same basic thing it needs to be a good ship worth its money.
To be honest you could give the dread 3 uni com as bo layout and it still wouldnt be as op as the scim by far so i dont really get your comment. The scim is so op that it kind of raises the limit of whats okay and whats op by a large margin. So no i dont get why roms can have a 5/3 + com tac + battle cloak + 5 tac console + hangar + crazy shields while cloaked and turn rate buff and secondary shiel console and all that stuff in one ship but it would be op to have a unique bo-layout on the dread?
No sir it wouldnt. Not saying it should have that but if it did it still wouldnt be as powerful as the scim
I'm not sure what you consider OP, but I would most certainly call having 50% of a ships boff abilities being LTCMDR or higher as being OP. As far as a unique boff layout, if the Fleet Gal-X had two LT Tacs it would most certainly be unique (plus give it four tac consoles and all four cruiser commands). The Gal-X was not built from the ground up as a dreadnought, unlike all of the other dread's in the game, so it should reflect it. I really think that the lance needs to be on par with the Garumba Javelin for effectiveness.
I do wholeheartedly agree that the Scimitar is nuts. I think if thye were going to release that ship with that layout, they should have reserved it for a T6 type ship and pair it with the Typhoon class Battleship.
I never looked at romulan ships because i don't play one; taking something away in order to balance out what i want to see added. The Galaxy is already an unusual ship with it's cloak and inbuilt Phaser Lance.
I'm not sure it has to give up too much. It's already so underperforming due to it's ancient design i highly doubt giving it a bit of an improvement would make it OP.
That's why i'd be completely satisfied with polishing the Dreadnought's Boff layout - the ship itself isn't all THAT bad (it's great for tanking, but outside from really bad random groups, how often do you need a tank these days?), but if you take apart the Avenger (meant as an example) you come across all those little things that it's got to hypothetically "fix" the Galaxy X:
-) 5 fore weapon bays. Either fixing the Lance or make it replaceable / it's energytype changeable comes up regularly. Giving the Dreadnought five weapons slots and a unique Phaser Lance (edit: to fit into the fifth fore weapon slot, to make that clear, i don't mean 5 slots PLUS Lance) would be a nice idea, even at the expense of taking away one from the aft.
-) It's Boff Layout. The Dreadnought's layout is terrible. Other ships can at least upgrade to a Fleet or C-Store variant; the Galaxy's only got it's engineering Boff slots to compensate, and that one doesn't give you the delicious, delicious Lt Cmdr Tactical Buffs.
-) Personally i don't have a big problem with the turn rate, but it's just one more thing the Avenger has and the Dreadnought not. Also: inertia and speed.
-) The Avenger may not be able to take as many hits as a Dreadnought but it's by no means squishy, plus due to power creep Damage is pretty much equal to defense these days.
-) Console slots
-) While we're at it let's add tac consoles
-) Cruiser commands
By no means do i want my Galaxy X to be turned into the Avenger and just giving it all those improvements on top of the existing ones without tradeoff would be a bit on the insane side - but the Avenger has goodies that the Galaxy could really use and sacrifices almost nothing for it except for the fact that it's ugly as hell.
I really don't need more, everything above 2 is serviceable for me, but i also don't see why a tactical warship like the Galaxy X shouldn't have it; with the current layout it certainly wouldn't make the ship OP.
The Gal-X shouldnt reflect a ground up DN / battlecruiser approach that the others ships have, it is a ramped up Exploration cruiser and should be set up that way. A 4/4 weapons setup and having at least three cruiser commands, if not all four should be a requisite.
There is nothing wrong with a 4/4 weapons setup, especially considering the lance, and the fact that it is a slow turning ship, the problem is that the lance needs to be as good as the Garumbas Javelin, which it isn't. The lance should be hard mounted, not replacable with another weapon, it is the main characteristic of the ship (that and the three nacelles).Four tac consoles should be just fine for the ship as well.
As far as boffs, a Fleet version would be fine with a LTCMDR tac, but with that as the only tac station, the ship needs to be tankier than other DN's. The Excelsior is a fantastic combat ship and it does fine with just that one LTCMDR tac slot.
As far as the Avenger not being squishy, especially in comparison to the Gal-X, it most certainly iis, and it should be. It's also squishier than the Excelsior equivalent as well. As far as DPS being equal to defense, I understand what you are saying but it isn't when it comes to the characteristics of a ship and how forgiving it is. The Gal-X can walk in the middle of a combat (high level PvE) with much more abandon than the Avenger can. If it messes up a little, it doesn't have to withdraw like an Avenger has to in order to recover.
One thing is certain: A fleet version of the Gal-X would defnitely be welcome. I hesitate to refer to ithe Gal-X as a Dreadnought though, because it's a joke compared to the overpowered nonsense Scimitar.
I agree with your sentiment, but pretty much everything compared to the Scimitar is somewhat of a joke.
this ship daesn't need much to be on part with others without being the best, the stats of the ship must be realocated with the tactical role in mind.
however no need of 4 tactical console for the cstore version or 5 weapons slot in the front, leave that to the avenger and scimi.
they are way to play with the stats to make it relevant again, return the cloack into an integrated one could be one of the trick to boost his general performance ( i always suggest this even tho i known that cryptic will not do it ).
sometime an intelligent allocation of stats can make a world difference in a good build.
the only things that must be enhanced right of the bat is the lance ( that daesn't mean more firepower ), bo layout and speed/inertia/ turn that could use a better adjustment.
They are never going to fix it, there are much better ships out there for the same $25. If they made the lance a special weapon that can be equipped on different ships it might be worth it.
They are never going to fix it, there are much better ships out there for the same $25. If they made the lance a special weapon that can be equipped on different ships it might be worth it.
Cryptic is a business, if they see a demand for a product they will make it.
If science ships are getting a second deflector, are cruisers gonna get something [off to the side] and escorts too?
Also, does no one ever run Nadion Inversion before using the Phaser Lance? I'm just wondering.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "Look at me I'm a target!" "Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK! "How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?" My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
I wonder if, since its a refit of the old Galaxy with the Cmdr and LtCmdr Eng, they did a fleet version with LtCmdr Tac instead of the current two tac officers, for a 4 boff setup? That would let it upgrade its tac abilities, still do the full Galaxy Cruiser thing, have a unique boff layout that wouldn't be just a copy of another Fed tac cruiser, and pay a price by having one less potential space trait? Would be something different, which the game can always use more of.
The Gal-X shouldnt reflect a ground up DN / battlecruiser approach that the others ships have, it is a ramped up Exploration cruiser and should be set up that way. A 4/4 weapons setup and having at least three cruiser commands, if not all four should be a requisite.
There is nothing wrong with a 4/4 weapons setup, especially considering the lance, and the fact that it is a slow turning ship, the problem is that the lance needs to be as good as the Garumbas Javelin, which it isn't. The lance should be hard mounted, not replacable with another weapon, it is the main characteristic of the ship (that and the three nacelles).Four tac consoles should be just fine for the ship as well.
As far as boffs, a Fleet version would be fine with a LTCMDR tac, but with that as the only tac station, the ship needs to be tankier than other DN's. The Excelsior is a fantastic combat ship and it does fine with just that one LTCMDR tac slot.
As far as the Avenger not being squishy, especially in comparison to the Gal-X, it most certainly iis, and it should be. It's also squishier than the Excelsior equivalent as well. As far as DPS being equal to defense, I understand what you are saying but it isn't when it comes to the characteristics of a ship and how forgiving it is. The Gal-X can walk in the middle of a combat (high level PvE) with much more abandon than the Avenger can. If it messes up a little, it doesn't have to withdraw like an Avenger has to in order to recover.
Lance needs to be as good as Javelin? Okay. As long as you're willing to add an equivalent to Siege Mode onto the Gal-X. Something that halves your turnrate and reduces engine power by 10 while adding to weapon power by 10. Y'know, that little feature that makes the dreaded Javelin useless in PvP because a slow-turning destroyer = mincemeat in most PvP. It can even be a problem in PvE against anything that happens to move fast (specifically, escorts and science ships). Oh, and a charge-up sequence that delays usage of your lance by a slightly variable amount of time. Heck, let's even throw in a boost of power loss by 25, increasing the loss from -50 on activation to -75. THEN you can get the apparently awesome capabilities of the Javelin, with the 20 second CD.
As long as we're clear on that, go ahead and ask for it.
If science ships are getting a second deflector, are cruisers gonna get something [off to the side] and escorts too?
Also, does no one ever run Nadion Inversion before using the Phaser Lance? I'm just wondering.
Cruisers already got something. That's what the cruiser commands are. The secondary deflector is the science ship response to that. Maybe escorts will get something, I don't know. Most folks consider 'em pretty powerful still, and not in need of such a buff.
all cruisers should have 3x there current hull and 2x there shieods to make up for there lack of mobility
new models of the galaxy and Gal-x should be made equal to the scimitars power including and accounting for the romulan 6.5% extra crit chance
Fed Fans arnt going to buy a scimitar its that simple so cryptic is losing money keeping the fed ships as 3rd place ships
Cryptoc make a new version of the Galaxy and gal-X put a price on it make it comparable to the scimitar and make money
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
Comments
I understand what youre getting at, but Fed (and KDF) cruiser hulls (of which the Gal-X belongs) have an archtypical CMDR Engineer. The whole thing with some of the Romulan Warbird layouts, not being tied to a hull type, as the Fed/KDF are, are somewhat insane but the whole CMDR tac or 2 LTCMDRS is also a bit off too.
As a Gal-X owner/user, regarding the Avenger getting what the "Gal-X guys wanted" sounds a tad irrational. For one thing, what would the ship give up to have that tactical layout? Pretty much all of its ability to soak damage? The lance? While the Avenger is faster and has a better turn rate (which is a pipe-dream if you wanted that for the Gal-X), it cant soak a hit like the Gal-X could/should. I could see a lone LTCMDR Tac slot or two Lt Tacs, but going "Avenger" would hurt it as well, both ships that have that layout (Avenger/Regent) give up a lot in the soaking territory doing so, thats why the Excelsior is still a viable choice of ship, even including the Avenger, because it can soak better. Going too far in the tactical will make it too soft of a target.
As far as the tac consoles, I could see three on the Gal-X and four on the Fleet while keeping 4 engie and two sci', but not five because its a revision of the Explorer hull.
BTW I am all for it having all four (or at least three) cruiser commands because its not a dreadnought-from-the-ground-up design.
Shall we include an enhanced battle cloak and an "I win" console too? I really hope your being sarcastic.
If you aren't being sarcastic, with ideas like those, do you really wonder why Cryptic doesn't listen to players requests about the ship?
I'm not sure it has to give up too much. It's already so underperforming due to it's ancient design i highly doubt giving it a bit of an improvement would make it OP.
That's why i'd be completely satisfied with polishing the Dreadnought's Boff layout - the ship itself isn't all THAT bad (it's great for tanking, but outside from really bad random groups, how often do you need a tank these days?), but if you take apart the Avenger (meant as an example) you come across all those little things that it's got to hypothetically "fix" the Galaxy X:
-) 5 fore weapon bays. Either fixing the Lance or make it replaceable / it's energytype changeable comes up regularly. Giving the Dreadnought five weapons slots and a unique Phaser Lance (edit: to fit into the fifth fore weapon slot, to make that clear, i don't mean 5 slots PLUS Lance) would be a nice idea, even at the expense of taking away one from the aft.
-) It's Boff Layout. The Dreadnought's layout is terrible. Other ships can at least upgrade to a Fleet or C-Store variant; the Galaxy's only got it's engineering Boff slots to compensate, and that one doesn't give you the delicious, delicious Lt Cmdr Tactical Buffs.
-) Personally i don't have a big problem with the turn rate, but it's just one more thing the Avenger has and the Dreadnought not. Also: inertia and speed.
-) The Avenger may not be able to take as many hits as a Dreadnought but it's by no means squishy, plus due to power creep Damage is pretty much equal to defense these days.
-) Console slots
-) While we're at it let's add tac consoles
-) Cruiser commands
By no means do i want my Galaxy X to be turned into the Avenger and just giving it all those improvements on top of the existing ones without tradeoff would be a bit on the insane side - but the Avenger has goodies that the Galaxy could really use and sacrifices almost nothing for it except for the fact that it's ugly as hell.
I really don't need more, everything above 2 is serviceable for me, but i also don't see why a tactical warship like the Galaxy X shouldn't have it; with the current layout it certainly wouldn't make the ship OP.
So there will never be an update.
IF there ever is one, it should focus on exactly 2 things:
- get a ltcom tac.
- turn the lance into an integrated weapon with high dps. No more of this 3 minute cd. TRIBBLE. if you park in front of this ship, you are getting hurt. period.
Thats all thats needed. No riping of romulans, or klingons.
FOCUS on the one gimmik this ship is supposed to sport: A huge gun around 200 meter in length shooting stuff.
Also upgrade tbe bortasqu auto turret to an integrated gun.
And stop the cloack TRIBBLE, its a hero dread not a scrummy romulan coward wagon.
That said, the GX is a warship. The entire point of it is to go into harms way, breaking off the saucer serves no purpose. Especially when it has a BFG strapped to the underside. If we could sacrifice the fourth weapon slot on the aft and transfer it forward, with a Lt. Commander tactical slot like the Avenger, we'd probably have a winner. That lance weapon may or may not need damage boost, to bring it more in line with the Avenger's VATA. Keep the same turn rate to even out the extra forward gun slot and call it done.
IMO, players want more Star Trek in their Star Trek Online, not less. We want to see more of the ships we loved from television, and less of these cryptic designs. Don't get me wrong, some of Cryptic's ships have been really nice as of late- but... without the Defiant, Galaxy, Sovereign, Intrepid, etc... this may as well be Space Adventures Online. Granted, it's 30 years later and the Galaxy is showing her age a little, but she needs to remain competitive with some of the other (newer) designs, for game-play purposes.
A lobi store console.
The effect of this console works like this...
When you activate the console, it rolls the ship onto its side, it then pitches really hard up, and backhand slaps whatever is right in front of it.
Gotta use that dinner plate for something
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
To be honest you could give the dread 3 uni com as bo layout and it still wouldnt be as op as the scim by far so i dont really get your comment. The scim is so op that it kind of raises the limit of whats okay and whats op by a large margin. So no i dont get why roms can have a 5/3 + com tac + battle cloak + 5 tac console + hangar + crazy shields while cloaked and turn rate buff and secondary shiel console and all that stuff in one ship but it would be op to have a unique bo-layout on the dread?
No sir it wouldnt. Not saying it should have that but if it did it still wouldnt be as powerful as the scim
A fleet. version would impart aminor stat upgrade that would leave the fleet gal x still lacking the same basic thing it needs to be a good ship worth its money.
I'm not sure what you consider OP, but I would most certainly call having 50% of a ships boff abilities being LTCMDR or higher as being OP. As far as a unique boff layout, if the Fleet Gal-X had two LT Tacs it would most certainly be unique (plus give it four tac consoles and all four cruiser commands). The Gal-X was not built from the ground up as a dreadnought, unlike all of the other dread's in the game, so it should reflect it. I really think that the lance needs to be on par with the Garumba Javelin for effectiveness.
I do wholeheartedly agree that the Scimitar is nuts. I think if thye were going to release that ship with that layout, they should have reserved it for a T6 type ship and pair it with the Typhoon class Battleship.
The Gal-X shouldnt reflect a ground up DN / battlecruiser approach that the others ships have, it is a ramped up Exploration cruiser and should be set up that way. A 4/4 weapons setup and having at least three cruiser commands, if not all four should be a requisite.
There is nothing wrong with a 4/4 weapons setup, especially considering the lance, and the fact that it is a slow turning ship, the problem is that the lance needs to be as good as the Garumbas Javelin, which it isn't. The lance should be hard mounted, not replacable with another weapon, it is the main characteristic of the ship (that and the three nacelles).Four tac consoles should be just fine for the ship as well.
As far as boffs, a Fleet version would be fine with a LTCMDR tac, but with that as the only tac station, the ship needs to be tankier than other DN's. The Excelsior is a fantastic combat ship and it does fine with just that one LTCMDR tac slot.
As far as the Avenger not being squishy, especially in comparison to the Gal-X, it most certainly iis, and it should be. It's also squishier than the Excelsior equivalent as well. As far as DPS being equal to defense, I understand what you are saying but it isn't when it comes to the characteristics of a ship and how forgiving it is. The Gal-X can walk in the middle of a combat (high level PvE) with much more abandon than the Avenger can. If it messes up a little, it doesn't have to withdraw like an Avenger has to in order to recover.
I agree with your sentiment, but pretty much everything compared to the Scimitar is somewhat of a joke.
however no need of 4 tactical console for the cstore version or 5 weapons slot in the front, leave that to the avenger and scimi.
they are way to play with the stats to make it relevant again, return the cloack into an integrated one could be one of the trick to boost his general performance ( i always suggest this even tho i known that cryptic will not do it ).
sometime an intelligent allocation of stats can make a world difference in a good build.
the only things that must be enhanced right of the bat is the lance ( that daesn't mean more firepower ), bo layout and speed/inertia/ turn that could use a better adjustment.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Cryptic is a business, if they see a demand for a product they will make it.
As it stands at the moment, it's a poor T5 ship and falls well short of T5.5 ships (especially the scimitar).
Daizen - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
Selia - Lvl 60 Tactical - Eclipse
Also, does no one ever run Nadion Inversion before using the Phaser Lance? I'm just wondering.
"Look at me I'm a target!"
"Fire the Lance on my mark... MARK!
"How many times have we gone into the breach again R'shee?"
My proposal for a Galaxy bundle
Lance needs to be as good as Javelin? Okay. As long as you're willing to add an equivalent to Siege Mode onto the Gal-X. Something that halves your turnrate and reduces engine power by 10 while adding to weapon power by 10. Y'know, that little feature that makes the dreaded Javelin useless in PvP because a slow-turning destroyer = mincemeat in most PvP. It can even be a problem in PvE against anything that happens to move fast (specifically, escorts and science ships). Oh, and a charge-up sequence that delays usage of your lance by a slightly variable amount of time. Heck, let's even throw in a boost of power loss by 25, increasing the loss from -50 on activation to -75. THEN you can get the apparently awesome capabilities of the Javelin, with the 20 second CD.
As long as we're clear on that, go ahead and ask for it.
Cruisers already got something. That's what the cruiser commands are. The secondary deflector is the science ship response to that. Maybe escorts will get something, I don't know. Most folks consider 'em pretty powerful still, and not in need of such a buff.
Then you've got to make some changes, specifically to:
45k hull
and
+10 power to weapons +10 power to shields
The Excel refit has 42,900 hull and +5 to all power levels.
The Odyssey has 42,000 hull and 10 to weapons, 5 to aux and 5 to engines
You've eclipsed both of those ships and actually given it more hull than the Fleet Galaxy itself.
So you're not really working "on the lines of the excel refit or oddy tac" at this point.
You also want to improve the lance, but not really have a single tradeoff for having this improved lance.
When the fleet Galaxy X comes out, there's a really good chance that your stats will not reflect what Geko does. So brace yourself? Or something.
Cryptic could argue cruisers got cruiser coomands
Most definitely, and if possible during BO's too.
new models of the galaxy and Gal-x should be made equal to the scimitars power including and accounting for the romulan 6.5% extra crit chance
Fed Fans arnt going to buy a scimitar its that simple so cryptic is losing money keeping the fed ships as 3rd place ships
Cryptoc make a new version of the Galaxy and gal-X put a price on it make it comparable to the scimitar and make money
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