test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Fleet Galaxy Dreadnought Announcement Imminent? (Announced)

13468911

Comments

  • sfc#5932 sfc Member Posts: 992 Bug Hunter
    edited February 2014
    rickdanko wrote: »
    As long as my Fleet Galaxy gets saucer separation, I'll be satisfied. :)
    All Fleet Galaxies are flagged to being able to use a Seperation console.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Oh come on. You know what I mean. The X will get the fleet treatment. Which will make it better than a free assault cruiser or star cruiser, the two free cruisers. And I guess you could even count the Galaxy Retro since it was "free" for a time.

    Can they do more to the ship when making it a fleet variant? Sure.
    Should they do more? Yeah, sure.

    Will they do more? Eh, it's Geko and I gave up trying to figure him out ages ago.

    But a fleet X will be better than the free Star Cruiser I got oh so many years ago.

    This is clearly not going to be offered for in game currency or it would be in the patch notes for tomorrow.

    It's a new ship that will be on the C-Store that is a 3 nacelled Galaxy variant. (My guess, again, is Federation Dreadnought Carrier.)

    Considering the Galaxy X will also be for sale, that implies there would be reasons to buy both as a new player.

    Hence why I think:

    Phaser lance is becoming a console. Galaxy X in its default form becomes 10 console (but cloak and lance each take up a console slot).

    Meanwhile, this new ship will be able to use cloak, saucer sep, and lance consoles and will have a more attractive DPS focus than the Galaxy-X, like the Armitage, like the Sovvie refit.

    The new ship will not include the Galaxy costume. New costume. Galaxy unusable unless you own the basic Dreadnought. Venture unusable unless you own the Venture.
  • deathsremnantdeathsremnant Member Posts: 265
    edited February 2014
    Why do people keep referring that Feds/KDF need a "Answer" to the Scimitar...Do you not realize that was what basically the Avenger+Mogh were?...5/3 cruisers, only thing missing was a Hanger bay, but honestly I never understood why the Scimmy got one in the first place.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    shpoks wrote: »
    As long as he doesn't slap that TRIBBLE on my Galaxy-R, I'm good.



    Typo right? :D
    I'm sure you didn't seriously mean 2. :P

    But 2 would be SOOOOOO MAJESTIC.

    ;-)

    (Yes. Typo. I hope.)
  • rmy1081rmy1081 Member Posts: 2,840 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    ...

    It's a new ship that will be on the C-Store that is a 3 nacelled Galaxy variant. (My guess, again, is Federation Dreadnought Carrier.)

    ...

    where does it say it's going to be a totally new ship? source? maybe I missed it?
  • z3ndor99z3ndor99 Member Posts: 1,391 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Right just an idea.... has anyone checked tribble to see if the, fed cloak console text ( mouth full ) has been updated at all? I mean tribble has given us major clues before ie; avenger, it was mentioned in the cloak console text. Just an idea.
  • edited February 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • oldravenman3025oldravenman3025 Member Posts: 1,892 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Not liking the idea of saucer separation on the Dreadnought Cruiser. Such is nothing more than a gimmick. And it makes no sense considering the nature of the upgrade from the standard Exploration Cruiser (i.e. That BFG strapped underneath the primary hull )


    The "X" series needs something actually useful like additional cruiser commands to bring it in line with other cruisers. And/or a ten console Fleet variant. Improved accuracy for the phaser lance would be nice too.


    If they are going to keep the standard cloaking technology, it needs to be an innate ability, not a console.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Why do people keep referring that Feds/KDF need a "Answer" to the Scimitar...Do you not realize that was what basically the Avenger+Mogh were?...5/3 cruisers, only thing missing was a Hanger bay, but honestly I never understood why the Scimmy got one in the first place.

    The most erregious thing about the 5 forward gun debate is that all the 50k builds use beam arrays, meaning its totally irrelevant that a ship has 5 guns fore.
    Its a gimmik.
    These builds do rely on a combination of things cryptic will have to change long term, because the dps really breaks the content.

    So why is everyone fixated on that.

    The galaxy x gimmik should be the lance: narrow arc high damage frontal gun. if you stat it properly you can even give the GX 2 Tac consoles, so its primary damage comes from the lance.

    This way you would not have an a2b monster that also fires a murder lance. You'd only have the murder lance.

    I would go as far and say all galaxies should have a slight slant to science.
    Give the galaxy r sensor analysis, give the gx the dderidex boff seating and a capable rework of the lance.
    Sabotage aux2bat builds by keeping tac console count low.
  • edited February 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • sudonamisudonami Member Posts: 143 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    I would go as far and say all galaxies should have a slight slant to science.
    Give the galaxy r sensor analysis, give the gx the dderidex boff seating and a capable rework of the lance.
    Sabotage aux2bat builds by keeping tac console count low.


    Funny you mention the science part. The TNG designs of the galaxy (including the gal-x) had an secondary deflector.
  • edited February 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • sudonamisudonami Member Posts: 143 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Either way that's two deflectors, ones just for shields and the other is for sensor data.
  • ddesjardinsddesjardins Member Posts: 3,056 Media Corps
    edited February 2014
    Why do people keep referring that Feds/KDF need a "Answer" to the Scimitar...Do you not realize that was what basically the Avenger+Mogh were?...5/3 cruisers, only thing missing was a Hanger bay, but honestly I never understood why the Scimmy got one in the first place.

    You can't compare them. You're not even close. I own all three.

    The Scimitar Warbird is in a class all it's own for THREE reasons:

    First - it's innate battlecloak adds movement and turn bonuses for destroyer-like manoeuvrability. The Mogh struggles with a simple cloak, and the feds 'may' use a cloak console if you've alredy purchased another ship (Galaxy-X). So the Scimitar is a true 10-console ship, while the Mogh gets a marginal cloak and the feds get the short end of the stick with a marginal cloak AND a 9-console build.

    Second - Commander Tac bridge position, plus universal Lt. com and ensign slots. You can literally have any loadout you want including a full aux2bat build. The Mogh and Avenger both have a lt. Commander tac position, and cannot fully implement an optimized A2B build.

    Three: Romulan Elite Droneships - 2 at a time:
    Romulan Drone Ship Gear and Abilities:
    * Disruptor Beam Array x3
    * Plasma Torpedoes
    * Multi-Spectral Emitters
    * Tri-Phasic Emitters
    * Beam Array: Overload: III
    * Beam Array: Fire at Will: III
    * Emergency Power to Shields III
    * Multi-Spectral Emitter - Sensor Distortion II

    Good Lord Man. The Mogh and Avenger get funky torpedoes.... "gosh-darn" a spatial charges console does more damage.

    Oh, and I forgot - the Scimitar has 5 tac consoles.

    When you talk about available power and power transfer, the Scimitar is the winner hands down.

    Better manoeuvrability (means you can engage more) + more available power (shoot more) + higher tactical capability (so many options to choose - FAW3 + APB3) = winner!
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,896 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    skollulfr wrote: »
    those where ground assault craft on the scimi. they where too small to hold a torpedo, set alone any anti-ship weapons, since they where smaller than probes.
    calling those things fighters is like calling a prius an apc


    thats not sabotaging aux2batt, thats sabotaging the entire ship

    What kind of probe are you talking about? That has to be one huge probe...because there are probes that can go what was it...like warp 8 or maybe even 9 and they were hardly bigger than a person and were transportable onto a standard transporter pad. This was during TNG...I imagine technology has evolved since then.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • davkurasdavkuras Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    If they are going to keep the standard cloaking technology, it needs to be an innate ability, not a console.

    that or I'd settle for Battle Cloak. Wasting a console slot to not being able to re-cloak during battle seems really stupid.
  • kintishokintisho Member Posts: 1,040 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Is it shiny? Is it scrumptious? Will it make us money?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Why do people keep referring that Feds/KDF need a "Answer" to the Scimitar...Do you not realize that was what basically the Avenger+Mogh were?...5/3 cruisers, only thing missing was a Hanger bay, but honestly I never understood why the Scimmy got one in the first place.

    Because the Scimitar had a hanger in the movie, full of Scorpion flyers. :P
  • sunfranckssunfrancks Member Posts: 3,925 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    No 3 pack, the current 9 pack killed my enthusiasm for ever getting packs again.

    Saucer sep, 10 consoles, better hull and a better boff seating layout please!

    More than likely a 3 pack though, as the devs never put time into older ships unless more money can be had..
    Fed: Eng Lib Borg (Five) Tac Andorian (Shen) Sci Alien/Klingon (Maelrock) KDF:Tac Romulan KDF (Sasha) Tac Klingon (K'dopis)
    Founder, member and former leader to Pride Of The Federation Fleet.
    What I feel after I hear about every decision made since Andre "Mobile Games Generalisimo" Emerson arrived...
    3oz8xC9gn8Fh4DK9Q4.gif





  • misterde3misterde3 Member Posts: 4,195 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    sudonami wrote: »
    Funny you mention the science part. The TNG designs of the galaxy (including the gal-x) had an secondary deflector.

    Funny how the TNGTM never mentiones the Galaxy-X because it predates "All Good things" by several years so how is that supposed to be even possible?
    Besides it only states the saucer section has tiny navigation deflectors (so tiny they look like windows) for use when it's separated from the lower hull.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    rmy1081 wrote: »
    where does it say it's going to be a totally new ship? source? maybe I missed it?

    Fleet versions get included in patch notes.

    C-Store updates are undocumented.

    We have a history of both approaches to upgrading ships but C-Store versions come with an added gimmick and may or may not be 10 consoles. (Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not. Generally, they're more likely to be when you have multiple consoles you can use together on a ship.)
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Also, from Branflakes, regarding the G-X announcement:
    You better know it We don't tease often*, but when we do, it's because there is usually substance behind it

    Looking forward to tomorrow afternoon.

    Cheers,

    Brandon =/\=

    *okay, it's pretty often

    SOURCE: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=15380181&postcount=171
  • john98837john98837 Member Posts: 761 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    The Odyssey is the Flagship of the Federation, and thus the "answer" to the Scimitar.

    Also if you actually think they would give that to the gal-X, then i am the king of Antarctica.

    The Odyssey is a bad joke, as is the Galaxy and Galaxy X in its current form. Ofcourse they won't make the Galaxy X a true answer to the scimitar. They seem very intent on keeping fed players in crappy ships.
  • johnstewardjohnsteward Member Posts: 1,073 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Still hoping the lance will be an extra weapon like the kumari wing cannon
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Still hoping the lance will be an extra weapon like the kumari wing cannon

    That's an interesting idea but wouldn't that limit the basic Galaxy-X even more, having to give up a weapon slot?
  • edited February 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • johnstewardjohnsteward Member Posts: 1,073 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Hope not! Unless it is part of a set bonus, I don't want to have to use a console slot in that way personally.

    Extra weapon != console slot

    I wouldnt mind 8 9th weapon slot for that. Just a BFG up front low arc low fire rate very high dmg. Much more fun than a special power usable every three minutes
  • supergirl1611supergirl1611 Member Posts: 809 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    Why do i have the feeling that if a new Galaxy-x is released as a c-store ship the Phaser lance will no longer be integrated and end up being a console, meaning if they make her a 10 console ship we potentially loss a console space.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    reyan01 wrote: »
    I, personally, am still hoping that it's a C-store version - I maintain the opinion that the ship will receive better attention/additions this way, whereas (as I've said in earlier posts) a Fleet version would probably, judging by all past Fleet ships, be extra hull, extra BOFF and one extra console slot.

    Plus, C-store (SHOULD) = accountwide unlock. Fleet ship doesn't.

    i agree, a rleet upgrade does nothing for the gx, it will still be inferior to its other fleet level competitors.

    A proper, new c store gx would have the best chance at getting a sgnificant upgrade.
  • misterde3misterde3 Member Posts: 4,195 Arc User
    edited February 2014
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Well, whichever we end up with - I just hope that the lance is NOT, in any way shape or form, the same as the one on the 'existing' Gal-X.

    One of the reasons I stopped using my Gal-X was the lance. What is the point of a powerful weapon that, more often than not, winds up MISSING it's target??
    I'll never forget playing HOSE once - I parked my Galaxy-X very close to one of the Unimatrix ships, buffed everything and then fired the lance. And it missed. It missed the largest NPC enemy ship in the game. Stood right next to it. And to add insult to injury, the unimatrix ship lanced me - and their lances are the polar oposite of the Gal-X's in that theirs rarely miss.

    So, as I said, I am definitely hoping that the new version improves on the lance, because if it comes with the inaccurate lump that the orinial comes with, it's not going to be worth the Zen/Fleet modules.

    An interesting idea a buddy of mine had was that the Galaxy-X shoud use a slightly altered version of the Quantum Field Focus thingy the Vesta can use because:
    a.) it looks like a Federation weapon and not like a reflex gun from "Macross"
    b.) it actually works

    And yeah, that would be a simple solution to the problem.
    Cryptic can reuse an existing mechanic and for example just alter it to several short beam bursts instead of a continuous beam. The only downside to this might be that it can no longer penetrate the target.
This discussion has been closed.