"If you are a Star Trek Online 600 Day Subscription Veteran, or Lifetime Subscriber, you can continue to choose to claim the Tier 5 Galaxy Exploration Cruiser Retrofit for Free Vice Admiral Ship Token."
Is this a new thing or have LTS always been able to do this?
The blog mentions a Galaxy bridge...is this a new, series-accurate bridge? Are there any screenshots available?
The Bridge is old and more bested on the Generation movie you can find them right now in the C-Store just go Ships>Bridge>and it should be near the bottom.
Extremely thrilled about this, very happy about the changes and additions to the line. I, for one am satisfied with how my Fleet Failaxy operates, and the upgrade to the saucer separation could only make it better, as I do use that quite regularly.
Super psyched about the changes to the Galaxy-X. While a hanger wouldn't be my first choice when it comes to ways to make the ship on par with other Dreadnoughts, most of the very, very good ships in-game have one anyway, so it certainly doesn't hurt in any way. (Now only if Fed has some kind of frigate pet, one can dream.)
Though, to be honest, not really that excited about the Ensign Uni boff slot, probably would have worked better on the original Galaxy than the Dreadnought, but then again, it doesn't really change anything, so I'm not against it.
Reserving serious judgment for when the stats for the Fleet Dreadnought are released, here's hoping that it gets a LtC Tactical station, perhaps a layout similar to the D'deridex, with a LtC Tac and Engi, Commander Engi, maybe Ens Sci and Uni. Would be satisfied with just a straight 10% buff though.
Overall, yay Cryptic, love the updates. Keep on going with this.
Wow, I feel like I've just been offered 1 million dollars then immediately had it taken away again.
Seriously thanks for getting my hopes up then revealing that most of the changes are only on the Dreadnaught (which I don't have or want).
PLUS combined with this:
"If you already own any of these Galaxy ships, the Galaxy Bundle will not be available for purchase."
Why aren't you adding the new BOFF seating and Hangar to the standard Galaxy as well?!?
Honestly? They hate the Galaxy class, which is the only possible explanation for totally ignoring player feedback on changing their boff stations to make them useful, and instead giving a minor update to saucer sep and adding a hangar that no one wanted..
I have to chime in in agreement with the consensus. Though I was excited initally with the words "Galaxy Class Reboot" and "bringing the Galaxy ships up to speed"... I am now underwhelmed at the result.
As others have said, making these tanky ships more tanky doesn't seem at all desirable in a game with many less iconic 'tank-scorts' able to dish twice the danger and still survive.
Ensign Tactical - Seriously? WHO would ever put anything but a Tac in this slot? This is a non-improvement improvement. It changes nothing. [On second glance, it is TRULY laughable. Is Sci a good choice? So a LT Sci and a Ens Sci - really, is that useful? Or an Eng - ANOTHER Eng in a ship already too heavy with shared-CD engineers? So we're back to Tac. Huh.]
Hangar bay? Not really helping. None of the Galaxy class ships ever flew as Carriers, in any way. This is a lazy bandaid. A good example of something the players DID ask for, that you guys should have REFUSED.
2 piece bonus? Limiting flexibility rather than expanding it.
Wide beam Phaser Lance attack? An improvement, but kinda meh.
Saucer Separation 'smoothing'? That's a bug fix, not an 'improvement'.
Saucer Sep for Dreadnought? Sure, an improvement, but personally, I'm not a huge fan - I like to see my Gals fully connected, fighting away.
And most of all, as much 'love' as the Dread got, I don't really see any love at all for the traditional Galaxy-D. Which is what I was hoping for, personally...
I love this game, but I continue to be disappointed at the Galaxy class underperformance. There are tons of better choices to fly, and I would LOVE to fly a Galaxy with even a few of the rational, well-thought out improvements others have posted on these forums.
The vast majority is NOT asking for the Galaxy class to be the BEST ship in the fleet. I generally fly the Avenger on my Feds, which is great, but not 'the best'. I see the Excelsior referred to as a great ship, and it certainly seems that the -D and the -X should be as good as this ship. We just want it NOT TO SUCK. But I have to say, even with A2B treatment, it is pretty lower-middle-class for the flagship of one of the iconic Trek properties.
6000 posts about this, (many terrible but many excellent), should have been enough to help the decisions made. This update is woefully disappointing, to my eyes.
Please reconsider ARC. Please make it optional, at the least. PLEASE.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.
The whole thing stinks of stupid. Seriously - I honestly can't get my head around this whole thing. I mean, look at it. The Fleet Galaxy can tank well but has no teeth. So what's the answer to that? Here's a clue: it has NOTHING to do with making it better at tanking in a game that doesn't really need tanks anyway!!
Or, to put this another way; you're given a new PC. It's powerful, but not very fast. Do you look at making it more powerful? NO - that was never the problem. You look at making it faster. Unless you're an idiot.
Or you're comfortable enough with the knowledge that the majority of your playerbase are idiots .
That would make it a Flight-Deck Cruiser, and then people would probably complain about it losing the Weapons Eff. and Maneuvering Cruiser Commands.
Yeah, take me for example - that would royally TRIBBLE me off. Maybe to the point of quitting the game. The Galaxy class was never a carrier or a FDC and I just want to fly my favourite ship from Star Trek as it was.
You can't imagine the sigh of relief I felt when I saw that only the dread is being slapped with a hangar, while my Galaxy-R managed to escape being turned into a joke.
That said, they coudl've made the ens.engi on the R universal as well, or maybe add a special weapon to the T5 C-Store Galaxy-R like 'Heavy Beam Array' to help with the low DPS a bit.
Eh, I'll take what's offered - they didn't make it better, but at least they didn't make it worse. I do like the new saucer separation that won't put my ship to a full stop.
Keep the Galaxy-R as is, but make the ensign station universal and maybe raise the turn rate one point.
But completely change the Saucer Seperation mode.
When separated, the whole ships turns into a Destroyer/Cruiser hybrid.
It doesn't need cannons, but a comparable turn rate to other destroyers.
Give it a phaser beam point defense console that is compatible with the anti matter spread (which is triggered on the saucer though if used) for a set benefit. The console beams are short low damage bursts that fire on anything with 5km distance and have extra damage against small craft and torpedos with high accuracy.
Separated the boff layout changes the LC Engineer to a LC Tac.
Separated the 4th engineering console becomes inert and a 3rd tac console is activated. (Ship is operated from a different bridge dedicated to battle after all in separation mode)
The cruiser commands get reduced to Weapon and speed buff, only the whole ship has all 4 available.
Give the ship skin an overhaul to give the ship the same or better viisual quality as the Ambassador.
If possible, give the saucer carrier commands and let it operate as a single unique frigate pet, no hangar bay for regular pets.
Make this version of the ship a C-Store only purchase and keep the current VA one for free for the vets if you have to.
I know I would finally pay money for it and you had a true hero ship that is worthy of the Name Enterprise.
Here's what I see are "improvements" if I'm so bold:
Saucer separation
Non-stop firing
This is pretty much the only new tech I see. And here's what is why I am calling this the Galaxy X Dreadful instead of dreadnaught:
2 piece bonus asks you to sacrifice 2 valuable console slots for +20 armor(skill)/+20 plating(skill)/+1 turn
I mean really? 2 Fleet Mine consoles can give you more for your ship than this will.
Wide beam while separated
What happened to the hundreds upon hundreds of folks complaining the lance doesn't hit its target very well. Are we really supposed to be excited for a buckshot version of this with less accuracy and less damage?
Hangar bay
What good is this again? There are no frigate-level pets for this at all. It will end up being a bunch of dead pets in a world of AoE
Universal Ensign
Are you kidding me? Tac Team is going to be a lot more useful to help augment those pitiful DPS issues than another hazard team or engineering team. I mean come on.
So given the public outcry that this is terrible and given that anybody with a logical sense of value for their dollar can see this is a terrible purchase, why are we being subjected to this? People have waited years for a revamp and this is what we get.. There's no logic and honestly is really disrespectful to the first group of folks who were duped into buying the Galaxy X to begin with.
Putting my two cents here after about a day of calming down and looking over everyone's rants comments.
Frankly, I find the adjustments a warm welcome. I got a Fleet Gal-R but never got the others. I never cared for DPS numbers and the like. I'm the guy who likes a challenge, no matter how one-sided it is. I mean, I barely even reach 4K DPS with my Mirror Heavy and MVAE, so there's a challenge right there. 'Sides, I love drawing aggro with it, especially in SB Defense.
As for the Gal-X redesigns, here's the problem: it's not the BOFF layout, it's our perception. One of the arguments I've seen as to why it should have a better BOFF layout is that it's a "Warship". It's appearance in "All Good Things..." suggest that it's less "Warship" and more "Ace Custom". There's a game called "Birth of the Federation" that classifies the X as a "heavy cruiser", which is more in line with that. Y'know what that game considers a Dreadnought? The Sovereign. That's right, the Enterprise-E. Our "Assault Cruiser".
Frankly, I don't want a Federation Scimitar. I want a ship I can enjoy and I've been hemming and hawwing about the Galaxys for ages. And I think this is my time.
Yeah, I like a challenge too. Some ships should be PVP pwnzor minmax ships. Others should be niche ships, with cool gimmicks that maybe aren't so min-maxed but can be used really well in PVE or similar.
And then there SHOULD be a few ships that are really hard to pilot right, and maybe have subpar stats, but that are fun because they're a challenge.
Frankly, I find the adjustments a warm welcome. I got a Fleet Gal-R but never got the others. I never cared for DPS numbers and the like. I'm the guy who likes a challenge, no matter how one-sided it is. I mean, I barely even reach 4K DPS with my Mirror Heavy and MVAE, so there's a challenge right there.
If you like the challenge of driving an inferior ship, then use the Tier 4 Galaxy but dont ask the rest of us to be stuck with a bad ship because of that. I want to enter a PVP with a iconic ship and feel useful not a burden. And I said again, I dont want to be OP like scimatar.. just useful.
Putting my two cents here after about a day of calming down and looking over everyone's rants comments.
Frankly, I find the adjustments a warm welcome. I got a Fleet Gal-R but never got the others. I never cared for DPS numbers and the like. I'm the guy who likes a challenge, no matter how one-sided it is. I mean, I barely even reach 4K DPS with my Mirror Heavy and MVAE, so there's a challenge right there. 'Sides, I love drawing aggro with it, especially in SB Defense.
As for the Gal-X redesigns, here's the problem: it's not the BOFF layout, it's our perception. One of the arguments I've seen as to why it should have a better BOFF layout is that it's a "Warship". It's appearance in "All Good Things..." suggest that it's less "Warship" and more "Ace Custom". There's a game called "Birth of the Federation" that classifies the X as a "heavy cruiser", which is more in line with that. Y'know what that game considers a Dreadnought? The Sovereign. That's right, the Enterprise-E. Our "Assault Cruiser".
Frankly, I don't want a Federation Scimitar. I want a ship I can enjoy and I've been hemming and hawwing about the Galaxys for ages. And I think this is my time.
Again nobody wants a fed scimitar. Not a single person I believe is asking for 5 tac consoles and 5 forward weapons. They're asking for a useful ship beyond tanking(which is as useful as two left shoes). I wouldn't ask a stirring hive of Gal X fans to calm down when Cryptic just came in and beat it with a disrespectful sick. :rolleyes:
The Galaxy-R is not a poor ship, she just has a bad rap. she is plenty capable, she just takes a different outlook and a willingness to think outside the box. The average forum goer is volatile, argumentative, and a parrot of the "common wisdom" (which is rarely common *OR* wise...) They also tend to be ego filled and certain they know better then others, especially the developers themselves...
Put that all together, and you get 600 page threads certain that a perfectly fine ship is unplayable, even when given hard, numeric proofs to the contrary... "Ship is not how I like it, its therefore broken, the devs are incompetent because they don't listen to my masterful insights!"
The Gal-X was a sweet ride before given a strong captain to tame her. Now, she just might become my ship of choice... Galaxy base, hanagar bay, ability to swing sci (The one thing that tends to keep me out of ships I like is that damned RPer in me that screams "You know, you are a sci captain... you would think your ship would have some sort of science capability... just sayin'!") and separation for when I want to pretend I'm in an escort? Yes, please!
Thanks a ton! Next time you tease me updates to my favorite class of ships, could you maybe not tease me for OVER 2 BLOODY YEARS!!! :P
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Galaxy base, hanagar bay, ability to swing sci (The one thing that tends to keep me out of ships I like is that damned RPer in me that screams "You know, you are a sci captain... you would think your ship would have some sort of science capability... just sayin'!") and separation for when I want to pretend I'm in an escort? Yes, please!
We agree, is a fantastic rolplay ship. Is lovely to fly it on the sol system or even see the phasers animation when she do Fire At Will. But in the terms of been useful for the team, is a TRIBBLE ship.. maybe the worst.
So, if you are happy because now you can separate the ship and do rolplay fantastic, but dont argue that the ship is balance with the rest for that! I love to rolplay, but I also want to be useful, and it can be both things (look at the Sove) but for some reason is not.
"To this day, these remain some of the most popular ships is STO undoubtedly due to their iconic stature."
Only if you are admitting that this game is simply Star Trek The Kiddie Generation Online. Fortunately for me, I stopped giving Cryptic money and will not give any more money until they stop wallowing around in ancient Picard history.
The Galaxy-R is not a poor ship, she just has a bad rap. she is plenty capable, she just takes a different outlook and a willingness to think outside the box. The average forum goer is volatile, argumentative, and a parrot of the "common wisdom" (which is rarely common *OR* wise...) They also tend to be ego filled and certain they know better then others, especially the developers themselves...
Put that all together, and you get 600 page threads certain that a perfectly fine ship is unplayable, even when given hard, numeric proofs to the contrary... "Ship is not how I like it, its therefore broken, the devs are incompetent because they don't listen to my masterful insights!"
I use the Galaxy-R as my main ship on my primary Fed. character 99% of the time. I invested a lot of time, knowledge and resources into her. She can pull her weight around, no doubt about it.
Still doesn't change the fact that whenever I switch to every other cruiser I own with the same gear, my efficency at least tripples and the time needed to finish a STF reduces significantly.
Not saying it's unplayavble, cause obviusly I'm using her for any content as well. But it's not fine. At least to me it's not perfectly fine to have the iconic Galaxy Class at the bottom of the proverbial barrel.
Love how you condescendingly dismissed everyone else's opinion calling them 'parrots' though. Classy.
Maybe I'm just missing something but is there ANYTHING even added or fixed for my t-5 admiral galaxy? You know...the galaxy that has about 6000 post about it and how awfull it is. Was this just missed somehow? because I'm not seeing anything.
"To this day, these remain some of the most popular ships is STO undoubtedly due to their iconic stature."
Only if you are admitting that this game is simply Star Trek The Kiddie Generation Online. Fortunately for me, I stopped giving Cryptic money and will not give any more money until they stop wallowing around in ancient Picard history.
Pardon me, but your signature says this:
"Picard Trek is not True Trek. Only Kirk Trek is True Trek. Picard Trek will be patterned for data storage."
So you much prefer ancient Kirk history. Excellent. Good for you. I can let you keep your ancient history; leave mine alone. You may not like it, but the Galaxy D is, (like the original Enterprise, as well as the -A and the Exeter, I think), are ships that have 'iconic stature.'
The Defiant APPROACHES iconic. The Voyager APPROACHES iconic. The D'Deridex APPROACHES iconic. The -C and the -E APPROACH iconic. Some of the various BoPs and the warbirds APPROACH iconic. The New Movie Enterprise is too young to be iconic yet. NONE of these are the equivalent of the ones I mentioned in terms of defining the Star Trek property.
So disrespect the 'oldsters' as much as you want. When one thinks of Star Trek, they are not thinking of a Tal Shiar Adapted Battlecruiser, or a Scimitar, or a JHAS.
It's the platter, with the tube, and the 2 other tubes. Everything else revolves around that.
None of which changes the fact that whatever the Galaxy can do, another cruiser can do it better.
The play arguments have been beaten to death. No one wants anything more than a viable endgame ship that is not (less than 50% as effective as other ships in the same vein). You can drive whatever ship you want. Just make the ship NOT SUCK please.
Please reconsider ARC. Please make it optional, at the least. PLEASE.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.
The Galaxy-R is not a poor ship, she just has a bad rap. she is plenty capable, she just takes a different outlook and a willingness to think outside the box. The average forum goer is volatile, argumentative, and a parrot of the "common wisdom" (which is rarely common *OR* wise...) They also tend to be ego filled and certain they know better then others, especially the developers themselves...
Put that all together, and you get 600 page threads certain that a perfectly fine ship is unplayable, even when given hard, numeric proofs to the contrary... "Ship is not how I like it, its therefore broken, the devs are incompetent because they don't listen to my masterful insights!"
The Gal-X was a sweet ride before given a strong captain to tame her. Now, she just might become my ship of choice... Galaxy base, hanagar bay, ability to swing sci (The one thing that tends to keep me out of ships I like is that damned RPer in me that screams "You know, you are a sci captain... you would think your ship would have some sort of science capability... just sayin'!") and separation for when I want to pretend I'm in an escort? Yes, please!
Thanks a ton! Next time you tease me updates to my favorite class of ships, could you maybe not tease me for OVER 2 BLOODY YEARS!!! :P
Unfortunately, it is posts like yours that the devs seem to pay the most attention to when it comes to things like this.
Now, I had stayed completely away from this Galaxy bombshell, but well, I want to interject now.
When people say comments like "The ships isn't bad, you just don't know how to fly it", generally I would agree. However, you are wrong in this case. The Gal and the Gal-X just simply don't fill any needed role, and anything you can creatively come up with to make it decent at anything, can easily be done by getting a different ship.
Want to use cannons effectively on a Gal-X? Well, you could load up on cannon doffs and only have RF1/SV1. Its very expensive, and you use up your doff slots. Then you need to buff your turn rate. Well, you could load up with RCS consoles,/Fleet RCS consoles and get some kind of measurable turn rate.
That is a buttload of dilithium, EC, and time.
Or just get an Avenger. Cheaper, more effective, and can do everything you are trying to do in the Gal-X, only a lot better.
Want to tank? Oddy is easily an equal, if not superior tank to both the Gal-X as well as the Gal-R, and it has a bit more teeth.
Science focused? Well, you could take that En. Universal and make it a sci, losing tac team, but I suppose you could get doffs for tac team AND cannons just to get 1 more en. science ability. Again, a lot of time and money.
Or get an Ambassador.
I initially looked at the C when they introduced it, and I thought it was garbage for the role I was filling, but I clearly could see the role that it was filling, and it did quite well. A Sci focused cruiser, and honestly, I didn't ever hear much complaining about that ship.
Then there are those that say they like a challenge. That is fine, and thank you for proving the point that the Galaxy ships have been a pile of TRIBBLE and will continue to be. I also like a challenge. I don't ask that everyone else suffer because of it though. I'll take a mirror ship, or standard gear, or a shuttle when I want a challenge. Not tell everyone to not buff this ship because I like the challenge of it.
So I see my favorite Trek ship in the ship store, having never bought it. Fix a bug issue, make a cosmetic change (which is the only way I can think to classify the universal En. change) and offer the the chance to replace 2 fleet RCS consoles that give me armor and hull HP, for 2 consoles that give less turn and less hull HP, AND I have to pay $40 for it?
I guess there is still hope for a decent Fleet Gal-X: Commander Tac, 5th forward weapon, 5 tac consoles, a passive +10% crith. But heck, even then it's still inferior to a battle cloaking, drone ship launching, Scimitar. :rolleyes:
The funny thing is that like always, the devs or the community representatives has gone missing.. again. We not even get a "Thanks for the feedback, I am going to send it to the correct eyes".
It is like they know they are wrong but still they can not admit it.
<snip>...
So I see my favorite Trek ship in the ship store, having never bought it. Fix a bug issue, make a cosmetic change (which is the only way I can think to classify the universal En. change) and offer the the chance to replace 2 fleet RCS consoles that give me armor and hull HP, for 2 consoles that give less turn and less hull HP, AND I have to pay $40 for it?
Uhm....thanks?
Yeah, I still won't be buying it.
Well summarized.
Please reconsider ARC. Please make it optional, at the least. PLEASE.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.
Comments
Been there for at least a year or longer?
The Bridge is old and more bested on the Generation movie you can find them right now in the C-Store just go Ships>Bridge>and it should be near the bottom.
Super psyched about the changes to the Galaxy-X. While a hanger wouldn't be my first choice when it comes to ways to make the ship on par with other Dreadnoughts, most of the very, very good ships in-game have one anyway, so it certainly doesn't hurt in any way. (Now only if Fed has some kind of frigate pet, one can dream.)
Though, to be honest, not really that excited about the Ensign Uni boff slot, probably would have worked better on the original Galaxy than the Dreadnought, but then again, it doesn't really change anything, so I'm not against it.
Reserving serious judgment for when the stats for the Fleet Dreadnought are released, here's hoping that it gets a LtC Tactical station, perhaps a layout similar to the D'deridex, with a LtC Tac and Engi, Commander Engi, maybe Ens Sci and Uni. Would be satisfied with just a straight 10% buff though.
Overall, yay Cryptic, love the updates. Keep on going with this.
Seriously thanks for getting my hopes up then revealing that most of the changes are only on the Dreadnaught (which I don't have or want).
PLUS combined with this:
"If you already own any of these Galaxy ships, the Galaxy Bundle will not be available for purchase."
Why aren't you adding the new BOFF seating and Hangar to the standard Galaxy as well?!?
Nah it was more like offering you a million dollars and find out when you got it that it is monopoly money LOL
Honestly? They hate the Galaxy class, which is the only possible explanation for totally ignoring player feedback on changing their boff stations to make them useful, and instead giving a minor update to saucer sep and adding a hangar that no one wanted..
That would make it a Flight-Deck Cruiser, and then people would probably complain about it losing the Weapons Eff. and Maneuvering Cruiser Commands.
That being said, if they ever get around to making a T5 Galaxy bundle, a science-oriented Flight-Deck Cruiser version would be neato.
As others have said, making these tanky ships more tanky doesn't seem at all desirable in a game with many less iconic 'tank-scorts' able to dish twice the danger and still survive.
Ensign Tactical - Seriously? WHO would ever put anything but a Tac in this slot? This is a non-improvement improvement. It changes nothing. [On second glance, it is TRULY laughable. Is Sci a good choice? So a LT Sci and a Ens Sci - really, is that useful? Or an Eng - ANOTHER Eng in a ship already too heavy with shared-CD engineers? So we're back to Tac. Huh.]
Hangar bay? Not really helping. None of the Galaxy class ships ever flew as Carriers, in any way. This is a lazy bandaid. A good example of something the players DID ask for, that you guys should have REFUSED.
2 piece bonus? Limiting flexibility rather than expanding it.
Wide beam Phaser Lance attack? An improvement, but kinda meh.
Saucer Separation 'smoothing'? That's a bug fix, not an 'improvement'.
Saucer Sep for Dreadnought? Sure, an improvement, but personally, I'm not a huge fan - I like to see my Gals fully connected, fighting away.
And most of all, as much 'love' as the Dread got, I don't really see any love at all for the traditional Galaxy-D. Which is what I was hoping for, personally...
I love this game, but I continue to be disappointed at the Galaxy class underperformance. There are tons of better choices to fly, and I would LOVE to fly a Galaxy with even a few of the rational, well-thought out improvements others have posted on these forums.
The vast majority is NOT asking for the Galaxy class to be the BEST ship in the fleet. I generally fly the Avenger on my Feds, which is great, but not 'the best'. I see the Excelsior referred to as a great ship, and it certainly seems that the -D and the -X should be as good as this ship. We just want it NOT TO SUCK. But I have to say, even with A2B treatment, it is pretty lower-middle-class for the flagship of one of the iconic Trek properties.
6000 posts about this, (many terrible but many excellent), should have been enough to help the decisions made. This update is woefully disappointing, to my eyes.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.
Or you're comfortable enough with the knowledge that the majority of your playerbase are idiots .
Yeah, take me for example - that would royally TRIBBLE me off. Maybe to the point of quitting the game. The Galaxy class was never a carrier or a FDC and I just want to fly my favourite ship from Star Trek as it was.
You can't imagine the sigh of relief I felt when I saw that only the dread is being slapped with a hangar, while my Galaxy-R managed to escape being turned into a joke.
That said, they coudl've made the ens.engi on the R universal as well, or maybe add a special weapon to the T5 C-Store Galaxy-R like 'Heavy Beam Array' to help with the low DPS a bit.
Eh, I'll take what's offered - they didn't make it better, but at least they didn't make it worse. I do like the new saucer separation that won't put my ship to a full stop.
Keep the Galaxy-R as is, but make the ensign station universal and maybe raise the turn rate one point.
But completely change the Saucer Seperation mode.
When separated, the whole ships turns into a Destroyer/Cruiser hybrid.
It doesn't need cannons, but a comparable turn rate to other destroyers.
Give it a phaser beam point defense console that is compatible with the anti matter spread (which is triggered on the saucer though if used) for a set benefit. The console beams are short low damage bursts that fire on anything with 5km distance and have extra damage against small craft and torpedos with high accuracy.
Separated the boff layout changes the LC Engineer to a LC Tac.
Separated the 4th engineering console becomes inert and a 3rd tac console is activated. (Ship is operated from a different bridge dedicated to battle after all in separation mode)
The cruiser commands get reduced to Weapon and speed buff, only the whole ship has all 4 available.
Give the ship skin an overhaul to give the ship the same or better viisual quality as the Ambassador.
If possible, give the saucer carrier commands and let it operate as a single unique frigate pet, no hangar bay for regular pets.
Make this version of the ship a C-Store only purchase and keep the current VA one for free for the vets if you have to.
I know I would finally pay money for it and you had a true hero ship that is worthy of the Name Enterprise.
How does that sound, guys?
Saucer separation Non-stop firing
This is pretty much the only new tech I see. And here's what is why I am calling this the Galaxy X Dreadful instead of dreadnaught:
2 piece bonus asks you to sacrifice 2 valuable console slots for +20 armor(skill)/+20 plating(skill)/+1 turn
I mean really? 2 Fleet Mine consoles can give you more for your ship than this will.Wide beam while separated
What happened to the hundreds upon hundreds of folks complaining the lance doesn't hit its target very well. Are we really supposed to be excited for a buckshot version of this with less accuracy and less damage?Hangar bay
What good is this again? There are no frigate-level pets for this at all. It will end up being a bunch of dead pets in a world of AoEUniversal Ensign
Are you kidding me? Tac Team is going to be a lot more useful to help augment those pitiful DPS issues than another hazard team or engineering team. I mean come on.So given the public outcry that this is terrible and given that anybody with a logical sense of value for their dollar can see this is a terrible purchase, why are we being subjected to this? People have waited years for a revamp and this is what we get.. There's no logic and honestly is really disrespectful to the first group of folks who were duped into buying the Galaxy X to begin with.
Frankly, I find the adjustments a warm welcome. I got a Fleet Gal-R but never got the others. I never cared for DPS numbers and the like. I'm the guy who likes a challenge, no matter how one-sided it is. I mean, I barely even reach 4K DPS with my Mirror Heavy and MVAE, so there's a challenge right there. 'Sides, I love drawing aggro with it, especially in SB Defense.
As for the Gal-X redesigns, here's the problem: it's not the BOFF layout, it's our perception. One of the arguments I've seen as to why it should have a better BOFF layout is that it's a "Warship". It's appearance in "All Good Things..." suggest that it's less "Warship" and more "Ace Custom". There's a game called "Birth of the Federation" that classifies the X as a "heavy cruiser", which is more in line with that. Y'know what that game considers a Dreadnought? The Sovereign. That's right, the Enterprise-E. Our "Assault Cruiser".
Frankly, I don't want a Federation Scimitar. I want a ship I can enjoy and I've been hemming and hawwing about the Galaxys for ages. And I think this is my time.
Yeah, I like a challenge too. Some ships should be PVP pwnzor minmax ships. Others should be niche ships, with cool gimmicks that maybe aren't so min-maxed but can be used really well in PVE or similar.
And then there SHOULD be a few ships that are really hard to pilot right, and maybe have subpar stats, but that are fun because they're a challenge.
If you like the challenge of driving an inferior ship, then use the Tier 4 Galaxy but dont ask the rest of us to be stuck with a bad ship because of that. I want to enter a PVP with a iconic ship and feel useful not a burden. And I said again, I dont want to be OP like scimatar.. just useful.
Division Hispana
www.divisionhispana.com
Again nobody wants a fed scimitar. Not a single person I believe is asking for 5 tac consoles and 5 forward weapons. They're asking for a useful ship beyond tanking(which is as useful as two left shoes). I wouldn't ask a stirring hive of Gal X fans to calm down when Cryptic just came in and beat it with a disrespectful sick. :rolleyes:
Put that all together, and you get 600 page threads certain that a perfectly fine ship is unplayable, even when given hard, numeric proofs to the contrary... "Ship is not how I like it, its therefore broken, the devs are incompetent because they don't listen to my masterful insights!"
The Gal-X was a sweet ride before given a strong captain to tame her. Now, she just might become my ship of choice... Galaxy base, hanagar bay, ability to swing sci (The one thing that tends to keep me out of ships I like is that damned RPer in me that screams "You know, you are a sci captain... you would think your ship would have some sort of science capability... just sayin'!") and separation for when I want to pretend I'm in an escort? Yes, please!
Thanks a ton! Next time you tease me updates to my favorite class of ships, could you maybe not tease me for OVER 2 BLOODY YEARS!!! :P
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
We agree, is a fantastic rolplay ship. Is lovely to fly it on the sol system or even see the phasers animation when she do Fire At Will. But in the terms of been useful for the team, is a TRIBBLE ship.. maybe the worst.
So, if you are happy because now you can separate the ship and do rolplay fantastic, but dont argue that the ship is balance with the rest for that! I love to rolplay, but I also want to be useful, and it can be both things (look at the Sove) but for some reason is not.
Division Hispana
www.divisionhispana.com
Only if you are admitting that this game is simply Star Trek The Kiddie Generation Online. Fortunately for me, I stopped giving Cryptic money and will not give any more money until they stop wallowing around in ancient Picard history.
I use the Galaxy-R as my main ship on my primary Fed. character 99% of the time. I invested a lot of time, knowledge and resources into her. She can pull her weight around, no doubt about it.
Still doesn't change the fact that whenever I switch to every other cruiser I own with the same gear, my efficency at least tripples and the time needed to finish a STF reduces significantly.
Not saying it's unplayavble, cause obviusly I'm using her for any content as well. But it's not fine. At least to me it's not perfectly fine to have the iconic Galaxy Class at the bottom of the proverbial barrel.
Love how you condescendingly dismissed everyone else's opinion calling them 'parrots' though. Classy.
You can't get anymore Truthful than this ^^
Pardon me, but your signature says this:
"Picard Trek is not True Trek. Only Kirk Trek is True Trek. Picard Trek will be patterned for data storage."
So you much prefer ancient Kirk history. Excellent. Good for you. I can let you keep your ancient history; leave mine alone. You may not like it, but the Galaxy D is, (like the original Enterprise, as well as the -A and the Exeter, I think), are ships that have 'iconic stature.'
The Defiant APPROACHES iconic. The Voyager APPROACHES iconic. The D'Deridex APPROACHES iconic. The -C and the -E APPROACH iconic. Some of the various BoPs and the warbirds APPROACH iconic. The New Movie Enterprise is too young to be iconic yet. NONE of these are the equivalent of the ones I mentioned in terms of defining the Star Trek property.
So disrespect the 'oldsters' as much as you want. When one thinks of Star Trek, they are not thinking of a Tal Shiar Adapted Battlecruiser, or a Scimitar, or a JHAS.
It's the platter, with the tube, and the 2 other tubes. Everything else revolves around that.
Bottom line for STO:
The play arguments have been beaten to death. No one wants anything more than a viable endgame ship that is not (less than 50% as effective as other ships in the same vein). You can drive whatever ship you want. Just make the ship NOT SUCK please.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.
Unfortunately, it is posts like yours that the devs seem to pay the most attention to when it comes to things like this.
Now, I had stayed completely away from this Galaxy bombshell, but well, I want to interject now.
When people say comments like "The ships isn't bad, you just don't know how to fly it", generally I would agree. However, you are wrong in this case. The Gal and the Gal-X just simply don't fill any needed role, and anything you can creatively come up with to make it decent at anything, can easily be done by getting a different ship.
Want to use cannons effectively on a Gal-X? Well, you could load up on cannon doffs and only have RF1/SV1. Its very expensive, and you use up your doff slots. Then you need to buff your turn rate. Well, you could load up with RCS consoles,/Fleet RCS consoles and get some kind of measurable turn rate.
That is a buttload of dilithium, EC, and time.
Or just get an Avenger. Cheaper, more effective, and can do everything you are trying to do in the Gal-X, only a lot better.
Want to tank? Oddy is easily an equal, if not superior tank to both the Gal-X as well as the Gal-R, and it has a bit more teeth.
Science focused? Well, you could take that En. Universal and make it a sci, losing tac team, but I suppose you could get doffs for tac team AND cannons just to get 1 more en. science ability. Again, a lot of time and money.
Or get an Ambassador.
I initially looked at the C when they introduced it, and I thought it was garbage for the role I was filling, but I clearly could see the role that it was filling, and it did quite well. A Sci focused cruiser, and honestly, I didn't ever hear much complaining about that ship.
Then there are those that say they like a challenge. That is fine, and thank you for proving the point that the Galaxy ships have been a pile of TRIBBLE and will continue to be. I also like a challenge. I don't ask that everyone else suffer because of it though. I'll take a mirror ship, or standard gear, or a shuttle when I want a challenge. Not tell everyone to not buff this ship because I like the challenge of it.
So I see my favorite Trek ship in the ship store, having never bought it. Fix a bug issue, make a cosmetic change (which is the only way I can think to classify the universal En. change) and offer the the chance to replace 2 fleet RCS consoles that give me armor and hull HP, for 2 consoles that give less turn and less hull HP, AND I have to pay $40 for it?
Uhm....thanks?
Yeah, I still won't be buying it.
It is like they know they are wrong but still they can not admit it.
Division Hispana
www.divisionhispana.com
Well summarized.
It seems the vast majority of your most active players (forum regulars) hate the idea... and while that's a small subset of the playerbase, I think it's an important constituency.
THE PLAYERS DO NOT WANT THIS.