Someone with sense. Now we are 3 already. But beware, every sentence you wrote will be turned around and used against you with hard-believed "Galaxy=Mary Sue" facts and believs.
Disclaimer: My discussions are on the Galaxy-R.
It's not about sense. I also pretty much agree with everything he said. It's about the preformance of the ship in this game. Personally, I don't want it or need it to be the best ship in the game, but it sure as hell doesn't deserve to be the least preforming ship in the game. That's my issue with this.
We have 5 most iconic ST ships that were as much as characters in the shows. Only 3 of them are availible to be used at end-game in STO. Neither of those 3 deserves to be the worst prefroming ship in the game. As it is, the Galaxy-R takes that place.
I use the ship, I love the ship, it can do the totally easy end-game content in STO, but I feel bad for her. This ship doesn't deserve to be the lowest preformer - it's neither the oldest, nor the smallest, nor the most obsolete ship by 2409 and her iconic stature in ST doesn't deserve that.
I mean there are only 3 iconic ST ships at end-game in STO. Out of who knows how many ships in the game, is it really that hard to make neither of those be the worst?
It's not about sense. I also pretty much agree with everything he said. It's about the preformance of the ship in this game. Personally, I don't want it or need it to be the best ship in the game, but it sure as hell doesn't deserve to be the least preforming ship in the game. That's my issue with this.
We have 5 most iconic ST ships that were as much as characters in the shows. Only 3 of them are availible to be used at end-game in STO. Neither of those 3 deserves to be the worst prefroming ship in the game. As it is, the Galaxy-R takes that place.
I use the ship, I love the ship, it can do the totally easy end-game content in STO, but I feel bad for her. This ship doesn't deserve to be the lowest preformer - it's neither the oldest, nor the smallest, nor the most obsolete ship by 2409 and her iconic stature in ST doesn't deserve that.
I mean there are only 3 iconic ST ships at end-game in STO. Out of who knows how many ships in the game, is it really that hard to make neither of those be the worst?
The only thing that the Galaxy-X needs is an increase to the spinal phaser's rate of fire bringing, it into line with what was shown onscreen. In fact, that is the only weapon we see it firing, and I can't imagine in a desperate bid to save a ship full of close friends you would hold anything back. That being so, I have to wonder, is the spinal phaser the only weapon mounted forward? With that much firepower, would you need any other forward weapons?
Here's the thing many people don't really seem to grasp about energy weapons, and generally feel the urge to staple more and more of them onto ships in lore: It doesn't actually really MATTER how many actual guns you put on the ship. All of them are ultimately driven by the same reactor cores on your ship. Once you have enough guns that firing them will consume all the output from your reactor, any more are superfluous and only provide additional arc coverage and redundancy in case any break. It seems very apparent that Star Trek ships, as seen on the show, are energy-limited rather than gun-limited: In combat situations in which it would make no sense to intentionally hold back firepower, you nonetheless do not see the ship blasting away from every gunport. The obvious reason why this occurs is simply because the ship can achieve full weapons output without having to blast energy out of every gunport to do it, as the draw of running every single weapon at once would exceed usable reactor power.
I mean there are only 3 iconic ST ships at end-game in STO. Out of who knows how many ships in the game, is it really that hard to make neither of those be the worst?
Yes, really. Nobody would have been surprised at all if the Excelsior had been a creaky old tub...it's 200 years old. But the Galaxy was supposed to be the second most recent of the iconic line, and yet it is completely outclassed by not only all the variants of its successors, but all of its predecessors as well. It's a complete and utter failure of a ship that underperforms in every role that it could be assigned to.
Just giving it Ens Uni insted of Ens Eng would have been enough to salvage it from bottom of the heap. The Klink Fleet Neghvar got this. The fact that they're doing it on the X, UNNECESSARILY, proves they CAN do this. Why the hell not?
I think that this will help my Gal-X to a very small degree. I will keep the universal a tac and the hanger will barely help. For one, the saucer separation will not elp because it does not come with a consul, and the doff cange does not help with the tac. Here's some advice cryptic, edit the doff system and include seperation with the ship:(
It's the Engineering Cruiser...so with folks picturing things as Tac > Sci > Eng...it's going to be considered the worst Cruiser. If the content existed for such a ship in STO, then it wouldn't be the case.
That content doesn't exist though...so yeah...they should, imho, make the Galaxy/Exploration more Star-like and the Gal-X more Assault-like...
This does raise a point though and one that would probably address a LOT if they ever considered.
Torpedos in the shows were tactical systems.
Beams were fueled by engine power and more engineering heavy.
If they redefined what skills went which professions a bit, it would probably result in a more lasting and more sound balance
Instead of Sci = Control, Eng = Power/Tankiness, and Tac = Weapons, it would work a lot better IMHO if it played out with all three being a mix of damage, control, and power but varying kinds and with each being issued a weapon specialty.
Here's the thing many people don't really seem to grasp about energy weapons, and generally feel the urge to staple more and more of them onto ships in lore: It doesn't actually really MATTER how many actual guns you put on the ship. All of them are ultimately driven by the same reactor cores on your ship. Once you have enough guns that firing them will consume all the output from your reactor, any more are superfluous and only provide additional arc coverage and redundancy in case any break. It seems very apparent that Star Trek ships, as seen on the show, are energy-limited rather than gun-limited: In combat situations in which it would make no sense to intentionally hold back firepower, you nonetheless do not see the ship blasting away from every gunport. The obvious reason why this occurs is simply because the ship can achieve full weapons output without having to blast energy out of every gunport to do it, as the draw of running every single weapon at once would exceed usable reactor power.
This point is not reflected in STO at all.
It was (when people ran more than 6 beams). But then Marion and Warp Cores showed up.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
It's not about sense. I also pretty much agree with everything he said. It's about the preformance of the ship in this game. Personally, I don't want it or need it to be the best ship in the game, but it sure as hell doesn't deserve to be the least preforming ship in the game. That's my issue with this.
We have 5 most iconic ST ships that were as much as characters in the shows. Only 3 of them are availible to be used at end-game in STO. Neither of those 3 deserves to be the worst prefroming ship in the game. As it is, the Galaxy-R takes that place. I use the ship, I love the ship, it can do the totally easy end-game content in STO, but I feel bad for her. This ship doesn't deserve to be the lowest preformer - it's neither the oldest, nor the smallest, nor the most obsolete ship by 2409 and her iconic stature in ST doesn't deserve that.
I mean there are only 3 iconic ST ships at end-game in STO. Out of who knows how many ships in the game, is it really that hard to make neither of those be the worst?
Ok, good points.
This is where the problem lies, not with the ship itself, but how it compares to other ships, especially ones that are contemporary with it, or earlier ones (I am looking at you Excelsior).
The Galaxy is sort of a square peg by itself, an overly large ship with a massively powerful warpcore, hefty phaser arrays, a large civilian complement with amenities for said civilians, with an exploration mission profile. How can you translate that into a ship that is competitive combat wise with other ships that were build with danger in mind (Excelsior was built during the cold war with the Klingon Empire for example)? Remember that when the Galaxy was built, there were no major conflicts or cold wars with any other powers.
I don't know that you can really do that and remain within the boundaries that sets the ship apart, otherwise, you just have Big Cruiser #XXXXX.
That's not to say that it's impossible. But to expect equivalent combat ability from this ship (Galaxy-R), I think may be expecting too much. I can understand your desire (and that of the many others that share this desire) for the Galaxy to stand out or at least be competitive. I have always loved the Excelsior and was very pleased I could get it in game (When I am Fedside, I now fly the Avenger as ship of choice). I was a bit surprised by the power that the Fleet Excelsior got, it's an incredible ship.
I think that it would be better to give the Galaxy other capabilities instead of combat upgrades. It was built as an exploration ship with the intent to showcase the Federation's capability, and to impress new species they came across. With this in mind I think that captaining a Galaxy should give one a bonus to diplomacy experience gained, and a bonus chance for success for diplomacy missions. Commanding a galaxy should give the captain a bonus to his diplomacy rank when determining what options are available to him in story missions (like at the conference in the 2800 Dominion mission). As far as space combat goes, the ship might get a bonus to deflector abilities, because it was the only part of the ship that was able to handle the full power output of the warpcore. That should be worth something at least.
Here's the thing many people don't really seem to grasp about energy weapons, and generally feel the urge to staple more and more of them onto ships in lore: It doesn't actually really MATTER how many actual guns you put on the ship. All of them are ultimately driven by the same reactor cores on your ship. Once you have enough guns that firing them will consume all the output from your reactor, any more are superfluous and only provide additional arc coverage and redundancy in case any break. It seems very apparent that Star Trek ships, as seen on the show, are energy-limited rather than gun-limited: In combat situations in which it would make no sense to intentionally hold back firepower, you nonetheless do not see the ship blasting away from every gunport. The obvious reason why this occurs is simply because the ship can achieve full weapons output without having to blast energy out of every gunport to do it, as the draw of running every single weapon at once would exceed usable reactor power.
This point is not reflected in STO at all.
It more or less was initially where you actually had to balance your power, and as you fired your weapons, your available weapon power would drop until resupplied by the warp core. Energy weapons, phasers at least, have capacitors that are charged to provide the power to the weapon, and are in turn powered by the ship's power system, whether it comes from the warp core or batteries (in case of main power failure). Now it's just a free-for-all with the doffs, consoles, warpcores, etc. that throw that formula out the airlock.
I, for one, would be willing to forgo the other forward firing weapons on the Galaxy-X, if I could get the weapon (BFG) to function like it did in the show :P
I know I'm late to the party, but I feel the need to toss in my 2 ec as well.
To summarize my feelings of the blog:
What I saw when to click the link to the blog: "Galaxy Class Reboot"
What I expected to read when I clicked the link to the blog: "We're rebalancing the Galaxy Refit to better reflect current end game content."
What I realized I was getting when I read the blog: "We're buffing the Galaxy Dreadnaught and we're giving the Galaxy Refit a cosmetic pass. And we're creating a two-piece set bonus."
Seriously guys? Seriously? Cryptc, go back and re-read the threadnaught on your perceived bias against the Galaxy-R by players. Most players complaining about the Galaxy class aren't calling for buffs to the Dreadnaught. Calling this a Galaxy Class reboot when you're buffing the Dreadnaught but all you're doing for the Refit is giving it a new coat of wax and replacing the air freshener hanging from the rearview mirror is simply disingenuous.
You want to buff the Galaxy-X? Fine. I actually don't have a problem with the changes as it brings something different to the tactical federation cruisers. But don't call this a reboot of the Galaxy class line of ships. All you're doing it raising false hopes and antagonizing your customers.
And for the record I think the calls for adapting the Dyson seat change tech to the Galaxy classes for separation is genius. Hell, even if you're not willing to adapt that tech to the current Galaxy-R, if you released a new Galaxy variant that utilized that tech (but required the separation console from the Gal-R >__>) I'd buy it.
The Galaxy is sort of a square peg by itself, an overly large ship with a massively powerful warpcore, hefty phaser arrays, a large civilian complement with amenities for said civilians, with an exploration mission profile. How can you translate that into a ship that is competitive combat wise with other ships that were build with danger in mind (Excelsior was built during the cold war with the Klingon Empire for example)? Remember that when the Galaxy was built, there were no major conflicts or cold wars with any other powers.
Excelsior was build as a racecar, nothing more nothing less. It's only when the transwarp drive "failed" then Starfleet decided to find some other uses for it.
The Galaxy was constructed at the end of a minor war with the Cardassians.
I think that it would be better to give the Galaxy other capabilities instead of combat upgrades. It was built as an exploration ship with the intent to showcase the Federation's capability, and to impress new species they came across. With this in mind I think that captaining a Galaxy should give one a bonus to diplomacy experience gained, and a bonus chance for success for diplomacy missions. Commanding a galaxy should give the captain a bonus to his diplomacy rank when determining what options are available to him in story missions (like at the conference in the 2800 Dominion mission). As far as space combat goes, the ship might get a bonus to deflector abilities, because it was the only part of the ship that was able to handle the full power output of the warpcore. That should be worth something at least.
This is the first time I've heard of this kind of suggestion. +1.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
What I realized I was getting when I read the blog: "We're buffing the Galaxy Dreadnaught and we're giving the Galaxy Refit a cosmetic pass.
The Galaxy isn't even getting a cosmetic pass. It's still the same, ugly model Cryptic made a couple years ago.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Boff layout is still crappy: only 1 lt tac. They should replace the lt.com eng with lt. com universal. Cant do much dmg with 1 lt tac. Tank is useless role in STO. Everyone wants dps. A2b+faw may boost dps, but the fed dreadnaught still lacks of dps compare to other factions' dreadnaught.
In order for the fed dreadnaught to be competive with the scim, boff layout must be more tac focus not eng.
The Galaxy isn't even getting a cosmetic pass. It's still the same, ugly model Cryptic made a couple years ago.
The ship won't grind to a halt every time you separate or recombine with the saucer anymore. Personally I consider animation improvements to be a cosmetic pass. And the separated saucer isn't going to default to the standard Galaxy saucer anymore if you're using one of the other skins.
The Galaxy isn't even getting a cosmetic pass. It's still the same, ugly model Cryptic made a couple years ago.
Actually, the previous ship artist, Capn Logan, did a tremendous overhaul on several ship models including the Galaxy class. It used to look horrid when the game launched and it actually looks pretty darn good for a MMO game that only gets a certain number of poly's for everything in the game. Be thankfuly you didn't see it before it was overhauled because it is obvious that you didn't.
I'm not really a huge Galaxy fan but I think that Drunk's ideas about refitting the Galaxy variants are a lot closer to the mark than adding hangar bays and swapping ensign stations. It's been said before but they need to be addressed to fit the content as-is, not to fit a paradigm that isn't present in the content design.
I also find..
"Note: If you already own any of these Galaxy ships, the Galaxy Bundle will not be available for purchase."
.. to be a troubling caveat for Galaxy enthusiasts. I mean, we have to assume that most of the people that 'support a revamped Galaxy-class exploration cruiser' already own at least one of the ships. Given that assumption it seems counterproductive to keep them from buying the bundle, though I suppose a cynical mind might imagine that PWE/Cryptic feels they can squeeze a few extra nickels out of the TNG diehards. I just find it hard to believe that there isn't some way of working around the 'buy one and no bundle' thing. It was a terrible precedent to set with the DSD and it's no better in this instance.
Excelsior was build as a racecar, nothing more nothing less. It's only when the transwarp drive "failed" then Starfleet decided to find some other uses for it.
The Galaxy was constructed at the end of a minor war with the Cardassians.
It was more than "just a racecar" since it was supposed to be a replacement for the Constitution Class. It eventually became the backbone of the fleet. The hull was sound, even though the transwarp project had failed. Having one named Enterprise didn't hurt for making it a mainstay either.
You are right about the Cardassians. I had completely forgotten about them being in TNG. :eek:
Quite easily, you are forgetting saucer separation. The civilians, families etc all occupied the saucer section. In the event of a dangerous situation or combat this separated and the Captain and bridge crew would transfer to the other bridge, which was called the Battle Bridge. Once separated the Enterprise D was a formidable combat vessel.
It didn't matter that there were no local conflicts going on at the time of the Enterprise's launch, the ship was built to handle any situation they could imagine and would be away from Earth for years and possibly far from any star base, it would have to fend for itself, this was the reason families were included on-board. Any ship being sent off to explore the Galaxy had to be able to defend itself and also be a damage dealer, the version we have is a feeble reflection of the original.
Congratulations, the Love Boat top half has separated from the main hull...no buffet for engineering.
I haven't forgotten about the saucer separation. Removing the saucer in no way makes it more capable. The shields do not gain strength, the phasers do not increase in power, it does not gain anything from losing the saucer.
The saucer just becomes a huge target. It has some combat ability, but it is hardly a full starship.
I'm amused by the people here trying to undersell the Galaxy class canon fire power. Never mind it was at least the equivalent of the other major powers warships, or close to it when not. You can claim plot armour all you want, but that's a hollow claim.
None of thus really matters in game though, nor does the in game one need to be a tactical powerhouse. Just needs to be fun.
And honest, how discouraging is that the only Dev-posted feedback received regarding the issue of the Galaxy-R receiving NO attention was a Twitter post? Honestly - they can comment on Twitter but not their own, official, messageboard?
I'm not mad about that , both because I'm used to it (Devs communicating "above our heads" on FB and Twitter) and because I don't see that specific info as a malicious thing by Smirk . He was asked something and he answered . Brandon did that a ton of times ... or so I hear ... (as I'm not on Twitter) .
It's Monday .
The Devs just got back to work ... .
I'm more then willing to pretend that some of them were quite oblivious to the forum rage over the weekend .
The point being that it's up to us to keep our voices heard , to keep this post on top of the news section in terms of responses , and most importantly to not burn out .
This is for the long haul , not for the immediate gratification of "we were right and they were wrong" .
Don't expect a pat on the head .
But don't give up either .
Tell the Devs that it's ok to pull back the release of the Galaxy pack for two weeks and to tweak it .
Tell them that you're ok with the delay of Season 9 for two weeks if they put that two weeks into the Galaxy (if they can make the Boff seat changes apply to the Galaxy as Drunk suggested) .
They have the Tech , all they need to is apply it .
This is where the problem lies, not with the ship itself, but how it compares to other ships, especially ones that are contemporary with it, or earlier ones (I am looking at you Excelsior).
The Galaxy is sort of a square peg by itself, an overly large ship with a massively powerful warpcore, hefty phaser arrays, a large civilian complement with amenities for said civilians, with an exploration mission profile. How can you translate that into a ship that is competitive combat wise with other ships that were build with danger in mind (Excelsior was built during the cold war with the Klingon Empire for example)? Remember that when the Galaxy was built, there were no major conflicts or cold wars with any other powers.
I don't know that you can really do that and remain within the boundaries that sets the ship apart, otherwise, you just have Big Cruiser #XXXXX.
That's not to say that it's impossible. But to expect equivalent combat ability from this ship (Galaxy-R), I think may be expecting too much. I can understand your desire (and that of the many others that share this desire) for the Galaxy to stand out or at least be competitive. I have always loved the Excelsior and was very pleased I could get it in game (When I am Fedside, I now fly the Avenger as ship of choice). I was a bit surprised by the power that the Fleet Excelsior got, it's an incredible ship.
Okay, I've said this many many times before and I guess I'll have to do it again:
There is no such thing as peace in space. There even aren't clearly cut territories between factions as portrayed when you look at a map. It's space.
The point of the Galaxy being built in times of proverbial peace has nothing to do with the potential of the ship. It was a starship created for stand alone deep space exploration missions lasting for 7 years, while carrying civilan personel on board. It was a ship designed for charting and venturing into the unknown. Who knows what to expect then, you can't seriously say that Starfleet would make a ship weaker that it's predecessors just because it's more peacefull now and send it into deep space. Starfleet in not stupid.
What happens if they encounter an hostile alien species? A rogue Romulan captain that would like a trophy? A Klignon House with their own agenda? Would they sacrifice more than 1000 lives just like that?
Besides, who guarantees that a war wouldn't explode tommorow? Those Galaxy Class ships were completely capable for everything, Starfleet top of the line. They were a tool to ensure peace just by their stature.
Personally, I'd rather the Galaxy gain some more science options than combat ones. Seems apropriate to me in terms of her role in the show.
However, canon has obviously been thrown through the window here long time ago so we can't really base a ship's preformance based on what was seen in canon. Because if we adhered to canon, there was no chance the Excelsior to be just a smidge behind the Sovereign in damage output, putting her 2 (even 3) successors to shame. I just want a Galaxy class that has some relevance and role at end-game and for her not to be the worst cruiser in STO, because such an iconic ship doesn't deserve that. The fact that many of us are asking for Boff changes rather than adapting the content to be more wellcoming to "uber-tanks" just shows the amount of faith we have in Cryptic adding more value and changing their end game as oposed to easy solutions like slapping a hangar on everything.
I think that it would be better to give the Galaxy other capabilities instead of combat upgrades. It was built as an exploration ship with the intent to showcase the Federation's capability, and to impress new species they came across. With this in mind I think that captaining a Galaxy should give one a bonus to diplomacy experience gained, and a bonus chance for success for diplomacy missions. Commanding a galaxy should give the captain a bonus to his diplomacy rank when determining what options are available to him in story missions (like at the conference in the 2800 Dominion mission). As far as space combat goes, the ship might get a bonus to deflector abilities, because it was the only part of the ship that was able to handle the full power output of the warpcore. That should be worth something at least.
The basic idea behind this suggestion is great, but I find it completely irrelevant in the curent game to be perfectly honest. Bonus to diplomacy? Who the heck cares? What diplomacy missions? The diplomacy missions are 0.001% of the game. A boost in a Doff segment will do nothing for the ship.
Once again, no matter how much I personally would like to see this, I just can't see Cryptic altering their entire game to satify this. Especially not afer we had the Lead Designer on podcasts stating his opinion that the people want pew-pew, so that's what they'll deliver.
The deflector thing could work, but I'm not sure they'll want to give that to a cruiser seen how the science ships in STO are about to get secondary deflectors and more deflector abilities.
It more or less was initially where you actually had to balance your power, and as you fired your weapons, your available weapon power would drop until resupplied by the warp core. Energy weapons, phasers at least, have capacitors that are charged to provide the power to the weapon, and are in turn powered by the ship's power system, whether it comes from the warp core or batteries (in case of main power failure). Now it's just a free-for-all with the doffs, consoles, warpcores, etc. that throw that formula out the airlock.
I, for one, would be willing to forgo the other forward firing weapons on the Galaxy-X, if I could get the weapon (BFG) to function like it did in the show :P
Agreed, sadly that formula really is out the airlock. And I could have been a good balancing starting point, especially under the assumption (that is even repeated by NPCs in game) that the bigger the ship the bigger the warp core is and the bigger power output it can generate.
I think that it would be better to give the Galaxy other capabilities instead of combat upgrades. It was built as an exploration ship with the intent to showcase the Federation's capability, and to impress new species they came across. With this in mind I think that captaining a Galaxy should give one a bonus to diplomacy experience gained, and a bonus chance for success for diplomacy missions. Commanding a galaxy should give the captain a bonus to his diplomacy rank when determining what options are available to him in story missions (like at the conference in the 2800 Dominion mission). As far as space combat goes, the ship might get a bonus to deflector abilities, because it was the only part of the ship that was able to handle the full power output of the warpcore. That should be worth something at least.
Great idea, I myself love the Galaxy, but it was not a combat vessel. Its primary function was to explore, implement the change above and I'll be happy.
IMHO there are enough ship builds out there to make the Galaxy effective in end game, I agree it should not be bottom of the pile, but I don't believe CBS will ever allow it to be the ship we want as it would be too far off canon.
P.S. I am loving the fact the cosmetic issue has been sorted, this was a huge bug bear for me when using my Fleet Exp Cruiser Retrofit!
IMHO there are enough ship builds out there to make the Galaxy effective in end game, I agree it should not be bottom of the pile, but I don't believe CBS will ever allow it to be the ship we want as it would be too far off canon.
Not adressing this at you personally, just making an observation - there is no such thing as too far off canon for this game.
Over 700 posts in a few days, as much as I am disappointed by this news and would more than want a workable galaxy experience tells me that cryptic just don't give a damn. Honestly they would of been better off not changing anything that making this half arsed change, would of saved them a lot of forum rage.
My question is, if it already hasn't been asked, will we see the NPC/PVE versions of the Galaxy classes invoke saucer separation; making the deepspace encounters more intersting?
Now, now I'm a "good" Fed Admiral I just so happen to really really like to make other Fed erm I mean Terran Empire ships GO BOOM. Bada BOOM!!!
Besides, I've never much liked the looks of the Galaxy class, nor the Sov for that matter; guess I'm an old TOS kinda guy:)
Okay, I've said this many many times before and I guess I'll have to do it again:
There is no such thing as peace in space. There even aren't clearly cut territories between factions as portrayed when you look at a map. It's space.
Major power have territorial control over star systems, areas of space between those systems, and this can be delineated in navigational maps. A ships computer can tell you when you are somewhere you shouldn't be. Some of those powers get very unhappy about people wandering about their lawn. You can have peace in space, just like you can have peace on the open ocean. During TNG era, the Federation had peace with the Klingon Empire, and Romulan Empire. Without peace, do you think either of these entities would have sat on their hands and let the Federation alone while it got about to mapping stars and rocks.
The point of the Galaxy being built in times of proverbial peace has nothing to do with the potential of the ship. It was a starship created for stand alone deep space exploration missions lasting for 7 years, while carrying civilan personel on board. It was a ship designed for charting and venturing into the unknown. Who knows what to expect then, you can't seriously say that Starfleet would make a ship weaker that it's predecessors just because it's more peacefull now and send it into deep space. Starfleet in not stupid.
What happens if they encounter an hostile alien species? A rogue Romulan captain that would like a trophy? A Klignon House with their own agenda? Would they sacrifice more than 1000 lives just like that?
The Galaxy class in the game can do all that, just like the one you see onscreen...minus the cast.
Besides, who guarantees that a war wouldn't explode tommorow? Those Galaxy Class ships were completely capable for everything, Starfleet top of the line. They were a tool to ensure peace just by their stature.
The Dominion didn't get that memo.
Again, the Galaxy class we have in the game, is everything you saw on the screen.
Personally, I'd rather the Galaxy gain some more science options than combat ones. Seems apropriate to me in terms of her role in the show.
However, canon has obviously been thrown through the window here long time ago so we can't really base a ship's preformance based on what was seen in canon. Because if we adhered to canon, there was no chance the Excelsior to be just a smidge behind the Sovereign in damage output, putting her 2 (even 3) successors to shame. I just want a Galaxy class that has some relevance and role at end-game and for her not to be the worst cruiser in STO, because such an iconic ship doesn't deserve that. The fact that many of us are asking for Boff changes rather than adapting the content to be more wellcoming to "uber-tanks" just shows the amount of faith we have in Cryptic adding more value and changing their end game as oposed to easy solutions like slapping a hangar on everything.
I did agree that having the Excelsior outperform the Galaxy in combat power was crazy. I might not have underlined that.
I still like my Excelsior.
The basic idea behind this suggestion is great, but I find it completely irrelevant in the curent game to be perfectly honest. Bonus to diplomacy? Who the heck cares? What diplomacy missions? The diplomacy missions are 0.001% of the game. A boost in a Doff segment will do nothing for the ship.
Once again, no matter how much I personally would like to see this, I just can't see Cryptic altering their entire game to satify this. Especially not afer we had the Lead Designer on podcasts stating his opinion that the people want pew-pew, so that's what they'll deliver.
The deflector thing could work, but I'm not sure they'll want to give that to a cruiser seen how the science ships in STO are about to get secondary deflectors and more deflector abilities.
I was just throwing an alternative idea out rather than jumping on the OMG it needs ltc tac wagon. I am aware of how likely anything that doesnt involve a hangar or a stupid console is going to be considered. The chance of that actually happening is somewhere off the deep end of nonexistent.
Agreed, sadly that formula really is out the airlock. And I could have been a good balancing starting point, especially under the assumption (that is even repeated by NPCs in game) that the bigger the ship the bigger the warp core is and the bigger power output it can generate.
The big issue is the need to break the great space combat dps stupidity. Seriously. Needing 99999999999k dps to pick flowers or chase bunnies is serious freaking stupid. The vicious dps cycle that Cryptic has chosen to embrace needs to come to a halt, and there needs to be some serious rebalancing done. That is another issue however.
Welcome back to work Devs, this week we expect much from you, in return you will get much from us, a nice start would be acknowledging our concerns in this thread.
I do hope that they knew of the "concerns" that we have even before they announced it. Like it hasn't been apparent in recent threads.
They have a chance here to do some good to the Gal R/X... I'd buy it I really would but not at it's current revamp offering. They need to really step up their game on this one.
Comments
Disclaimer: My discussions are on the Galaxy-R.
It's not about sense. I also pretty much agree with everything he said. It's about the preformance of the ship in this game. Personally, I don't want it or need it to be the best ship in the game, but it sure as hell doesn't deserve to be the least preforming ship in the game. That's my issue with this.
We have 5 most iconic ST ships that were as much as characters in the shows. Only 3 of them are availible to be used at end-game in STO. Neither of those 3 deserves to be the worst prefroming ship in the game. As it is, the Galaxy-R takes that place.
I use the ship, I love the ship, it can do the totally easy end-game content in STO, but I feel bad for her. This ship doesn't deserve to be the lowest preformer - it's neither the oldest, nor the smallest, nor the most obsolete ship by 2409 and her iconic stature in ST doesn't deserve that.
I mean there are only 3 iconic ST ships at end-game in STO. Out of who knows how many ships in the game, is it really that hard to make neither of those be the worst?
Well, ok 4
This point is not reflected in STO at all.
Yes, really. Nobody would have been surprised at all if the Excelsior had been a creaky old tub...it's 200 years old. But the Galaxy was supposed to be the second most recent of the iconic line, and yet it is completely outclassed by not only all the variants of its successors, but all of its predecessors as well. It's a complete and utter failure of a ship that underperforms in every role that it could be assigned to.
Just giving it Ens Uni insted of Ens Eng would have been enough to salvage it from bottom of the heap. The Klink Fleet Neghvar got this. The fact that they're doing it on the X, UNNECESSARILY, proves they CAN do this. Why the hell not?
This does raise a point though and one that would probably address a LOT if they ever considered.
Torpedos in the shows were tactical systems.
Beams were fueled by engine power and more engineering heavy.
If they redefined what skills went which professions a bit, it would probably result in a more lasting and more sound balance
Instead of Sci = Control, Eng = Power/Tankiness, and Tac = Weapons, it would work a lot better IMHO if it played out with all three being a mix of damage, control, and power but varying kinds and with each being issued a weapon specialty.
/10stupidChar
It was (when people ran more than 6 beams). But then Marion and Warp Cores showed up.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Ok, good points.
This is where the problem lies, not with the ship itself, but how it compares to other ships, especially ones that are contemporary with it, or earlier ones (I am looking at you Excelsior).
The Galaxy is sort of a square peg by itself, an overly large ship with a massively powerful warpcore, hefty phaser arrays, a large civilian complement with amenities for said civilians, with an exploration mission profile. How can you translate that into a ship that is competitive combat wise with other ships that were build with danger in mind (Excelsior was built during the cold war with the Klingon Empire for example)? Remember that when the Galaxy was built, there were no major conflicts or cold wars with any other powers.
I don't know that you can really do that and remain within the boundaries that sets the ship apart, otherwise, you just have Big Cruiser #XXXXX.
That's not to say that it's impossible. But to expect equivalent combat ability from this ship (Galaxy-R), I think may be expecting too much. I can understand your desire (and that of the many others that share this desire) for the Galaxy to stand out or at least be competitive. I have always loved the Excelsior and was very pleased I could get it in game (When I am Fedside, I now fly the Avenger as ship of choice). I was a bit surprised by the power that the Fleet Excelsior got, it's an incredible ship.
I think that it would be better to give the Galaxy other capabilities instead of combat upgrades. It was built as an exploration ship with the intent to showcase the Federation's capability, and to impress new species they came across. With this in mind I think that captaining a Galaxy should give one a bonus to diplomacy experience gained, and a bonus chance for success for diplomacy missions. Commanding a galaxy should give the captain a bonus to his diplomacy rank when determining what options are available to him in story missions (like at the conference in the 2800 Dominion mission). As far as space combat goes, the ship might get a bonus to deflector abilities, because it was the only part of the ship that was able to handle the full power output of the warpcore. That should be worth something at least.
It more or less was initially where you actually had to balance your power, and as you fired your weapons, your available weapon power would drop until resupplied by the warp core. Energy weapons, phasers at least, have capacitors that are charged to provide the power to the weapon, and are in turn powered by the ship's power system, whether it comes from the warp core or batteries (in case of main power failure). Now it's just a free-for-all with the doffs, consoles, warpcores, etc. that throw that formula out the airlock.
I, for one, would be willing to forgo the other forward firing weapons on the Galaxy-X, if I could get the weapon (BFG) to function like it did in the show :P
To summarize my feelings of the blog:
What I saw when to click the link to the blog: "Galaxy Class Reboot"
What I expected to read when I clicked the link to the blog: "We're rebalancing the Galaxy Refit to better reflect current end game content."
What I realized I was getting when I read the blog: "We're buffing the Galaxy Dreadnaught and we're giving the Galaxy Refit a cosmetic pass. And we're creating a two-piece set bonus."
Seriously guys? Seriously? Cryptc, go back and re-read the threadnaught on your perceived bias against the Galaxy-R by players. Most players complaining about the Galaxy class aren't calling for buffs to the Dreadnaught. Calling this a Galaxy Class reboot when you're buffing the Dreadnaught but all you're doing for the Refit is giving it a new coat of wax and replacing the air freshener hanging from the rearview mirror is simply disingenuous.
You want to buff the Galaxy-X? Fine. I actually don't have a problem with the changes as it brings something different to the tactical federation cruisers. But don't call this a reboot of the Galaxy class line of ships. All you're doing it raising false hopes and antagonizing your customers.
And for the record I think the calls for adapting the Dyson seat change tech to the Galaxy classes for separation is genius. Hell, even if you're not willing to adapt that tech to the current Galaxy-R, if you released a new Galaxy variant that utilized that tech (but required the separation console from the Gal-R >__>) I'd buy it.
Excelsior was build as a racecar, nothing more nothing less. It's only when the transwarp drive "failed" then Starfleet decided to find some other uses for it.
The Galaxy was constructed at the end of a minor war with the Cardassians.
This is the first time I've heard of this kind of suggestion. +1.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
The Galaxy isn't even getting a cosmetic pass. It's still the same, ugly model Cryptic made a couple years ago.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
In order for the fed dreadnaught to be competive with the scim, boff layout must be more tac focus not eng.
Actually, the previous ship artist, Capn Logan, did a tremendous overhaul on several ship models including the Galaxy class. It used to look horrid when the game launched and it actually looks pretty darn good for a MMO game that only gets a certain number of poly's for everything in the game. Be thankfuly you didn't see it before it was overhauled because it is obvious that you didn't.
I also find..
"Note: If you already own any of these Galaxy ships, the Galaxy Bundle will not be available for purchase."
.. to be a troubling caveat for Galaxy enthusiasts. I mean, we have to assume that most of the people that 'support a revamped Galaxy-class exploration cruiser' already own at least one of the ships. Given that assumption it seems counterproductive to keep them from buying the bundle, though I suppose a cynical mind might imagine that PWE/Cryptic feels they can squeeze a few extra nickels out of the TNG diehards. I just find it hard to believe that there isn't some way of working around the 'buy one and no bundle' thing. It was a terrible precedent to set with the DSD and it's no better in this instance.
It was more than "just a racecar" since it was supposed to be a replacement for the Constitution Class. It eventually became the backbone of the fleet. The hull was sound, even though the transwarp project had failed. Having one named Enterprise didn't hurt for making it a mainstay either.
You are right about the Cardassians. I had completely forgotten about them being in TNG. :eek:
Congratulations, the Love Boat top half has separated from the main hull...no buffet for engineering.
I haven't forgotten about the saucer separation. Removing the saucer in no way makes it more capable. The shields do not gain strength, the phasers do not increase in power, it does not gain anything from losing the saucer.
The saucer just becomes a huge target. It has some combat ability, but it is hardly a full starship.
The Enterprise only survived all those situations it did because it had plot armor and the crew was able to perform plot induced miracles. And when the plot dictated, it went boom too. It wasn't because the Galaxy class was so awesome. The Romulans were so impressed with it though they thought it would make a nice trophy.
The ship we have in game is a fairly good reflection of the Galaxy, and it's limitations. It was never meant to be a battleship, nor should it be.
But I do agree that it can be more than what it is now.
None of thus really matters in game though, nor does the in game one need to be a tactical powerhouse. Just needs to be fun.
I'm not mad about that , both because I'm used to it (Devs communicating "above our heads" on FB and Twitter) and because I don't see that specific info as a malicious thing by Smirk . He was asked something and he answered . Brandon did that a ton of times ... or so I hear ... (as I'm not on Twitter) .
It's Monday .
The Devs just got back to work ... .
I'm more then willing to pretend that some of them were quite oblivious to the forum rage over the weekend .
The point being that it's up to us to keep our voices heard , to keep this post on top of the news section in terms of responses , and most importantly to not burn out .
This is for the long haul , not for the immediate gratification of "we were right and they were wrong" .
Don't expect a pat on the head .
But don't give up either .
Tell the Devs that it's ok to pull back the release of the Galaxy pack for two weeks and to tweak it .
Tell them that you're ok with the delay of Season 9 for two weeks if they put that two weeks into the Galaxy (if they can make the Boff seat changes apply to the Galaxy as Drunk suggested) .
They have the Tech , all they need to is apply it .
Okay, I've said this many many times before and I guess I'll have to do it again:
There is no such thing as peace in space. There even aren't clearly cut territories between factions as portrayed when you look at a map. It's space.
The point of the Galaxy being built in times of proverbial peace has nothing to do with the potential of the ship. It was a starship created for stand alone deep space exploration missions lasting for 7 years, while carrying civilan personel on board. It was a ship designed for charting and venturing into the unknown. Who knows what to expect then, you can't seriously say that Starfleet would make a ship weaker that it's predecessors just because it's more peacefull now and send it into deep space. Starfleet in not stupid.
What happens if they encounter an hostile alien species? A rogue Romulan captain that would like a trophy? A Klignon House with their own agenda? Would they sacrifice more than 1000 lives just like that?
Besides, who guarantees that a war wouldn't explode tommorow? Those Galaxy Class ships were completely capable for everything, Starfleet top of the line. They were a tool to ensure peace just by their stature.
Personally, I'd rather the Galaxy gain some more science options than combat ones. Seems apropriate to me in terms of her role in the show.
However, canon has obviously been thrown through the window here long time ago so we can't really base a ship's preformance based on what was seen in canon. Because if we adhered to canon, there was no chance the Excelsior to be just a smidge behind the Sovereign in damage output, putting her 2 (even 3) successors to shame. I just want a Galaxy class that has some relevance and role at end-game and for her not to be the worst cruiser in STO, because such an iconic ship doesn't deserve that. The fact that many of us are asking for Boff changes rather than adapting the content to be more wellcoming to "uber-tanks" just shows the amount of faith we have in Cryptic adding more value and changing their end game as oposed to easy solutions like slapping a hangar on everything.
The basic idea behind this suggestion is great, but I find it completely irrelevant in the curent game to be perfectly honest. Bonus to diplomacy? Who the heck cares? What diplomacy missions? The diplomacy missions are 0.001% of the game. A boost in a Doff segment will do nothing for the ship.
Once again, no matter how much I personally would like to see this, I just can't see Cryptic altering their entire game to satify this. Especially not afer we had the Lead Designer on podcasts stating his opinion that the people want pew-pew, so that's what they'll deliver.
The deflector thing could work, but I'm not sure they'll want to give that to a cruiser seen how the science ships in STO are about to get secondary deflectors and more deflector abilities.
Agreed, sadly that formula really is out the airlock. And I could have been a good balancing starting point, especially under the assumption (that is even repeated by NPCs in game) that the bigger the ship the bigger the warp core is and the bigger power output it can generate.
Great idea, I myself love the Galaxy, but it was not a combat vessel. Its primary function was to explore, implement the change above and I'll be happy.
IMHO there are enough ship builds out there to make the Galaxy effective in end game, I agree it should not be bottom of the pile, but I don't believe CBS will ever allow it to be the ship we want as it would be too far off canon.
P.S. I am loving the fact the cosmetic issue has been sorted, this was a huge bug bear for me when using my Fleet Exp Cruiser Retrofit!
Not adressing this at you personally, just making an observation - there is no such thing as too far off canon for this game.
but whatever, opinions... i really hope cryptic gets it, hops in and cleans up this mess. though i don't expect
Now, now I'm a "good" Fed Admiral
Besides, I've never much liked the looks of the Galaxy class, nor the Sov for that matter; guess I'm an old TOS kinda guy:)
Major power have territorial control over star systems, areas of space between those systems, and this can be delineated in navigational maps. A ships computer can tell you when you are somewhere you shouldn't be. Some of those powers get very unhappy about people wandering about their lawn. You can have peace in space, just like you can have peace on the open ocean. During TNG era, the Federation had peace with the Klingon Empire, and Romulan Empire. Without peace, do you think either of these entities would have sat on their hands and let the Federation alone while it got about to mapping stars and rocks.
The Galaxy class in the game can do all that, just like the one you see onscreen...minus the cast.
The Dominion didn't get that memo.
Again, the Galaxy class we have in the game, is everything you saw on the screen.
I did agree that having the Excelsior outperform the Galaxy in combat power was crazy. I might not have underlined that.
I still like my Excelsior.
I was just throwing an alternative idea out rather than jumping on the OMG it needs ltc tac wagon. I am aware of how likely anything that doesnt involve a hangar or a stupid console is going to be considered. The chance of that actually happening is somewhere off the deep end of nonexistent.
The big issue is the need to break the great space combat dps stupidity. Seriously. Needing 99999999999k dps to pick flowers or chase bunnies is serious freaking stupid. The vicious dps cycle that Cryptic has chosen to embrace needs to come to a halt, and there needs to be some serious rebalancing done. That is another issue however.
I do hope that they knew of the "concerns" that we have even before they announced it. Like it hasn't been apparent in recent threads.
They have a chance here to do some good to the Gal R/X... I'd buy it I really would but not at it's current revamp offering. They need to really step up their game on this one.
Guess we have to wait and see what they do.