test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Galaxy "Reboot" Feedback

1568101133

Comments

  • tksmittytksmitty Member Posts: 173 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    A revamped Gal-X would have been the only thing that would have brought me back to the Fed side. What I would have wanted to see changed with it's upgrade: Lt. Cmdr and Ens. Uni and an accuracy boost for the lance (I've watched the lance miss gates...).

    The hangar is nice, Saucer sep is cool but I wouldn't use it. So, overall? Meh, I'm still KDF main.

    It's too bad. The Gal-X is such a gorgeous ship.
    Current ship/builds:
    KDF Tac: Bortasqu' Tactical
    Fed Tac: Fleet Gal-X

    Keep those big guns a-thunderin'
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,880 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    marc8219 wrote: »
    I would have rather it got a Lt Cmdr Tac, Lt Tac, Cmdr Eng, Lt Sci, Ens Universal layout. No Fed ships have a layout like that so it won't be copying anything. Or that layout without ensign uni would also be acceptable. Also instead of a hangar more turn rate and better inertia, or anything instead of a hangar.

    Still doesn't change the fact that there are at least a half dozen different Cruisers available that have a Lt Cmdr Tac. Maybe if they gave it a Lt Cmdr Sci it would be more interesting and a bit uncommon...it might fit sorta since the Mirror one uses Gravity Well.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • shaneseifertshaneseifert Member Posts: 59 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    ghyudt wrote: »
    Its not like this is making it any worse. Now its got a hanger on top of having the saucer itself as an ally with DHCs. Personally, I hate universal slots because they makes ships too versatile, but this won't be like that. If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to use it. But its an improvement nonetheless, and then I'm happy to see it. But I'm happier about the changes to the galaxy. And the who cares what the new console slot is for? Most of you will just put a universal item in there anyway, so what does it matter?

    Not making them much better either. Yes I know some people have made some good voodoo builds and had okay performance. But let's put it this way, aside from being a target, what is the ship really good at? What does it to that a different ship doesn't do better and hit harder In return? The ship is not broken, but when an Excelsior can zip in and tool it, kinda sad. And if you think the Excelsior should be able to do that.......we'll.......not much point in talking....
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 937 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Another thought: Castrating the dreadnaught on comm powers makes no sense at all. The scimitar doesn't get gimped on singularity powers simply because of its title, so why does the dread lose half the powers? So: Dreadnaught comms.

    Flagship Assault: Weapon system efficiency + Strategic maneuvering. Reduces weapon power drain and boosts maneuvering.

    Flagship Defense: Shield Frequency Modulation + Attract Fire. Improves shield regen and resistance and boosts hull resistance while boosting threat.

    Feel free to name them something else, but yes... lets give this ship some real special and not smoke and mirrors, yes?

    And if we can't make a massive overhaul of the ship (boff seating, etc.) because it's long standing and been purchased as is, etc. etc. then lets work around that.

    *edit*: grammar -.-
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I just LOL at Cryptic's pending changes to the Galaxy. It changes NOTHING about what's wrong with the Galaxy / Gal-X. In general, there are 2 main griefing points about all the Galaxy variants.

    1. They dont hit hard enough; Offensively weak.

    2. They handle pretty terribly.

    The changes don't alleviate these properly.

    - Not sure if the revamp will give the Gal-X an extra TAC Console.
    - The Phaser Lance has a nasty tendency to miss and has a very long 3 min cooldown. This is not rectified.
    - All Galaxy variants, to include the offensive oriented Gal-X, are starved in TAC BOFF stations. Making the precious Ens TAC station Universal is false choice... OF COURSE THE PLAYER WILL KEEP THAT AT TAC. They will be stupid to do otherwise in an already TAC starved boat.
    - The +1 turn rate was needed, but it was tied to Console Bonuses. HORRIBLE MOVE. It should have been an inherent bonus to the ships, not via Consoles.
    - Hangar Bay? Hangar Bay? You guys need to stop the cheapskate idea that throwing a hangar on anything you're not sure of will alleviate the problems. Because when I think of the Galaxy class ships, I see them launching a bunch of fighters... NOT.
    - Making the Phaser Lance have an AOE option goes completely against its use as shown in TNG.

    My input to make the Fleet Galaxy-X competitive to other Fed Cruisers?
    Consoles: TAC4, ENG4, SCI2
    Retain traditional 4x4 weapons layout
    Turn Rate: 7
    BOFF Stations: LtCdr TAC, Lt TAC, Cmdr ENG, Ens ENG, Lt SCI
    - No Phaser Lance AOE, just the current, straight piercing beam.
    - Set Bonus: +15% Phaser Damage Bonus
    * Bonus for Galaxy: +20 Starship Starship Hull Plating skill, +20 Starship Armor Reinforcement skill
    * Bonus for Gal-X: Phaser Lance cooldown reduced from 3 minutes to 1m30s. If it misses, the cooldown isn't a killer for the weapon.
    XzRTofz.gif
  • aelfwin1aelfwin1 Member Posts: 2,896 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    stf65 wrote: »
    Cryptic doesn't do random things. They follow a marketing schedule.

    Right .
    So tell me this :
    Which ship was released (or re-released or upgraded or whatever) TWO WEEKS after the LoR 120$ ship package was introduced ?
    See the LoR ship package didn't even get Fleet Variants until a couple of months after it was introduced -- with the goal being to get as many ppl to buy the initial package as possible .
    That too has to do with marketing .

    Let's go another route :
    Which ship was released (or re-released or upgraded or whatever) TWO WEEKS after a Lockbox ship came out ?

    'Cause those things need a time period to be sold as a "Premium" package as well ... , and if they don't sell too well , you'll get an advert vid for them within 2-6 weeks after their launch .

    But you don't put out a product with a flashy outstanding of price tag of 100$ , and immediately put out another one Two Weeks Later .

    That happens either because of a Marketing Blunder , or because you have to Artificially Boost Sales to Meet Bottom Line Expectations .

    Or , if you like rainbows and ponies , you can call it serendipity . ;)
  • priestofsin420priestofsin420 Member Posts: 419
    edited March 2014
    aelfwin1 wrote: »
    Right .
    So tell me this :
    Which ship was released (or re-released or upgraded or whatever) TWO WEEKS after the LoR 120$ ship package was introduced ?
    See the LoR ship package didn't even get Fleet Variants until a couple of months after it was introduced -- with the goal being to get as many ppl to buy the initial package as possible .
    That too has to do with marketing .

    Let's go another route :
    Which ship was released (or re-released or upgraded or whatever) TWO WEEKS after a Lockbox ship came out ?

    'Cause those things need a time period to be sold as a "Premium" package as well ... , and if they don't sell too well , you'll get an advert vid for them within 2-6 weeks after their launch .

    But you don't put out a product a flashy outstanding (price tag wise) 100$ product , and immediately put out another one Two Weeks Later .

    That happens either because of a Marketing Blunder , or because you have to Artificially Boost Sales to Meet Bottom Line Expectations .

    Or , if you like rainbows and ponies , you can call it serendipity . ;)

    Do... do you even read your own posts? The 9-pack of dyson ships was to pay for the expensive skin+mechanics work that the dyson ships cost... instead of just releasing a new "Dyson" ship that was the same across all factions, they put in the time and money to create a unique variant for every faction. This gives them to right to sell a 9-pack to those who want it... the regular price for 3 of them is still the standard $50.
    Sardak (Science Officer): Captain of a 23k DPS R'Mor Temporal Science Vessel, R.R.W. Vathos
    Odan Brota (Science Officer): Captain of a 28k DPS Scryer Intel Science Vessel, U.S.S. Kepler
    Patiently waiting for a Romulan Science Vessel
  • wazzagiowwazzagiow Member Posts: 769 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Maybe your right. They are being released very close together. So expect your right on the money.
  • projectfrontierprojectfrontier Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I just LOL at Cryptic's pending changes to the Galaxy. It changes NOTHING about what's wrong with the Galaxy / Gal-X. In general, there are 2 main griefing points about all the Galaxy variants.

    1. They dont hit hard enough; Offensively weak.

    2. They handle pretty terribly.

    The changes don't alleviate these properly.

    - Not sure if the revamp will give the Gal-X an extra TAC Console.
    - The Phaser Lance has a nasty tendency to miss and has a very long 3 min cooldown. This is not rectified.
    - All Galaxy variants, to include the offensive oriented Gal-X, are starved in TAC BOFF stations. Making the precious Ens TAC station Universal is false choice... OF COURSE THE PLAYER WILL KEEP THAT AT TAC. They will be stupid to do otherwise in an already TAC starved boat.
    - The +1 turn rate was needed, but it was tied to Console Bonuses. HORRIBLE MOVE. It should have been an inherent bonus to the ships, not via Consoles.
    - Hangar Bay? Hangar Bay? You guys need to stop the cheapskate idea that throwing a hangar on anything you're not sure of will alleviate the problems. Because when I think of the Galaxy class ships, I see them launching a bunch of fighters... NOT.
    - Making the Phaser Lance have an AOE option goes completely against its use as shown in TNG.

    My input to make the Fleet Galaxy-X competitive to other Fed Cruisers?

    The Phaser Lance being included on the purported fleet version makes the c-store version completely superfluous, you can even get the cloak console elsewhere.

    And as the stats will not be inline with other dreadnoughts on the c-store version in spite of Cryptic stating "We have updated the Galaxy Dreadnought stats to bring it in line with other Dreadnoughts." (as other Dreadnoughts have 10 consoles, boosted shields Fleet-store ships as well as superior-boff-seating arrangements) the Galaxy-X, as announced, is even obsolete before it even hits the showroom floor.
  • wast33wast33 Member Posts: 1,855 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    it's not a reboot. it's slap on and leave it :(
  • johnstewardjohnsteward Member Posts: 1,073 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I was SO hoping for a dread with a resl lance weapon build in like with the new Science destroyers :(
  • wast33wast33 Member Posts: 1,855 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I was SO hoping for a dread with a resl lance weapon build in like with the new Science destroyers :(

    may that would have been a bit much of programming. boff layout on the other hand probably is only a button to press: PRESS IT FINALLY... (i like the lance-idea as well)
  • johnstewardjohnsteward Member Posts: 1,073 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Dont think so. Once they done it once it will be just copy paste. Surely a bit more work but to really csll it a revamp and to be worth the cost why not. The lance should be a real weapom like the kumari wing cannon
  • aelfwin1aelfwin1 Member Posts: 2,896 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Do... do you even read your own posts? The 9-pack of dyson ships was to pay for the expensive skin+mechanics work

    Well I have to read my own posts since I write them up . It's a package deal ! ;)

    As to what you really pay for when you choose to spend 100$ up front in this game ... well I've made a nice post about that here :

    It's called Purchasing "tech" VS purchasing "content" , and it draws some interesting parallels between the 120$ ship package that came out on the tail of LoR and the Dyson 9-pack farce .

    But you don't sound like a person who cares much about why he's asked to pay 100$ and for what , so it may not be for you . :o
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 937 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Dont think so. Once they done it once it will be just copy paste. Surely a bit more work but to really csll it a revamp and to be worth the cost why not. The lance should be a real weapom like the kumari wing cannon

    Except it shouldn't take up a slot like the wing cannon does, it should be built in and make the gal-x the first ship to break the 8 weapon barrier.

    Also, if they haven't reduced the cooldown on the lance overload (what I shall call it) they should make that a set bonus of perhaps equipping the antimatter spread, saucer sep, and a cloak, then it cuts the cool to 90 seconds.

    This plus the dread comm powers I suggested earlier could make the ship quite a beast despite the lower tac boffs.

    Some may not like this, but I think that it might also make more sense to make the sci lt. into a uni so that you can forgo science in favor of more tac, at least then one could slot a beta or delta with a cannon power, especially with aux to bat builds, that might be helpful...

    Then give the galaxy the uni ensign so it can at least tilt slight more sci or tac if it wants to escape the balls to the walls engineering layout.
  • captainrevo1captainrevo1 Member Posts: 3,948 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    This thread is just a big logical fallacy.

    First, there is no data to show how well these ships are or are not selling. So its a total assumption. They could equally be selling amazingly. releasing another item (which this is not even really as its just upgrades to what is already there) is just an attempt to make even more money. even if you are making a boat load of money, you still want to make more.

    Cryptic are always releasing stuff. sometimes they release stuff close together. This is nothing new. This stuff is also planned out well in advance. things are not being released on a random whim.

    If the updates are more or less ready then releasing it now or in a few weeks in really not going to make a massive difference. there entire business is not hinging on getting these upgrades out as fast as they can.

    The galaxy dreadnought upgrades have been in development for some time, they so had to release eventually. now just happens to be the time. if it was released a month ago people could say the horgen box was not selling. if it was released in a months time they would latch onto whatever future ship they release was not selling.

    If they could develop ships even faster they would probably release something every week if they could.
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    It still amuses me to no end to see people STILL saying the DSD's are bad ships.

    If you believe them to be bad ships, then you are horrible at ship building.

    All im gonna say.

    Toodles.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    I was SO hoping for a dread with a resl lance weapon build in like with the new Science destroyers :(
    The Phaser Lance being included on the purported fleet version makes the c-store version completely superfluous, you can even get the cloak console elsewhere.


    The Gal-X's Phaser Lance *is* built into the ship :rolleyes:

    I really like it when people comment on something and have absolutely no first hand knowledge on the subject.

    Again, there is NO Phaser Lance Console you have to drag over.

    It's also quite normal for C-Store versions being 9 console versions only with the Fleet version being 10. Some ships don't follow that rule, but this is the usual routing. The Sovereign/Regent does this, the Avenger/Mogh does this, etc. Any old 9 console ship is superfluous when you can access a 10 console version of the same type. The advantage for the c-store ships is still an account wide unlock and making fleet versions cheaper to purchase. THAT isn't superfluous.
    And as the stats will not be inline with other dreadnoughts on the c-store version in spite of Cryptic stating "We have updated the Galaxy Dreadnought stats to bring it in line with other Dreadnoughts." (as other Dreadnoughts have 10 consoles, boosted shields Fleet-store ships as well as superior-boff-seating arrangements) the Galaxy-X, as announced, is even obsolete before it even hits the showroom floor.

    OF COURSE THE FLEET GAL-X I PROPOSED GETS THE FULL FLEET STAT TREATMENT. That is a given, and if you haven't noticed the Console layout I proposed is... having TEN Consoles.

    The stats I proposed would make the Gal-X stand proudly in line with the other worthwhile Fed Cruisers in STO, and other TAC oriented Cruisers in the game. But I guess what you really wanted was a Fed Scimitar, didn't you?
    XzRTofz.gif
  • pweistheworstpweistheworst Member Posts: 986 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Everything looks great, but it's missing one ESSENTIAL thing:

    The phaser lance weapon needs a significant boost to its accuracy!!!

    One of the big reasons I stopped using the Galaxy X dreadnaught is the stupid phaser lance that only hits the target between 40% and 60% of the time.

    No one wants to use a special weapon with a massive cooldown if it misses the target half the time or more.

    The devs either need to dramatically increase the accuracy of the lance or they need to make it so the cooldown is really short and the player can fire it more frequently in combat.
    In the immortal words of Captain Sisko: "It may not be what you believe, but that doesn't make it wrong."

    Don't believe the lies in this forum. I am NOT an ARC user. I play STO on Steam or not at all.
  • variant37variant37 Member Posts: 867 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    aelfwin1 wrote: »
    Was 100$ for 3 ships (that can't even change their skin) too much ?

    Did Cryptic see the "sales" numbers and imminently started to rummage around the bottom of the barrel for something "those people" (us) will buy ?

    Yeah , I know ... it's a tinfoil hat idea . :)


    I don't think it's a tinfoil hat idea. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the C-store Dysons have been a colossal disaster. Who seriously wants to pay $100 for that 9-pack of ugly ships?
  • aelfwin1aelfwin1 Member Posts: 2,896 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    It still amuses me to no end to see people STILL saying the DSD's are bad ships.

    If you believe them to be bad ships, then you are horrible at ship building.

    All im gonna say.

    Toodles.

    Actually , the OP was not about them being good or bad ships .
    Sooo kind of missed the point there .

    .. and ESO can't come soon enough ... for you .

    Toodles .

    This thread is just a big logical fallacy.

    First, there is no data to show how well these ships are or are not selling. So its a total assumption.

    It's not an assumption , it's a supposition . Learn the difference .

    And as to "there is no data" -- see that's an assumption right there (by you) .
    Said data does exist (another assumption) , Cryptic has it . ;)

    Oh , and in your spread of "things that happened" , you've not given a single example to counter mine from post # 46 .

    That's not how you convince ppl . :)
  • greyhame3greyhame3 Member Posts: 914 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Always love gamer conspiracy theories, they are so amusing. :)

    To be honest, unless you didn't already own a Galaxy class this, what they just announced does nothing for you. so it's kind of hard to see this as a money grab.
  • stf65stf65 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    aelfwin1 wrote: »
    Right .
    So tell me this :
    Which ship was released (or re-released or upgraded or whatever) TWO WEEKS after the LoR 120$ ship package was introduced ?
    Somewhat pointless question since Cryptic doubled the ship art team a few months before LOR, as Ian couldn't keep up with the ship demand from LOR by himself. Once they had gotten over the LOR glut, and since nothing since them has required them to make so many ships at once, getting back into a normal schedule isn't much of a problem.

    We should also keep in mind that the dyson set is really only 3 ship skins: Fed, Rom, KDF. It's not a major issue for the art team. You might like to look at it as 9 ships but from an art perspective it's simply 3 ships. Making 3 ships didn't set them back any major about of time.

    I'll say it again too, even the LOR issue was about marketing. The marketing team had set a relese schedule that had to be met. This required a new ship artist be hired to help meet that schedule. A lot of the problems in sto have come from the marketing team, because the sto devs are usually running slower then the release date. This leads to some uneven patches and not always getting everything fixed they way they want it to be by that date arrives.
  • cryptkeeper0cryptkeeper0 Member Posts: 989 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    The lance should just be narrow cone attack similar to thalaron pulse, more of a skill shot.


    But IMO the new Gal-X is basically a Gal-R in nearly every way, to make them more different I have two suggestions chooses.

    Give Gal-R a ensign uni and replace com engi with a com Tac on the fleet Gal-x, not only will this make the Gal-x a unique fed ship, it will be inline with 2 other dreadnought besides the Bulkwork dreadnought which is basically a OPs oddy with better base stats and a hanger...

    second suggestion make the the Gal-R have universal Lt slots and ensign. This would give the Gal-R a flexible setup that the Gal-x or other fed cruisers can't replicate.
  • wilbor2wilbor2 Member Posts: 1,684 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Ive played for a few years now n have never seen them add a update to a ship so im not sure if it coming out is in answer to poor sales. But the extra slots has got me thinking somthing is up. i think its to try n shut ppl up about the lack of customisation on there latest ships.
    gs9kwcxytstg.jpg
  • projectfrontierprojectfrontier Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    wilbor2 wrote: »
    Ive played for a few years now n have never seen them add a update to a ship so im not sure if it coming out is in answer to poor sales. But the extra slots has got me thinking somthing is up. i think its to try n shut ppl up about the lack of customisation on there latest ships.

    I find the "free slots" suspicious too, especially given how false the advertising is on slots being for sale when it's a zen sale.
  • thlaylierahthlaylierah Member Posts: 2,987 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    It still amuses me to no end to see people STILL saying the DSD's are bad ships.

    If you believe them to be bad ships, then you are horrible at ship building.

    All im gonna say.

    Toodles.

    I think it's a case of sour grapes: people didn't do the grind for the 4th part and are now going to pout until that's in the store.

    Oh Wait, it's in the Lobi shop! Now it's just too expensive, resume pout.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Commander Tactical? Not going to happen on either ship.

    Try a different idea? One that may have a chance of happening?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • uryenserellonturyenserellont Member Posts: 858 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    Commander Tactical? Not going to happen on either ship.

    Try a different idea? One that may have a chance of happening?

    Swap LT tac and LTC eng. C eng + LTC eng is overkill, and LT tac as highest tac is underpowered.

    LTC tac
    C eng
    LT eng
    LT sci
    E uni

    It's a very simple change and is completely in line with the other major fed fleet cruisers.
  • erraberrab Member Posts: 1,434 Arc User
    edited March 2014
    aelfwin1 wrote: »
    We just got hit with 3 ships + some tech being sold for 100$ -- you know it as the 9 ship bundle offering (10,000 ZEN = 100$ ; over 55% savings!) just last week !

    Next week we're getting the Galaxy "bundle" for 40$ .

    Was 100$ for 3 ships (that can't even change their skin) too much ?

    Did Cryptic see the "sales" numbers and imminently started to rummage around the bottom of the barrel for something "those people" (us) will buy ?

    Yeah , I know ... it's a tinfoil hat idea . :)

    ... until you measure the time between the release of the 100$ for 3 ships and 40$ for ... is it 1 or 2 ships ?
    Or is it 40$ for ZERO new ships (art assets) and just more tech-in-a-shell , like the 100$ 3 pack is ?

    If Cryptic is hurting for money and think that this Galaxy 3 pack is going help........

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUttbZcv7WI
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In or Register to comment.