Really was hoping for Fleet Torhkat layout or something similar, guess my Gal-x will still be collecting dust.:mad:
There really is no need for ships with Cmdr and Lt Cmdr eng, its a bad design the way this games boff abilities work. Ships with less eng and more sci are better tanks and healers, and ships with less eng and more tac are better DPS cruisers. All you really need is Cmdr and Lt eng at most and even less is also good.
Sadness, a great opportunity is wasted here. A slight boff station switch (with a slight lean towards tactical) upon separation would have been the most elegant way to go here.
Considering that Cryptic didn't have to do anything to the Galaxy class ships, this is a welcome change, and I (my opinion) like the changes to the Dreadnought, will definitely get this ship now.
My only complaint would be that the "Galaxy Bundle" is a bit of a slap in the fact to those people who have a c-store galaxy class ship but not all three, right now I'm looking at spending 4400 zen just to get the other c-store Galaxy ships (1500 refit, 2500 dreadnought, and 400 bridge pack), and this is effectively added to the 2000 that I paid for my Galaxy Retrofit... kinda rude on Cryptic's part...
Complaints aside, Thank you Developers for giving the Dreadnought some love, any chance of seeing improvements in the Galaxy Retrofit in the future?
I've been traveling for a week so I hadn't had a chance to voice my concerns. I'm very disappointed in this revamp. I have owned the X since it was first released and have flown it very little. This thing should have had a ltc tac or uni. Really big mistake here...
I own an avenger already and really don't see the point in changing what I do with my Galaxy X or bother with the R or fleet versions since I can't see any point in spending more for just a few gimmicky changes. I will test out the lance again and see if it really performs any differently but I have a feeling that years of waiting for a viable fed dreadnought were just pipe dreams.
Gold Sub since March 2010
Lifetime Sub since June 2010
Considering that Cryptic didn't have to do anything to the Galaxy class ships, this is a welcome change, and I (my opinion) like the changes to the Dreadnought, will definitely get this ship now.
My only complaint would be that the "Galaxy Bundle" is a bit of a slap in the fact to those people who have a c-store galaxy class ship but not all three, right now I'm looking at spending 4400 zen just to get the other c-store Galaxy ships (1500 refit, 2500 dreadnought, and 400 bridge pack), and this is effectively added to the 2000 that I paid for my Galaxy Retrofit... kinda rude on Cryptic's part...
Complaints aside, Thank you Developers for giving the Dreadnought some love, any chance of seeing improvements in the Galaxy Retrofit in the future?
This is there updates to the Galaxy line, all of them. Otherwise, why would they call it a Galaxy Reboot?
I'll still get the pack sometime soon. I like the Galaxy, and I figure that I might need a decent hypertank for some stuff. Or just for fun.
But seriously, Commander/LTC eng is a little much on the eng side. Commander-ensign or LTC-lieutenant is more than enough for a solid Aux2Bat build; any more is just wasted slots.
I like EPTS1--RSP1--BP1--AB3 on a Commander eng slot, and Engineering Team 1 on an ensign eng slot. That's plenty for a tank.
Hell, my Scimitar is nearly invincible if I time it right, and it only has like LT/Ensign eng.
I suggest either boosting the Galaxy line's shields and hull OR shifting some of its boffs into tac and/or sci. Make it a slower, tougher version of the Breen cruiser and you'll rake in the cash.
This is there updates to the Galaxy line, all of them. Otherwise, why would they call it a Galaxy Reboot?
Though I hope I'm wrong about that.
Nope, you are correct, they have stated on twitter that the Galaxy-R is never being updated. Personally i find it funny. 570+ page thread about how bad the galaxy-R is and THIS is their answer, just goes to show you how much cryptic "cares" about its playerbase.
I've been traveling for a week so I hadn't had a chance to voice my concerns. I'm very disappointed in this revamp. I have owned the X since it was first released and have flown it very little. This thing should have had a ltc tac or uni. Really big mistake here...
I own an avenger already and really don't see the point in changing what I do with my Galaxy X or bother with the R or fleet versions since I can't see any point in spending more for just a few gimmicky changes. I will test out the lance again and see if it really performs any differently but I have a feeling that years of waiting for a viable fed dreadnought were just pipe dreams.
Agreed. After looking at the stats they just put up it looks like no changes to the BOFF layout aside from the universal ensign slot. Way to listen to people, Cryptic.
Yeah, I know - but one lives in hope. False hope, since the dev's didn't listen, but nonetheless.....
I think it's illogical to ignore the perfectly valid logic behind why Cryptic is probably ignoring what they did - the problem isn't with the Galaxy. It's with the gameplay's demand for nothing but DPS, and the power creep which allowed ships meant to be glass cannons to tank everything, rendering tank-y ships like the Galaxy useless.
The gameplay needs to be changed to suit every ship configuration so that the Galaxy and other underused ship finally have their place, the ships themselves don't need the changes.
I of course could be wrong on their reasoning, but that reason seems to be a very justified one if they do have it.
Though quite telling that nothing has really been said by a dev....
Considered and rejected because it was 'too much trouble' or that it would ruin some preconceived notion about things is my guess. We can have a science ship that can become a tactical ship with one click of a button but we can't have a Galaxy-class Dreadnought with even a single LtCmdr Tactical slot. Go figure.
I think it's illogical to ignore the perfectly valid logic behind why Cryptic is probably ignoring what they did - the problem isn't with the Galaxy. It's with the gameplay's demand for nothing but DPS, and the power creep which allowed ships meant to be glass cannons to tank everything, rendering tank-y ships like the Galaxy useless.
The gameplay needs to be changed to suit the Galaxy and other underused ships, the ships themselves don't need the changes.
I of course could be wrong on their reasoning, but that reason seems to be a very justified one if they do have it.
And if you actually believe they are going to change the game at all, ever, then you are in denial about Cryptic/PWE and what they are like.
Hrmmm, like I said in the other blog thread...if Cryptic went Fleet Negh'Var instead of Bulwark for the BOFF layout...I'd fully expect folks to rip into them for it...
NOTE: Details are subject to change.
...I'd highly recommend the details do change.
I don't even have a single Fed toon and I'm reaching for the Excedrin for the /facepalm this is...meh.
Considered and rejected because it was 'too much trouble' or that it would ruin some preconceived notion about things is my guess. We can have a science ship that can become a tactical ship with one click of a button but we can't have a Galaxy-class Dreadnought with even a single LtCmdr Tactical slot
Yet the same sci-tac ship cannot use faction-specific hull material, even though it's technically possible and players requested it in numerous threads.
And it's just "yet another example" of Cryptic's twisted vision of the game...
Has ANY of the threads concerning the Gal R/X been taken under consideration?
Yes, the feedback threads have been bookmarked, noted, and passed to the appropriate Devs, and they have also read/considered them.
Please keep in mind that we do listen to all feedback, and take what we can from what is constructive, and try to base future decisions on what we hear from our player community.
However, that does not mean that we can change everything in-game to what all players are asking for. There will always be the plain and simple truth that we cannot change everything to make everyone happy 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean we don't try to do things for the benefit of our players.
When we work on reboots such as the Galaxy reboot, and when we add Fleet versions of desired ships, we have our own internal reasons behind every decision. Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.
Angry abusive posts wont get any of us anywhere, so keep in mind, the more pages upon pages of non-constructive posts will only bury constructive feedback posts, making it even harder to hear the things that could affect real change to our decision making process.
The last thing we want is any of you to feel that you are being ignored or that your voices are unheard. That being said, sometimes those voices need to understand that even though you really really want something to change, if we do not change things to accommodate your requests, this is nothing personal.
We will continue to listen to your feedback and take it into consideration.
We sincerely appreciate your support, as well as your passion for STO.
I do hope that you can convince them to explain their decisions here if they can. Not for my sake, but for the sake of the posters that are disappointed by the changes. Though I would appreciate it if you could confirm that it was this or not.
If anything, that's to cover themselves, legally, in case they decide to nerf it.
Or am I being too cynical now?
No, but I don't see them making this worse than it is.
The upgrades are nice, but fall fatally short of a home run. It's almost as if the devs and the decision makers don't actually play the game at the same level as the rest of us.
I understand why this ship would NOT get a Commander Tac position. But Lt.Com would raise the bar on the significantly to make this ship a MUST BUY as opposed to WTFNWIH.
Yes, the feedback threads have been bookmarked, noted, and passed to the appropriate Devs, and they have also read/considered them.
Please keep in mind that we do listen to all feedback, and take what we can from what is constructive, and try to base future decisions on what we hear from our player community.
However, that does not mean that we can change everything in-game to what all players are asking for. There will always be the plain and simple truth that we cannot change everything to make everyone happy 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean we don't try to do things for the benefit of our players.
When we work on reboots such as the Galaxy reboot, and when we add Fleet versions of desired ships, we have our own internal reasons behind every decision. Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.
Angry abusive posts wont get any of us anywhere, so keep in mind, the more pages upon pages of non-constructive posts will only bury constructive feedback posts, making it even harder to hear the things that could affect real change to our decision making process.
The last thing we want is any of you to feel that you are being ignored or that your voices are unheard. That being said, sometimes those voices need to understand that even though you really really want something to change, if we do not change things to accommodate your requests, this is nothing personal.
We will continue to listen to your feedback and take it into consideration.
We sincerely appreciate your support, as well as your passion for STO.
~CaptainSmirk
Nicely done, very tactful, i think all of us who are hoping for some change in STO should remember these words.:D
Yes, the feedback threads have been bookmarked, noted, and passed to the appropriate Devs, and they have also read/considered them.
Please keep in mind that we do listen to all feedback, and take what we can from what is constructive, and try to base future decisions on what we hear from our player community.
However, that does not mean that we can change everything in-game to what all players are asking for. There will always be the plain and simple truth that we cannot change everything to make everyone happy 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean we don't try to do things for the benefit of our players.
When we work on reboots such as the Galaxy reboot, and when we add Fleet versions of desired ships, we have our own internal reasons behind every decision. Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.
Angry abusive posts wont get any of us anywhere, so keep in mind, the more pages upon pages of non-constructive posts will only bury constructive feedback posts, making it even harder to hear the things that could affect real change to our decision making process.
The last thing we want is any of you to feel that you are being ignored or that your voices are unheard. That being said, sometimes those voices need to understand that even though you really really want something to change, if we do not change things to accommodate your requests, this is nothing personal.
We will continue to listen to your feedback and take it into consideration.
We sincerely appreciate your support, as well as your passion for STO.
~CaptainSmirk
Maybe they can give the reasoning why they feel the Galaxy-R (and it's Fleet variant) are fine the way they are then? Since there's been lots of feedback about how they are not really designed to fit current content with little information on why during this reboot they decided to leave them alone.
Also give the reasoning why they think the Galaxy-X needs it's boff layout the way it is. Just sort of a general "This is what we envision for these ships, which is why we are doing what we are doing." post so at least we know where the devs are coming from.
Would certainly help with the "We're listening" perception, even if it means that no changes are happening.
Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.
No offense intended Smirk, but Im pretty sure that a dreadnought without a tactical leaning will never make much sense
I know you pass along feed back but there is one thing that is consistent. This ship needs a lt commander tactical. Can you please pass that along with emphasis? Thank you.
Maybe you could tell us your reasons for making this Galaxy DREADNOUGHT so engineering heavy? It's even less tactically oriented than the Excelsior class which is supposed to be a CRUISER. I'd really really REALLY like to know what let to this decision. I mean the feedback is almost unanimously for at least a lt com tactical slot. And this is really not that unreasonable, is it? After all - and I know I'm repeating myself here - it's a DREADNOUGHT !
Comments
There really is no need for ships with Cmdr and Lt Cmdr eng, its a bad design the way this games boff abilities work. Ships with less eng and more sci are better tanks and healers, and ships with less eng and more tac are better DPS cruisers. All you really need is Cmdr and Lt eng at most and even less is also good.
My only complaint would be that the "Galaxy Bundle" is a bit of a slap in the fact to those people who have a c-store galaxy class ship but not all three, right now I'm looking at spending 4400 zen just to get the other c-store Galaxy ships (1500 refit, 2500 dreadnought, and 400 bridge pack), and this is effectively added to the 2000 that I paid for my Galaxy Retrofit... kinda rude on Cryptic's part...
Complaints aside, Thank you Developers for giving the Dreadnought some love, any chance of seeing improvements in the Galaxy Retrofit in the future?
I own an avenger already and really don't see the point in changing what I do with my Galaxy X or bother with the R or fleet versions since I can't see any point in spending more for just a few gimmicky changes. I will test out the lance again and see if it really performs any differently but I have a feeling that years of waiting for a viable fed dreadnought were just pipe dreams.
Lifetime Sub since June 2010
Though I hope I'm wrong about that.
But seriously, Commander/LTC eng is a little much on the eng side. Commander-ensign or LTC-lieutenant is more than enough for a solid Aux2Bat build; any more is just wasted slots.
I like EPTS1--RSP1--BP1--AB3 on a Commander eng slot, and Engineering Team 1 on an ensign eng slot. That's plenty for a tank.
Hell, my Scimitar is nearly invincible if I time it right, and it only has like LT/Ensign eng.
I suggest either boosting the Galaxy line's shields and hull OR shifting some of its boffs into tac and/or sci. Make it a slower, tougher version of the Breen cruiser and you'll rake in the cash.
Nope, you are correct, they have stated on twitter that the Galaxy-R is never being updated. Personally i find it funny. 570+ page thread about how bad the galaxy-R is and THIS is their answer, just goes to show you how much cryptic "cares" about its playerbase.
Agreed. After looking at the stats they just put up it looks like no changes to the BOFF layout aside from the universal ensign slot. Way to listen to people, Cryptic.
https://twitter.com/PWE_BranFlakes/status/440944213136797696
Though quite telling that nothing has really been said by a dev....
The gameplay needs to be changed to suit every ship configuration so that the Galaxy and other underused ship finally have their place, the ships themselves don't need the changes.
I of course could be wrong on their reasoning, but that reason seems to be a very justified one if they do have it.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Considered and rejected because it was 'too much trouble' or that it would ruin some preconceived notion about things is my guess. We can have a science ship that can become a tactical ship with one click of a button but we can't have a Galaxy-class Dreadnought with even a single LtCmdr Tactical slot. Go figure.
And if you actually believe they are going to change the game at all, ever, then you are in denial about Cryptic/PWE and what they are like.
NOTE: Details are subject to change.
...I'd highly recommend the details do change.
I don't even have a single Fed toon and I'm reaching for the Excedrin for the /facepalm this is...meh.
If anything, that's to cover themselves, legally, in case they decide to nerf it.
Or am I being too cynical now?
This need a lt cmdr tac boff slot.
And it's just "yet another example" of Cryptic's twisted vision of the game...
does not really help i guess
Yes, the feedback threads have been bookmarked, noted, and passed to the appropriate Devs, and they have also read/considered them.
Please keep in mind that we do listen to all feedback, and take what we can from what is constructive, and try to base future decisions on what we hear from our player community.
However, that does not mean that we can change everything in-game to what all players are asking for. There will always be the plain and simple truth that we cannot change everything to make everyone happy 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean we don't try to do things for the benefit of our players.
When we work on reboots such as the Galaxy reboot, and when we add Fleet versions of desired ships, we have our own internal reasons behind every decision. Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.
Angry abusive posts wont get any of us anywhere, so keep in mind, the more pages upon pages of non-constructive posts will only bury constructive feedback posts, making it even harder to hear the things that could affect real change to our decision making process.
The last thing we want is any of you to feel that you are being ignored or that your voices are unheard. That being said, sometimes those voices need to understand that even though you really really want something to change, if we do not change things to accommodate your requests, this is nothing personal.
We will continue to listen to your feedback and take it into consideration.
We sincerely appreciate your support, as well as your passion for STO.
~CaptainSmirk
If you actually explain what they are like and demonstrate that they are not trying to improve themselves, that might be of great help.
I do hope that you can convince them to explain their decisions here if they can. Not for my sake, but for the sake of the posters that are disappointed by the changes. Though I would appreciate it if you could confirm that it was this or not.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
No, but I don't see them making this worse than it is.
The upgrades are nice, but fall fatally short of a home run. It's almost as if the devs and the decision makers don't actually play the game at the same level as the rest of us.
I understand why this ship would NOT get a Commander Tac position. But Lt.Com would raise the bar on the significantly to make this ship a MUST BUY as opposed to WTFNWIH.
IF this was nearly ANY other game developer, i would say you are. In this case, no, you are understanding EXACTLY what is going on.
There were Undine frigates and a Dreadnought offscreen.
~CaptainSmirk
Nicely done, very tactful, i think all of us who are hoping for some change in STO should remember these words.:D
Also give the reasoning why they think the Galaxy-X needs it's boff layout the way it is. Just sort of a general "This is what we envision for these ships, which is why we are doing what we are doing." post so at least we know where the devs are coming from.
Would certainly help with the "We're listening" perception, even if it means that no changes are happening.
Except they really do NOT listen to what ANYONE says, at all. IT would be one thing if they at least somewhat listened to feedback, but they do not.
No offense intended Smirk, but Im pretty sure that a dreadnought without a tactical leaning will never make much sense
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
I know you pass along feed back but there is one thing that is consistent. This ship needs a lt commander tactical. Can you please pass that along with emphasis? Thank you.