again the pres is out of office by now. the next one can reneg that order.
But he/she hasn't...plus does the Federation president reign under the same terms of the US president? He/She may not just get two four year terms then it's bye bye...maybe has longer terms or maybe can have four or five terms...
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
But he/she hasn't...plus does the Federation president reign under the same terms of the US president? He/She may not just get two four year terms then it's bye bye...maybe has longer terms or maybe can have four or five terms...
There has to be some limit. he saw a different president between St 4 and St 6 and it's been 15 years since the order was given and who knows how long he was president before that. Crytpic can clear this up on what was agreed to in the Romulan Republic treaty and who is Federation president.
...other than all the ships, uniforms, science, kdf consoles, love, and dev devotion.
I assume you answer to my post?
Let me get this straight:
- all the ships:
So you want to fly FED ships with your KDF char?
Or what do you mean by that?
- all the uniforms
Same as above.
- science
You don't have acess to all science powers?
- KDF consoles
Unless you do PvP, why should anyone care?
But if you do, then i agree. I don't like the whole lockbox-console idea. It only results in having other factions easier access of a certain console than the original faction. Typical Cryptic logic IMO.
- love
You play a Klingon and want LOVE...?
Seriously, i get your point, but since there are much less ppl playing Klingons in the first place i don't think Cryptic would put much more work into them.
And let's face it Klingon faction isn't very popular, not just because they don't have as many ships or uniforms. Even if they would get 20 new ships today, i doubt that masses of players suddenly would want to play a KDF char.
- dev devotion
Same as above.
Aside from the typical fluff like ship skins, variations and new releases, KDF ships are by far the more fun to fly ships, especially battlecruisers. (They also look much better than Cryptic made Starfleet ships IMO.)
In fact, i belive that Cryptics devs create better looking KDF/ROM ships on purpose.
I know it's still unfair, i'm sorry for you guys.
EDIT:
I know this isn't a FED vs. KDF thread (i wouldn't have posted in it in the first place) but i think creating the KDF faction was a big mistake from a developers point of view.
Especially since PvP isn't a central aspect of the game (thankfully).
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Again the Galaxy X is a capable ship. The galaxy R needs attention more than the Galaxy X
the galaxy retrofit definitly need more attention than the galaxy x, but that daesn't mean that the galaxy x is perfect as it is.
people that said the galaxy x is fine just don't use it seriously in pvp, if they ever use it at all.
i use this ship exclusively for more than 2 years now, both in pve and pvp.
and i can tell you that exept me there is no regular user of the galaxy x in pvp.
the galaxy retrofit definitly need more attention than the galaxy x, but that daesn't mean that the galaxy x is perfect as it is.
people that said the galaxy x is fine just don't use it seriously in pvp, if they ever use it at all.
i use this ship exclusively for more than 2 years now, both in pve and pvp.
and i can tell you that exept me there is no regular user of the galaxy x in pvp.
Sure the G-X "upgrades" where a joke, no doubt.
The devs gave the G-X the uni ensign that was suggested for the G-R. (the lowest possible enhacement of all suggested reworks). In my opinion the G-X uni ens is totally pointless and missing the point of that ship completely. I can't remember of anyone even remotely suggesting something like that for the G-X...
The G-X should have got a Lt. Cmdr Tac instead.
So be careful what you wish from Cryptics devs... lol.
(if it where a Escort it surely would have got a Lt.cmdr uni )
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Id say it needs another update this time one that actually does what the playerbase wants and makes it a tactical terror it should be.
1. Change the power settings to be plus 10 weapons plus 5 shields and plus 5 engines.
2. Update the Boff config to be lots more tactical and something unique to Feds like
Com Tactical
Lt Com Engineer
Lt Engineer
Lt Science
Ens Tac or universal
3. Ditch shotgun lance idea. Make it have a 5for/3rear weapons and make the 5th forward weapons the lance that fire at same rate a Dual heavy cannon does, Slightly less damage with a 90 degree arc and bonus to Accuracy. When in Separation Mode you make it 4/3 weapons with all the power that usual feeds the Lance its power being rerouted/devoted to speed and turn rate bonuses making it turn almost as good as an escort.
4. Make it more Dreadnought feeling by losing the hanger bay (let the Rommies Scimitar have the hanger bay as their unique dreadnought feature) and add a three min cooldown Lance overcharge like we have now but make it disable the now 5th forward weapon lance for say 5-10 secs. Would take it offline and charge for say 2 secs, fire it double blast like it does now and resume normal firing 3 secs or so after the blast.
5. To add a optional thing I'd like them to add a cstore item Dreadnought Lance that gives you option to switch to different energy types. Make the 5th Forward slot only able to slot the original Phaser lance or one of the different energy type Lances from cstore.
I am tired of these post. The Galaxy does not need a revamp. It has it's own Boff layout and there is very few ships out here this unique. There is nothing wrong with the ship. Yes I do prefer different boff layout for a cruiser. That ship exist for me. If you don't like it find something to fly.
the Assault Refit (Regent)
the Excelsior
the Avenger
And now you want to add the Gal X?
The ship may be a little slow and under powered for PVP, but she's fine for PVE. You have to choose between looks and BOFF layout. Nobody else gets as much choice as the Feds and your still not happy.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
the Assault Refit (Regent)
the Excelsior
the Avenger
And now you want to add the Gal X?
The ship may be a little slow and under powered for PVP, but she's fine for PVE. You have to choose between looks and BOFF layout. Nobody else gets as much choice as the Feds and your still not happy.
If you're a fan of a certain ship, why would you care if 500 other ships have a Lt. Cmdr but yours doesn't?
That's a typical MMO player statement IMO:
"Go only after the stats, the ship itself doesn't care..."
But if you're more a trek fan than MMO player, then you care very well what ship you fly.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Id say it needs another update this time one that actually does what the playerbase wants and makes it a tactical terror it should be.
1. Change the power settings to be plus 10 weapons plus 5 shields and plus 5 engines.
2. Update the Boff config to be lots more tactical and something unique to Feds like
Com Tactical
Lt Com Engineer
Lt Engineer
Lt Science
Ens Tac or universal
3. Ditch shotgun lance idea. Make it have a 5for/3rear weapons and make the 5th forward weapons the lance that fire at same rate a Dual heavy cannon does, Slightly less damage with a 90 degree arc and bonus to Accuracy. When in Separation Mode you make it 4/3 weapons with all the power that usual feeds the Lance its power being rerouted/devoted to speed and turn rate bonuses making it turn almost as good as an escort.
4. Make it more Dreadnought feeling by losing the hanger bay (let the Rommies Scimitar have the hanger bay as their unique dreadnought feature) and add a three min cooldown Lance overcharge like we have now but make it disable the now 5th forward weapon lance for say 5-10 secs. Would take it offline and charge for say 2 secs, fire it double blast like it does now and resume normal firing 3 secs or so after the blast.
5. To add a optional thing I'd like them to add a cstore item Dreadnought Lance that gives you option to switch to different energy types. Make the 5th Forward slot only able to slot the original Phaser lance or one of the different energy type Lances from cstore.
My dream for the Dreadnought anyways
Now maybe the Gal-X deserves some changes but do we need yet another tactical ship? You wonder why all Cryptic makes is tactical ships these days? Because people want to turn what isn't a tac ship into one...the Gal-X, the Intrepid, and even the D'D.
Umm in case you didn't notice, every playable ship with *dreadnought* in the name has one hangar bay...some even two. Personally I think ever Dreadnought should have two bays except the Scimitar...I mean it doesn't make sense that two of the most powerful dreadnoughts have two hangar bays while the weakest of the Dreadnoughts a.k.a. the Gal-X and the Voth Dread only have 1.
I also don't agree with being able to change the lance damage type and never have, it's a Starfleet ship...last thing we need is people flying around with a Plasma lance with a ship chocked full of plasma damage sci consoles and the singularity harness 2 piece...
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
I am tired of these post. The Galaxy does not need a revamp. It has it's own Boff layout and there is very few ships out here this unique. There is nothing wrong with the ship. Yes I do prefer different boff layout for a cruiser. That ship exist for me. If you don't like it find something to fly.
it funny how many people said the galaxy x is fine as is but don't fly the ship.
but your right, they are very few ship as unique, in a sense as, as clueless.
in fact the only one that came to my mind that beat it on the subject is the galaxy retrofit.
and if you didn't known the odyssey can mimick the galaxy x bo layout anyday.
the Assault Refit (Regent)
the Excelsior
the Avenger
And now you want to add the Gal X?
The ship may be a little slow and under powered for PVP, but she's fine for PVE. You have to choose between looks and BOFF layout. Nobody else gets as much choice as the Feds and your still not happy.
i don't care about having 10 trillion different ship, console and whatever in the federation faction, i just care about the galaxy x not to be a joke.
and i don't anderstand, you mean that the galaxy x is bad and we should be happy because the federation faction got every other toy?
so what the idea? potential galaxy x player are here to "paid" for the federation acces to all the goodie? seriously?
and the real question is not how many fed cruiser need a ltcommander tact.
because if you think the federation in all sto livetime will only have 3 cruiser with a lt commander tact, then prepare yourself to see that undone ( not neccesaraly with the galaxy x ).
no the real question is what would you give to a tactical cruiser to not make it a joke, especially when this one already have a slow turn , speed and inertia, and just a lt tact and sci.
your going to do the cryptic move? slap a hangar?
FIX!!
and sorry, again i don't see why we should choose between pvp and pve with this ship.
the regent, exelsior and avenger sure don't have to.
or else i would ask for a official disclaimer in the cstore description of the galaxy x, something like this:
be aware this ship is not suit for pvp
Now maybe the Gal-X deserves some changes but do we need yet another tactical ship? You wonder why all Cryptic makes is tactical ships these days? Because people want to turn what isn't a tac ship into one...the Gal-X, the Intrepid, and even the D'D.
Umm in case you didn't notice, every playable ship with *dreadnought* in the name has one hangar bay...some even two. Personally I think ever Dreadnought should have two bays except the Scimitar...I mean it doesn't make sense that two of the most powerful dreadnoughts have two hangar bays while the weakest of the Dreadnoughts a.k.a. the Gal-X and the Voth Dread only have 1.
I also don't agree with being able to change the lance damage type and never have, it's a Starfleet ship...last thing we need is people flying around with a Plasma lance with a ship chocked full of plasma damage sci consoles and the singularity harness 2 piece...
in case you didn't known the galaxy x IS a tactical ship, it is the galaxy retrofit that is not.
it got 3 tactical boff, a phaser lance, cloack can equip dual cannon and got 4 tactical console slot and now a hangar bay.
they call it dreadnought cruiser, not dreadnought healer:rolleyes:
and that why it need change, it would be more difficult to call for a change in the tactical departementtif it was not a tactical ship in the first place.
the thing is that it don't need much, just a lt commander tac, and they can remove that stupid hangar if they want to.
see that really not a big deal, especially when you see thing like the narcine dreadnought with a COMMANDER tactical and a lt commander universal combined with 9 f*****g turn rate and 2 hangar bay!!!
a 6base turn rate/25 inertia ltcommander tact ship is still in the lowest damage potential ship in the game.
but don't worry, at tier 5, even these small change will never happened, cryptic said f.. sorry, no.
now we just have to see what the tier 6 upgrade will do.
I agree that the lance needs to be changed. But that's about it. Traditionally, no ship can fire while cloaked. The scimitar was the only ship to break this rule, as far as I know. And battle cloaks are something that should be strictly reserved for romulans and Klingons.
As far as the lance goes, I would definitely like to see it narrowed out, but weather or not it is changed to a hardpoint weapon, it should not be affected by weapon mod abilities. Considering its current power, a beam overloaded lance would be ridiculously overpowered, as would its shotgun version when the saucer is separated. The real major change I would make is give it huge shield penetration, something between 50 and 75%.
I agree that the lance needs to be changed. But that's about it. Traditionally, no ship can fire while cloaked. The scimitar was the only ship to break this rule, as far as I know. And battle cloaks are something that should be strictly reserved for romulans and Klingons.
As far as the lance goes, I would definitely like to see it narrowed out, but weather or not it is changed to a hardpoint weapon, it should not be affected by weapon mod abilities. Considering its current power, a beam overloaded lance would be ridiculously overpowered, as would its shotgun version when the saucer is separated. The real major change I would make is give it huge shield penetration, something between 50 and 75%.
Haha. Shield penetration. Yes. Because the game seriously needs more of THAT.....
What needs to happen:
Make the Lance into a very narrow arc hard point weapon akin to other ship integrated weapons. Its on target dps should come out as about 3 times a dual heavy cannon, pre skills and stat mods.
The ship naturally loses this weapon when its separating, instead gaining the current shotgun shot.
If you are in front of a GX, it will hurt you. So be somewhere else. Given that its a sluggish ship, evading the firing arc is easy enough.
And no, this is not too much damage. A FAW scimi pulls what, 50k plus dps in a large arc?
So there.
The Federation already has a slew of superior FAW ships, so focus the galaxy x on its gimmick. Which is a large phaser beam cannon pointing straightforward, ready to maul ships into scrap.
Trim down the tactical consoles and add science or engineering console instead to lower the standard weapon damage if the non lance damage needs to go down, but ramp up that frontal cannon accordingly.
There is no reason this ship should not be focused around this specific trait. The large gun.
And loose the bloody dual cannons. Those have no place on any galaxy derivate.
the lance should have it cooldown lower to 2 minute instead of 3.
and that it work like a beam overload instead of a lance, just like the gurumba.
don't get me wrong i don't speak about the new " alway crit" feature that beam overload got now.
but how beam work in the hit an miss chance.
that why i think the gurumba lance miss less often than the galaxy x.
also, the 2 iteration shot should be removed, just 1 shot.
because right now, the second shot just drastically increase the chance to loose 50% of it dmg on top of letting the opponent a chance to escape.
it is also considerably increase the time we need to keep the target aligned.
if that were done i don't see the need to increase the dps of the weapon, indeed who need more power if it is to miss the target anyway.
i am not for making it a 5th slot weapons also, and don't see the need to be able to change the weapon type, but i am not close the last idea.
the shotgun lance is what the original lance should have been, mechanically, just not a wide angle aoe attack.
it would be good if the cloack become integrated again too, not a battle cloack, just a normal cloack like it is now, but one that don't occupy a console slot.
it funny how many people said the galaxy x is fine as is but don't fly the ship.
but your right, they are very few ship as unique, in a sense as, as clueless.
in fact the only one that came to my mind that beat it on the subject is the galaxy retrofit.
and if you didn't known the odyssey can mimick the galaxy x bo layout anyday.
Nope wrong. I own the Galaxy and the Oddy both are great ships. When I fly them I fly them for what they are tanks. And truly no ship does it as good as either. I spec I to threat like a tank should and you never not even a 80k dps scimmy removes aggro from me. So the ship does its job just fine. I like the Oddy more because I flip the lt com back and forth to a sci station.
in case you didn't known the galaxy x IS a tactical ship, it is the galaxy retrofit that is not.
it got 3 tactical boff, a phaser lance, cloack can equip dual cannon and got 4 tactical console slot and now a hangar bay.
they call it dreadnought cruiser, not dreadnought healer:rolleyes:
and that why it need change, it would be more difficult to call for a change in the tactical departementtif it was not a tactical ship in the first place.
the thing is that it don't need much, just a lt commander tac, and they can remove that stupid hangar if they want to.
see that really not a big deal, especially when you see thing like the narcine dreadnought with a COMMANDER tactical and a lt commander universal combined with 9 f*****g turn rate and 2 hangar bay!!!
a 6base turn rate/25 inertia ltcommander tact ship is still in the lowest damage potential ship in the game.
but don't worry, at tier 5, even these small change will never happened, cryptic said f.. sorry, no.
now we just have to see what the tier 6 upgrade will do.
I was talking about the fact that the person I replied to wants the Cmdr to be changed to tac...there is a big difference between changing the Cmdr to tac or the Lt Cmdr. If you take away the Cmdr Eng it isn't a Dreadnought Cruiser anymore...and it would also have it's Cruiser commands taken away.
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
Now maybe the Gal-X deserves some changes but do we need yet another tactical ship? You wonder why all Cryptic makes is tactical ships these days? Because people want to turn what isn't a tac ship into one...the Gal-X, the Intrepid, and even the D'D.
Umm in case you didn't notice, every playable ship with *dreadnought* in the name has one hangar bay...some even two. Personally I think ever Dreadnought should have two bays except the Scimitar...I mean it doesn't make sense that two of the most powerful dreadnoughts have two hangar bays while the weakest of the Dreadnoughts a.k.a. the Gal-X and the Voth Dread only have 1.
I also don't agree with being able to change the lance damage type and never have, it's a Starfleet ship...last thing we need is people flying around with a Plasma lance with a ship chocked full of plasma damage sci consoles and the singularity harness 2 piece...
1. It was already a tactical ship. It was one of the first tactical cruisers offered by cryptic in this game. It was the first of the dreadnoughts and needs to be upped into the tactical position it deserves as a dreadnought. Tactical cause a science ships or a engineer ship doesn't have the Tac boffs to use cannons. Some maybe happy with the cryptic kit bash Avenger but I'd prefer to fly my Galaxy-X with proper stations.
2. In case you didn't know the first ship with dreadnought didn't have nor did it need hanger bays. Most in the thread to update the Galaxy-X never wanted a hanger bay period let alone two. I'd prefer making it a unique Starfleet design instead of a knockoff off the others. Since it has a cruiser command for aggro make it have an innate engineering ability that lets it help survive. Sorry don't think slapping a hanger bay let alone another hanger bay onto a ship to make it balanced is always the answer.
3. Personally I only use phasers so don't affect me either way but it was something alot requested so it should atleast be given some attention and consideration.
I was talking about the fact that the person I replied to wants the Cmdr to be changed to tac...there is a big difference between changing the Cmdr to tac or the Lt Cmdr. If you take away the Cmdr Eng it isn't a Dreadnought Cruiser anymore...and it would also have it's Cruiser commands taken away.
The person being me. Also don't get me wrong but why shouldn't the Federation have one cruiser that breaks the rules alittle and puts a Com Tactical on a cruiser. Seeing as its a Dreadnought cruiser I don't see the harm in making it unique and giving it a better reason to only have its two cruiser commands instead of the 4 other cruisers get. If you were infact talking about that then why didn't you say anything about it. Your chief complaint was about another tactical ship which this wouldn't be as it is already a tactical ship.
Why isn't it a cruiser anymore. Didn't know the cruiser had to have a Engineer Commander or it wasn't a cruiser by definition anymore. It still looks like a cruiser would still fly like one. It just wouldn't be the weak Tactical joke of the dreadnoughts it is now. Hell its not nearly as tactically sound as the Regent or the new Avenger. Dreadnoughts should bring more rain so to speak in the damage department. Other ships can have Tactical Commanders surely Starfleet can have one. Or should all starfleet officers be forced to fly alien ships instead of the ones we actually like just for the better layouts.
Hell keep it the way it is and make me a Mirror Galaxy Dreadnought with the tactical boffs i want and leave the stupid hanger bay off. Don't need or want it either way. I'd prefer it without pet spam thanks.
The biggest problem with the Galaxy X is they kind of reached saturation point.
The people who want them already have them, the people who don't want a powerful ship. There is very little incentive to "fix" a ship they've taken this many goes at getting right.
There are a lot of ships in this game that need work, let's see them have a balance pass before we take yet another look at the Galaxy.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
The biggest problem with the Galaxy X is they kind of reached saturation point.
The people who want them already have them, the people who don't want a powerful ship. There is very little incentive to "fix" a ship they've taken this many goes at getting right.
There are a lot of ships in this game that need work, let's see them have a balance pass before we take yet another look at the Galaxy.
I hope you mean Galaxy -X.:)
The "real" Galaxy (-R) didn't get any rework at all. Although it needed a rework more than any other ship in the game IMO, for years by now.
EDIT:
Let's face it the G-X is totally underwhelming compared to other Dreadnoughts.
It's not wonder why ppl. want a more tactical focussed ship.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
The person being me. Also don't get me wrong but why shouldn't the Federation have one cruiser that breaks the rules alittle and puts a Com Tactical on a cruiser. Seeing as its a Dreadnought cruiser I don't see the harm in making it unique and giving it a better reason to only have its two cruiser commands instead of the 4 other cruisers get. If you were infact talking about that then why didn't you say anything about it. Your chief complaint was about another tactical ship which this wouldn't be as it is already a tactical ship.
Why isn't it a cruiser anymore. Didn't know the cruiser had to have a Engineer Commander or it wasn't a cruiser by definition anymore. It still looks like a cruiser would still fly like one. It just wouldn't be the weak Tactical joke of the dreadnoughts it is now. Hell its not nearly as tactically sound as the Regent or the new Avenger. Dreadnoughts should bring more rain so to speak in the damage department. Other ships can have Tactical Commanders surely Starfleet can have one. Or should all starfleet officers be forced to fly alien ships instead of the ones we actually like just for the better layouts.
Hell keep it the way it is and make me a Mirror Galaxy Dreadnought with the tactical boffs i want and leave the stupid hanger bay off. Don't need or want it either way. I'd prefer it without pet spam thanks.
Care to name me one ship that is under the Cruiser or Battlecruise classification without a Cmdr Eng?
Nope wrong. I own the Galaxy and the Oddy both are great ships. When I fly them I fly them for what they are tanks. And truly no ship does it as good as either. I spec I to threat like a tank should and you never not even a 80k dps scimmy removes aggro from me. So the ship does its job just fine. I like the Oddy more because I flip the lt com back and forth to a sci station.
no ship daes it as good as either?
are you serious?
to get agrro in this game you have many possibilitie and can combined them.
you can have it by firepower and spec in threat control in the skill tree but also by slotting threat console in sci slot of the ship.
now, how many sci console slot daes the fleet galaxy x have?
response:2
how many sci console daes the fleet ambasador have?
response
how many sci console daes the voth bulwark dreadnought cruiser have?
response: 3
how many sci console daes tholian recluse carrier have?
response: 3
how many sci console daes the fleet star cruiser have?
response: 4
and most of them got better sci bridge officer than the galaxy x, the only one that the galaxy x can match is the star cruiser, if you turn the ensign tactical to science, but then this one will still have 2 more science console slot.
the best tank in the game got more than just a lt sci bridge officer.
so again, sorry to opened your eyes but the galaxy x is not meant to be an ubber tank.
it can do it like every other cruiser, but is certainly not the best or the more appropriate for it
Here you go...let me help you...since I already know the answer I will save you time and the answer is none.
If you want a ship with a Tac Cmdr Starfleet has plenty of Escorts and Destroyers that way -->
I'm so sick and tired of this game being all about sticking as many tactical slots as possible on something or sticking a Tac Cmdr on everything...
Yea lets go with STO that makes the Intrepid a Science ship and the Akira a escort (The Akira-class was a type of heavy cruiser starship in service to the Federation Starfleet in the 24th century.) How bout no thanks. I'll stick to the logic that it's a cruiser cause the Galaxy is a cruiser and X is a modified Galaxy built for war with the Klingons.
The Federation has a nice big line of ships to chose from but none like the Scimitar, Jem'hadar, or Xindi with the Commander Tactical which all are listed as Dreadnoughts. Now if the Galaxy-x is gonna be in the dreadnought class then it should get what all other have in the Tactical Commander even if it is listed as a Dreadnought cruiser. The fact that it has a Tactical commander unlike the other Federation cruisers doesn't make its origins of being developed from a cruiser any less true.
There are plenty of ships that have a complete lack of tactical slots and tactical boffs to chose from. The point I'm trying to make is that this is one of the few ships (especially in the Federation) that is built for and deserves a Tactical overhaul.
If you want your engineer heavy or science heavy ships then get the regular Galaxy or Intrepid... Both can be found that way --->
I was talking about the fact that the person I replied to wants the Cmdr to be changed to tac...there is a big difference between changing the Cmdr to tac or the Lt Cmdr. If you take away the Cmdr Eng it isn't a Dreadnought Cruiser anymore...and it would also have it's Cruiser commands taken away.
yes, you are right on this.
cruiser should not get acces to a commander tactical.
and even if that was somehow allowed, i am not sure if it is a good idea to give it to a 6 turn ship.
the speed/turn and inertia of the ship force it to compensate with the number of sci and enginer bridge officer.
by giving it a commander tact it is mechanically remove more on the sci or engi side.
giving it a lt commander tact is already a tricky thing if you want to do it right but is completely doable.
in pve, this woudn't be a problem for now, where you can sacrifice survivability, but i don't think it would be viable in pvp.
that is also why the narcine dreadnought got 9 degree turn, because it got less sci and eng bo, and can't battle cloack or singularity jump away like the scimitar.
beside pve will become harder in the future, the dev will readjust the new content for us to not finish it in 1 minute , so even there, loosing more survivability may not be insignificant.
so to conclude, no to a commander tact on the galaxy x, if it speed/turn/inertia stay the same.
The person being me. Also don't get me wrong but why shouldn't the Federation have one cruiser that breaks the rules alittle and puts a Com Tactical on a cruiser.
ho but that will come, with time, but don't expect the galaxy x to be the one that will receive it
The biggest problem with the Galaxy X is they kind of reached saturation point.
The people who want them already have them, the people who don't want a powerful ship. There is very little incentive to "fix" a ship they've taken this many goes at getting right.
There are a lot of ships in this game that need work, let's see them have a balance pass before we take yet another look at the Galaxy.
yes, and it was intentional from cryptic to do so, make many "upgrade" to calm the crowd but not real upgrade, so the ship just stay relative TRIBBLE and we can't said nothing because you known they already do it 3 time!
why did it took them just one attempt to make the patrol escort right?
and that also why it is useless to post thread asking for a new revamp of these ship ( galaxy and galaxy x ) because cryptic just don't want them to be competitive.
ho but that will come, with time, but don't expect the galaxy x to be the one that will receive it
yes, and it was intentional from cryptic to do so, make many "upgrade" to calm the crowd but not real upgrade, so the ship just stay relative TRIBBLE and we can't said nothing because you known they already do it 3 time!
why did it took them just one attempt to make the patrol escort right?
and that also why it is useless to post thread asking for a new revamp of these ship ( galaxy and galaxy x ) because cryptic just don't want them to be competitive.
Well as I see it if Com tac isn't optional then atleast a lt com and lt tac so it doesn't take from the boff stations that the Avenger regent or excelsior have. Something like this...
Com Eng
Lt com tac
Lt tac
Lt sci or Lt engineer
ens sci or ens engineer
Seems to be true they don't want players Galaxy's getting any good use out of them and the update to the X was sad to say the least. Barely call it an update as all they really did was make a fleet version add saucer separation which they had already promised and add a hanger most didn't want. Ooh and shotgun lance...
The "real" Galaxy (-R) didn't get any rework at all. Although it needed a rework more than any other ship in the game IMO, for years by now.
EDIT:
Let's face it the G-X is totally underwhelming compared to other Dreadnoughts.
It's not wonder why ppl. want a more tactical focussed ship.
I did mean the Galaxy X but the Gal R did get some small upgrades in the form of the console bonus that is available to the Gal X. I also thought they did a visual update as they needed to rework the ship for Saucer Separation.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Comments
But he/she hasn't...plus does the Federation president reign under the same terms of the US president? He/She may not just get two four year terms then it's bye bye...maybe has longer terms or maybe can have four or five terms...
There has to be some limit. he saw a different president between St 4 and St 6 and it's been 15 years since the order was given and who knows how long he was president before that. Crytpic can clear this up on what was agreed to in the Romulan Republic treaty and who is Federation president.
This. The header "Welcome to the Federation Forums, the faction that has pretty much everything." should be at the top of the page.
Show us where this is stated. Provide us with a link please.
According to this http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_Federation_of_Planets the current president, Aennik Okeg, has been president since 2392. There is no indication that he is going anywhere.
The Galaxy-X is fine, other than the alignment of the spinal lance on one of the skins.
I assume you answer to my post?
Let me get this straight:
- all the ships:
So you want to fly FED ships with your KDF char?
Or what do you mean by that?
- all the uniforms
Same as above.
- science
You don't have acess to all science powers?
- KDF consoles
Unless you do PvP, why should anyone care?
But if you do, then i agree. I don't like the whole lockbox-console idea. It only results in having other factions easier access of a certain console than the original faction. Typical Cryptic logic IMO.
- love
You play a Klingon and want LOVE...?
Seriously, i get your point, but since there are much less ppl playing Klingons in the first place i don't think Cryptic would put much more work into them.
And let's face it Klingon faction isn't very popular, not just because they don't have as many ships or uniforms. Even if they would get 20 new ships today, i doubt that masses of players suddenly would want to play a KDF char.
- dev devotion
Same as above.
Aside from the typical fluff like ship skins, variations and new releases, KDF ships are by far the more fun to fly ships, especially battlecruisers. (They also look much better than Cryptic made Starfleet ships IMO.)
In fact, i belive that Cryptics devs create better looking KDF/ROM ships on purpose.
I know it's still unfair, i'm sorry for you guys.
EDIT:
I know this isn't a FED vs. KDF thread (i wouldn't have posted in it in the first place) but i think creating the KDF faction was a big mistake from a developers point of view.
Especially since PvP isn't a central aspect of the game (thankfully).
the galaxy retrofit definitly need more attention than the galaxy x, but that daesn't mean that the galaxy x is perfect as it is.
people that said the galaxy x is fine just don't use it seriously in pvp, if they ever use it at all.
i use this ship exclusively for more than 2 years now, both in pve and pvp.
and i can tell you that exept me there is no regular user of the galaxy x in pvp.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Sure the G-X "upgrades" where a joke, no doubt.
The devs gave the G-X the uni ensign that was suggested for the G-R. (the lowest possible enhacement of all suggested reworks). In my opinion the G-X uni ens is totally pointless and missing the point of that ship completely. I can't remember of anyone even remotely suggesting something like that for the G-X...
The G-X should have got a Lt. Cmdr Tac instead.
So be careful what you wish from Cryptics devs... lol.
(if it where a Escort it surely would have got a Lt.cmdr uni
1. Change the power settings to be plus 10 weapons plus 5 shields and plus 5 engines.
2. Update the Boff config to be lots more tactical and something unique to Feds like
Com Tactical
Lt Com Engineer
Lt Engineer
Lt Science
Ens Tac or universal
3. Ditch shotgun lance idea. Make it have a 5for/3rear weapons and make the 5th forward weapons the lance that fire at same rate a Dual heavy cannon does, Slightly less damage with a 90 degree arc and bonus to Accuracy. When in Separation Mode you make it 4/3 weapons with all the power that usual feeds the Lance its power being rerouted/devoted to speed and turn rate bonuses making it turn almost as good as an escort.
4. Make it more Dreadnought feeling by losing the hanger bay (let the Rommies Scimitar have the hanger bay as their unique dreadnought feature) and add a three min cooldown Lance overcharge like we have now but make it disable the now 5th forward weapon lance for say 5-10 secs. Would take it offline and charge for say 2 secs, fire it double blast like it does now and resume normal firing 3 secs or so after the blast.
5. To add a optional thing I'd like them to add a cstore item Dreadnought Lance that gives you option to switch to different energy types. Make the 5th Forward slot only able to slot the original Phaser lance or one of the different energy type Lances from cstore.
My dream for the Dreadnought anyways
You've already got 3:
the Assault Refit (Regent)
the Excelsior
the Avenger
And now you want to add the Gal X?
The ship may be a little slow and under powered for PVP, but she's fine for PVE. You have to choose between looks and BOFF layout. Nobody else gets as much choice as the Feds and your still not happy.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
If you're a fan of a certain ship, why would you care if 500 other ships have a Lt. Cmdr but yours doesn't?
That's a typical MMO player statement IMO:
"Go only after the stats, the ship itself doesn't care..."
But if you're more a trek fan than MMO player, then you care very well what ship you fly.
Now maybe the Gal-X deserves some changes but do we need yet another tactical ship? You wonder why all Cryptic makes is tactical ships these days? Because people want to turn what isn't a tac ship into one...the Gal-X, the Intrepid, and even the D'D.
Umm in case you didn't notice, every playable ship with *dreadnought* in the name has one hangar bay...some even two. Personally I think ever Dreadnought should have two bays except the Scimitar...I mean it doesn't make sense that two of the most powerful dreadnoughts have two hangar bays while the weakest of the Dreadnoughts a.k.a. the Gal-X and the Voth Dread only have 1.
I also don't agree with being able to change the lance damage type and never have, it's a Starfleet ship...last thing we need is people flying around with a Plasma lance with a ship chocked full of plasma damage sci consoles and the singularity harness 2 piece...
it funny how many people said the galaxy x is fine as is but don't fly the ship.
but your right, they are very few ship as unique, in a sense as, as clueless.
in fact the only one that came to my mind that beat it on the subject is the galaxy retrofit.
and if you didn't known the odyssey can mimick the galaxy x bo layout anyday.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
i don't care about having 10 trillion different ship, console and whatever in the federation faction, i just care about the galaxy x not to be a joke.
and i don't anderstand, you mean that the galaxy x is bad and we should be happy because the federation faction got every other toy?
so what the idea? potential galaxy x player are here to "paid" for the federation acces to all the goodie? seriously?
and the real question is not how many fed cruiser need a ltcommander tact.
because if you think the federation in all sto livetime will only have 3 cruiser with a lt commander tact, then prepare yourself to see that undone ( not neccesaraly with the galaxy x ).
no the real question is what would you give to a tactical cruiser to not make it a joke, especially when this one already have a slow turn , speed and inertia, and just a lt tact and sci.
your going to do the cryptic move? slap a hangar?
FIX!!
and sorry, again i don't see why we should choose between pvp and pve with this ship.
the regent, exelsior and avenger sure don't have to.
or else i would ask for a official disclaimer in the cstore description of the galaxy x, something like this:
be aware this ship is not suit for pvp
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
in case you didn't known the galaxy x IS a tactical ship, it is the galaxy retrofit that is not.
it got 3 tactical boff, a phaser lance, cloack can equip dual cannon and got 4 tactical console slot and now a hangar bay.
they call it dreadnought cruiser, not dreadnought healer:rolleyes:
and that why it need change, it would be more difficult to call for a change in the tactical departementtif it was not a tactical ship in the first place.
the thing is that it don't need much, just a lt commander tac, and they can remove that stupid hangar if they want to.
see that really not a big deal, especially when you see thing like the narcine dreadnought with a COMMANDER tactical and a lt commander universal combined with 9 f*****g turn rate and 2 hangar bay!!!
a 6base turn rate/25 inertia ltcommander tact ship is still in the lowest damage potential ship in the game.
but don't worry, at tier 5, even these small change will never happened, cryptic said f.. sorry, no.
now we just have to see what the tier 6 upgrade will do.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
As far as the lance goes, I would definitely like to see it narrowed out, but weather or not it is changed to a hardpoint weapon, it should not be affected by weapon mod abilities. Considering its current power, a beam overloaded lance would be ridiculously overpowered, as would its shotgun version when the saucer is separated. The real major change I would make is give it huge shield penetration, something between 50 and 75%.
Haha. Shield penetration. Yes. Because the game seriously needs more of THAT.....
What needs to happen:
Make the Lance into a very narrow arc hard point weapon akin to other ship integrated weapons. Its on target dps should come out as about 3 times a dual heavy cannon, pre skills and stat mods.
The ship naturally loses this weapon when its separating, instead gaining the current shotgun shot.
If you are in front of a GX, it will hurt you. So be somewhere else. Given that its a sluggish ship, evading the firing arc is easy enough.
And no, this is not too much damage. A FAW scimi pulls what, 50k plus dps in a large arc?
So there.
The Federation already has a slew of superior FAW ships, so focus the galaxy x on its gimmick. Which is a large phaser beam cannon pointing straightforward, ready to maul ships into scrap.
Trim down the tactical consoles and add science or engineering console instead to lower the standard weapon damage if the non lance damage needs to go down, but ramp up that frontal cannon accordingly.
There is no reason this ship should not be focused around this specific trait. The large gun.
And loose the bloody dual cannons. Those have no place on any galaxy derivate.
and that it work like a beam overload instead of a lance, just like the gurumba.
don't get me wrong i don't speak about the new " alway crit" feature that beam overload got now.
but how beam work in the hit an miss chance.
that why i think the gurumba lance miss less often than the galaxy x.
also, the 2 iteration shot should be removed, just 1 shot.
because right now, the second shot just drastically increase the chance to loose 50% of it dmg on top of letting the opponent a chance to escape.
it is also considerably increase the time we need to keep the target aligned.
if that were done i don't see the need to increase the dps of the weapon, indeed who need more power if it is to miss the target anyway.
i am not for making it a 5th slot weapons also, and don't see the need to be able to change the weapon type, but i am not close the last idea.
the shotgun lance is what the original lance should have been, mechanically, just not a wide angle aoe attack.
it would be good if the cloack become integrated again too, not a battle cloack, just a normal cloack like it is now, but one that don't occupy a console slot.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Nope wrong. I own the Galaxy and the Oddy both are great ships. When I fly them I fly them for what they are tanks. And truly no ship does it as good as either. I spec I to threat like a tank should and you never not even a 80k dps scimmy removes aggro from me. So the ship does its job just fine. I like the Oddy more because I flip the lt com back and forth to a sci station.
I was talking about the fact that the person I replied to wants the Cmdr to be changed to tac...there is a big difference between changing the Cmdr to tac or the Lt Cmdr. If you take away the Cmdr Eng it isn't a Dreadnought Cruiser anymore...and it would also have it's Cruiser commands taken away.
1. It was already a tactical ship. It was one of the first tactical cruisers offered by cryptic in this game. It was the first of the dreadnoughts and needs to be upped into the tactical position it deserves as a dreadnought. Tactical cause a science ships or a engineer ship doesn't have the Tac boffs to use cannons. Some maybe happy with the cryptic kit bash Avenger but I'd prefer to fly my Galaxy-X with proper stations.
2. In case you didn't know the first ship with dreadnought didn't have nor did it need hanger bays. Most in the thread to update the Galaxy-X never wanted a hanger bay period let alone two. I'd prefer making it a unique Starfleet design instead of a knockoff off the others. Since it has a cruiser command for aggro make it have an innate engineering ability that lets it help survive. Sorry don't think slapping a hanger bay let alone another hanger bay onto a ship to make it balanced is always the answer.
3. Personally I only use phasers so don't affect me either way but it was something alot requested so it should atleast be given some attention and consideration.
The person being me. Also don't get me wrong but why shouldn't the Federation have one cruiser that breaks the rules alittle and puts a Com Tactical on a cruiser. Seeing as its a Dreadnought cruiser I don't see the harm in making it unique and giving it a better reason to only have its two cruiser commands instead of the 4 other cruisers get. If you were infact talking about that then why didn't you say anything about it. Your chief complaint was about another tactical ship which this wouldn't be as it is already a tactical ship.
Why isn't it a cruiser anymore. Didn't know the cruiser had to have a Engineer Commander or it wasn't a cruiser by definition anymore. It still looks like a cruiser would still fly like one. It just wouldn't be the weak Tactical joke of the dreadnoughts it is now. Hell its not nearly as tactically sound as the Regent or the new Avenger. Dreadnoughts should bring more rain so to speak in the damage department. Other ships can have Tactical Commanders surely Starfleet can have one. Or should all starfleet officers be forced to fly alien ships instead of the ones we actually like just for the better layouts.
Hell keep it the way it is and make me a Mirror Galaxy Dreadnought with the tactical boffs i want and leave the stupid hanger bay off. Don't need or want it either way. I'd prefer it without pet spam thanks.
The people who want them already have them, the people who don't want a powerful ship. There is very little incentive to "fix" a ship they've taken this many goes at getting right.
There are a lot of ships in this game that need work, let's see them have a balance pass before we take yet another look at the Galaxy.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
The "real" Galaxy (-R) didn't get any rework at all. Although it needed a rework more than any other ship in the game IMO, for years by now.
EDIT:
Let's face it the G-X is totally underwhelming compared to other Dreadnoughts.
It's not wonder why ppl. want a more tactical focussed ship.
Care to name me one ship that is under the Cruiser or Battlecruise classification without a Cmdr Eng?
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Playable_starship
Here you go...let me help you...since I already know the answer I will save you time and the answer is none.
If you want a ship with a Tac Cmdr Starfleet has plenty of Escorts and Destroyers that way -->
I'm so sick and tired of this game being all about sticking as many tactical slots as possible on something or sticking a Tac Cmdr on everything...
no ship daes it as good as either?
are you serious?
to get agrro in this game you have many possibilitie and can combined them.
you can have it by firepower and spec in threat control in the skill tree but also by slotting threat console in sci slot of the ship.
now, how many sci console slot daes the fleet galaxy x have?
response:2
how many sci console daes the fleet ambasador have?
response
how many sci console daes the voth bulwark dreadnought cruiser have?
response: 3
how many sci console daes tholian recluse carrier have?
response: 3
how many sci console daes the fleet star cruiser have?
response: 4
and most of them got better sci bridge officer than the galaxy x, the only one that the galaxy x can match is the star cruiser, if you turn the ensign tactical to science, but then this one will still have 2 more science console slot.
the best tank in the game got more than just a lt sci bridge officer.
so again, sorry to opened your eyes but the galaxy x is not meant to be an ubber tank.
it can do it like every other cruiser, but is certainly not the best or the more appropriate for it
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Yea lets go with STO that makes the Intrepid a Science ship and the Akira a escort (The Akira-class was a type of heavy cruiser starship in service to the Federation Starfleet in the 24th century.) How bout no thanks. I'll stick to the logic that it's a cruiser cause the Galaxy is a cruiser and X is a modified Galaxy built for war with the Klingons.
The Federation has a nice big line of ships to chose from but none like the Scimitar, Jem'hadar, or Xindi with the Commander Tactical which all are listed as Dreadnoughts. Now if the Galaxy-x is gonna be in the dreadnought class then it should get what all other have in the Tactical Commander even if it is listed as a Dreadnought cruiser. The fact that it has a Tactical commander unlike the other Federation cruisers doesn't make its origins of being developed from a cruiser any less true.
There are plenty of ships that have a complete lack of tactical slots and tactical boffs to chose from. The point I'm trying to make is that this is one of the few ships (especially in the Federation) that is built for and deserves a Tactical overhaul.
If you want your engineer heavy or science heavy ships then get the regular Galaxy or Intrepid... Both can be found that way --->
yes, you are right on this.
cruiser should not get acces to a commander tactical.
and even if that was somehow allowed, i am not sure if it is a good idea to give it to a 6 turn ship.
the speed/turn and inertia of the ship force it to compensate with the number of sci and enginer bridge officer.
by giving it a commander tact it is mechanically remove more on the sci or engi side.
giving it a lt commander tact is already a tricky thing if you want to do it right but is completely doable.
in pve, this woudn't be a problem for now, where you can sacrifice survivability, but i don't think it would be viable in pvp.
that is also why the narcine dreadnought got 9 degree turn, because it got less sci and eng bo, and can't battle cloack or singularity jump away like the scimitar.
beside pve will become harder in the future, the dev will readjust the new content for us to not finish it in 1 minute , so even there, loosing more survivability may not be insignificant.
so to conclude, no to a commander tact on the galaxy x, if it speed/turn/inertia stay the same.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
ho but that will come, with time, but don't expect the galaxy x to be the one that will receive it
yes, and it was intentional from cryptic to do so, make many "upgrade" to calm the crowd but not real upgrade, so the ship just stay relative TRIBBLE and we can't said nothing because you known they already do it 3 time!
why did it took them just one attempt to make the patrol escort right?
and that also why it is useless to post thread asking for a new revamp of these ship ( galaxy and galaxy x ) because cryptic just don't want them to be competitive.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Well as I see it if Com tac isn't optional then atleast a lt com and lt tac so it doesn't take from the boff stations that the Avenger regent or excelsior have. Something like this...
Com Eng
Lt com tac
Lt tac
Lt sci or Lt engineer
ens sci or ens engineer
Seems to be true they don't want players Galaxy's getting any good use out of them and the update to the X was sad to say the least. Barely call it an update as all they really did was make a fleet version add saucer separation which they had already promised and add a hanger most didn't want. Ooh and shotgun lance...
I did mean the Galaxy X but the Gal R did get some small upgrades in the form of the console bonus that is available to the Gal X. I also thought they did a visual update as they needed to rework the ship for Saucer Separation.
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.