test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Needed upgrades to Galaxy Class?

1181921232442

Comments

  • stomperx99stomperx99 Member Posts: 863 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    No thread bumping please. It's not allowed. ~Bluegeek
    ZomboDroid10122015042230.jpg

    I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
  • jtoney3448jtoney3448 Member Posts: 642 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    She wasnt dead Jim, just resting was all.

    Think most of us are waiting to see what the T6 downgrade the galaxy-r will get this time round. Im personally betting on 2 Cmd eng and 6 eng consoles, cause ya know... like cryptic.... need I say more?

    And what makes starfleet cruisers unique... 2 necells and a saucer.... thats bout it in this game. Though personally there IS nothing that made them really unique in the shows. Klinks had cannons, roms had battle cloaks. Feds just were resilient thats bout it.

    Maybe a increased hull regen since fed crews in the show repaired the ship fast? Or increased base accuracy due to good sensor targeting tech? Bout all I could offer up.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    jtoney3448 wrote: »
    She wasnt dead Jim, just resting was all.

    Think most of us are waiting to see what the T6 downgrade the galaxy-r will get this time round. Im personally betting on 2 Cmd eng and 6 eng consoles, cause ya know... like cryptic.... need I say more?
    I fear thats the best we can expect...
    jtoney3448 wrote: »
    And what makes starfleet cruisers unique... 2 necells and a saucer.... thats bout it in this game. Though personally there IS nothing that made them really unique in the shows. Klinks had cannons, roms had battle cloaks. Feds just were resilient thats bout it.

    Maybe a increased hull regen since fed crews in the show repaired the ship fast? Or increased base accuracy due to good sensor targeting tech? Bout all I could offer up.
    Yeah, Klingons had cannons, but no one ever said they where stronger than starfleet phaser beams.
    That's just a STO thing.

    But you're right, starfleet ships or better said Crusiers could get a Sensor analysys like power or they could be allowed to equip more than one omni beam at the rear weapons slot. (depending on their turnrate) I'd prefer the later one.
    I wouldn't increase their tankiness TBH, what they need is some sort of unique offensive capability.
    Since STO got rid of the stone/paper/scissor mechanic, every ship should have balanced defensive and offensive capabilites, just like in "real" trek. Maybe the introduction of solo queus will stimulate more balanced builds.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    for tier 6, do you think the gap between the galaxy R and everything else will grow or shrink?
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    for tier 6, do you think the gap between the galaxy R and everything else will grow or shrink?

    Grow. I'm very wary of the "will be competitive" vagueness asserted at Vegas. I'm not convinced the upgrade system they've hinted at is ...

    1- Fully realized internally
    2- Capable of dealing with the horde of ships that already exist
    3- Is designed to actually stay competitive

    If T6 isn't superior then it has no market value to the players. Which would be anathema to calling it T6 and to doing the expansion in the first place.

    And I'm also biased by the last 4 years of seeing this game develop.

    In short, I feel the gap will get bigger. Making this an even bigger ongoing issue for fans of the Galaxy class starship.

    I'm sorry to be so pessimistic. But that's how I feel.

    :(
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • stomperx99stomperx99 Member Posts: 863 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    stomperx99 wrote: »
    No thread bumping please. It's not allowed. ~Bluegeek

    I'm sorry Blue.. :(
    ZomboDroid10122015042230.jpg

    I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
  • simeion1simeion1 Member Posts: 898 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    There is nothing wrong with the galaxy class star ships. The problem lies in the threat gen matrix of Cryptic and power able to be used at lt commander and commander level eng positions. If aceton beam was more effective and lower cool down along with boarding party being able to shut down Boff stations cruisers would be more effective. I would also ask to a buff to DEM. The problem does not lie in the ship but the powers the ship and player base has asses to.
    320x240.jpg
  • jtoney3448jtoney3448 Member Posts: 642 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    If the past is an indicator, the gap will grow. I to am worried about their definition of capable. My G-R pulls and maintains threat in STFs with no use of +Th consoles or cruiser command, just 6 points in threat gen skill.

    I like to tank in games, provide the solid wall for the group to hide behind. But it seems a tad unfair that all other ships in the game are better suited for doing multiple roles, but G-R is stuck as tank and tank alone. Makes it a boring ship very quickly.

    Any more all ships in the game have branched improvements, save the defiant and intrepid. The idea of pure ships sounds cool but the lack of boff power diversity, and the DPS race that the game has become make them into last place ships of their tier. The intrepid and defiant fair better in that re-guard then the galaxy.

    You can either look at the galaxy 1 of 2 ways. Nothing wrong with it, something wrong with the games ineffective use of eng heavy layouts. Or, the game is as its intended to be, dps rat race and thus there is something wrong with the idea of making a ship so eng heavy.

    Personally I think its a little from both, the game is overly dps based which is sad for Sci/Eng captains and ships. And that making ships have locked console/boff layouts can lead to ships being considered 'bad' thus lower sales and underused.

    Neither of those is going to change anytime soon as cryptic's announcement of T6 ships already showed they don't "see" a problem yet. "We want more/better science ships." "Dont worry we have more tac heavy science ships on the way with DR!"

    They equate better science ships to tac heavy science ships, so MOAR DPS! Is their line of thoughts, not make new useful science boffs or new seating/console layout in the other direction.

    Sad really, cause you can bet same logic is applied to cruisers, they can't "fix" what isnt broken if they cant see it, even if the rest of us do.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    jtoney3448 wrote: »
    If the past is an indicator, the gap will grow. I to am worried about their definition of capable. My G-R pulls and maintains threat in STFs with no use of +Th consoles or cruiser command, just 6 points in threat gen skill.

    I like to tank in games, provide the solid wall for the group to hide behind. But it seems a tad unfair that all other ships in the game are better suited for doing multiple roles, but G-R is stuck as tank and tank alone. Makes it a boring ship very quickly.

    Any more all ships in the game have branched improvements, save the defiant and intrepid. The idea of pure ships sounds cool but the lack of boff power diversity, and the DPS race that the game has become make them into last place ships of their tier. The intrepid and defiant fair better in that re-guard then the galaxy.

    You can either look at the galaxy 1 of 2 ways. Nothing wrong with it, something wrong with the games ineffective use of eng heavy layouts. Or, the game is as its intended to be, dps rat race and thus there is something wrong with the idea of making a ship so eng heavy.

    Personally I think its a little from both, the game is overly dps based which is sad for Sci/Eng captains and ships. And that making ships have locked console/boff layouts can lead to ships being considered 'bad' thus lower sales and underused.

    Neither of those is going to change anytime soon as cryptic's announcement of T6 ships already showed they don't "see" a problem yet. "We want more/better science ships." "Dont worry we have more tac heavy science ships on the way with DR!"

    They equate better science ships to tac heavy science ships, so MOAR DPS! Is their line of thoughts, not make new useful science boffs or new seating/console layout in the other direction.

    Sad really, cause you can bet same logic is applied to cruisers, they can't "fix" what isnt broken if they cant see it, even if the rest of us do.

    sadly i have ot agree. heck from what i saw one of the fed T6 ships looks like a Battlestar. THis is not battlestar Galatica this is STAR TREK Cryptic. Can you for once in your life Listen to us? FIX THE GR's BO LAYOUT AND GET SHIP DESIGNERS THAT KNOW TREK. Moonraker, Wiley Coyote, even DJ Curtis can make awesome ship designs.

    We play this game because we are Trek fans and want a Trek game.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Grow. I'm very wary of the "will be competitive" vagueness asserted at Vegas. I'm not convinced the upgrade system they've hinted at is ...

    1- Fully realized internally
    2- Capable of dealing with the horde of ships that already exist
    3- Is designed to actually stay competitive

    If T6 isn't superior then it has no market value to the players. Which would be anathema to calling it T6 and to doing the expansion in the first place.

    And I'm also biased by the last 4 years of seeing this game develop.

    In short, I feel the gap will get bigger. Making this an even bigger ongoing issue for fans of the Galaxy class starship.

    I'm sorry to be so pessimistic. But that's how I feel.

    :(
    I share your opinion.

    Considered how they have treated the G-R in the last several years, i think we have no reason to be optimistic.
    It's sad, that there isn't any sign of the devs changing their mind regarding this ship, least of all from capt. Gecko.

    Sure, most ships will stay competetive (whatever that means in their minds) but the G-R will be the least competetive of all, i have no doubts about that.


    To be honest, i only hope that they will someday release a worthy sucessor of the GCS family.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • starboardnacellestarboardnacelle Member Posts: 67 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Honestly, I'll settle for Sensor Analysis.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Grow. I'm very wary of the "will be competitive" vagueness asserted at Vegas. I'm not convinced the upgrade system they've hinted at is ...

    1- Fully realized internally
    2- Capable of dealing with the horde of ships that already exist
    3- Is designed to actually stay competitive

    If T6 isn't superior then it has no market value to the players. Which would be anathema to calling it T6 and to doing the expansion in the first place.

    And I'm also biased by the last 4 years of seeing this game develop.

    In short, I feel the gap will get bigger. Making this an even bigger ongoing issue for fans of the Galaxy class starship.

    I'm sorry to be so pessimistic. But that's how I feel.

    :(

    at this point, it is not being pessimistic but realistic.

    if i remember correctly, when the fleet ship appear isn't the fleet negvar got a universal ensign, the dderidex already got one, and the galaxy retrofit get nothing and like it?.
    somehow it seem that the evolution concerning the galaxy is going backward.

    i have a hard time to imagine what kind of change will the tier6 ship will bring ( more console slot, more bridge officer slot? new integrated ship power like the romulans? ).
    but even if my mind would really like to convince me that it could be an opportunity for the galaxy class ship in this game to, at last, become a real option, my experience on the matter calm me down very quickly.
    going to the tier 3 ship to the tier 4 galaxy was a " what the heck" moment in it time.
    going to the tier 4 galaxy to the tier 5 galaxy was a disapointment, to the point of really asking myself if i have reach the last tier.
    going to the tier 5 galaxy to the fleet galaxy was facepalm worthy.

    now going to the fleet galaxy to the tier 6 galaxy.... well i think that i can predict that it will be epic facepalm worthy.
    ho..... i could be wrong.....you known!........i. could. be. wrong.
    galaxy should be better after the upgrade, at least i hope so, because it is already what I have told myself before the last 2 upgrade.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    To be honest, i only hope that they will someday release a worthy sucessor of the GCS family.

    some would argue with you that the odyssey is that succesor:rolleyes:
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    i still think the T4 refit is better then the retrofit (yes you read that right) just because of the ensign science station
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    neo1nx wrote: »
    some would argue with you that the odyssey is that succesor:rolleyes:

    well in universe it is. it takes over the mission profile of the galaxy-class as deep space explore and multi-mission flagship.


    right now in universe the odyssey is to the galaxy what the galaxy was to the out going ambassador

    (i personal find the sov as a weird gray area as it never actually replaced the galaxy as they where in service at the same time)


    i would still rather fly the galaxy though
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    neo1nx wrote: »
    some would argue with you that the odyssey is that succesor:rolleyes:
    I meant a sucessor to the Galaxy design, of course.

    Odyssey has almost nothing to do with Galaxy Design, it's rather inspired by Excelsior and Sovereign, especially if you look at their proportions.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    neo1nx wrote: »
    going to the fleet galaxy to the tier 6 galaxy.... well i think that i can predict that it will be epic facepalm worthy.
    Or it could give the Galaxy an epic comeback. The devs are pushing for massive space combat rebalancing this expansion, after all.

    I do think that we'll need to wait and see how exactly our tier 5 ships will be upgraded, but at this point it could go either way for even the poor ol' Galaxy.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    Or it could give the Galaxy an epic comeback. The devs are pushing for massive space combat rebalancing this expansion, after all.

    I do think that we'll need to wait and see how exactly our tier 5 ships will be upgraded, but at this point it could go either way for even the poor ol' Galaxy.

    id only have hope if they devs suddenly stopped believing the galaxy deserves to be the worst ship in the game. they think jobing to everything is not the exception but the rule for the galaxy, and if you just watched the show, did not judge it as a sum of its parts and conveniently forget the moment were it was a bad TRIBBLE despite late 80s vfx, thats the typical opinion you get.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    id only have hope if they devs suddenly stopped believing the galaxy deserves to be the worst ship in the game. they think jobing to everything is not the exception but the rule for the galaxy, and if you just watched the show, did not judge it as a sum of its parts and conveniently forget the moment were it was a bad TRIBBLE despite late 80s vfx, thats the typical opinion you get.

    Yet in games where is was playable it was always among the top of the klist of feds strongest ships and usually only beaten by Sovie. In this game it should be 3rd or 4th considering where you put the GalX but nope it's basically dead last at endgame eprformance.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Yet in games where is was playable it was always among the top of the klist of feds strongest ships and usually only beaten by Sovie. In this game it should be 3rd or 4th considering where you put the GalX but nope it's basically dead last at endgame eprformance.

    one thing that should be remembered, is that if the enterprise jobed, every other ship would have double jobed, because it was the best. ether that or the crews legendary incompetence allowed them to get jobed.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    The devs are pushing for massive space combat rebalancing this expansion, after all.

    They are? I missed those comments. Was that in a podcast or something?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    id only have hope if they devs suddenly stopped believing the galaxy deserves to be the worst ship in the game. they think jobing to everything is not the exception but the rule for the galaxy, and if you just watched the show, did not judge it as a sum of its parts and conveniently forget the moment were it was a bad TRIBBLE despite late 80s vfx, thats the typical opinion you get.
    Yeah, strangely ppl seem only to remember the GCS getting beatings.
    I think it's interesting from a psychological point of view. Obvioulsy the Galaxies round shaped appearance doesn't make her look especially dangerous compared to other ships, like the Akira or Sovereign. It's almost like ppl think:
    ***It doesn't look badass, so it can't be as strong as a ship that looks badass.***

    80s special effects wheren't as advanced as later series, so TNG got typically less space combat. Additionally the big -Ds captain can't be considered as space cowboy. (except later in the movies, but that's another topic IMO)
    Later series introduced Battleships, Escorts and "combat optimized" ships. (most fan assumptions because those ships looked more "badass") So the GCS was more and more considered outdated, but the use of a bit common sense would tell the contrary.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • jtoney3448jtoney3448 Member Posts: 642 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Truth is, TNG was a TV show, sadly people need to be reminded of said fact. It was all done with models and thus no awesome CGI space battles. Enterprise and Voyager/movies were examples of what starfleet ships COULD do in combat once CGI was added thus the Galaxy would be more like that if TNG aired with CGI.

    It was a big lumbering hulk for most onscreen stuff because of the limitations of the show, like budgets/time etc. The only real TNG episode I remember with decent space combat was AGT and that was the end of the show, thus out with a bang. If you think about it you didn't see the connie doing run and gun in TWoK, cause plot, and no CGI.

    Try to judge the ships of star trek without plot armor/hinderances, and always remembering the limitations of the shows. After all I remember that in DS9 the devs fav series, that somehow no ships had shields impacts in the combat scenes. But I dont go "The ships had no shields!". Truth is they couldnt add all the special effects needed cause of time and money.

    So try to take the respective hardware we know the galaxy has, aka torp launchers/phaser arrays/engines and think what voyager would have done with those.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    ^ and thats why its absurd to ONLY hold the galaxy class to some impossible standard, and try to stat it as precisely as you can based on all its air time, were it jobed more often then it got to show what it was capable of. every other ship gets a pass, and awesome stats, because it got less screen time. hold the galaxy to that standard instead, and it would be a fine ship in game
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,014 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    gpgtx wrote: »
    i still think the T4 refit is better then the retrofit (yes you read that right) just because of the ensign science station

    Which is why I cannot understand Cryptic's stubborn stance on not allowing a player who purchased the T4 refits to use those at endgame. You can only play the retrofits of the "big three" which ignore the vessel you bought at T4. Why is that?
    gpgtx wrote: »
    well in universe it is. it takes over the mission profile of the galaxy-class as deep space explore and multi-mission flagship.


    right now in universe the odyssey is to the galaxy what the galaxy was to the out going ambassador

    (i personal find the sov as a weird gray area as it never actually replaced the galaxy as they where in service at the same time)


    i would still rather fly the galaxy though

    In-game universe. Don't forget that STO does not advance the universe itself, in canon the Galaxy still doesn't have a successor. The Sovereign is indeed an evolution of the Excelsior and a replacement for all the heavy cruisers in service prior to the dominion war.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    ***It doesn't look badass, so it can't be as strong as a ship that looks badass.***

    ^^ Roughly 3/4 of the STO playerbase, in a nutshell.
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    They are? I missed those comments. Was that in a podcast or something?
    STLV and the point of this whole thread. The thread being something that I think would be a great opportunity to help ships like the Galaxy out.
    id only have hope if they devs suddenly stopped believing the galaxy deserves to be the worst ship in the game. they think jobing to everything is not the exception but the rule for the galaxy, and if you just watched the show, did not judge it as a sum of its parts and conveniently forget the moment were it was a bad TRIBBLE despite late 80s vfx, thats the typical opinion you get.
    Assuming things like that will not get us anywhere. And regardless, waiting till X2 would still be a good idea.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Cryptic has time and time again missed the chance to make something of the galaxy.


    I just want to have you focus on this:

    They made sciency neghvar.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    Cryptic has time and time again missed the chance to make something of the galaxy.


    I just want to have you focus on this:

    They made sciency neghvar.
    We don't have a Mirror Universe Exploration Cruiser yet...
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Even the regular versions of both ships make me wonder.

    Both have the same BOFF layout, but the Negh'Var got a much more balanced console layout, 1500 more crew, 3 points higher turnrate, DHCs and a cloak. And that's just the regular version, no C-Store. The G-R is a C-Store ship and only got 1000 hitpoins more hull, that's it.
    Great balancing, devs! lol.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
Sign In or Register to comment.