i don't think anyone thinks just adding a hanger would fix it. its not a hanger OR, its a hanger AND. all the really large cruisers should be dreadnaughts, just due to size. that just happens to come with a hanger, and its hardly misplaced on such large cruisers.
One last thing about that issue:
It's actually very simple, if ppl ask for a hangar bay on the G-R and Cryptics devs would add one, the G-R would have enough changes in their eyes and will NOT get more important things.
(like more firepower a versatile BOFF/console layout or Sensor Analysis and so on)
The point is, only to ask for the most important things first. Asking for secondary stuff like a hangar bay won't do any good IMO.
Devs will only belive a Hangar Bay would be ENOUGH to fix the G-R, which is not true.
... and we all know that Galaxy Class related things get easily missunderstood by cryptics devs (*looks at the G-X :rolleyes:)
I won't pay tribute to that stupid Hangar Bay issue anymore by mentioning it. :mad:
"...'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
Oh just to add more fuel to the fire, Constellation Class, buy the zen store ship unlock the costume for any version of the ship, so what do we have ? a Constitution kit bash skin to place on the fleet heavy cruiser making the Constellation Class capable of outgunning a Galaxy if the skin is used
One last thing about that issue:
It's actually very simple, if ppl ask for a hangar bay on the G-R and Cryptics devs would add one, the G-R would have enough changes in their eyes and will NOT get more important things.
(like more firepower a versatile BOFF/console layout or Sensor Analysis and so on)
The point is, only to ask for the most important things first. Asking for secondary stuff like a hangar bay won't do any good IMO.
Devs will only belive a Hangar Bay would be ENOUGH to fix the G-R, which is not true.
... and we all know that Galaxy Class related things get easily missunderstood by cryptics devs (*looks at the G-X :rolleyes:)
I won't pay tribute to that stupid Hangar Bay issue anymore by mentioning it. :mad:
You make a compelling point. But people have already asked for a hangar (I mean that request goes back ages to way before the "revamp" even). So that cat's kind of already out of the bag?
I don't know. Right now I don't even know how to wrap my brain around the Galaxy's future in the post expansion world.
I wouldn't fear the Hangar request. There's far too much going on in terms of upgrades, how to upgrade, Tier U, Tier 6, etc, etc.
well we have further proof that a switch can be flipped and an ENS can be turned universal easily enough. if the galaxy X wasn't evidence enough. its quite disturbing how much better picard's first ship is then his flagship. yet this modest adjustment is denied the ship that needs it most.
4/3/3 consoles is better then 5/3/2, period. 8 turn is better then 6, and a universal ens is many, many times better then 3 ENS eng. the galaxy has a decent chunk more hull, but thats only helpful as spike soak, only really helpful in pvp. overall survivability will be worse, because its much easier to camp behind a galaxy then a tiny well turning heavy.
the galaxy can saucer separate, to have the same basic turn rate and hitpoints as the heavy, but its still got all its other disadvantages. including a turn rate potential not even close to what the heavy can get, due to its lower base multiplier.
NO ONE is going to claim the fleet heavy is one of the top cruisers, its got a LTC eng, its guarantied to be mediocre. yet, its still TWICE as effective as the galaxy R. a ship in canon thats 10 times better then the constellation. what more evidence is needed that the galaxy R's continued existence as is is a crime against the IP?
A big, big room with lots of voices. I'll toss mine in.
How to fix the Galaxy:
First, identify a suitable and useful role for it. In Star Trek lore, the Galaxy's primary utility came from being a big, solid, multi-role ship. Most of those roles are not mirrored in gameplay, however, and being solid only gets you so far. It's biggest weakness is being a relatively low DPS ship in a game that favors high DPS.
So, what roles can we abstract for it and how can we make them mechanically viable? Well, it's big, solid, and has a LOT of crew. It has room for lots of auxiliary craft, but it's not really designed to be a carrier. It's supposed to be tough, but there's little reason to engage it directly. It's a tank and it's a tank that's not living up to its full potential. It's a tank in a game that doesn't make "tank" mean anything fun.
So, let's fix that. Here's what I propose:
1) Let it be able to spit out boarding parties for free. The ship isn't a carrier, but boarding party shuttles are annoying and soak up fire. The ship's not designed to be a carrier, but those big shuttlebays should have some use.
2) Give it (and ships in other factions that are supposed to fill the same role) a more powerful engineering aura than is typical to represent the ship's large crew and typical role as a task group commander. Something that will make it a higher priority target. Off the cuff, I'd call it "Fleet Coordination" and have it provide a boost to accuracy, base critical hit chance, and defense/evasion. If it shows up in group PVP, folks should have a pressing need to kill it quickly. If you're going to fly it solo, having the ship's weapons proc more often will help offset the ship's low tac bias. Another idea in this vein is to provide an aura that significantly boosts torpedo DPS in some way.
Start with those two basic ideas, and I bet you the Galaxy will feel like a more relevant ship with only a bit more tweaking.
1) Let it be able to spit out boarding parties for free. The ship isn't a carrier, but boarding party shuttles are annoying and soak up fire. The ship's not designed to be a carrier, but those big shuttlebays should have some use.
That...is not a horrible suggestion. It would require fixing up boarding parties to actually be worthwhile, but I think that suggestion has some merit to it. Hmm.
well we have further proof that a switch can be flipped and an ENS can be turned universal easily enough. if the galaxy X wasn't evidence enough. its quite disturbing how much better picard's first ship is then his flagship. yet this modest adjustment is denied the ship that needs it most.
4/3/3 consoles is better then 5/3/2, period. 8 turn is better then 6, and a universal ens is many, many times better then 3 ENS eng. the galaxy has a decent chunk more hull, but thats only helpful as spike soak, only really helpful in pvp. overall survivability will be worse, because its much easier to camp behind a galaxy then a tiny well turning heavy.
the galaxy can saucer separate, to have the same basic turn rate and hitpoints as the heavy, but its still got all its other disadvantages. including a turn rate potential not even close to what the heavy can get, due to its lower base multiplier.
Easiest sollution?
Introduce a Mirror G-R having the Fleet Ambassadors BOFF layout.
(+Non fleet Ambassador console layout)
Most lazy sollution?
Unlock G-R shipparts for the G-X.
Best sollution?(within reason)
1. Make her a engineering counterpart to the Nebula.
2. Give her the same BOFF/Console Layout like the D'D.
(heck, even ROM players seem to complain about the D'D, but it would be a HUGE improvement for the G-R. How terrible would it be for cryptics devs to give the GCS at least that?)
I could live with each of those sollutions TBH.
None of those sollutions would make the G-R OP or superior to any top of the line ship in the Game, but it would still be 1000 times better than that miserable thing we have since four years in this game.
Strangely, every try to put the G-R out of its pitiable state makes certain ppl. come up with some faux "canon" proof that's supposed to show how lame GCS was on TV. What about the Jem Hadar Bug ship, thats the most dangerous ship in the game, how canon is that?
Every other ship got favoured in one or another way, except the G-R which is the worst ship in the game. period.
NO ONE is going to claim the fleet heavy is one of the top cruisers, its got a LTC eng, its guarantied to be mediocre. yet, its still TWICE as effective as the galaxy R. a ship in canon thats 10 times better then the constellation. what more evidence is needed that the galaxy R's continued existence as is is a crime against the IP?
Truer words have never been spoken
"...'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
i'll be honest when the D'D was first shown as a carbon copy of the GCS and then was changed i thought the the fleet GCS was going to get the D'D's new boff seating and was sad when that did not happen
i'll be honest when the D'D was first shown as a carbon copy of the GCS and then was changed i thought the the fleet GCS was going to get the D'D's new boff seating and was sad when that did not happen
There's one thing we can be absolutely sure about in STO, Cryptics devs will never cease trying to disappoint GCS fans.
"...'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
it should be noted that even with a ENS uni the galaxy R would still be the worst ship, there just wouldn't be a mile of distance between it and the second worst any longer
Isn't it sad though, the fleet constellation that is 125 years old now outguns the fleet galaxy. /facepalm
Only the tier 3 Constellation is 125 years old. The fleet ships are retro chassis retrofitted with modern(as of 2409) tech.
Basically as if both the Constellation and the Galaxy were built in 2409, the Constellation would have outgunned the Galaxy. But the T3 Constellation is the 'original' and the T4 Galaxy is the 'original'. Or supposed to be. I think.
Then again, only the Galaxy-R can use saucer sep...
Well it's still a valid hypothesis I think. *shrug*
nothing retrofit is a new construction. its an old ship, thats been upgraded, its in the very name.
we've been over this, the sovereign doesn't even outgun the galaxy, a hunk of junk like a constellation would be 0 real threat to one. there was even an episode about that very thing.
Terminology once again shows that Cryptic either doesn't care or doesn't know better. The constellation at T3 is supposed to be the "Heavy Cruiser Refit" - that doesn't make sense.
Like DDIS said, a retrofit is an old ("original") ship which is fitted with the best technology that is available within it's original limitations (which is why TMP-era ships just face hard limits how much they can fit). Retrofits can even made on the fly without a need to be in drydock. A refit is a completely new or heavily overhauled (as in visible modified) starship of the same class as the original, it requires docking at a shipyard and disassembling of hull and components. The resulting ship will have current, state-of-the-art technology.
A Galaxy should outgun the Constellation even if the latter one is refitted, however, since the two ships are not even intented to compete with each other. STO doesn't know that concept, in-game all ships are equal and meant to be able to face each other 1 on 1 (A B'rel can do the same tasks a Oddyssey can).
I like that they even advertise the Constellation with the TNG quote that says the Enterprise (Galaxy Class) is vastly superior in every possible way - yet, the resulting ship is much more useful in-game
^ 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
The bizarre thing is, the Galaxy Class is one (if not THE) most popular ship in Star Trek (outside STO) and has a huge fanbase. Many ppl. come to STO expecting a adequate representation of it and get disappointed. Having such a popular ship in such a miserable state doesn't show much quality IMO.
I simply don't understand the logic behind that.
Having ppl being disappointed CANNOT help making them want to play that game. It's not like ppl would never fly any other ship, everyone has several characters and flies a variety of ships. I just don't get it.
Is it really the antipathy of one single dev towards that ship?
It's hard to belive that TBH.
"...'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
lets hope the galaxy class is a tier 6 ship with a different bridge layout and a different console layout not to mention the ship skill will get like other tier 6 ships.
lets hope the galaxy class is a tier 6 ship with a different bridge layout and a different console layout not to mention the ship skill will get like other tier 6 ships.
There is no T6 galaxy and never will be, devs have said all the ships stop at T5-U, except for the NEW T6 designs.
Not even lockbox ships get full T6 upgrade. Even if the galaxy gets another tac console at T5U it doesnt have enough tac boff seating to make it matter, just the same with another sci console. And a 6th engineer console would just be so pointless it would be a troll.
Honestly without a 13th boff ability or a boff layout change, even with T5-U it will still be the worst ship hands down.
There is no T6 galaxy and never will be, devs have said all the ships stop at T5-U, except for the NEW T6 designs.
Not even lockbox ships get full T6 upgrade. Even if the galaxy gets another tac console at T5U it doesnt have enough tac boff seating to make it matter, just the same with another sci console. And a 6th engineer console would just be so pointless it would be a troll.
Honestly without a 13th boff ability or a boff layout change, even with T5-U it will still be the worst ship hands down.
Yea seeing how the intrepid gets a tier 6 I think its safe to say there is a tier 6 galaxy class
Yea seeing how the intrepid gets a tier 6 I think its safe to say there is a tier 6 galaxy class
T6 Intrepid? really?
I'm sure they'll find a excuse to keep the GCS at the low end.
"...'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 bizarre thing is, the Galaxy Class is one (if not THE) most popular ship in Star Trek (outside STO) and has a huge fanbase. Many ppl. come to STO expecting a adequate representation of it and get disappointed. Having such a popular ship in such a miserable state doesn't show much quality IMO.
I simply don't understand the logic behind that.
Having ppl being disappointed CANNOT help making them want to play that game. It's not like ppl would never fly any other ship, everyone has several characters and flies a variety of ships. I just don't get it.
Is it really the antipathy of one single dev towards that ship?
It's hard to belive that TBH.
This. I play this game to relive my childhood watching TNG both in old and in new ways. My primary ship is a fully fleet fitted Fleet Galaxy and it is a bruiser. I often come in second or third place in elite STFs and yesterday I came in first the CE elite event.
What T6 Intrepid? There's no T6 Intrepid, you guys are dreaming. The Intrepid just got an aesthetic revamp including the interior set, because aparently the USS Voyager will be used in the new content. The Intrepid will remain a T5 ship, upgradeable just like all the rest.
I often come in second or third place in elite STFs and yesterday I came in first the CE elite event.
I mean no offense, but if that is the case, then quite frankly you're either playing with people who don't know how to build or use ships or they're using mirandas. There aren't many high end boats that can't outgun a galaxy class. Some of the science vessels perhaps?
I mean no offense, but if that is the case, then quite frankly you're either playing with people who don't know how to build or use ships or they're using mirandas. There aren't many high end boats that can't outgun a galaxy class. Some of the science vessels perhaps?
you got me thinking.
the galaxy retrofit got 2 tactical bridge officer and 2 tactical console.
is there a t5 science ship that got just that too? i don't remember.
not that it would change a thing, because, techically, at raw power a science ship with the same amount of bo and tact console should still be less powerfull than a cruiser due to the number of weapons slot.
well... no, when you think about it, science ship have more science console slot, wih ambassy console they could still be more powerfull even with the same amount of bo and tact console and 2 weapons slot less.
hmmm, interesting, anyone known a sci ship that have the potential to be less or equal in firepower than the galaxy retrofit?
The Nebula has less firepower than the G-R if you don't use the universal Lt as tac (6 weapons, 2 tac consoles). But my fleet nebula on my sci gets first place in CCE 8/10 times - because dps is not the thing that counts in CC/CE, healing and debuffing seem to help your "rating" as well.
^ 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
I mean no offense, but if that is the case, then quite frankly you're either playing with people who don't know how to build or use ships or they're using mirandas. There aren't many high end boats that can't outgun a galaxy class. Some of the science vessels perhaps?
Not discussing STFs, but in the CEE I get a lot of 1-st palces in a Galaxy-R as well. It's about the only content that lets the ship (if heavily invetsed in and set up properly) shine, because it doesn't only calculate raw DPS into the equation.
The Nebula has less firepower than the G-R if you don't use the universal Lt as tac (6 weapons, 2 tac consoles). But my fleet nebula on my sci gets first place in CCE 8/10 times - because dps is not the thing that counts in CC/CE, healing and debuffing seem to help your "rating" as well.
hmmm, well no, since you have the possibility to have 4 tactical power, + sensor analysis and 4 scie console slot in the fleet version compared to the 3 slot for the fleet galaxy... also 9 base turn rate.
wich is better to have? 2 more weapons slot or 1 ensign and lt tac bo combined with 1 more sci console slot and sensor analysis?
Comments
It's actually very simple, if ppl ask for a hangar bay on the G-R and Cryptics devs would add one, the G-R would have enough changes in their eyes and will NOT get more important things.
(like more firepower a versatile BOFF/console layout or Sensor Analysis and so on)
The point is, only to ask for the most important things first. Asking for secondary stuff like a hangar bay won't do any good IMO.
Devs will only belive a Hangar Bay would be ENOUGH to fix the G-R, which is not true.
... and we all know that Galaxy Class related things get easily missunderstood by cryptics devs (*looks at the G-X :rolleyes:)
I won't pay tribute to that stupid Hangar Bay issue anymore by mentioning it. :mad:
You make a compelling point. But people have already asked for a hangar (I mean that request goes back ages to way before the "revamp" even). So that cat's kind of already out of the bag?
I don't know. Right now I don't even know how to wrap my brain around the Galaxy's future in the post expansion world.
I wouldn't fear the Hangar request. There's far too much going on in terms of upgrades, how to upgrade, Tier U, Tier 6, etc, etc.
4/3/3 consoles is better then 5/3/2, period. 8 turn is better then 6, and a universal ens is many, many times better then 3 ENS eng. the galaxy has a decent chunk more hull, but thats only helpful as spike soak, only really helpful in pvp. overall survivability will be worse, because its much easier to camp behind a galaxy then a tiny well turning heavy.
the galaxy can saucer separate, to have the same basic turn rate and hitpoints as the heavy, but its still got all its other disadvantages. including a turn rate potential not even close to what the heavy can get, due to its lower base multiplier.
NO ONE is going to claim the fleet heavy is one of the top cruisers, its got a LTC eng, its guarantied to be mediocre. yet, its still TWICE as effective as the galaxy R. a ship in canon thats 10 times better then the constellation. what more evidence is needed that the galaxy R's continued existence as is is a crime against the IP?
How to fix the Galaxy:
First, identify a suitable and useful role for it. In Star Trek lore, the Galaxy's primary utility came from being a big, solid, multi-role ship. Most of those roles are not mirrored in gameplay, however, and being solid only gets you so far. It's biggest weakness is being a relatively low DPS ship in a game that favors high DPS.
So, what roles can we abstract for it and how can we make them mechanically viable? Well, it's big, solid, and has a LOT of crew. It has room for lots of auxiliary craft, but it's not really designed to be a carrier. It's supposed to be tough, but there's little reason to engage it directly. It's a tank and it's a tank that's not living up to its full potential. It's a tank in a game that doesn't make "tank" mean anything fun.
So, let's fix that. Here's what I propose:
1) Let it be able to spit out boarding parties for free. The ship isn't a carrier, but boarding party shuttles are annoying and soak up fire. The ship's not designed to be a carrier, but those big shuttlebays should have some use.
2) Give it (and ships in other factions that are supposed to fill the same role) a more powerful engineering aura than is typical to represent the ship's large crew and typical role as a task group commander. Something that will make it a higher priority target. Off the cuff, I'd call it "Fleet Coordination" and have it provide a boost to accuracy, base critical hit chance, and defense/evasion. If it shows up in group PVP, folks should have a pressing need to kill it quickly. If you're going to fly it solo, having the ship's weapons proc more often will help offset the ship's low tac bias. Another idea in this vein is to provide an aura that significantly boosts torpedo DPS in some way.
Start with those two basic ideas, and I bet you the Galaxy will feel like a more relevant ship with only a bit more tweaking.
That...is not a horrible suggestion. It would require fixing up boarding parties to actually be worthwhile, but I think that suggestion has some merit to it. Hmm.
Mine Trap Supporter
Introduce a Mirror G-R having the Fleet Ambassadors BOFF layout.
(+Non fleet Ambassador console layout)
Most lazy sollution?
Unlock G-R shipparts for the G-X.
Best sollution? (within reason)
1. Make her a engineering counterpart to the Nebula.
2. Give her the same BOFF/Console Layout like the D'D.
(heck, even ROM players seem to complain about the D'D, but it would be a HUGE improvement for the G-R. How terrible would it be for cryptics devs to give the GCS at least that?)
I could live with each of those sollutions TBH.
None of those sollutions would make the G-R OP or superior to any top of the line ship in the Game, but it would still be 1000 times better than that miserable thing we have since four years in this game.
Strangely, every try to put the G-R out of its pitiable state makes certain ppl. come up with some faux "canon" proof that's supposed to show how lame GCS was on TV. What about the Jem Hadar Bug ship, thats the most dangerous ship in the game, how canon is that?
Every other ship got favoured in one or another way, except the G-R which is the worst ship in the game. period.
Truer words have never been spoken
i want my uni ensign damn it!!!
and the use of specialist boffs on all ships with 3 ensigns of the same type
even though getting a uni ensign would make it so the GCS would not get this but what ever still think it needs to be done
i would at least be able to fly it with out feeling like i am hurting my other teammates
but then i would of been ok if both the dreadnought and the R got the hanger and the uni ensign when the reboot happened
Basically as if both the Constellation and the Galaxy were built in 2409, the Constellation would have outgunned the Galaxy. But the T3 Constellation is the 'original' and the T4 Galaxy is the 'original'. Or supposed to be. I think.
Then again, only the Galaxy-R can use saucer sep...
Well it's still a valid hypothesis I think. *shrug*
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 man, it really wouldn't. The Galaxy is like 8 to 10 times larger than the Constellation.
we've been over this, the sovereign doesn't even outgun the galaxy, a hunk of junk like a constellation would be 0 real threat to one. there was even an episode about that very thing.
Like DDIS said, a retrofit is an old ("original") ship which is fitted with the best technology that is available within it's original limitations (which is why TMP-era ships just face hard limits how much they can fit). Retrofits can even made on the fly without a need to be in drydock. A refit is a completely new or heavily overhauled (as in visible modified) starship of the same class as the original, it requires docking at a shipyard and disassembling of hull and components. The resulting ship will have current, state-of-the-art technology.
A Galaxy should outgun the Constellation even if the latter one is refitted, however, since the two ships are not even intented to compete with each other. STO doesn't know that concept, in-game all ships are equal and meant to be able to face each other 1 on 1 (A B'rel can do the same tasks a Oddyssey can).
I like that they even advertise the Constellation with the TNG quote that says the Enterprise (Galaxy Class) is vastly superior in every possible way - yet, the resulting ship is much more useful in-game
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I simply don't understand the logic behind that.
Having ppl being disappointed CANNOT help making them want to play that game. It's not like ppl would never fly any other ship, everyone has several characters and flies a variety of ships. I just don't get it.
Is it really the antipathy of one single dev towards that ship?
It's hard to belive that TBH.
There is no T6 galaxy and never will be, devs have said all the ships stop at T5-U, except for the NEW T6 designs.
Not even lockbox ships get full T6 upgrade. Even if the galaxy gets another tac console at T5U it doesnt have enough tac boff seating to make it matter, just the same with another sci console. And a 6th engineer console would just be so pointless it would be a troll.
Honestly without a 13th boff ability or a boff layout change, even with T5-U it will still be the worst ship hands down.
Yea seeing how the intrepid gets a tier 6 I think its safe to say there is a tier 6 galaxy class
I'm sure they'll find a excuse to keep the GCS at the low end.
This. I play this game to relive my childhood watching TNG both in old and in new ways. My primary ship is a fully fleet fitted Fleet Galaxy and it is a bruiser. I often come in second or third place in elite STFs and yesterday I came in first the CE elite event.
I mean no offense, but if that is the case, then quite frankly you're either playing with people who don't know how to build or use ships or they're using mirandas. There aren't many high end boats that can't outgun a galaxy class. Some of the science vessels perhaps?
you got me thinking.
the galaxy retrofit got 2 tactical bridge officer and 2 tactical console.
is there a t5 science ship that got just that too? i don't remember.
not that it would change a thing, because, techically, at raw power a science ship with the same amount of bo and tact console should still be less powerfull than a cruiser due to the number of weapons slot.
well... no, when you think about it, science ship have more science console slot, wih ambassy console they could still be more powerfull even with the same amount of bo and tact console and 2 weapons slot less.
hmmm, interesting, anyone known a sci ship that have the potential to be less or equal in firepower than the galaxy retrofit?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Not discussing STFs, but in the CEE I get a lot of 1-st palces in a Galaxy-R as well. It's about the only content that lets the ship (if heavily invetsed in and set up properly) shine, because it doesn't only calculate raw DPS into the equation.
hmmm, well no, since you have the possibility to have 4 tactical power, + sensor analysis and 4 scie console slot in the fleet version compared to the 3 slot for the fleet galaxy... also 9 base turn rate.
wich is better to have? 2 more weapons slot or 1 ensign and lt tac bo combined with 1 more sci console slot and sensor analysis?
drunk, what do you think?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271