test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Needed upgrades to Galaxy Class?

13637383941

Comments

  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    ghyudt wrote: »
    You really didn't understand did you? I said, turn rate doesn't matter if you can't drop your targets shields. As in, if you're in an eclipse, and shooting at a galaxy, and you can't bring its shields down, your turn rate means nothing. But on the other hand, the galaxy is actually capable of defeating the eclipse. As for there not being a fleet version, what does that matter? The T6 ships already have more console slots and abilities than any T5U, fleet or not. If anything, a fleet eclipse would be about an even match to the fleet galaxy T5U.

    My Padawan Learner... I am sorry, you're not ready to become a Jedi Knight yet.

    Try to take the blinders off the horse, but the horse wants them on...
    XzRTofz.gif
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    ghyudt wrote: »
    You really didn't understand did you? I said, turn rate doesn't matter if you can't drop your targets shields. As in, if you're in an eclipse, and shooting at a galaxy, and you can't bring its shields down, your turn rate means nothing. But on the other hand, the galaxy is actually capable of defeating the eclipse. As for there not being a fleet version, what does that matter? The T6 ships already have more console slots and abilities than any T5U, fleet or not. If anything, a fleet eclipse would be about an even match to the fleet galaxy T5U.

    you cant be using ether ship to 10% of its potential, and think this way.

    eclipse can slot override subsystem safeties, surgical strike, and ionic turbulence. any of these 3 skills could single handedly embarrassed any galaxy R with their power, let alone how dominating it would be to use all 3, as the eclipse easily can.

    the eclipse actually trounces even the scimitar in DPS potential, and you're saying it cant overcome the worst ship in the game? you cant fake being this dumb.
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    something that is really sad. the stargazer is a better cruiser then the galaxy class


    the stargazer a ship that was falling a part at the seems


    the nebula class science ship is also a better cruiser then the galaxy
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    ghyudt wrote: »
    Superior? The Eclipse? Are you sure we're playing the same game?

    ho i am sure we are playing the same game but.... not at the same level it would seem:rolleyes:
    I have yet to either fight against or alongside an Eclipse that is even remotely capable of out-tanking the galaxy

    well, maybe it is time to play with another peoples, or stop pugging.

    opvpchannel: here you will find player that will outank and kill you in your galaxy with an eclipse ( and they don't need intel power to do that, even the neutronic torp is not needed )

    just for the story the most experimented pvp players of this game have created the t5uchannel after DR launch.
    no t6 ship and power allowed, why? because they are freakingly overpower to the point were skillplay is not mandatory anymore, almost.

    you think you will be able to take down an eclipse shield or that this ship is not capable to take you down in your galaxy, why don't you go ask in these channel, just for fun?
    or better, you known that there is a pvp forum here?
    why don't you create a new thread there to ask any pvp player to "try" to take you down.
    let me help you with the title, here it is

    i don't think an eclipse can beat me in my galaxy, i challenge you to prove me wrong!


    ....good luck!


    Just because a ship can use cannons and tank well does not make it superior

    for this i will redirect you to
    dps public channel
    10k channel
    30k channel

    in a pve environment, cannons are not the dps killer anymore, so if you bring here the "cannon" argument with the idea that it equal more dps ( thus in the mind of many player means it is superior ) forget it and go back to the drawing board.
    even in pvp environment cannon are not always the best dps weapons with the DR changes nowaday.
    And turn rate doesn't really mean anything when you can't even seem to drop your targets shields.

    turn rate/speed/inertia are negligible in pve, but are critical in pvp.
    that what escort use to speed tank.
    the better these 3 values are the better your ship is, regardless of it bo layout
    imagine the galaxy with 15 turn and 60 inertia, that would change it a lot, but that work also with a galaxy with 3 turn and 10 inertia!!
    you see? none of the others stats of the ship changes, but it change the ship completely.
    what is the heavy cruiser retrofit? basically a galaxy with better turn and inertia.
    http://sto.gamepedia.com/Fleet_Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit

    when a DHC escort is firering at you, you are not force to tank all the damage!
    you also have the possibilitie to get out of their firering arc (90°).
    the more speed, turnrate and inertia you have, the faster you will be able to do it.

    how can you reduce the firepower of a beam cruiser by half?
    you sit in front or behind it. that way this cruiser only have 4 weapons shooting at you at any given time.
    you see now how these value help you tank?

    these values are not the decisive factor in tanking but one should not dismiss them like you have.
    If you want a superior tank ship, the guardian is what you should be referring to.

    let me correct that one:)

    If you want somes superior tank ships, the star cruiser/exelsior/ambassador/assault cruiser/avenger/odyssey/eclipse/heavy cruiser retrofit is what you should be referring to.
  • edited January 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    edalgo wrote: »
    Thanx for the LuLz.

    Now I'm out of popcorn!

    (Hands a bag of freshly popped popcorn)
    XzRTofz.gif
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    ghyudt wrote: »
    Just because a ship can use cannons and tank well does not make it superior.

    ho! it just hit me as i was reading yout comment again but... you were speaking about the galaxy x here right?:D
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    i laughed then cried because it's true
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    well prier to the gear upgrade and the recent power DPS creep it was griefing taking in a galaxy with out a plasma build with the embassy consoles
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • timelord79timelord79 Member Posts: 1,852 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    I expect a T6 Galaxy Class retrorefit with Command specialization soon-ish. :)
    11750640_1051211588222593_450219911807924697_n.jpg
  • edited January 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    timelord79 wrote: »
    I expect a T6 Galaxy Class retrorefit with Command specialization soon-ish. :)

    i expect it too but not " soon-ish".
    i see it in a bit more than a year, would be cool if it have 1 lt intel and ... i don't known 1 lt command or lt commander command.
    we will see when these new abilities come out
  • starfish1701starfish1701 Member Posts: 782 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    If any devs are reading this, please give this iconic ship the love it deserves.

    The game has been running for five years. Most people would have expected that by now we would have a full interior, multiple variants and at least one really good high end loadout.

    Please do for the Galaxy what you've done for the Intrepid.

    She was the USS Enterprise for a generation. She deserves it. :)
  • hyperionx09hyperionx09 Member Posts: 1,709 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    The most it'll get is a similar setup to the Pathfinder. Ensign Eng switched to Lt. Uni, and probably the Lt. Tac made Lt Tac/Hybrid. Which would allow for a theoretical 4 Tac skills (2 Lt seats).

    And that won't happen until they have a new episode series to star the ship the way they did the Intrepid. The Devs themselves stated that they chose to fully market the T6 Intrepid/Pathfinder as they spent a fair amount of asset time on it for Delta Rising's episodes. Otherwise, they intend to stick to their plans of releasing newer original designs that are hybrids or descendants of older ships (their notable statement "We have no plans to release T6 versions of existing ships at this time").

    And even then, it's not a guarantee; the Scimitar got an interior layout with one of the recent DR episodes, yet Cryptic has refused to release the interior to existing owners of the ships. Same applies to the Tal Shiar Adapted Battlecruiser, and that one's a Lobi item.

    At this rate though; it's more likely we'll see a return to DS9 and the starring of the Defiant in a T6 iteration before a new T6 Galaxy. Which would likely also match the Pathfinder in seat adjustments; Ensign Tac -> Lt Uni and Lt Sci -> Lt Sci/Hybrid. Why? Because aside from the Galaxy fanbase, there's an equally notable fanbase that clamors for more DS9 content and Cardassian conflicts. And if Cryptic went that route, they can round out a Cardassian console 3-set (via 2 new Cardassian ships; 1 new T6 Lobi and 1 new T6 Lockbox) AND a Defiant 3-pack at the same time (the Defiant is sitting on 2 of 3 variants for an eventual 3 pack (and would undoubtedly come with new interiors if made), which results in a perfect storm of monetary influx.

    Don't get me wrong; I fully expect a T6 version of the Galaxy (and all other T5 ships) in the future; but it's a matter of how (what storyline would feature it) and when (reliant on Cryptic's future plans). It's guaranteed they'd make money off it even if it just has the setup I stated earlier; the Pathfinder proved it (regardless of whether it was the bundle pack or the limited time T6 Ship+Extras pack). As well, the Galaxy is sitting on 2 of 3 variants needed for a Galaxy Cruiser 3-pack (which will no doubt come with the interiors if they're made). So there's potential monetary there.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    lol, the APU thing got that ENS uni the galaxy R needed for so long, and even 3 tac consoles
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited January 2015

    At this rate though; it's more likely we'll see a return to DS9 and the starring of the Defiant in a T6 iteration before a new T6 Galaxy. Which would likely also match the Pathfinder in seat adjustments; Ensign Tac -> Lt Uni and Lt Sci -> Lt Sci/Hybrid. Why? Because aside from the Galaxy fanbase, there's an equally notable fanbase that clamors for more DS9 content and Cardassian conflicts. And if Cryptic went that route, they can round out a Cardassian console 3-set (via 2 new Cardassian ships; 1 new T6 Lobi and 1 new T6 Lockbox) AND a Defiant 3-pack at the same time (the Defiant is sitting on 2 of 3 variants for an eventual 3 pack (and would undoubtedly come with new interiors if made), which results in a perfect storm of monetary influx.

    i doubt about that, why redone the defiant interior? it is here already and you can buy it in the cstore.
    and it is not a crappy one, the devs at the time wanted to be accurate to the show when they did it, so much that it was even used as logging screen in season 5 if i remember correctly , they already set a story for the ds9 theme with the feature episode on top of the original storilyne concerning ds9 in the game
    all major ship concerning ds9 have been sold in lockbox, galor, bug ship, the dominion dreadnought.

    so i certainly don't see them going back to redo a defiant interior ( what it would be anyway since the interior of the show as already been recreated ) or spending huge resources to do the other ds9 ship interior that are not as iconic as the defiant.
    anyway any story related to ds9 would feel like "deja vu", i think the dev and most of the player want something that haven't been done yet in this game.
    in short, something new in the storyline and gameplay point of view of this game.

    but you are right on the idea that a galaxy t6 or whatever will not come if there is no new story arc and interior that come with it, like it happened for the intrepid.
    luckily gecko mentioned himself that a galaxy interior is something that he want for the game to be completed, so there is now a 100% probability that it will come, the question is: when.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited January 2015
    lol, the APU thing got that ENS uni the galaxy R needed for so long, and even 3 tac consoles

    woop, error on my part, i misread your comment
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Hmm you think we will get a command Galaxy class type star ship soon.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    nataku302 wrote: »
    Hmm you think we will get a command Galaxy class type star ship soon.

    I think that the closest we will see to an upgraded Galaxy is the Guadian , although I think that the Guardian shoudlve been a "command" ship. As far as a T6 Defiant, doesnt the Phantom fill that role? I really dont expect much from previous teir ships showing Up for T6 and beyond. Maybe if the rumored new show happens and they get permission to use those ships, we might see more hero/ canon ships.

    Now the real "trick" thing would be to have a uni-specialty boff slot that would allow either command or intel
  • iontigerhawkiontigerhawk Member Posts: 19 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Look, the Galaxy-X Dreadnought needs to be reconfigured to a tactical based warship.
    I would like to see the vessel being able to be configured or upgraded to fit our own needs based on our tactical, science or engineer based characters. Since we can now upgrade armor and weapons, why not have the ability to configure our own ships with additional bridge officer stations and additional module slots. The Galaxy dreadnought is crippled from a tactical stand point. It needs 3 tactical stations. 3 universal stations that can be used for Lt. Commander to Lieutenant to 2 Engineer stations on Commander and 1 Lt. Commander and two science stations one Commander and one Lieutenant Commander. This will make the Galaxy-X Dreadnought a more balanced warship. Just my perspective since I've been using it with my Tactical officer.
    I could do a side argument for the armitage escort starship as to how it needs additional science engineer and tactical module slots, however that could be for another thread or relevant here well.
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Look, the Galaxy-X Dreadnought needs to be reconfigured to a tactical based warship.
    I would like to see the vessel being able to be configured or upgraded to fit our own needs based on our tactical, science or engineer based characters. Since we can now upgrade armor and weapons, why not have the ability to configure our own ships with additional bridge officer stations and additional module slots. The Galaxy dreadnought is crippled from a tactical stand point. It needs 3 tactical stations. 3 universal stations that can be used for Lt. Commander to Lieutenant to 2 Engineer stations on Commander and 1 Lt. Commander and two science stations one Commander and one Lieutenant Commander. This will make the Galaxy-X Dreadnought a more balanced warship. Just my perspective since I've been using it with my Tactical officer.
    I could do a side argument for the armitage escort starship as to how it needs additional science engineer and tactical module slots, however that could be for another thread or relevant here well.

    Nope The Galaxy class needs to be reconfigured the Galaxy X dreadnought doesn't need to be reconfigured. The galaxy class needs to be reconfigured to be a tactical based warship since it was used in a war and did a good job at it.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    nataku302 wrote: »
    Nope The Galaxy class needs to be reconfigured the Galaxy X dreadnought doesn't need to be reconfigured. The galaxy class needs to be reconfigured to be a tactical based warship since it was used in a war and did a good job at it.

    that is just a point of view and can not seriously be use as an argument to convinced cryptic to redo the galaxy retrofit.
    and even on this own thread some who are for a new galaxy version don't like to see it as a "tactical warship of doom".
    even my older stance on the subject is a point of view.
    i wanted cryptic to change the galaxy retrofit and the galaxy x, because both were inneficient in their respective role in this game compared to other ships in the same categorie.
    because i naively bielieve that all tier 5 ship should be more or less equal and balanced.

    but that not how cryptic do things in this game, time as allows us to see that.
    there are lv40 ship, then cstore ship then fleet ship, lockbox and t5u.
    and all add a little layer of creep everytime.
    older ship ( meaning ship that were here at the beguining of the game ) are not supposed, in cryptic view, to stay competitive with newer release ad vitam eternam.

    with that stance, the galaxy retrofit and galaxy x are INDEED "good as is"
    they are not supposed to compete or be more balanced.
    and even if you provide the proof of misconception in the bo layout of the ship regarding the game mechanics, it will sound irrelevant to them.
    it is just like trying to rebalanced a tier 2 ship, what for? move on! we are at tier6 now.

    so no, i don't think that the galaxy x is "good as is" and just the galaxy retrofit need work if you want to known, but in the end this is irrelevant and can not be use as an argument to convince cryptic to redo these ships.
    no arguments will.
    the only hope is that at some point a tier 6 galaxy will emerge, there you will have a more balanced and efficient galaxy
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    neo1nx wrote: »
    that is just a point of view and can not seriously be use as an argument to convinced cryptic to redo the galaxy retrofit.
    and even on this own thread some who are for a new galaxy version don't like to see it as a "tactical warship of doom".
    even my older stance on the subject is a point of view.
    i wanted cryptic to change the galaxy retrofit and the galaxy x, because both were inneficient in their respective role in this game compared to other ships in the same categorie.
    because i naively bielieve that all tier 5 ship should be more or less equal and balanced.

    but that not how cryptic do things in this game, time as allows us to see that.
    there are lv40 ship, then cstore ship then fleet ship, lockbox and t5u.
    and all add a little layer of creep everytime.
    older ship ( meaning ship that were here at the beguining of the game ) are not supposed, in cryptic view, to stay competitive with newer release ad vitam eternam.

    with that stance, the galaxy retrofit and galaxy x are INDEED "good as is"
    they are not supposed to compete or be more balanced.
    and even if you provide the proof of misconception in the bo layout of the ship regarding the game mechanics, it will sound irrelevant to them.
    it is just like trying to rebalanced a tier 2 ship, what for? move on! we are at tier6 now.

    so no, i don't think that the galaxy x is "good as is" and just the galaxy retrofit need work if you want to known, but in the end this is irrelevant and can not be use as an argument to convince cryptic to redo these ships.
    no arguments will.
    the only hope is that at some point a tier 6 galaxy will emerge, there you will have a more balanced and efficient galaxy

    Why not release three versions that benefit what people want like one for tac, one for eng and one for science for a tier 6 ship. Give it a command or intel hybrid and yea
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    nataku302 wrote: »
    Why not release three versions that benefit what people want like one for tac, one for eng and one for science for a tier 6 ship. Give it a command or intel hybrid and yea

    Three-pack-ships are the biggest rip-off possible. Purchase the *exact* ship three times with a slight console change.
    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
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Whilst I do agree, I will say that I've always felt that the one saving grace, where said packs are concerned, is thay they are at least account-wide unlocks.

    Although, saying that, seeing how alt-unfriendly this game has become.....

    It wouldn't even be half as bad if you were to buy one for full price and the other two at a discount if you so desire. But it's either the whole pack (60 dollars - sixty friggin dollars for ingame-items) or you buy one for thirty. If you want to add the rest to your collection afterwards you basically have to pay ninety dollars in total.

    Mind you, I'm not even buying a ship for 20 bucks. to me that's just madness. I will pay to play a game and then have everything, but I don't pay for pieces. But I can understand why some people would. But in that systems, three-packs are just evil. It's literally selling the same ship two or three times and they sell it as something good because "you have a choice".
    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
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I Posted the Following to another older Thread about the Galaxy Issues, but since that Thread was Closed (to old, necromancy whatever), and i was redirected to this Thread i will Just Copy and Paste my Thoughts about the Galaxy Problem here.



    Even so that this Thread is an older one...one of so many Threads about how owner of the Galaxy X are UNHAPPY with it...i still have to add my 5 Cents to it (like i did with many of the other Threads about the GX) since from time to time, iam looking for News in Hope that Cryptic FINALY opens their Eyes and Realize that the Layout of the Gal X is WRONG, and that they should Fix it FOR GODS SAKE i also own the Galaxy 3 Pack - mainly for the Gal X - but dont use them anymore for some time now, because of the Layout that BELONGS to a Exploration Cruiser NOT A BLOODY WARSHIP / DREADNOUGHT that the Gal X is! .

    I have 40 (YES FOURTY) chars on my Main Account, whenever i Created a new Char i was going through my avaible Zen Store Ships and whenever i saw the unused Galaxy X i had a sad sad Face, sad AND ANGRY due to the Fact that Cryptic DELIBERATELY Ignores their MISTAKE that they made when giving this Ship its (WRONG) Layout and IGNORING this even so that People Complain about it all the Time = deaf Devs??????

    Looking at nearly all the other Cruisers in game who all have a better Tactical layout than an ACTUAL WARSHIP further Frustrates me, what Kind of Twisted Joke is that? Whats Wrong with whoever is Responsible for that?? I Remember when in 2008 in Las Vegas when the Game was Introduced to the Public (With leonard Nimoy R.I.P) that after someone from the Public asked how canon will the Game be to the Star Trek Franchise, the answer was "AS CANON AS POSSIBLE" and that they watch all Movies / Series read the Books and so on......well....HAVE you ever Watched the TNG Episode "All Good Things"?? NO? DO IT, Yes? DO IT AGAIN!

    Turning Ships that are Supposed to be CANNONFODDER (Jem Hadar Bug Ship) into UBER PVP Godlike Ships, while at the same Time, Ships that are Supposed to be SUPERIOR UBERShips into Tame Exploration Cruisers and so on is......."Insert your own Expression here"

    Of Course they cant make everything 1 to 1 like in the Series / Movies no doubt about that, BUT thats still FAR away from "As Canon as POSSIBLE"

    Jesus Christ YOU (Cryptic) MADE A MISTAKE, Players are Pointing out that Mistake ( GAL X = NO Exploration Cruiser but WARSHIP) and the same Players also give you ideas for Solutions, so how about just saying "Sorry Guys youre Right we made an Mistake" and than....FIX IT!

    The Galaxy Xs Offensive Capabilities should at least be Equel OR even Slightly Superior to ALL other Fed Cruisers in Game, why?.... DREADNOUGHT. the Word Dreadnought should make Enemys Fear when Faced with one, and not LAUGH their BUTTS off (sadly the Case with the Gal X)

    Since you Unfortunately allready made this Mistake and many (but by far not all) owners accepted it and use it as a Eng Heavy Tank, the Best Solution to Fix this MESS would be the following changes (to the Normal Gal X, the Fleet OR at least the Fleet Gal X T5U, yes CHARGE US for it but at least give us the Option!)


    COMM Eng
    LTComm Uni
    LT Uni
    LT Sci
    ENS Tac

    with that Boff Layout, People who use it as a ENG Heavy Tank could continue to do so, BUT People who want to Fly it as what it should be as a DREADNOUGHT would FINALY have the Option to do so = EVERYONE is Happy, so WHATS the Problem with that??

    The Console Slots that we get with Fleet / T5U are allredy GOOD now give it the above Boff Layout to Backup the 4 Tactical Consoles!

    also, while the Widebeam Phaser Lance is nice, the Sniper (normal) Lance is just...BAD, the Accuracy of it is TERRIBLE to say the Least, HOW on Earth can i stand NOT Moving right NEXT to a Borg Command Ship or Cube that also does NOT Move, fire my Lance and.....MISS?! DOUBLE or TRIPPLE its Accuracy to make it even Worth Firing it, also the Cooldown is way longer than that of other Ships "Special Weapons" like the one on the Guramba, Cut it Down to match those, its not Like its such a total PAWNAGE Weapon anyway......

    another thing that would be nice but not a must would be at least +10 to Weapons +5 to Shields and +5 to Engines

    other than those changes EVERYTHING else is totaly Fine with it. Unlike some other People who ask for totaly Unrealistic or Changes that would hurt the overall Balance (like giving it 2 or more Commander Stations with a Commander Tactical and in addition a Lt Commander Tactical, and a whole bunch of other things) those changes that i Posted above are ABSOLUTELY Realistic and the way how the Galaxy X should be from the Begining! it would not be Overpowered at all, BUT it would Reflect the Galaxy X from the Series WAY better...it would be WAY more Canon than it is right now, and it would be Usefull Compared to the Cruiser in Game (i dont say other Cruiser because its a Dreadnought not a Cruiser......)


    i could say so much more about why and how and so on......but it would be nothing that was not allready said by Countless other People before me so...

    PLEASE CRYPTIC STOP IGNORING US, STOP INSULTING THE GALAXY X AND PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF WHATEVER IS HOLY TO YOU, FIX THAT BLOODY THING ALLREADY, THANK YOU!
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I Posted the Following to another older Thread about the Galaxy Issues, but since that Thread was Closed (to old, necromancy whatever), and i was redirected to this Thread i will Just Copy and Paste my Thoughts about the Galaxy Problem here.



    Even so that this Thread is an older one...one of so many Threads about how owner of the Galaxy X are UNHAPPY with it...i still have to add my 5 Cents to it (like i did with many of the other Threads about the GX) since from time to time, iam looking for News in Hope that Cryptic FINALY opens their Eyes and Realize that the Layout of the Gal X is WRONG, and that they should Fix it FOR GODS SAKE i also own the Galaxy 3 Pack - mainly for the Gal X - but dont use them anymore for some time now, because of the Layout that BELONGS to a Exploration Cruiser NOT A BLOODY WARSHIP / DREADNOUGHT that the Gal X is! .

    I have 40 (YES FOURTY) chars on my Main Account, whenever i Created a new Char i was going through my avaible Zen Store Ships and whenever i saw the unused Galaxy X i had a sad sad Face, sad AND ANGRY due to the Fact that Cryptic DELIBERATELY Ignores their MISTAKE that they made when giving this Ship its (WRONG) Layout and IGNORING this even so that People Complain about it all the Time = deaf Devs??????

    Looking at nearly all the other Cruisers in game who all have a better Tactical layout than an ACTUAL WARSHIP further Frustrates me, what Kind of Twisted Joke is that? Whats Wrong with whoever is Responsible for that?? I Remember when in 2008 in Las Vegas when the Game was Introduced to the Public (With leonard Nimoy R.I.P) that after someone from the Public asked how canon will the Game be to the Star Trek Franchise, the answer was "AS CANON AS POSSIBLE" and that they watch all Movies / Series read the Books and so on......well....HAVE you ever Watched the TNG Episode "All Good Things"?? NO? DO IT, Yes? DO IT AGAIN!

    Turning Ships that are Supposed to be CANNONFODDER (Jem Hadar Bug Ship) into UBER PVP Godlike Ships, while at the same Time, Ships that are Supposed to be SUPERIOR UBERShips into Tame Exploration Cruisers and so on is......."Insert your own Expression here"

    Of Course they cant make everything 1 to 1 like in the Series / Movies no doubt about that, BUT thats still FAR away from "As Canon as POSSIBLE"

    Jesus Christ YOU (Cryptic) MADE A MISTAKE, Players are Pointing out that Mistake ( GAL X = NO Exploration Cruiser but WARSHIP) and the same Players also give you ideas for Solutions, so how about just saying "Sorry Guys youre Right we made an Mistake" and than....FIX IT!

    The Galaxy Xs Offensive Capabilities should at least be Equel OR even Slightly Superior to ALL other Fed Cruisers in Game, why?.... DREADNOUGHT. the Word Dreadnought should make Enemys Fear when Faced with one, and not LAUGH their BUTTS off (sadly the Case with the Gal X)

    Since you Unfortunately allready made this Mistake and many (but by far not all) owners accepted it and use it as a Eng Heavy Tank, the Best Solution to Fix this MESS would be the following changes (to the Normal Gal X, the Fleet OR at least the Fleet Gal X T5U, yes CHARGE US for it but at least give us the Option!)


    COMM Eng
    LTComm Uni
    LT Uni
    LT Sci
    ENS Tac

    with that Boff Layout, People who use it as a ENG Heavy Tank could continue to do so, BUT People who want to Fly it as what it should be as a DREADNOUGHT would FINALY have the Option to do so = EVERYONE is Happy, so WHATS the Problem with that??

    The Console Slots that we get with Fleet / T5U are allredy GOOD now give it the above Boff Layout to Backup the 4 Tactical Consoles!

    also, while the Widebeam Phaser Lance is nice, the Sniper (normal) Lance is just...BAD, the Accuracy of it is TERRIBLE to say the Least, HOW on Earth can i stand NOT Moving right NEXT to a Borg Command Ship or Cube that also does NOT Move, fire my Lance and.....MISS?! DOUBLE or TRIPPLE its Accuracy to make it even Worth Firing it, also the Cooldown is way longer than that of other Ships "Special Weapons" like the one on the Guramba, Cut it Down to match those, its not Like its such a total PAWNAGE Weapon anyway......

    another thing that would be nice but not a must would be at least +10 to Weapons +5 to Shields and +5 to Engines

    other than those changes EVERYTHING else is totaly Fine with it. Unlike some other People who ask for totaly Unrealistic or Changes that would hurt the overall Balance (like giving it 2 or more Commander Stations with a Commander Tactical and in addition a Lt Commander Tactical, and a whole bunch of other things) those changes that i Posted above are ABSOLUTELY Realistic and the way how the Galaxy X should be from the Begining! it would not be Overpowered at all, BUT it would Reflect the Galaxy X from the Series WAY better...it would be WAY more Canon than it is right now, and it would be Usefull Compared to the Cruiser in Game (i dont say other Cruiser because its a Dreadnought not a Cruiser......)


    i could say so much more about why and how and so on......but it would be nothing that was not allready said by Countless other People before me so...

    PLEASE CRYPTIC STOP IGNORING US, STOP INSULTING THE GALAXY X AND PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF WHATEVER IS HOLY TO YOU, FIX THAT BLOODY THING ALLREADY, THANK YOU!

    No one cares about the galaxy x we want them to fix the galaxy r first then X.
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    nataku302 wrote: »
    No one cares about the galaxy x we want them to fix the galaxy r first then X.

    Speak for yourself, maybe YOU dont Care, but more than enough other People DO Care, and iam not Saying that they should not Fix the Galaxy R, i agree that it also has to be Fixed since its BS that is Inferior to Ships like the MUCH Older Ambassador and Excelsior Class, so i agree and Respect your Oppinion and i expect the same from you.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    1.) re roll the commander eng to a hybrid commander eng/command
    2.) ltc eng and ensign eng: re roll to universal
    3.) rest of the seats remain as is.

    4.
    The t6 ship should have a 3 piece set:
    Antimatter spread, saucer separation and Phaser lance.
    When the lance console is equipped, the ship gets a forced mesh addon (the lance). A bit like the borg spikes from the borg set, but with no option to turn it off (except removing the console).
    If you activate the phaser lance all systems but weapons take a 75 power hit. The lance then fires pulses until its shut off again. (essentialy a forward facing heavy weapon).

    5.) The ship should be able to use all existing galaxy model parts, so the player can decide what he wants to fit. The third nacelle and strut become entirely optional.

    Roll the GX and GR together into one and let the player decide how he wants to use it.
  • highlandrisehighlandrise Member Posts: 354 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    1.) re roll the commander eng to a hybrid commander eng/command
    2.) ltc eng and ensign eng: re roll to universal
    3.) rest of the seats remain as is.

    4.
    The t6 ship should have a 3 piece set:
    Antimatter spread, saucer separation and Phaser lance.
    When the lance console is equipped, the ship gets a forced mesh addon (the lance). A bit like the borg spikes from the borg set, but with no option to turn it off (except removing the console).
    If you activate the phaser lance all systems but weapons take a 75 power hit. The lance then fires pulses until its shut off again. (essentialy a forward facing heavy weapon).

    5.) The ship should be able to use all existing galaxy model parts, so the player can decide what he wants to fit. The third nacelle and strut become entirely optional.

    Roll the GX and GR together into one and let the player decide how he wants to use it.

    The Way how you Describe the Lance should work sounds like an idea, but i Disagree with the Rest, dont Turn that thing into a Command Ship, the Layout that i Mentioned is allready Perfect for it

    COMM Eng
    LTComm Uni (OR a LTComm Universal / Command if at all)
    LT Uni
    LT Sci
    ENS Tac

    thats what it needs, also the Phaser Lance should be ALWAYS Avaible regardless the Consoles, thats Part of that Ship, and the Third Nacelle is together with the Phaser Lance also what Seperates the Galaxy X from the Normal Galaxy, so it should be not Removable, every other Galaxy Part should be abaible for the Galaxy X too
Sign In or Register to comment.