test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Needed upgrades to Galaxy Class?

13468942

Comments

  • alexveccialexvecci Member Posts: 119 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I ship you can only get via zen. BOPS are free. and CBS has been silent on this. the only place we've seen their foot down is the T5 connie idea.

    The Galaxy in itself IS free (AKA Exploration Cruiser), it'd actually be its Retrofit (Exploration Cruiser Retrofit) and Refit (Venture Refit class) that are paid.

    As for the BoPs, not ALL the BoPs are free. B'Rel is a free ship (starter ship even), B'Rel Retrofit is not (just like the galaxy).

    See the pattern?
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    No it wouldn't for the console layout and other stats would remain the same and has Shipok said you have to claim that the KDF's entire BOP line is then super. Sorry dude there is no logical arguement against the Gal r and Fleet Gal being universal

    your clearly not experienced enough to make a judgment call like that. bops are tin cans, even with all universal stations they are underpowered. it doesn't mater how universal your stations are when your chassis is made of glass. all the good station setups you could make out of what the bop has is replicated by all the top escorts and warbirds already out there, and they are all more durable, have more weapons, have an ENS station, and some even cloak better.


    a cruiser with all universals is a WHOLE nother thing. first of all, all other heal boat cruisers, carriers and sci ships would be instantly irreverent next to the galaxy, the perfect healer setup is at your disposal, fully customizable. even with just 2 tac consoles, the ship would have access to a COM tac, 8 weapons, and 44k base hull. tac consoles are real nice and all, but its high level tac boff powers that give a ship most of its teeth. it would shake up the tac cruiser hierarchy considerably.


    the cruiser line is done a disservice if there is 1 ship that alone can do anything any of the rest of them can. they should all have their own station niche, so they are all worth having, and swapping too. the galaxy should have heavy universals yes, but not ALL. you managed to come up with the 1 build that would prove cryptics worries correct, that a good galaxy would hurt sales of everything else. all universal would do it

    something more reasonable is this

    COM eng
    LTC uni
    LT uni
    LT sci
    ENS sci


    or
    COM eng
    LTC uni
    LT eng
    LT sci
    ENS uni

    with these you could replicate the station setups of other tac cruisers, wile being a lesser tactical platform and inferior to them, or you could make a super minmaxed sci cruiser that can forgo tac all together, a unique niche among cruisers.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    alexvecci wrote: »
    The Galaxy in itself IS free (AKA Exploration Cruiser), it'd actually be its Retrofit (Exploration Cruiser Retrofit) and Refit (Venture Refit class) that are paid.

    As for the BoPs, not ALL the BoPs are free. B'Rel is a free ship (starter ship even), B'Rel Retrofit is not (just like the galaxy).

    See the pattern?

    Um the T4 Galaxy would remain untouched. the Gal R and the fleet Gal are the ones I'm aiming at.. Yes not all BOPS are free but there is T1 -T5 that are free and all universal
    your clearly not experienced enough to make a judgment call like that. bops are tin cans, even with all universal stations they are underpowered. it doesn't mater how universal your stations are when your chassis is made of glass. all the good station setups you could make out of what the bop has is replicated by all the top escorts and warbirds already out there, and they are all more durable, have more weapons, have an ENS station, and some even cloak better.


    a cruiser with all universals is a WHOLE nother thing. first of all, all other heal boat cruisers, carriers and sci ships would be instantly irreverent next to the galaxy, the perfect healer setup is at your disposal, fully customizable. even with just 2 tac consoles, the ship would have access to a COM tac, 8 weapons, and 44k base hull. tac consoles are real nice and all, but its high level tac boff powers that give a ship most of its teeth. it would shake up the tac cruiser hierarchy considerably.


    the cruiser line is done a disservice if there is 1 ship that alone can do anything any of the rest of them can. they should all have their own station niche, so they are all worth having, and swapping too. the galaxy should have heavy universals yes, but not ALL. you managed to come up with the 1 build that would prove cryptics worries correct, that a good galaxy would hurt sales of everything else. all universal would do it

    something more reasonable is this

    COM eng
    LTC uni
    LT uni
    LT sci
    ENS sci


    or
    COM eng
    LTC uni
    LT eng
    LT sci
    ENS uni

    with these you could replicate the station setups of other tac cruisers, wile being a lesser tactical platform and inferior to them, or you could make a super minmaxed sci cruiser that can forgo tac all together, a unique niche among cruisers.

    Close to my acceptable. make one of the LT scis a tac and that be acceptable. but my goal would be all universal. and again what proof do you have that it be OP. again the only thing that would change on the ship is the BO slots EVERYTHING else remains the same.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    kimmym wrote: »
    If ship crafting ends up being as simple as letting us use the stats of any ship we own on the model of any other ship we own for a cost, threads like this vanish in a puff of smoke.

    Does that mean at some time in the future, whenever Geko gets around to implementing this, I'll be able to put a T2 Exeter Skin on a Xindi Carrier Layout?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited June 2014



    Close to my acceptable. make one of the LT scis a tac and that be acceptable. but my goal would be all universal. and again what proof do you have that it be OP. again the only thing that would change on the ship is the BO slots EVERYTHING else remains the same.


    that would then kill the minmaxed sci tank nitch it could play. personally i like the no tac witht he LTC and ens uni my self.

    ALL THE SCI!!!!
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    kimmym wrote: »
    If ship crafting ends up being as simple as letting us use the stats of any ship we own on the model of any other ship we own for a cost, threads like this vanish in a puff of smoke.
    I bet the life of my firstborn on that not happening. I'm very very sure that's the complete opposite of what the STO team wants to accomplish. I think that we'll be able to make additions to our ship, but I doubt we'll ever be able to build one from the ground up using aspects of any other previous ship. I gotta admit though, that'd be hella cool regardless.

    Oh, and related note. I finally got myself a Fleet Exploration Cruiser. I thought that since I've been flying the Galaxy/Venture/Monarch retrofits for so long, why not upgrade?
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    (...)

    Close to my acceptable. make one of the LT scis a tac and that be acceptable. but my goal would be all universal. and again what proof do you have that it be OP.again the only thing that would change on the ship is the BO slots EVERYTHING else remains the same.

    *This* is the *problem* with your proposal.
    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
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    All universal BO on a Gal R? Yeah dreaming if anybody thinks that will fly. Only reason that flies with BoP is because they are literally class cannons.

    I'd like to see a couple of BOFF slots go universal like LtCmdr and maybe a LT slot, but other than that 3tac/4Eng/3Sci console slots would also be the ticket.

    That IMHO would fix the ship. Till then, not going to be.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    *This* is the *problem* with your proposal.
    talonxv wrote: »
    All universal BO on a Gal R? Yeah dreaming if anybody thinks that will fly. Only reason that flies with BoP is because they are literally class cannons.

    I'd like to see a couple of BOFF slots go universal like LtCmdr and maybe a LT slot, but other than that 3tac/4Eng/3Sci console slots would also be the ticket.

    That IMHO would fix the ship. Till then, not going to be.

    again WHY. I have yet to see a logical reason why. Were are talking 2 ships you can only get via zen and fleet marks. all other stats remain the same just a change of BO slots. I have yet to see a real logical counter to it.
  • lan451lan451 Member Posts: 3,386 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    dontdrunkimshoot already explained to you why it's a bad idea. Go reread his post.
    JWZrsUV.jpg
    Mine Trap Supporter
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    again WHY. I have yet to see a logical reason why. Were are talking 2 ships you can only get via zen and fleet marks. all other stats remain the same just a change of BO slots. I have yet to see a real logical counter to it.

    Please refer to these postings. I really don't know what other reason you need.

    All T5 raiders have: Only 11 BOFF abilities, no 5-console-setups, 60% of the Galaxy's hull, 0.8 shield mod. The BoPs cannot be compared to the Galaxy at all. It doesn't work. I really don't want to be mean, I just don't know what else do you need.
    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
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I disagree. why would all universal make the Galaxy OP. all it does is fiux the proimary problem with the ship and allows creativeity for the player to have fun. Other cruiser would not become obsolete for there console layouts and other stats would still be useful. And again two ships need zen and Fleet cred to get vs a line of T1-4 and a few zen and fleet ships.
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I disagree. why would all universal make the Galaxy OP. all it does is fiux the proimary problem with the ship and allows creativeity for the player to have fun. Other cruiser would not become obsolete for there console layouts and other stats would still be useful. And again two ships need zen and Fleet cred to get vs a line of T1-4 and a few zen and fleet ships.

    Actually it WOULD make all other cruisers obsolete because you can sit there and run Aux2batt literally nonstop with the correct doffs in place.

    Meaning you run at 125 everything, then ontop of it you can sit there and run FAW ALL THE TIME.

    Sorry stupidly OP.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!

    http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
  • seriousxenoseriousxeno Member Posts: 473 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    The only way we would ever get anything is universal would most definitely come with the following catch:

    - The Commander rank BOFF station remains engineer. :eek:

    Cryptic does not allow ANY faction based ships to have universal commanders (at least so far). Heck, the only ship I can think of on the top of my head is the Tholian Recluse, and thats lobi only and non-faction.

    But to be honest, I could very much live with that layout.

    - Lt. Uni
    - Comm Engi
    - Lt. Com Uni
    - Lt. Uni
    - Ens Uni

    You wanna know the fallout if an all universal layout were to happen?
    You will have eggheads and escort jocks begging for universal commander slots for their ships and I couldn't blame them at that point.

    The way things are going though, we would be very lucky to get even a universal Lt. on the exploration cruiser... or an ensign :(
    latest?cb=20090525051807&path-prefix=en
    "Let them eat static!"
  • empireofsteveempireofsteve Member Posts: 665 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    The only way we would ever get anything is universal would most definitely come with the following catch:

    - The Commander rank BOFF station remains engineer. :eek:

    Cryptic does not allow ANY faction based ships to have universal commanders (at least so far). Heck, the only ship I can think of on the top of my head is the Tholian Recluse, and thats lobi only and non-faction.

    But to be honest, I could very much live with that layout.

    - Lt. Uni
    - Comm Engi
    - Lt. Com Uni
    - Lt. Uni
    - Ens Uni

    You wanna know the fallout if an all universal layout were to happen?
    You will have eggheads and escort jocks begging for universal commander slots for their ships and I couldn't blame them at that point.

    The way things are going though, we would be very lucky to get even a universal Lt. on the exploration cruiser... or an ensign :(
    Birds of prey have universal commander slots.
    NERF CANNONS - THEY NEED A 50% NERF
    CRUISERS NEED A 206% HULL BUFF
  • seriousxenoseriousxeno Member Posts: 473 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    True, but they have 1 less BOFF power too, in addition to all the other differences mentioned earlier.
    latest?cb=20090525051807&path-prefix=en
    "Let them eat static!"
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I think if you made 3 versions of the galaxy class for each of the class it should work because the tv show has portrayed the galaxy class as a fighter since its been used in the dominion war, its been shown as a science and engineering ship as well. So the lay out should look more like this

    Tactical:

    cmd eng
    Lt cmd tac
    lt eng
    lt sci
    ens tac

    console lay out: 4 tac 4 eng 3 sci
    turn rate: 6.5 seeing how its the tactical version of the ship.

    Engineering: same as what the C store version and fleet version except change the 5th eng console slot to a tac slot

    Science:
    same as the tactical one except change the lt com and eng to science, change the lt sci back to tac and give it 4 science console and 3 eng and 3 tac. Except give the ship a second deflector seeing how its the science based ship of the galaxy class.


    Also give three ships a hanger bay seeing how the galaxy x got one. The galaxy X should have a slower turn rate seeing how it seems more heavyer then the galaxy class.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    Actually it WOULD make all other cruisers obsolete because you can sit there and run Aux2batt literally nonstop with the correct doffs in place.

    Meaning you run at 125 everything, then ontop of it you can sit there and run FAW ALL THE TIME.

    Sorry stupidly OP.

    Nope. not everyone likes or does aux to bat. and other cruisers have better turn rates and different console layout.
  • stomperx99stomperx99 Member Posts: 863 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    I liked Drunk's Galaxy 3 Pack Proposal when it was still In his sig! :P

    Can we have it please? (°-°>)>
    ZomboDroid10122015042230.jpg

    I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    spockout1 wrote: »
    Agree with the following: ENS Universal vice ENS Engineer BOFF, and/or 3rd Tac Console slot.

    Otherwise, I run a pretty good Galaxy-class setup as-is with my Eng captain. Six purple MK XII phaser arrays, purple MK XII photons fore and aft, Borg engines and deflector, MACO resilient shield, purple field stabilizing warp core. Blue RCS accelerator, purple neutronium, purple EFF, saucer sep, blue field generator, purple bio monitor, antimatter spread, and two MK XII purple phaser relays.

    TT, BFAW
    EPTS, DEM, EPTS, EWP
    EPTW, RSP, A2SIF
    ET
    TB, TSS

    Five space traits Techie, Warp Theorist, Accurate, Elusive, Grace Under Fire, plus all 4 Borg Space passives.

    Skills are spec'd for hull, shield, and weapon strength, boost power levels, and repair effectiveness. Also have 3 levels of Threat Control. I get the two-piece bonus from the Borg and GCS sets. Strategic Maneuvering boosts speed and turn.

    I am able to kite Elite Tac Cubes, Donatra, Gateways, etc. and keep myself alive for a while. Most of the time, I can hold aggro while the rest of my team pummels the enemy. I also consistently place or better in queues like Gorn Minefield.

    The Galaxy leaves a bit to be desired in a DPS-centric game, but she's still a good ship for PvE.

    PvP is a whole different animal.

    Isn't that layout exactly what's on the galaxy dreadnaught now? Why would you want 2 ships with the same exact setup?
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    row124 wrote: »
    Just like everyone else here I also love the Galaxy class and it's my main ship. The basic problem is that the ship is to ridged and leans towards engineering.

    The solution is to add flexibility. The best way to do that is to change it's bridge officer layout. People have said this before. This is not a new idea. Making that ensign engineer into a universal would help everyone out.

    However, if the devs did this it would open Pandora's box. I don't think it does personally, but the developers would. This would also call into question the Defiant and Intrepid classes respectfully.

    The developers don't want to mess around with the: Galaxy, Defiant and Intrepid classes starships because these are the big three. Touching one would mean touching the other two.

    If you truly want to fix the Galaxy then you must advocate changing the Defiant and Intrepid. My vote is to make all three ships have universal ensigns.

    Why not just make them all ensign tactical, since that's exactly what everyone would use them for?
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    ghyudt wrote: »
    Why not just make them all ensign tactical, since that's exactly what everyone would use them for?

    I wouldn't want that TBH.


    In my opinion the big three should get BOFF layouts inspired by the Fleet Patrol Escort Refit:

    Defiant: Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr., Lt., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3, 3, 3 (fleet 4)

    Intrepid: Lt., Lt.Cmdr., Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3, 3 (fleet 4), 3

    Galaxy: Lt., Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3 (fleet 4), 3, 3
    "...'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 June 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    I wouldn't want that TBH.


    In my opinion the big three should get BOFF layouts inspired by the Fleet Patrol Escort Refit:

    Defiant: Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr., Lt., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3, 3, 3 (fleet 4)

    Intrepid: Lt., Lt.Cmdr., Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3, 3 (fleet 4), 3

    Galaxy: Lt., Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr., Lt.Cmdr.
    Consoles: 3 (fleet 4), 3, 3
    I'd be pissed if Cryptic changed the ships I've been flying, as I'm sure many others would as well. If ships eventually exist the way you describe them, they'll need to be completely separate ships from existing ones. Like the Patrol Escort/Patrol Escort Refit had done.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    I'd be pissed if Cryptic changed the ships I've been flying, as I'm sure many others would as well. If ships eventually exist the way you describe them, they'll need to be completely separate ships from existing ones. Like the Patrol Escort/Patrol Escort Refit had done.
    Of course, that would be a given.
    "...'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)
  • mirrorchaosmirrorchaos Member Posts: 9,844 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    still see people are requesting the galaxyfail to get some tlc? priceless!

    wasnt that already fixed and "working as intended"? :P
    T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW.
    Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    still see people are requesting the galaxyfail to get some tlc? priceless!

    wasnt that already fixed and "working as intended"? :P
    The Galaxy itself might be 'working as intended', but it's still sub-par in comparison to other ships. This thread exists for us to discuss ways for it to be competitively viable in hopes that the devs will make it happen somehow.
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    ghyudt wrote: »
    Why not just make them all ensign tactical, since that's exactly what everyone would use them for?

    as for the gal-r i would use a uni ensign for sci. actually that is how i have my dreadnought set up. no ensign tac

    but i am strange i guess. could use TSS and HE at the ensign level and that opens up some LT level sci fun
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • gpgtxgpgtx Member Posts: 1,579 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    still see people are requesting the galaxyfail to get some tlc? priceless!

    wasnt that already fixed and "working as intended"? :P

    lets be honest here the galaxy "reboot" was more of a dreadnought reboot as the gal-r got nothing.

    ok ok it got the 2 piece set bonus but really that was all for you to buy the R so you can put the 2 consoles on the dreadnought.
    victoriasig_zps23c45368.jpg
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    Why?

    Why is the Galaxy Class supposed to be just the ship that is supposed to be the tank of all tanks?
    I think a ship like the Typhoon or the Jupiter should be much more specialzied towards tanking than the Galaxy.


    As admiralq1732 said, the Galaxy Class was a multi mission ship, capable to fill a huge bandwidth of missions, including tactical missions.
    I think it's pretty one sided thinking to belive that Starfleet would send it's most complex ship into the unknown (meaning: no reinforcements) without the ability to outfight an enemy.

    .. and btw. the un-"holy" trinity of MMORPGs has tankfully been abandoned for good.

    I'm sorry, but I don't seem to remember being able to actually use a Jupiter or Typhoon class. We're talking about a playable ship here. And what's wrong with having an actual tank here? Why does a Cstore ship HAVE to be tactically powerful? We have far more of those than is necessary already. Why not have 3 ships each dedicated to a specific career? They're the only unique ones left anymore. I don't understand this need that you all seem to have to force dps play on everyone. Again, why can't we have a high level ship that DOESNT have a tactical focus. Seeing as the dreadnaught already fills a tactical role, we should just leave the galaxy alone.
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited June 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    I'd be pissed if Cryptic changed the ships I've been flying, as I'm sure many others would as well. If ships eventually exist the way you describe them, they'll need to be completely separate ships from existing ones. Like the Patrol Escort/Patrol Escort Refit had done.

    Agreed. I'd much rather see them have each ship class, not type, have a different setup and set of strengths and weaknesses. Make the venture and the galaxy two completely different ships rather than the same exact ship with a different skin. Leave the galaxy alone, and make the venture this tactical dream come true everyone seems to want.
Sign In or Register to comment.