test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Galaxy class

1454648505164

Comments

  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    with all the weapon upgrades and a bunch of other factors i cant recall clearly, tac consoles over all effect has diminished since befor DR, they arent the factor they used to be. 3 on these is no big deal.
  • caasicamcaasicam Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    with all the weapon upgrades and a bunch of other factors i cant recall clearly, tac consoles over all effect has diminished since befor DR, they arent the factor they used to be. 3 on these is no big deal.

    This, here. You'll actually see a greater increase in weapon damage from Mk XIII to Mk XIV with three tactical consoles than four. Granted, you'll have more damage with four tac consoles and MK XIV weapons than three, but it will be very slight. At most, you're just missing out on 1.9% CrtH from Spire Tac consoles.

    If y'all want a Tac-heavy Galaxy, wait for the T6 Dreadnought Cruiser to come out. It'll have four tac consoles in the Fleet version. Also, on that T6 Dread post above, the Lance is already at a 2 minute cooldown, it got reworked when all the clickies got reduced from 3 to 2 minutes.

    I do love speculation for that ship, though.
  • spockout1spockout1 Member Posts: 314 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Just the LtCdr Tac is great. I can finally use Torp Spread 3, and BFAW 2, aaannd TT.

    I think the DD+ came out with the best BOFF layout, although there will have to be some compromises for Tac abilities - or at least you know what's going in the LT Uni slot. Galaxy+ and Neg+ are copy pastes, but both pretty good. Can you imagine the Romulan player outrage if the DD+ got the same BOFF setup as the GCS and Nehg'var? They'd be starting a "What's Cryptic's Beef with the D'D?" thread.
    "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true. Except for a T5 Connie. That would be f*%#ing awesome." - Mr. Spock
  • darlexadarlexa Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    ya, if thats the only thing to complain about, thats pretty great. will need to see it in person though of course.




    and the abomination takes it's rightful place in obscurity, and there was much rejoicing. as long as that thing exists, the real galaxy will always have to be made intentionally worse.

    dunno what you have agains the gal x, its been a good solid ship ever since the overhaul. with the hanger and the saucer sep its an effective little squadron.

    you seem very intolerant of the idea of players using ships that mesh with their playing style.
  • spockout1spockout1 Member Posts: 314 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    No, I think DDIS is saying that they have seen fit in the past to essentially nerf the vanilla Galaxy as a way to keep the Gal-X a more "tac leaning" Galaxy ship. So, by default, the vanilla Galaxy has had to be less tactical - i.e. crappy at killing stuff, which makes up most of the game content.
    "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true. Except for a T5 Connie. That would be f*%#ing awesome." - Mr. Spock
  • potasssiumpotasssium Member Posts: 1,225 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I just wish the Negh'var and Galaxy weren't so similiar.

    that said I think the Galaxy fared very well, I would have perfered a Ltc Sci, and with that in mind, I think the D'D makes out the best in basic stats and Boff layout.
    Thanks for the Advanced Light Cruiser, Allied Escort Bundles, Jem-Hadar Light Battlecruiser, and Mek'leth
    New Content Wishlist
    T6 updates for the Kamarag & Vor'Cha
    Heavy Cruiser & a Movie Era Style AoY Utility Cruiser
    Dahar Master Jacket

  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Time to change that signature now :)
    I'll gladly change it when i got the ship in game and see its not a aprils fool.
    Maybe i'm a bit paranoid but Cryptic has disappointed me too often.
    shpoks wrote: »
    Hehe :) I know I'm probably in the minority here, but it's my second favourite Star Trek show after TNG. :D
    You're not the only one. :)


    Regarding the 3 tac consoles, if i had to choose between pure weapon power and versatility i'd always choose versatility.
    The Andromedas LtCmdr Engineer/Command and its uni ensign are incomparable more versatile than T5 Galaxy BOFF layout. So i can live with "only" 3 tac consoles, it surely won't steal my sleep.


    One more thing:
    The Andromeda got turnrate of 6 and a max base hull of 53,200 at level 60 plus Command – Attract Fire. (1000 Crew)
    The Negh’Tev has a turnrate of 9, has acess to DHC and a max base hull of 52,000 at level 60. (2500 crew)
    Is 1500 more hull and a medicore Cruiser Command Array power a good tradeoff for the Andromeda?


    Don't get me wrong, i'm not ranting or something like that i'm just curious.
    "...'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)
  • darlexadarlexa Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    well gentlemen is a stretch, but at least in the post STO launch years, i've sort of led the charge around here on the inconvenient truth of galaxy ownage. you think the canon has been hotly debated around here post game launch, you should have seen the galaxy vs sov threadnaughts in the prelaunch days.


    just sold off some dil for the 3 pack and had a look at the galaxy in the ship customize, just about gagged looking at that old and busted model. with these great stats, and how the X gets no tier 6 or even upgraded costume actually makes me feel sorry for the X, my most hated ship.



    i have hopes (small ones as i am being realistic) that the gal x gets some of it by the simple fact that its using the galaxy as the basis. my personal setup uses the standard galaxy engineering hull and saucer instead of the -R.

    might mean my breen t6 carrier gets used longer then i intended to. with purple swarmer's its a lot of fun. the fact that its a science bent ship with good tactical slots available leaves me miffed at the gal x, supposedly a combat oriented ship. if it wasn't for the outstanding fighters i have, it would i woud stil be running my avenger full time.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darlexa wrote: »
    dunno what you have agains the gal x, its been a good solid ship ever since the overhaul. with the hanger and the saucer sep its an effective little squadron.

    you seem very intolerant of the idea of players using ships that mesh with their playing style.

    lol :rolleyes:

    this has nothing to do with its stats, i dislike the X purely because everything added too it makes no sense when you apply any fleshed out trek tech logic to it. not to mention all that TRIBBLE they glued onto it ruins all the attractive features of the galaxy design. its also more then likely a figment of Q's imagination, not something they would actually build because again, it doesn't make any sense.

    that leaves it the starships equivalent of a riced out civic.
  • caasicamcaasicam Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    One more thing:
    The Andromeda got turnrate of 6 and a max base hull of 53,200 at level 60 plus Command – Attract Fire. (1000 Crew)
    The Negh’Tev has a turnrate of 9, has acess to DHC and a max base hull of 52,000 at level 60. (2500 crew)
    Is 1500 more hull and a medicore Cruiser Command Array power a good tradeoff for the Andromeda?


    Don't get me wrong, i'm not ranting or something like that i'm just curious.

    The math internally for the game rounds that hull rating out to about 58,666 at Fleet 10% increase, and that allows me to have around 115k hull without a fully specc'ed Command, which in turn means the ability to survive Borg Plasma Energy Balls Of Death after shields have been stripped by the Nice Shields You've Got There Borg Tachyon beams, so I'd say it's worth it. Besides, the Attrack Fire would actually synergize well with the clicky part of the console.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    I'll gladly change it when i got the ship in game and see its not a aprils fool.
    Maybe i'm a bit paranoid but Cryptic has disappointed me too often.


    You're not the only one. :)


    Regarding the 3 tac consoles, if i had to choose between pure weapon power and versatility i'd always choose versatility.
    The Andromedas LtCmdr Engineer/Command and its uni ensign are incomparable more versatile than T5 Galaxy BOFF layout. So i can live with "only" 3 tac consoles, it surely won't steal my sleep.


    One more thing:
    The Andromeda got turnrate of 6 and a max base hull of 53,200 at level 60 plus Command – Attract Fire. (1000 Crew)
    The Negh’Tev has a turnrate of 9, has acess to DHC and a max base hull of 52,000 at level 60. (2500 crew)
    Is 1500 more hull and a medicore Cruiser Command Array power a good tradeoff for the Andromeda?


    Don't get me wrong, i'm not ranting or something like that i'm just curious.

    klingons always had the luxury of trading in a ridiculously small amount of hull strength to gain DHC, turnrate and for some reason almost triple the crew numbers.



    But i guess that only means that the question "how many klingons does it take to fire a disruptor" can be answered now: a whole lot too many.

    ^^

    Anyway: Andromeda rocks, gonna be beam boating her anyway for obvious reasons so klinkers can keep their DHC and turnrate and stuff.


    In fact: its the D'dorkly Dex that got shafted by having its tac slot be hybrid with command.
    If you ask me: i'm always willing to give up engineering powers for spec powers, but tac powers? Nah.... Then again: the scimitar still hangs above this like a freaking "why aren't you buying me instead? " sign.

    hehe.
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,495 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • huntorhuntor Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Yes! Finally!! The Galaxy got what it deserved!!

    *Party amplifier*
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,448 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Hearing those guys in the main thread complain about the ship's new stats and layout not being impressive are hilarious.
    well gentlemen is a stretch, but at least in the post STO launch years, i've sort of led the charge around here on the inconvenient truth of galaxy ownage. you think the canon has been hotly debated around here post game launch, you should have seen the galaxy vs sov threadnaughts in the prelaunch days.
    It must've been magnificent.
    just sold off some dil for the 3 pack and had a look at the galaxy in the ship customize, just about gagged looking at that old and busted model. with these great stats, and how the X gets no tier 6 or even upgraded costume actually makes me feel sorry for the X, my most hated ship.
    Don't the Galaxy-X will have its day again....but to quote Gowron, "Not Today". :eek: (only emote with Gowron's eyes)
    so, with this 3pack launch a few other things are happening. namely fleet versions of these ships, and possibly others 10 console tier 6 as well? the intel ships are long past due for that.

    also the console they all get, "this console also provides a passive bonus to max sub-system power levels." so what, these ships get to have 130 max power in all subsystem all the time? that could very sell be worth a tac console even. shame these don't get like an intel hybrid, OSS3 would have been perfect on these ships.
    That would be freaking awesome.

    But no intel...the synergy would've been monstrous. And with that hull, she could survive the power drop off.
    i had a feeling thomas was behind that skin, him and the new ep i think are what made a gud galaxy possible, from what i've seen their fan cred is not in question. good god, what an improvement at every angle. especially the side profile, the neck is perfect.
    You know, I don't know if it's new tech, or just more time to devote.

    I know STO was extremely rushed since Cryptic was dumped a timeline after Perpetual farted away all the build time.

    But MOTHER OF GOD, the Redshirt April Fools. THAT'S what the game looked like at launch????? That Intrepid model is BUTT ugly. FUGLY. Bu-sai-ku!
    so, as far as i can tell from this pic, its got the 4 foot model secondary hull, 6 foot model saucer, and 4 foot model saucer rim windows lol
    Agreed, basically a Galaxy best of pack.

    It's weird though, the Andromeda got the 2360s style escape pods.
    the other 2 sep capable costumes got the big array too, its pretty hard to justify spliting it up, unless you stuck ugly, unnecessary lines all over the saucer. if you judged firepower based solely on model appearance, even in 2410 galaxy and galaxy variants would be the fleet's big guns still. the ody's arrays are only about the size of the sovereign's, its extremely poorly armed, its got the firepower of a heavy cruiser thats 1/3 it's size.

    the ody is like the galaxy class from TNG, if you took all its epic fails in battle literally and threw out all other evidence, distilled into ship form. its like, exactly the failboat a casual tng fan might think the galaxy was.

    the split up arrays on the avenger annoyed the TRIBBLE out of me, but on that ship i think the cannons are supposed to be the main guns, with beams secondary. the guardian is about as fail as the ody in regard to being under gunned.

    required reading for ship artist before any more fed cruisers get made- http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=23029901&postcount=1147

    especially after how they armed those command cruiser. good god the micro arrays on those things.
    Hey? Which has longer arrays? The Oddy or the Sovvy?
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    klingons always had the luxury of trading in a ridiculously small amount of hull strength to gain DHC, turnrate and for some reason almost triple the crew numbers.



    But i guess that only means that the question "how many klingons does it take to fire a disruptor" can be answered now: a whole lot too many.

    ^^

    Anyway: Andromeda rocks, gonna be beam boating her anyway for obvious reasons so klinkers can keep their DHC and turnrate and stuff.


    In fact: its the D'dorkly Dex that got shafted by having its tac slot be hybrid with command.
    If you ask me: i'm always willing to give up engineering powers for spec powers, but tac powers? Nah.... Then again: the scimitar still hangs above this like a freaking "why aren't you buying me instead? " sign.

    hehe.

    You know it's weird to me, Klingon ships to me would have the strongest weapons, the most redundancy, the hardest hulls, and the weakest damn shields. Romulan ships would have big experimental strong weapons, strong cloaks, powerful shields, and tissue paper hulls. And Starfleet would be the balance, with strongest shields, strong hulls, and strong weapons.
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • sonnikkusonnikku Member Posts: 77 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    I'll gladly change it when i got the ship in game and see its not a aprils fool.
    Maybe i'm a bit paranoid but Cryptic has disappointed me too often.


    You're not the only one. :)


    Regarding the 3 tac consoles, if i had to choose between pure weapon power and versatility i'd always choose versatility.
    The Andromedas LtCmdr Engineer/Command and its uni ensign are incomparable more versatile than T5 Galaxy BOFF layout. So i can live with "only" 3 tac consoles, it surely won't steal my sleep.


    One more thing:
    The Andromeda got turnrate of 6 and a max base hull of 53,200 at level 60 plus Command – Attract Fire. (1000 Crew)
    The Negh’Tev has a turnrate of 9, has acess to DHC and a max base hull of 52,000 at level 60. (2500 crew)
    Is 1500 more hull and a medicore Cruiser Command Array power a good tradeoff for the Andromeda?

    Fed Tax. I pay it gladly. KDF get nicer things in this way as a bribe (apology?) for being so neglected. Their tailor doesn't even work right.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »
    Hearing those guys in the main thread complain about the ship's new stats and layout not being impressive are hilarious.

    the L2P is strong with 90% of the player base. almost no time is spent trying to figure things out on thier own, or measure what really helps and whats inconsequential. pve requires no understanding, just time. then they go on the forum and just repeat things they don't understand that they hear the muh deeps guys say.

    captaind3 wrote: »
    But MOTHER OF GOD, the Redshirt April Fools. THAT'S what the game looked like at launch????? That Intrepid model is BUTT ugly. FUGLY. Bu-sai-ku!

    thee intrepid has been god awful until VERY recently, it got a bit better after launch, like the moving pylons got added and impule engines got put in the right place, and stopped being located in its aft torp launchers anymore lol. something that to this day that POS typhoon still has. disgraceful that thing hasn't been expunged from the game by now, the galaxy class should be in its place honestly.

    but the galaxy, the current model that needs a bag over its head that bites the dust tomorrow? thats like version 3 of the galaxy model in this game. wile redshirt is up, go have a look at the sto launch galaxy, no trek game has ever had a galaxy model that horrifyingly bad, even really old games managed to make better approximations.

    http://screenshots.stoarchive.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/screenshot_2010-06-19-01-23-45.jpg
    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2010/02/Flop-_Galaxy_Klasse_argl____2.jpg
    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/EiSkwAQ3_1E/maxresdefault.jpg

    captaind3 wrote: »
    Agreed, basically a Galaxy best of pack.

    It's weird though, the Andromeda got the 2360s style escape pods.

    those are based on windows selected. and the squares aren't necessarily older and inferior, they are probably higher capacity and the ideal shape for linking together and long duration... drifting.

    captaind3 wrote: »
    Hey? Which has longer arrays? The Oddy or the Sovvy?

    http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6801454400_49ee00e393_o.jpg

    look about the same size to me
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    you know, the odyssey looks awesome from the top.
    I guess shes a case like the galaxy: the angle of view is important.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    the X will probably have something other then command as its hybrid slot. right now command is getting the releases, so there's no tier 6 dread at the same time.

    frankly, intel makes the most sense for it. being all sneaky, cloaky, and lancy. pilot? naw.


    it is surprising they aren't taking the time to update the dread model though, wile the galaxy costume is so freshly worked on. updating it later when a tier 6 dread is released, will surly take longer to adjust if done then.

    you know, with the whole not doing it now? sorta makes me think its gonna stay a tier 5 orphan. and sorry, but not gonna shed any tiers over that.
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    amosov78 wrote: »

    It is beautifull, isn't it? :)
    It will be a pure joy to take the command of one after the patch! :)
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    the X will probably have something other then command as its hybrid slot. right now command is getting the releases, so there's no tier 6 dread at the same time.

    frankly, intel makes the most sense for it. being all sneaky, cloaky, and lancy. pilot? naw.


    it is surprising they aren't taking the time to update the dread model though, wile the galaxy costume is so freshly worked on. updating it later when a tier 6 dread is released, will surly take longer to adjust if done then.

    you know, with the whole not doing it now? sorta makes me think its gonna stay a tier 5 orphan. and sorry, but not gonna shed any tiers over that.



    Well, ever since the defensive power creep, the lance has become a trivial weapon in any case, and cryptic is unlikely to make it an inbuild weapon ala dyson guns.

    In my opinion, the whole Galaxy x ship should revolve around that one thing we saw it do. Fire a big honking super phaser. For tac cruiser duty, the assault cruiser variants, avenger, and excel always have been better.

    Really, the GX is all about the lance gun, and if the gun sucks then the ship has no meaning past being a fancy costume option.


    With the reworked boff seating it now has, the Galaxy will be my new staple.

    Will i buy a redo of the GX? only if that gimmick gun actually becomes the center point of a re-release of that ship.

    Right now, the GX has lost its luster. I used to be able to lance targets for critical death regularly.. nowadays the thing barely scratches anything.
    So yeah. Off to the far side of the bus it is.
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    the X will probably have something other then command as its hybrid slot. right now command is getting the releases, so there's no tier 6 dread at the same time.

    frankly, intel makes the most sense for it. being all sneaky, cloaky, and lancy. pilot? naw.


    it is surprising they aren't taking the time to update the dread model though, wile the galaxy costume is so freshly worked on. updating it later when a tier 6 dread is released, will surly take longer to adjust if done then.

    you know, with the whole not doing it now? sorta makes me think its gonna stay a tier 5 orphan. and sorry, but not gonna shed any tiers over that.

    I doubt about that considering that from geko own words, the gal x is the best seller ship of the game, i hardly see cryptic pass on that considering the demand
  • polaronbeam1polaronbeam1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    we should all name our tier 6 galaxys the USS polaronbeam, to honor and keep alive the memory of his general stupidity.

    Oh, grow up. What are you, twelve years old? Stop playing the "eternal victim" and take some responsibility for you own actions and the results of those actions regarding what happen in those "dearly" (and thankfully) departed "Galaxy" treads, which apparently, you're still holding a grudge about.

    Holding a grudge is one thing, but apparently, I'm still living in a few of your heads "rent free". Fortunately, the reverse is NOT true.
  • polaronbeam1polaronbeam1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    This, SO MUCH THIS.

    I'm so excited. A few years of fighting and we've finally got what we've been campaigning for LTC tac, Ens Uni, and even the LTC Command/Eng. This is awesome. AND the costume too.

    I'd like to thank everyone who volunteered to change their signature, for helping make this a reality. (You can take them down now ;) )

    Lol! And yet, I'll guarantee that when the "Tier 6 Iconic SOVEREIGN Class" ship is released with 5 Tac consoles AND commander/Lt Comm Tac station, the wailing from you guys will commence in full force yet again. As a matter of fact, It's ALREADY beginning in the General Discussion section of the forum. So yet ANOTHER useless round of "phaser array lengths", "it's the writers' fault", "technical manuals", blah blah blah, ad nauseum will sure to be commencing shortly.


    Captain Geko CLEARLY said that due to the "free to play" nature, that items like ships
    are going to be the thing that drives profits, which make TOTAL sense. They have bills to pay just like every one else. As such, ships stats are ALWAYS going to change. Even though I stand by my belief that the GCS was an inconsistent, average to crappy ship as portrayed in TNG, I also said that it would or could probably receive a third tac console. However, in NO circumstance will it EVER "outgun" certain "on screen" ships such as Sovereign class ship, because in NO Star Trek video game, has it EVER outgunned a Sovereign Class ship. Whine about "phaser lengths" all you want to, but Star Trek gaming history is NOT on your side.

    Some of you guys, (not all) have said some of the most bizarre, immature things about the devs and those who disagree with you that, if were said to YOU or your loved ones (if you have any), you would totally freak out. But yet, many of you (you know who you are), NEVER take ANY responsibility for your OWN actions, and are rather content with playing the "eternal victim", while "dishing out" what you CLEARLY cannot take.

    Even though I have left you guys alone, you CLEARLY are unable to get ME out of your thoughts. Sad, but interesting.
  • polaronbeam1polaronbeam1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Originally Posted by dontdrunkimshoot

    "we should all name our tier 6 galaxys the USS polaronbeam, to honor and keep alive the memory of his general stupidity."

    Hahahahahaha gotta love this guy,best post ever!!!

    And yet, I want to see how much laughing is done when the OTHER "iconic" ships are released that have stat that you you Galaxy people don't agree with.

    It appears that you guys are itching to get another "Galaxy" thread closed with these cyber bullying comments about me that you are making. I can accommodate this, but it's sad that you guys have not learned your lessons engaging in the same behaviors over and over again. Will you EVER learn?
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Lol! And yet, I'll guarantee that when the "Tier 6 Iconic SOVEREIGN Class" ship is released with 5 Tac consoles AND commander/Lt Comm Tac station, the wailing from you guys will commence in full force yet again. As a matter of fact, It's ALREADY beginning in the General Discussion section of the forum. So yet ANOTHER useless round of "phaser array lengths", "it's the writers' fault", "technical manuals", blah blah blah, ad nauseum will sure to be commencing shortly.

    While your general lack of knowledge on the game mechanics of STO is very amusing, I'm feeling very very happy these days so I'll help you out - the Sovereign Class is a cruiser. Therefore the Sovereign Class, just as any other cruiser in STO will never get a 5-th tactical console and a Cmdr. tactical Boff slot. At least not at T6, I can't predict the future of ship tiers.

    And we also never wanted the ship in STO to be better than the Sovereign. We just wanted it usefull, which is what we got now and as you can see, we're pretty damn happy about it! :)

    But please don't let that or the fact that you were wrong stop you, by all means, let your hair go and rage on dude! :D
    Captain Geko CLEARLY said that due to the "free to play" nature, that items like ships
    are going to be the thing that drives profits, which make TOTAL sense. They have bills to pay just like every one else. As such, ships stats are ALWAYS going to change. Even though I stand by my belief that the GCS was an inconsistent, average to crappy ship as portrayed in TNG, I also said that it would or could probably receive a third tac console. However, in NO circumstance will it EVER "outgun" certain "on screen" ships such as Sovereign class ship, because in NO Star Trek video game, has it EVER outgunned a Sovereign Class ship. Whine about "phaser lengths" all you want to, but Star Trek gaming history is NOT on your side.

    Some of you guys, (not all) have said some of the most bizarre, immature things about the devs and those who disagree with you that, if were said to YOU or your loved ones (if you have any), you would totally freak out. But yet, many of you (you know who you are), NEVER take ANY responsibility for your OWN actions, and are rather content with playing the "eternal victim", while "dishing out" what you CLEARLY cannot take.

    Even though I have left you guys alone, you CLEARLY are unable to get ME out of your thoughts. Sad, but interesting.

    Or you could have been gratious about it and just admited that you were wrong in your claims that the devs. will never touch and improve the Galaxy Class. Which ironically happened 2 times already after that statement you made alone. We'd have parted on friendly basis in this already expired thread and call it a day.

    But whatever anyways, the T6 Galaxy and her fleet counterpart are due in just a couple of hours. It's an amazing ship that will be usefull and fun to fly.
    All your claims and points about the "space hotel" that you liked insulting so much are now moot, so I'll just leave you with this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5QGkOGZubQ
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,448 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    the L2P is strong with 90% of the player base. almost no time is spent trying to figure things out on thier own, or measure what really helps and whats inconsequential. pve requires no understanding, just time. then they go on the forum and just repeat things they don't understand that they hear the muh deeps guys say.
    I think it's rather nuts that they're complaining that it ONLY has three tac consoles.

    I guess it's also a matter of who you listen to. Listening to guys like you and virusdancer and tons of others across these boards, you learn about diminishing returns. Not to mention the rather plain to see pattern of how ships receive console layouts and boffs. Which is why I said they came to play, because that LtCdr Tac slot and a LtCdr Hybrid Command was WAAAAY better than expected.

    I still haven't found anyone who can explain to me, proper firing sequences and timing though.

    thee intrepid has been god awful until VERY recently, it got a bit better after launch, like the moving pylons got added and impule engines got put in the right place, and stopped being located in its aft torp launchers anymore lol. something that to this day that POS typhoon still has. disgraceful that thing hasn't been expunged from the game by now, the galaxy class should be in its place honestly.
    I think at this point it's kind of clear they're not going to release a Typhoon. I'd prefer one of those Kitbashed monster Sovereigns myself.

    I have a dream for a Probert original Galaxy battleship, with the bridge module buried deep in the core of the saucer, covered in heavy ablative armor, and with a real grumpy attitude.
    but the galaxy, the current model that needs a bag over its head that bites the dust tomorrow? thats like version 3 of the galaxy model in this game. wile redshirt is up, go have a look at the sto launch galaxy, no trek game has ever had a galaxy model that horrifyingly bad, even really old games managed to make better approximations.

    http://screenshots.stoarchive.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/screenshot_2010-06-19-01-23-45.jpg
    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2010/02/Flop-_Galaxy_Klasse_argl____2.jpg
    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/EiSkwAQ3_1E/maxresdefault.jpg

    Come on now :D yesterday's Enterprise wasn't as ugly AS THOSE anymore.

    But WTF are those saucer impulse engines? What is up with the back of that Saucer Section?

    I wouldn't have released that as a matter of pride.
    those are based on windows selected. and the squares aren't necessarily older and inferior, they are probably higher capacity and the ideal shape for linking together and long duration... drifting.


    So by mass of the ship, with the same power plant the Sovereign should have more surplus power for weapons right?
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    you know, the odyssey looks awesome from the top.
    I guess shes a case like the galaxy: the angle of view is important.
    The Galaxy looks good from just about every angle. I think there's one angle where I don't like her, but only one. I think the Oddy only looks good from above, and the classic below three quarter aft view (the warp out angle). Ironically that's the angle I think the Sovereign looks the worst from.
    the X will probably have something other then command as its hybrid slot. right now command is getting the releases, so there's no tier 6 dread at the same time.

    frankly, intel makes the most sense for it. being all sneaky, cloaky, and lancy. pilot? naw.

    That depends. Intel for a Gal-X intended for the sniper style of play, Pilot if the style is to swing it around and knock everything down.
    it is surprising they aren't taking the time to update the dread model though, wile the galaxy costume is so freshly worked on. updating it later when a tier 6 dread is released, will surly take longer to adjust if done then.

    you know, with the whole not doing it now? sorta makes me think its gonna stay a tier 5 orphan. and sorry, but not gonna shed any tiers over that.

    It does defy logic not updating the model to the new standard it just seems like it would be less work.

    And oh be quiet you.
    reynoldsxd wrote: »
    Well, ever since the defensive power creep, the lance has become a trivial weapon in any case, and cryptic is unlikely to make it an inbuild weapon ala dyson guns.

    In my opinion, the whole Galaxy x ship should revolve around that one thing we saw it do. Fire a big honking super phaser. For tac cruiser duty, the assault cruiser variants, avenger, and excel always have been better.

    Really, the GX is all about the lance gun, and if the gun sucks then the ship has no meaning past being a fancy costume option.


    With the reworked boff seating it now has, the Galaxy will be my new staple.

    Will i buy a redo of the GX? only if that gimmick gun actually becomes the center point of a re-release of that ship.

    Right now, the GX has lost its luster. I used to be able to lance targets for critical death regularly.. nowadays the thing barely scratches anything.
    So yeah. Off to the far side of the bus it is.
    I agree 100%

    The Galaxy-X is the A-10 Thunderbolt II of Starfleet Vessels. A ship built around a gun. That should be the primary focus of her actions. It should be hard to hit with, but when it hits, it should matter...and make things cease to be matter. Even if the play mechanic means you have to divert all power to the lance, that's fine as long as it actually functions properly.


    Lol! And yet, I'll guarantee that when the "Tier 6 Iconic SOVEREIGN Class" ship is released with 5 Tac consoles AND commander/Lt Comm Tac station, the wailing from you guys will commence in full force yet again. As a matter of fact, It's ALREADY beginning in the General Discussion section of the forum. So yet ANOTHER useless round of "phaser array lengths", "it's the writers' fault", "technical manuals", blah blah blah, ad nauseum will sure to be commencing shortly.

    No one here is arguing that the Sovereign is the tactically focused cruiser, just that the galaxy should be able to be when the situation calls for it.
    Captain Geko CLEARLY said that due to the "free to play" nature, that items like ships
    are going to be the thing that drives profits, which make TOTAL sense. They have bills to pay just like every one else. As such, ships stats are ALWAYS going to change. Even though I stand by my belief that the GCS was an inconsistent, average to crappy ship as portrayed in TNG, I also said that it would or could probably receive a third tac console. However, in NO circumstance will it EVER "outgun" certain "on screen" ships such as Sovereign class ship, because in NO Star Trek video game, has it EVER outgunned a Sovereign Class ship. Whine about "phaser lengths" all you want to, but Star Trek gaming history is NOT on your side.
    I have no problem with the ship sales model. I don't have the cash to participate in it, but I understand it.

    As for your view of the Galaxy as a crappy combat ship, you clearly skipped the Dominion war so I can't help you.
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • thunderhawk101thunderhawk101 Member Posts: 227 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I have to admit... I never saw it being implemented... not really. OR if it did, it would be in such a way that would still be rather hamstrung. About the only thing which makes this a little melancholic is that the Andromeda Class will likely forever get me out of my Odyssey now... And while the Ody is no Galaxy Class. She's still a hell of a ship. Either way, here's to the new T-6 Exploration Cruiser. May she ply the lanes long and fly well. :)
    erei1 wrote: »
    I enjoy this kind of thread. It's like farting in the air to fight the wind. It's poetic, childish and completely useless.
Sign In or Register to comment.