The real problem is that every ship in the game that's t5-u is suppose to be able to do end game content and be balanced against every other ship.
Cryptic should of offered all the ship types as in lay out and stats they have for each class and then allowed people to pick a skin for it. So if you wanted to play with the stats of a Excel with the Galaxy skin you could or play with the Excel skin with the stats of a Galaxy you could.
So you go to the shipyard, select the type of ship you want. Escort, Sci or Cruiser. Look over the layout and stats, pick one then the skin.
Cryptic if you want to make some money and maybe some happy players, you should offer something like those Galor halos for a Galaxy.
Sovereign classification : explorer is accepted as a battleship,
Galaxy classification : explorer is not accepted as a battleship when we provide numerous examples through t.v episodes where its quite evident that the ship performs this role. Especially in battle groups where it is the command ship.
Because it's called an "exploration cruiser" and it's design is elegant and curvy.
For a lot of the people of STO and this forum, if a ship doesn't have warbattledread'o'doom before it's name, black hull, pointless spikes sticking around from everywhere or a bat'leth sticking from the saucer - it means the ship sucks.
Yes, this is the average level of comprehenssion most of the population around here has, unfortunately.
Then how about duplicating the T5U D'Deridex layout ?
Same era , generally same supposed abilities (except the D'D is a bit slower at warp) .
The D'D is an awesome beam boat , but by far not the best , not next to the best of T5U nor next to the T6 .
I don't know how many times I have repeated this idea myself in both the old and the new Galaxy threads in Federation Shipyards. It's even emphasized by the fact that Cryptic had the exact same Boff layout for the D'Deridex when it appeared on Tribble, but after people complaining that it'll suck just like the Galaxy Class - they switched it to what the D'D currently has.
Frankly, I'm alomst 100% convinced that the reason they insist on the Galaxy sucking so bad is because certain devs have some weird grudge with it or TNG. There are just less and less other logical explanations for what's going on on with this issue.
... I just love all the crybabies who don't want to fly a Galaxy , but they don't want it to have a better layout either . How ****ed up can you get ...
Yep, pretty messed up......a perfect example of selfishness and arrogance for no reason other than being selfish and arrogant.
It's time for people to stop arguing whether the Galaxy class was an effective warship or explorer or whatever within Trek canon. Trek canon is irrelevant. Older crappier ships from the 22nd and 23rd century in Trek canon are better endgame ships than the Galaxy is now.
Shut up about the Galaxy being too old or crappy based on what you saw on TV. It's irrelevant to how Cryptic sets ship capabilities within the game. If you want the Galaxy to suck in game, your real reason is because you dislike the ship and think it's ugly. If you want the Galaxy to rock in game, your real reason is because you like the ship and think it's beautiful. This is the truth behind your pointless canon arguments.
I'm quoting this for the truth it represents.
While I myself can get entangled in these arguments cause I'm a fan and sometimes find them interesting, this right here is the essence of things. It's a GAME. A game that allows some pretty messed up stuff and doesn't really follow much rules and logic when it comes to preformance, age and positioning of the ship classes.
So taking this into consideration, I just feel it's embarassing that one of the handfull of hero ships from Star Trek, one that left a mark on the franchise is represented in such a sorry state in the official Star Trek MMO. If it was any random canon or non-canon ship, it probably wouldn't have created such a fuss around it, but when the game allows ships older than 200 years to be top of the line - it's just an epic fail for one of the 5 "hero" ships to be the suckiest ship in the lineup. That's the reason why I'm fighting this fight, I'm a KDF main FFS.
What variant is that in your sig picture? Even from a Galaxy hater that's not at all a bad looking ship and really improves on many of what I consider the aesthetic design flaws. Can we get a similar skin for the Guardian, please? Then we all might be happy.
Venture Nacelles, and neck with a Gal;axy saucer and hull by the looks of things
In my opinion the Venture Neck fixes almost all the issue i had with the Cobra head the galaxy is. I'd fly one iof it weren't for the ship not suiting my play style
These are the Voyages on the STO forum, the final frontier. Our continuing mission: to explore Pretentious Posts, to seek out new Overreactions and Misinformation , to boldly experience Cynicism like no man has before.......
It's time for people to stop arguing whether the Galaxy class was an effective warship or explorer or whatever within Trek canon. Trek canon is irrelevant. Older crappier ships from the 22nd and 23rd century in Trek canon are better endgame ships than the Galaxy is now.
Shut up about the Galaxy being too old or crappy based on what you saw on TV. It's irrelevant to how Cryptic sets ship capabilities within the game. If you want the Galaxy to suck in game, your real reason is because you dislike the ship and think it's ugly. If you want the Galaxy to rock in game, your real reason is because you like the ship and think it's beautiful. This is the truth behind your pointless canon arguments.
I only agree that Trek canon has no meaning within STO. The other side is Star Trek, not STO. And if people try to argue canon that the flagship of the UFP was in any way shape or form underperforming they argue very selective and ignore most of what has been stated on-screen and in the TMs.
Fact is that the Galaxy Class is a potentially very powerful ship with a huge arsenal at it's disposal, canonically because a "Explorer" was meant to face the unknown dangers of space alone, lightyears away from support. It's funny that people like to argue either that it's "bad" because it didn't shot everything out of the sky or argue that Jean-Luc Picard was a "bad" captain for rather taking hits and than landing any. It was the freaking point of the show. Being powerful but not using that power to win arguments by force was the true strength that was shown on-screen. I find it kind of sad that today, 25 years later, the younger generation of people once again only recognizes martial strength and warmongering as viable strategies, but I'm drifting away from the topic now .
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I only agree that Trek canon has no meaning within STO. The other side is Star Trek, not STO. And if people try to argue canon that the flagship of the UFP was in any way shape or form underperforming they argue very selective and ignore most of what has been stated on-screen and in the TMs.
Fact is that the Galaxy Class is a potentially very powerful ship with a huge arsenal at it's disposal, canonically because a "Explorer" was meant to face the unknown dangers of space alone, lightyears away from support. It's funny that people like to argue either that it's "bad" because it didn't shot everything out of the sky or argue that Jean-Luc Picard was a "bad" captain for rather taking hits and than landing any. It was the freaking point of the show. Being powerful but not using that power to win arguments by force was the true strength that was shown on-screen. I find it kind of sad that today, 25 years later, the younger generation of people once again only recognizes martial strength and warmongering as viable strategies, but I'm drifting away from the topic now .
How very right you are. The whole point of TNG was to try and avoid use of force, except as a last resort. Kids today think that blowing up anything that moves is so awesome. I don't think they really understand the ramifications of such a mindset.
The thing is - almost no one is asking for the Galaxy to be a 'god ship'. The average thing players want is the ens eng to be made a universal. That way people who like it the way it is now - don't have to change anything. It gives science lovers an extra low rank sci power. It gives tac lovers a tac team. For a T6 Galaxy, we want it just like the Pathfinder. lt tac, lt uni, comm eng, ltcom eng/comm, lt sci.
Most of us just want a build we can be flexible with that isn't absolutely worthless without four recluses and their mesh weavers ultraspamming pattern beta 3 on a target. And - yes- without multiple ally ships dumping attack patterns the Galaxy is useless. She can't deal enough damage to be a viable tank - a tank has to deal enough damage to build and keep threat. She's substandard in everything she is and does in game. You say the Galaxy isn't bad, but when every single other ship in the game has a better build - it still makes it the worst ship in the game.
3 Ensign eng stations on one ship is useless in it's overkill.
Although martial artists train in order to defend themselves - and do not seek to be overtly aggressive (not the good guys anyway) - it does not mean they are any less deadly or any less able to defend themselves than a 'cocky' aggressive person who seeks out confrontation (indeed, they are probably better at fighting than such people).
To stretch the analogy a bit, I see the Federation and thier ships as 'martial artists', they do not seek out confrontation, but they are highly skilled, powerfull and very able to defend themselves.
The Klingons learnt this, who at first saw the Federation as 'weak' because they did not seek to expand teritory via conflict. They eventually came to see that the Federation was very powerfull indeed, and could have destroyed the Klingon Empire if it had wished to do so.
That is why the Klingons became allies - they knew the federation was passive, but had very sharp teeth if pushed.
True, but it was repeated a few times in TNG and DS9 - Matok and other high members of the empire repeatedly told the likes of Gowron that they could not afford to goto war with the Federation, and it was foolish to see them as 'weak'.
And - yes- without multiple ally ships dumping attack patterns the Galaxy is useless. She can't deal enough damage to be a viable tank - a tank has to deal enough damage to build and keep threat. She's substandard in everything she is and does in game. You say the Galaxy isn't bad, but when every single other ship in the game has a better build - it still makes it the worst ship in the game.
Stop right there before you give too much misinformation and lies about Galaxy R. You dont need 4 debuffers to have Galaxy R deal DPS.
Most of the DPS comes from Piloting Skill. If you are not dealing 50k DPS with a Galaxy R without debuffers, the first problem is the pilot. The second problem would be the build.
The debuffers only help once you have piloting skill polished and build optimized. thats why you see DPS prime players still do 100k DPS without recluses. But can push them to 180k DPS with recluses. However, without piloting skill polished even with build optimized and with 4 recluses the DPS of scimitar can drop to 10-15k DPS. The same thing can be said of the Galaxy R.
Galaxy R only becomes a bad ship if you have a bad pilot piloting it.
Stop right there before you give too much misinformation and lies about Galaxy R. You dont need 4 debuffers to have Galaxy R deal DPS.
Most of the DPS comes from Piloting Skill. If you are not dealing 50k DPS with a Galaxy R without debuffers, the first problem is the pilot. The second problem would be the build.
The debuffers only help once you have piloting skill polished and build optimized. thats why you see DPS prime players still do 100k DPS without recluses. But can push them to 180k DPS with recluses. However, without piloting skill polished even with build optimized and with 4 recluses the DPS of scimitar can drop to 10-15k DPS. The same thing can be said of the Galaxy R.
Galaxy R only becomes a bad ship if you have a bad pilot piloting it.
Using a very dedicated very inflexible build centered around a2b, embassy plasma consoles, and no fun. And even in this very inflexible build - which really DOES rely on other players debuffing - any other cruiser in the game can do it better. This also doesn't fix the fact that the third universal ensign station is absolutely useless - it's always on cooldown without a wide enough power variety.
I'm not saying the Galaxy can't be shoehorned into a dps role. But everything else does it better. Can I get 50k from a Galaxy? Yes. Can any other ship with the same gear break that number stupidly easily? Yup. In the case of the Regent and Avenger, by half. In the case of the Eclipse and Scimitar, doubled.
Right now the Galaxy is 'lame cheese build or fly something else'. For min-maxers, the 'highest base dps build' is great. For the players who play this game and want the Galaxy because they love it and just want to have fun - the Galaxy isn't suitable at all.
They didn't want to go to war with the Federation because they realized they're better off as allies than enemies.
Explain the Romulans and the Cardassians. See, the thing is, all three of the Federation's major opponents have one thing in common: they're violent, imperialist, racial supremacists who respect one thing, military force, above all else. And Starfleet had proven repeatedly it could beat them if they tried invading.
And with the Klingons in particular it was deliberately meant to mirror the thaw in US-Soviet relations that happened at roughly the same time: the Klingons tried to keep up with the Federation's industrial capacity and accidentally ****ed themselves up. Basically the Federation was able to out-spend the Klingons to the point where even if the Klingons did go ahead and go to full-scale war, they'd either lose or win such a Pyrrhic victory that they wouldn't be able to keep the Romulans from taking advantage and steamrolling them in short order.
There's this old Klingon saying, "Only a fool fights in a burning house." The status quo was unsustainable, so the Klingons made a pragmatic choice to change the situation so it was more favorable to them.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Stop right there before you give too much misinformation and lies about Galaxy R. You dont need 4 debuffers to have Galaxy R deal DPS.
Most of the DPS comes from Piloting Skill. If you are not dealing 50k DPS with a Galaxy R without debuffers, the first problem is the pilot. The second problem would be the build.
The debuffers only help once you have piloting skill polished and build optimized. thats why you see DPS prime players still do 100k DPS without recluses. But can push them to 180k DPS with recluses. However, without piloting skill polished even with build optimized and with 4 recluses the DPS of scimitar can drop to 10-15k DPS. The same thing can be said of the Galaxy R.
Galaxy R only becomes a bad ship if you have a bad pilot piloting it.
name 1 tier5U fed crusier, other then the star crusier, with LESS DPS potential then the galaxy
So since the T-6 Intel Guardian is a ship that actually exists in game and is purchasable right now, I have to assume this wishing for the Ye Olde Galaxy to be buffed is just wishful thinking from people too cheap to actually buy the T6 "Galaxy-Like" ship?
Comments
Cryptic should of offered all the ship types as in lay out and stats they have for each class and then allowed people to pick a skin for it. So if you wanted to play with the stats of a Excel with the Galaxy skin you could or play with the Excel skin with the stats of a Galaxy you could.
So you go to the shipyard, select the type of ship you want. Escort, Sci or Cruiser. Look over the layout and stats, pick one then the skin.
Cryptic if you want to make some money and maybe some happy players, you should offer something like those Galor halos for a Galaxy.
Because it's called an "exploration cruiser" and it's design is elegant and curvy.
For a lot of the people of STO and this forum, if a ship doesn't have warbattledread'o'doom before it's name, black hull, pointless spikes sticking around from everywhere or a bat'leth sticking from the saucer - it means the ship sucks.
Yes, this is the average level of comprehenssion most of the population around here has, unfortunately.
I don't know how many times I have repeated this idea myself in both the old and the new Galaxy threads in Federation Shipyards. It's even emphasized by the fact that Cryptic had the exact same Boff layout for the D'Deridex when it appeared on Tribble, but after people complaining that it'll suck just like the Galaxy Class - they switched it to what the D'D currently has.
Frankly, I'm alomst 100% convinced that the reason they insist on the Galaxy sucking so bad is because certain devs have some weird grudge with it or TNG. There are just less and less other logical explanations for what's going on on with this issue.
Yep, pretty messed up......a perfect example of selfishness and arrogance for no reason other than being selfish and arrogant.
I'm quoting this for the truth it represents.
While I myself can get entangled in these arguments cause I'm a fan and sometimes find them interesting, this right here is the essence of things. It's a GAME. A game that allows some pretty messed up stuff and doesn't really follow much rules and logic when it comes to preformance, age and positioning of the ship classes.
So taking this into consideration, I just feel it's embarassing that one of the handfull of hero ships from Star Trek, one that left a mark on the franchise is represented in such a sorry state in the official Star Trek MMO. If it was any random canon or non-canon ship, it probably wouldn't have created such a fuss around it, but when the game allows ships older than 200 years to be top of the line - it's just an epic fail for one of the 5 "hero" ships to be the suckiest ship in the lineup. That's the reason why I'm fighting this fight, I'm a KDF main FFS.
Venture Nacelles, and neck with a Gal;axy saucer and hull by the looks of things
In my opinion the Venture Neck fixes almost all the issue i had with the Cobra head the galaxy is. I'd fly one iof it weren't for the ship not suiting my play style
I only agree that Trek canon has no meaning within STO. The other side is Star Trek, not STO. And if people try to argue canon that the flagship of the UFP was in any way shape or form underperforming they argue very selective and ignore most of what has been stated on-screen and in the TMs.
Fact is that the Galaxy Class is a potentially very powerful ship with a huge arsenal at it's disposal, canonically because a "Explorer" was meant to face the unknown dangers of space alone, lightyears away from support. It's funny that people like to argue either that it's "bad" because it didn't shot everything out of the sky or argue that Jean-Luc Picard was a "bad" captain for rather taking hits and than landing any. It was the freaking point of the show. Being powerful but not using that power to win arguments by force was the true strength that was shown on-screen. I find it kind of sad that today, 25 years later, the younger generation of people once again only recognizes martial strength and warmongering as viable strategies, but I'm drifting away from the topic now
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
^^^YES! I totally agree with this! Lets do this!
[/SIGPIC]
How very right you are. The whole point of TNG was to try and avoid use of force, except as a last resort. Kids today think that blowing up anything that moves is so awesome. I don't think they really understand the ramifications of such a mindset.
[/SIGPIC]
Most of us just want a build we can be flexible with that isn't absolutely worthless without four recluses and their mesh weavers ultraspamming pattern beta 3 on a target. And - yes- without multiple ally ships dumping attack patterns the Galaxy is useless. She can't deal enough damage to be a viable tank - a tank has to deal enough damage to build and keep threat. She's substandard in everything she is and does in game. You say the Galaxy isn't bad, but when every single other ship in the game has a better build - it still makes it the worst ship in the game.
3 Ensign eng stations on one ship is useless in it's overkill.
To stretch the analogy a bit, I see the Federation and thier ships as 'martial artists', they do not seek out confrontation, but they are highly skilled, powerfull and very able to defend themselves.
The Klingons learnt this, who at first saw the Federation as 'weak' because they did not seek to expand teritory via conflict. They eventually came to see that the Federation was very powerfull indeed, and could have destroyed the Klingon Empire if it had wished to do so.
That is why the Klingons became allies - they knew the federation was passive, but had very sharp teeth if pushed.
True, but it was repeated a few times in TNG and DS9 - Matok and other high members of the empire repeatedly told the likes of Gowron that they could not afford to goto war with the Federation, and it was foolish to see them as 'weak'.
Not heard of this, will have to look into it
Yeah that looks sweet. Decent Trek on film again.
Wow just watched the first 5 minutes of the teaser and its pretty bloody good! even got actors from Star trek in it!
Brilliant idea to do it documentary style! - Thanks for mentioning this
Stop right there before you give too much misinformation and lies about Galaxy R. You dont need 4 debuffers to have Galaxy R deal DPS.
Most of the DPS comes from Piloting Skill. If you are not dealing 50k DPS with a Galaxy R without debuffers, the first problem is the pilot. The second problem would be the build.
The debuffers only help once you have piloting skill polished and build optimized. thats why you see DPS prime players still do 100k DPS without recluses. But can push them to 180k DPS with recluses. However, without piloting skill polished even with build optimized and with 4 recluses the DPS of scimitar can drop to 10-15k DPS. The same thing can be said of the Galaxy R.
Galaxy R only becomes a bad ship if you have a bad pilot piloting it.
Using a very dedicated very inflexible build centered around a2b, embassy plasma consoles, and no fun. And even in this very inflexible build - which really DOES rely on other players debuffing - any other cruiser in the game can do it better. This also doesn't fix the fact that the third universal ensign station is absolutely useless - it's always on cooldown without a wide enough power variety.
I'm not saying the Galaxy can't be shoehorned into a dps role. But everything else does it better. Can I get 50k from a Galaxy? Yes. Can any other ship with the same gear break that number stupidly easily? Yup. In the case of the Regent and Avenger, by half. In the case of the Eclipse and Scimitar, doubled.
Right now the Galaxy is 'lame cheese build or fly something else'. For min-maxers, the 'highest base dps build' is great. For the players who play this game and want the Galaxy because they love it and just want to have fun - the Galaxy isn't suitable at all.
Ah, thank you
Explain the Romulans and the Cardassians. See, the thing is, all three of the Federation's major opponents have one thing in common: they're violent, imperialist, racial supremacists who respect one thing, military force, above all else. And Starfleet had proven repeatedly it could beat them if they tried invading.
And with the Klingons in particular it was deliberately meant to mirror the thaw in US-Soviet relations that happened at roughly the same time: the Klingons tried to keep up with the Federation's industrial capacity and accidentally ****ed themselves up. Basically the Federation was able to out-spend the Klingons to the point where even if the Klingons did go ahead and go to full-scale war, they'd either lose or win such a Pyrrhic victory that they wouldn't be able to keep the Romulans from taking advantage and steamrolling them in short order.
There's this old Klingon saying, "Only a fool fights in a burning house." The status quo was unsustainable, so the Klingons made a pragmatic choice to change the situation so it was more favorable to them.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
name 1 tier5U fed crusier, other then the star crusier, with LESS DPS potential then the galaxy