My main thing is turn rate, it's just to slow fix the galaxy's turn rate and what earlier people had sugggested either buff up the Gal R or take down her CP price
Again, while the Galaxy's base turning rate is low, skilled pilots can still coax more than enough maneuverability out of them to get the job done through clever use of throttle, items, equipment, and powers.
The major area the Galaxy-R suffers from is DPS, which is the purpose of this topic, to petition to move the fifth eng console slot to be a third tactical console slot.
As a veteran Galaxy player: A THOUSAND TIMES NO. Either move the extra engineering console slot to tactical or leave the console layout as is. As for the BOFF layout, the only real change that would be quite useful would be the ability to have that ensign station become a universal, otherwise it's all good.
As I said, however. I'm still comfortable with it having a fifth engineering slot. A third tactical console would be nice, but I'll still be getting the FG-R either way.
Hm. Struggling to get past the shields on BoPs, getting toyed with by Jem'Hadar Attack Ships... Getting slapped around by both. Truth be told very little of the footage in that video is what I would call flattering to the hull, really. Except for, maybe, the 'bodily using its hull to shield other parts of the fleet' scene from DS9, which actually is a good example of what they seem to intend it to be doing in STO.
So I take it you missed the vapourising multiple small ships with a single salvo, the destruction of a BoP with a handful of phaser shots, the massive barrages of torpedos, putting a ship-sized hole through a Borg cube, and that while "bodily using its hull to shield other parts of the fleet" the Magellan and the Venture took apart a Galor class warship in a few shots?
A tank that's rubbish at aggro generation is a bad tank, in STO a hull tank is a bad tank, so unless what they seem to intend to be doing in STO is being a bad tank, it needs looking at.
We are PWE. Your forums and game accounts will be added to our own. Your community will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
It really doesn't matter what the Users think of the ship stats, whats important is what Cryptic thinks of the Ship stats...
NONE of the ships that currently exist in the game could be considered to be PERFECT SHIPS.... Though in reality, part of the challenge of the game is to learn to exist within the limitation of the ships provided...
(As an example, I'm still debating what is the better Engineer ship, my tricked out D'Kora, or my Science Odyssey beam boat. The Science Odyssey has better DPS and is better for tanking, but the D'Kora is so useful for general play...)
be too powerful, considering the maneuverability of the Galaxy? I mean, considering that starfleet seems to have thrown allot of resources in the basic Galaxy Spaceframe, as I think there are more galaxy variants/sub-variants then any other ship, a decent upgrade might be in order.
"..and like children playing after sunset, we were surrounded by darkness." -Ruri Hoshino
I use mine for tanking, so to be honest, I'm fine with 5 engineering consoles.
The 4-3-3 loadout would make me equally as happy-in-pants.
A 5-2-3, maybe even happier, heh (but kind of goes against the "exploration" and science nature of the ship... however, the Boff layout did that already)
However, the Ensign Engineering station should have been universal from the start.
I saw this fleet system as a perfect way for the devs to rectify that.
And they did not.
I am simply amazed that they failed to implement a change that everyone agreed with, despite many arguments on the other proposed changes to the Galaxy-R.
Except perhaps Sollvax, but even then, only changing the uni ens station would still have allowed him to keep his loadout as-is.
The Negh'Var had the same boff loadout, and HAS been changed to a uni ensign.
Why would they not do the same for the Galaxy???
I don't think it would be too powerful, no.
But I, personally, would not want to lose the Cmdr and LtCmdr Eng stations.
Dropping the Ens eng for a LtCmdr Sci would be perfectly acceptable though.
Or a LtCmdr Tac, but that may step on the toes of the Excelsior Retro a bit.
It's me, Chrome. [Join Date: May 2009]
"Oh, I may be captain by rank... but I never wanted to be anything else but an engineer." ~Montgomery Scott~
If anything, the Star Cruiser or the Oddy should be the engineering weighted ships.
The Galaxy Class was an explorer. It was sent out to seek out new life and new civilizations. It was a reaction to a time of relative peace - no Borg or Dominion threat looming on the horizon when it was designed. Engineerng and Science should be its strength. It's tactical abilities are a result of the superior Federation technology, not because it was build for war.
The ship is called exploration cruiser. I think it needs more exploration.
So this is my idea:
That's pretty much what I said :P
Throw in the Sensor Analysis from scienceships and we're on the same page.
Since the Fleet Galaxy Class Retrofit is a fleet exploration cruiser I wondering if they could either switch that ensign engineer to either a science ensign or a tactical ensign.
The ideal case would be to make it universal; however to reflect Starfleet's exploration ideals a science ensign would fit more with the theme.
The star cruiser and sciency Oddy are better tanking monsters than the Ops Oddy by far. The extra engineering console with armor that barely provides a resist bonus due to stacking penalties, doesn't do enough to help over an extra sci console that can take a field generator. And there's no special reason why a ship has to be in line with another. The fleet Sovereign is certainly not in line with the tactical Odyssey. It has four tactical consoles, a Lt. Cmdr tac boff, a Lt. tac boff and a Lt. universal boff. It's meant to be a dps monster, far more than the tac Oddy.
I want a ship that's a hybrid between the old assault cruiser and star cruiser. I think the Galaxy class is the perfect choice for a versatile hybrid ship, because it's an exploration cruiser, meant to be relatively capable at everything, not specialised in tactical or science or engineering. Right now, it's barely more than a warp capable brick and the fleet version will be even moreso if Cryptic doesn't answer my plea.
And while I understand your opinion, it's kind of obvious that this is about want, not need. I don't need to play this game, but I want to. I also want a change to a fleet ship because I think it would be a change for the better. I want to see how many people agree and disagree with me.
I agree with you...a hybrid between the old assault cruiser and the star cruiser is the perfect middle of the way/balanced approach to the galaxy problem.
Comments
Again, while the Galaxy's base turning rate is low, skilled pilots can still coax more than enough maneuverability out of them to get the job done through clever use of throttle, items, equipment, and powers.
The major area the Galaxy-R suffers from is DPS, which is the purpose of this topic, to petition to move the fifth eng console slot to be a third tactical console slot.
As a veteran Galaxy player: A THOUSAND TIMES NO. Either move the extra engineering console slot to tactical or leave the console layout as is. As for the BOFF layout, the only real change that would be quite useful would be the ability to have that ensign station become a universal, otherwise it's all good.
As I said, however. I'm still comfortable with it having a fifth engineering slot. A third tactical console would be nice, but I'll still be getting the FG-R either way.
Like my fanpage!
https://www.facebook.com/CaptainBMoney913
Join Date: August 29th 2010
So I take it you missed the vapourising multiple small ships with a single salvo, the destruction of a BoP with a handful of phaser shots, the massive barrages of torpedos, putting a ship-sized hole through a Borg cube, and that while "bodily using its hull to shield other parts of the fleet" the Magellan and the Venture took apart a Galor class warship in a few shots?
A tank that's rubbish at aggro generation is a bad tank, in STO a hull tank is a bad tank, so unless what they seem to intend to be doing in STO is being a bad tank, it needs looking at.
We are PWE. Your forums and game accounts will be added to our own. Your community will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
It really doesn't matter what the Users think of the ship stats, whats important is what Cryptic thinks of the Ship stats...
NONE of the ships that currently exist in the game could be considered to be PERFECT SHIPS.... Though in reality, part of the challenge of the game is to learn to exist within the limitation of the ships provided...
(As an example, I'm still debating what is the better Engineer ship, my tricked out D'Kora, or my Science Odyssey beam boat. The Science Odyssey has better DPS and is better for tanking, but the D'Kora is so useful for general play...)
I could get into that.
But would
Cmdr. Engineer
Lt. Cmdr Science
Lt. Cmdr Tactical
Lt. Engineering
be too powerful, considering the maneuverability of the Galaxy? I mean, considering that starfleet seems to have thrown allot of resources in the basic Galaxy Spaceframe, as I think there are more galaxy variants/sub-variants then any other ship, a decent upgrade might be in order.
I use mine for tanking, so to be honest, I'm fine with 5 engineering consoles.
The 4-3-3 loadout would make me equally as happy-in-pants.
A 5-2-3, maybe even happier, heh (but kind of goes against the "exploration" and science nature of the ship... however, the Boff layout did that already)
However, the Ensign Engineering station should have been universal from the start.
I saw this fleet system as a perfect way for the devs to rectify that.
And they did not.
I am simply amazed that they failed to implement a change that everyone agreed with, despite many arguments on the other proposed changes to the Galaxy-R.
Except perhaps Sollvax, but even then, only changing the uni ens station would still have allowed him to keep his loadout as-is.
The Negh'Var had the same boff loadout, and HAS been changed to a uni ensign.
Why would they not do the same for the Galaxy???
I am disappoint.
*EDIT*
I don't think it would be too powerful, no.
But I, personally, would not want to lose the Cmdr and LtCmdr Eng stations.
Dropping the Ens eng for a LtCmdr Sci would be perfectly acceptable though.
Or a LtCmdr Tac, but that may step on the toes of the Excelsior Retro a bit.
It's me, Chrome. [Join Date: May 2009]
"Oh, I may be captain by rank... but I never wanted to be anything else but an engineer." ~Montgomery Scott~
That's pretty much what I said :P
Throw in the Sensor Analysis from scienceships and we're on the same page.
Yes please
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
Also, maybe increase the turn radius for this fleet upgrade? Even if only by one?
My Gaming Blog
The ideal case would be to make it universal; however to reflect Starfleet's exploration ideals a science ensign would fit more with the theme.
I agree with you...a hybrid between the old assault cruiser and the star cruiser is the perfect middle of the way/balanced approach to the galaxy problem.