Notice that picture in the front? this is TNG meaning no CGI and so models so excuse me I laugh at the notion of "a few dozen" models just to be used on a scene that would be the opening of the episode.
Since I'd have work to do, but are more invested in this at the moment XD:
That's 17 vessels on-screen crowding one galor. Since we are already in mid-battle and it's impossible to say which ships are shown when the camera angle changes I think we can safely call it "near two dozen" vessels. I correct my statement regarding that Although I think NO ONE involved in the production of this has ever spent that much thought about anything of this.
That still means you need a swarm of these to threaten a not combat ready cruiser and still suffer avoidable losses. Sure, these are Maquis but I don't think it's that much different when you send Peregrine straight into enemy lines on battlestations (I don't want to do all this for sacrifice of angels, but plenty of them die and they manage to disable one ship on-screen - which is actually fine. I'll come to that.)
Sorry but TNG was a rather conservative show with its budget.
I know. Space combat started to get worse when CGI was introduced
And I used TNG for a reason, it was there ... if I go DS9 then you better remain silent since THAT ship (I only called it a small craft, no names) was then mentioned to the a Federation design and on the subject of small craft.
I mentioned the Peregrine above. And it is pretty much the same as the Maquis uses, it's based on a civillian design. If you talk about the Defiant, she is supposed to be nimble and devestating, though even she engages almost exclusively small enemy vessels equaling her size while the cruisers engage the other cruisers.
You know, commanding a small wing of Peregrines or KDF fighters which warp in on the battlefield, strike and damage/disable a single target and then get the hell out of there would be a cool feature to have. But carrying fighters into battle is not a good plan. So I'm not opposing small craft. In fact I once saw an Atrox in-game who launched Runabouts - that was pretty cool, actually. The Atrox stays a ugly piece of scrap, though.
I do not wish to repeat the broken record that was hearing you people flip-floping with the Carriers arguments back pre-Atrox, fact is ... its on the show and it was shown more times that the Galaxy-Class Death Star Phase and the Federation uses it, dont like it? Then dont bring up the series as evidence.
As for the Death Star Phaser ... I said that for one reason, people are bring down the fighters because "its not Star Wars" and yet the whole "but the Enterprise blown a hole on the Cube, clearly its because of the Uberphaser of Doom +5(!!!)" that pissed me off, yes it did but reason why was not because it was that powerful but rather they wanted to show the Cube could take such visual damage and suffer no loss of abilities.
Well, if we argue that way then those fighters in TNG only inflicted damage because they had to show the Maquis as a serious threat in the DMZ. Hell, so many things in the show were purely for dramatic reasons, ships had plot-shielding all the time, so if we discard everything on-screen as evidence there are only the "facts" left we collect in those threads. And they hardly speak for fightercraft but can fortify the reason why a cruiser should pack a bigger punch than escorts.
And I will stop here before I type something I will regret ... but I will say this, you people just want your favorite ship being Uber? I like for my B'rel to have 30,000 of hull and the freaking "enhanced" battlecloak to not make me visible for 3 seconds and I know some want for the Defiant to have a Battlecloak but THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, one thing is trying to make the worst T5 cruiser (not ship) to be a option and another is to make "best ship ever".
I was never demanding the best ship ever. I just want a frigging universal ensign on the Gal-R, that was all XD And I like the heavy-beam-array idea which would be a new kind of weapon available to all T5 cruisers, yes even the red side although technically none of them should have beam arrays at all but emitters. They were never shown using arrays. But I'm not going into that one XD
I agree. The saucer-seperation is a very stupid concept if you think about it for too long, at least for the purpose it should have. That does not however negate the overall capability of the whole Galaxy nor the limited use of small vessels
^ 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
ya, the saucer separation as a battle tactic is basically worthless, the big guns are on the saucer. the star drive section would only have about the phaser firepower of an ambassador class, but substantially more torpedo firepower at least. since that level of firepower is proboly enough to deal with about 90% of know threats, they could separate the saucer for maximum civilian safety and engage with just the star drive. but its kind of pointless, those big guns would make any fight with those 90% very short. the only real purpose it ended up serving was being a very comfortable lifeboat if there is a containment failure in the star drive section, as long as it doesn't crash.
death star phasers? thats kind of funny. its actually similar to what happens during prefire. it also makes the galaxy X completely pointless. it already had the biggest gun, with the best packaging, fireing arc, and space efficiency it could possibly have. then they strap on this huge, low fireing arc, outboard death ray, which disregards all the innovation of the array for no reason. with the way the array was able to damage the borg ship in q who, a stranded galaxy with just its main arrays should have been able to inflict similar damage to those klingon cruisers in AGT, especially if its early 25th century teched out. but they would never let a galaxy stomp a mud hole like that wile not looking altered, even though the sum of its parts would give it the ability too.
I know. Space combat started to get worse when CGI was introduced
Space Combat was best in TOS. You could see the Enterprise PEWPEWing, but for obvious, and entirely logical reasons, not at WHAT, because realistically, what you'd be shooting at would be far too distant to actually SEE. Budget constraints there actually made the combat better.
That still means you need a swarm of these to threaten a not combat ready cruiser and still suffer avoidable losses. Sure, these are Maquis but I don't think it's that much different when you send Peregrine straight into enemy lines on battlestations (I don't want to do all this for sacrifice of angels, but plenty of them die and they manage to disable one ship on-screen - which is actually fine. I'll come to that.)
To be fair, those avoidable losses aren't really so bad. I mean, they're picking a fight with a cruiser, and only a FEW of them get shot down.
Compare that against if they had been able to afford an actual cruiser (let's face it, the Maquis are a bunch of rebels and therefore cannot afford real ships), how many of them would have been killed by exploding consoles or collapsing ceilings?
When a fighter is shot down in one shot, one, and only one, person dies. Maybe. He might have been able to eject. How many people die when consoles start exploding left and right with each hit and random power conduits start spraying FIRE across the decks, hrm?
Besides, fighters sort of suck it hard when someone uses FAW here, too.
Space Combat was best in TOS. You could see the Enterprise PEWPEWing, but for obvious, and entirely logical reasons, not at WHAT, because realistically, what you'd be shooting at would be far too distant to actually SEE. Budget constraints there actually made the combat better.
This is absolutely true. But even in TNG close-quarter-combat, I prefer models over CGI since these actually move like Id imagine a spaceship to move and not pull stupid stunts. It's always great to see a wing of BoP which are models sticked together fly in a tight formation
To be fair, those avoidable losses aren't really so bad. I mean, they're picking a fight with a cruiser, and only a FEW of them get shot down.
Compare that against if they had been able to afford an actual cruiser (let's face it, the Maquis are a bunch of rebels and therefore cannot afford real ships), how many of them would have been killed by exploding consoles or collapsing ceilings?
When a fighter is shot down in one shot, one, and only one, person dies. Maybe. He might have been able to eject. How many people die when consoles start exploding left and right with each hit and random power conduits start spraying FIRE across the decks, hrm?
Besides, fighters sort of suck it hard when someone uses FAW here, too.
That FAW entirely kills the idea of fighters is probably in this discussion from the beginning, yet it's always ignored for some reason. Anyway, sure less losses are better than huge losses but to be honest, sending fighters against cruisers is equal to putting those men in their cascets right away. Starfleet just wouldn't do it outright since even when all consoles on a ship explode (why again? XD) your chances are better on a ship with decent matters of defense than in a tiny metal case which has to be fitted with humongous generators to constantly create the weapon output needed to actually HURT a cruiser which features in comparision to your small pet impenetrable shields and astronomous firepower. It's not that in star Trek, the enemies turbolasers are too slow to hit your fighters...
^ 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
Anyway, sure less losses are better than huge losses but to be honest, sending fighters against cruisers is equal to putting those men in their cascets right away.
Untrue. Some of them live! That same argument is sort of like X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter, and I'm totally siding with the TIE Fighter here. Those Rebels have no idea how to make a real fighter. Live dangerously, fly fast!
Starfleet just wouldn't do it outright since even when all consoles on a ship explode (why again? XD) your chances are better on a ship with decent matters of defense than in a tiny metal case which has to be fitted with humongous generators to constantly create the weapon output needed to actually HURT a cruiser which features in comparision to your small pet impenetrable shields and astronomous firepower.
Yeah, but you see, when you're a young male, fighters let you show off your coolness and swagger to the females. YOU are the top gun. That, or you die in a flaming heap, but the youth were never good with risk assessment. And honestly, your odds of death aren't significantly worse than they were as Faceless Redshirt #232, and dying in a fast fighter is a hell of a lot more cool a death than being CRUSHED BY A PIECE OF FALLING CEILING DEBRIS. In SPACE. Seriously, that's a totally unnecessary death. You're being killed by your own ship's stupid artificial gravity there. There's no good reason for stuff to FALL on you in SPACE. Besides, have you SEEN what happens to your 800+ man crew on your ship anytime you get in a fight? Within the first opening volleys, HALF OF THEM ARE DEAD. I'll take my chances on a fighter, thanks.
Plus, the fighter pilots probably get a tube to pee in. Do you see any bathrooms on the SHIP? No! I'm pretty sure that people volunteer to be fighter pilots just so they can pee in that tube rather than holding it in forever.
The consoles exlpode due to overload in the electroplasma distribition network. Thats right people behind every wall, under every table, and inside your very food replicator, there lurks a conduit barely containing large volumes of extremely hot, electricaly charged, compressed plasma, just waiting to get out and melt your unsuspescting face.
As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
The consoles exlpode due to overload in the electroplasma distribition network. Thats right people behind every wall, under every table, and inside your very food replicator, there lurks a conduit barely containing large volumes of extremely hot, electricaly charged, compressed plasma, just waiting to get out and melt your unsuspescting face.
You forgot the inside your shower, under your bed, and inside the closet. Must give that evil monkey nightmares knowing what's right next to it's sleeping area. XD
And who says small craft are useless? They make wonderful gnats and distractions for the larger ships. Just like the zerg, you send in the zerglings to cause a little chaos while the hydralisks (which are bigger and slower) get into position and then finish off everythign else.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
And who says small craft are useless? They make wonderful gnats and distractions for the larger ships. Just like the zerg, you send in the zerglings to cause a little chaos while the hydralisks (which are bigger and slower) get into position and then finish off everythign else.
Actually, upgraded Zerglings rip a siege tank to bits in seconds XD No need for Hydralisks anymore.
^ 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
The consoles exlpode due to overload in the electroplasma distribition network. Thats right people behind every wall, under every table, and inside your very food replicator, there lurks a conduit barely containing large volumes of extremely hot, electricaly charged, compressed plasma, just waiting to get out and melt your unsuspescting face.
Which, of course, just makes you go, WHY?!? WHY exactly does there need to be high-powered electroplasma behind a CONSOLE? What's wrong with FIBER-OPTIC CABLES, which never EXPLODE or KILL ANYONE, and probably would transmit signal faster?
I mean, consoles shouldn't need to transmit any large amount of power. They just need to compute and give orders to the ship. You don't need massive amounts of energy that can explode to do this.
i figured someone would point that out, it was a weak argument unfortunately. but the main point is space pt boats are not going to be as effective as their water counterparts. even if they can carry 3 or 4 full size torps, any energy weapons will be extreamly weak. it all just doesn't translate well from ocean to space at all.
Neither do most things. Realistically, we would see space combat just like that written in Honor Harrington novels. Massive hulks of ships blasting at insane ranges.
So you don't think a cruiser should have a equal chance
To beat your escort I'n a 1 on 1 pvp match ? Are you saying you
Don't want a fair fight or give up your current I win button
You didn't read the part about balancing all three ships
Out on test center.if testing were done I'n this manner
The final outcome on the ships stats would be suprising
Indeed
I just want a equal chance to win and pull my weight I'n
Any STF with my ship be it a science ship or engineer ship
Just so you understand, my main ships ARE cruisers, I have no idea where you assumed (and we all know what that does) that I am a solid escort player. I just think the steps asked to take to make a balances here are over the top. I might not beat escorts every time in a 1v1, but I sure put a pounding on them, and I rarely fight 1v1 anyways. Honestly, I actually have better success against escorts than I do cruisers.
If you want balance, this is what I suggest:
A proportional balance between hull strength and turn rate/inertia. The worse it turns the stronger the hull is from damage.
Escorts could use one less weapon (probably in the aft).
And up the damage a smidge on the single cannons to make them more attractive for players to use.
It (MAY) be fair to say that STO has a fair bit of DS9 emphasis. With that it mind it is a pity that the Galaxy class that we have in game is more reminisent of the TNG-era Galaxy class than the DS9 Dominion War era Galaxy class.
Well, maybe you can consider the Fleet Galaxy to be the DS9 one, with more hull, use less shield and aux power and go straight to weapons and the extra engineer console could be for more weapons power or something.
It was there as soon as actually put up the stats for a HBA idea and also the flagship Aura/Buff. :P
And I stand by both of those ideas as a good way to bring balance in for the tier 5 cruisers in general (if you are just joining us, it's back on page 16 or 17 I believe).
Actually, upgraded Zerglings rip a siege tank to bits in seconds XD No need for Hydralisks anymore.
That's not true. What idiot ONLY puts siege tanks? I automatically assumed there were bunkers and turrets and PFs (if it's WoL). Oh, and of course the supply depot wall. So sorry bro, still need dem hydralisks to get in. But if it's at the point where you have kraklings (sue me, I always say it like that... after all usual online SN is Krakmonkey, but they didn't let me use it -.-) then you would probably have switched to ultralisks for the added epicness and insane survivability, in which case you STILL need hydralisks. In fact, I can't think of a time that hydralisks aren't useful. Ever. Unless this is Brood War and they have reavers. Or the siege tank ball. THEN you're boned. But everything else is cool lol.
Edit:
P.S. You can tell we are TRUE nerds because we are making connections between StarCraft and Star Trek Online XD.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Edit:
P.S. You can tell we are TRUE nerds because we are making connections between StarCraft and Star Trek Online XD.[/COLOR]
It was clear to me the minute I realised I spent more time on these forums to discuss Starfleets uniform policy and ship specifications and how it all sucks in STO as opposed to write something about the actual game XD
But I never played SC on a competative level. The few times I did my swarm of zerglings brought havoc upon my enemies. I'm more of a DoW player, though XD
^ 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
It was clear to me the minute I realised I spent more time on these forums to discuss Starfleets uniform policy and ship specifications and how it all sucks in STO as opposed to write something about the actual game XD
But I never played SC on a competative level. The few times I did my swarm of zerglings brought havoc upon my enemies. I'm more of a DoW player, though XD
You're still right, 7 or 8 zerglings will defeat a single tank every time, seven or eight marines will kill a single broodlord every time, 7 or 8 zealots will kill an ultralisk every time. Swarming is a legitimate strategy. What the other guy said was true too, there are always encampments, and varied unit structures.
The interesting thing is that in SC you will always see marines zealots and lings in the end game because they are so versatile and cheap. This is the reason that I think justifies their existence in Star trek. Yes they will likely get one beamed in battle, buts thats a beam thats not hitting a vessel, and time/focus/energy being taken away from a tactical officer. The ships already have the space for them because of other duties, and the civilian sector is already making them for whatever reasons, so why not add that extra little advantage. Its really one of those cold commander in chief style decisions
But thats in a game absolutely dedicated to balance, I always hope theres some pro gaming fans in cryptic to help work out this mess.
That's not true. What idiot ONLY puts siege tanks? I automatically assumed there were bunkers and turrets and PFs (if it's WoL). Oh, and of course the supply depot wall. So sorry bro, still need dem hydralisks to get in. But if it's at the point where you have kraklings (sue me, I always say it like that... after all usual online SN is Krakmonkey, but they didn't let me use it -.-) then you would probably have switched to ultralisks for the added epicness and insane survivability, in which case you STILL need hydralisks. In fact, I can't think of a time that hydralisks aren't useful. Ever. [/QUOTE]
Actually Hydrolisks were considered the worst unit for zerg in the pro scene for a long time. They were only ever used for base defense vs. air and a timing attack against protoss gateway play. This is the reason they are adding a speed upgrade to hydras in the upcoming HOTS expansion in an effort to make them viable again, the unit used for the situations you describe was usually the roach or an infestor. Ultralisks were also considered pretty worthless, they are getting a burrow charge ability in HOTS to help prevent kiting.
Actually Hydrolisks were considered the worst unit for zerg in the pro scene for a long time. They were only ever used for base defense vs. air and a timing attack against protoss gateway play. This is the reason they are adding a speed upgrade to hydras in the upcoming HOTS expansion in an effort to make them viable again, the unit used for the situations you describe was usually the roach or an infestor. Ultralisks were also considered pretty worthless, they are getting a burrow charge ability in HOTS to help prevent kiting.
Wings of Liberty Hydralisks were terrible. I agree. Slow, squishy, TIER 2 and cost 2 supply. And expensive. Not a good unit.
BROOD WAR Hydralisks on the other hand... Fast, still squishy, TIER 1 RANGED, 1 supply, and CHEAP. They were great support/assault units. You combine them with zerglings and you just cannot stop that easily early game. Lings were the cheap meatwall that you threw at the enemy defenses to gain aggro, then you took them out with Hydralisks. Cannons were boned, Bunkers got wasted, and even other zerg hives weren't really able to hold off that combo easily.
But alas, Wings of Liberty... took away the move speed (crucial in the high speed high adrenaline gameplay I see there), took away the lower tier (again crucial in WoL online play), and took away their cheapness in supply. That was the real hit. Combine that with the increased resource cost, and hydralisks were no longer the primary zerg ground combat unit. It hurt to see them derped in that way, and tbh, I will take a brood war hydralisk any day over this Roach business.
As for ultralisks, yes, they took away the nightmares of brood war and replaced them with these slow things that they expect us to keep calling ultras. Brood War ultralisk may not have had AoE blade attacks, but they had HIGH movement speed (faster than upgraded zealots) and THICK armor (which thankfully they were allowed to keep). But it was close to impossible for many ground units to kite the Brood War ultralisk, and combine a dozen of them with Hydralisks and Guardians, and whatever it was you were attacking was pretty much screwed.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I mean, come on guys, just make the Galaxys Eng. ensing and its Sci. Lt. into a ensign and Lt. unversal. I'm already on a point where i would be glad about this, even without a third tac. console. (althrough it would be nice, too)
If Starfleet Escorts can get a +1 Maneuverability, the Galaxy can get a slight BOFF buff.
Devs? hello?
Hello...
"...'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
Yeah, the devs are apparently a bit choosey about the threads they read/answer.
Seriously, do we want something entirely impossible?
Would it turn the ship "balance" upside down?
Maybe it would be too much work?
Are we too few, maybe they think no one else cares about the Galaxy Class?
Would a Galaxy Class that is more versatile become a threat to their beloved Escorts?
Or do they just think there is nothing to gain from making the Galaxy Class a more fun to fly ship?
What do you think?
Thank you for reading.
"...'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
I think they choose whats most important to work on for next release.
New lockbox Items?
new ships?
Balance and fix old ships?
New content?
Fix KDF?
And Lockbox will always win. Look at the amount of stuff in the new lockbox. From ships to Consoles with Set Bonuses. That you HAVE to have lobi for to purchase.
Fixing/Balancing old stuff is stuff people already bought. How much would they make fixing old ships that were account wide unlocks VS making new stuff thats locked to one character?
And making Set bonuses where you want more then just the Grand prize out of the Lockbox, you want more then one thing outta the gamble, its a good win/win for cash flow I'm sure.
And Im not a F2P guy, I've spent plenty. But now at that point where I have to choose if I support this single character system much. Im not throwing out the kinda cash it would take to get a gamble console set for each toon I run.
I did buy several C-Store and fleet ships. I wanted each toon to be their own experience. But, not paying to gamble on each toon. So to continue means I gotta pick what 1 toon is my main. And the DPS way the game is focused means Tac is all that matters in my eyes.
That's why i am in favour of them making a "mirror" Galaxy Class. They would make money PLUS there would finally be a acceptable Galaxy Class in this game.
Hull HP, BOFF & Console Layout of the Regent Class, just the looks of a Galaxy. I think it would be awesome.
In exchange for its (still) low maneuverability this "mirror" Galaxy could keep it's Saucer Seperation function.
I would buy it instantly, twice. :cool:
Thank you for reading.
"...'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
I haven't seen ANYTHING Enterprise -E did which the previous enterprise couldn't.
With regard to this, Starfleet had developed new technology that the Galaxy class just wasn't capable of running (the sovi had better shields, impulse drive, power system, warp drive, tactical systems and sensor arrays) and as we all know the flagship ALWAYS hosts the fleets best technology, it's more of a test bed that some of the high end science ships. Not only that but Starfleet was working on a new look as well, a more streamlined and sleek design for their ships (which turned out to be an improvement upon their combat capability and as it happens their ability to drive into other ships, it also showed development of their own rather than using their neighbours designs for inspiration (see klingon ships then look at the Galaxy class)), frankly the bulky Galaxy design was just that, bulky, which was it's primary design flaw as it wasn't a brilliant turner and should an enemy escape the forward phaser banks the Galaxy was at an immediate and severe disadvantage, which happens to be the reason the galaxy was only the flagship for 7 years (compared to other more successful designs (such as the Excelsior) which were far longer).
I'm sorry to say that the Galaxy turn rate is close to right in game, I think it could use an extra point but it should never be fast due to it's bulk, I think what it is missing is that 90 degree arc of death in front of it (all the ships weaknesses but none of it's strengths), with it's low turn rate and speed it more than pays for the hull it has and fire-power it lacks.
With regard to this, Starfleet had developed new technology that the Galaxy class just wasn't capable of running (the sovi had better shields, impulse drive, power system, warp drive, tactical systems and sensor arrays) and as we all know the flagship ALWAYS hosts the fleets best technology, it's more of a test bed that some of the high end science ships.
How do you know Galaxy wasn't capable of using newer technology? Better Warp Drive? You can't have a much better warp drive when it's already near 9,99 and Sovereign was a step backwards - have a look at the size of the nacelles. So long and so little gain.
frankly the bulky Galaxy design was just that, bulky, which was it's primary design flaw as it wasn't a brilliant turner and should an enemy escape the forward phaser banks the Galaxy was at an immediate and severe disadvantage
Have you ever seen Star Trek on TV? Take a look at a sharp and fast turn when escaping the Borg cube.
How do you know Galaxy wasn't capable of using newer technology? Better Warp Drive? You can't have a much better warp drive when it's already near 9,99 and Sovereign was a step backwards - have a look at the size of the nacelles. So long and so little gain.
Ok I don't remember when I found this out it's been a while since I did watch the show or the films for that matter, however I believe it was more efficient (just because it can't reach higher speeds doesn't mean it isn't better).
Have you ever seen Star Trek on TV? Take a look at a sharp and fast turn when escaping the Borg cube.
I'm talking as standard, unless it HAD to turn fast (in which case they pulled off some clever engineering trick prolonged use of which I believe to be dangerous). I have watched every episode of TNG, DS9 and VOY on different occasions however that is a lot of detail to remember and sadly it has been a while as well so I will happily admit my info may not be perfectly accurate
You know, commanding a small wing of Peregrines or KDF fighters which warp in on the battlefield, strike and damage/disable a single target and then get the hell out of there would be a cool feature to have. But carrying fighters into battle is not a good plan.
This is how I was hoping at least Fed fighters would work, so instead of fighter bays you'd have "Subspace Comms" or somesuch to call in warp capable fighters and gunships. So instead of "Carriers", Starfleeet would have "Command and Control" ships. All it'd take is for destroyed fighters to warp out instead of blow up when they pass a damage threshold.
With regard to this, Starfleet had developed new technology that the Galaxy class just wasn't capable of running (the sovi had better shields, impulse drive, power system, warp drive, tactical systems and sensor arrays) and as we all know the flagship ALWAYS hosts the fleets best technology, it's more of a test bed that some of the high end science ships. Not only that but Starfleet was working on a new look as well, a more streamlined and sleek design for their ships (which turned out to be an improvement upon their combat capability and as it happens their ability to drive into other ships, it also showed development of their own rather than using their neighbours designs for inspiration (see klingon ships then look at the Galaxy class)), frankly the bulky Galaxy design was just that, bulky, which was it's primary design flaw as it wasn't a brilliant turner and should an enemy escape the forward phaser banks the Galaxy was at an immediate and severe disadvantage, which happens to be the reason the galaxy was only the flagship for 7 years (compared to other more successful designs (such as the Excelsior) which were far longer).
I'm sorry to say that the Galaxy turn rate is close to right in game, I think it could use an extra point but it should never be fast due to it's bulk, I think what it is missing is that 90 degree arc of death in front of it (all the ships weaknesses but none of it's strengths), with it's low turn rate and speed it more than pays for the hull it has and fire-power it lacks.
Just my 2 pence
funny, i don't recall anyone ever stating that the enterprise E was the flagship, its just sort of what everyone decided to assume.
the sovereign is NOT a galaxy replacement, they are in completely different size tiers. the galaxy is the fleet's battleship, the sovereign is only a large heavy cruiser. the volume of the galaxy is actually 2.4 times greater then the sovereign, they arent even comparable.
the equipment the sovereign comes with being a bit more advanced is due in part that the design is about a decade newer, the scheduled major refits all ships have will even that out, throughout tng there was mention all the time of refits.
there was nothing fundamentally flawed about the galaxy, quite the opposite. its internal compartments were almost completely modular and could be swamped out as needed. the enterprise D even launched with 35% of its interior unutilized, ready for mission specific equipment and sections to be swapped in as needed. the galaxy class assembled during the ramp up to the dominian war had even less of their interior filled out.
the only galaxy we are very familiar with was the enterprise, and it was clearly loaded to the gills with scientific and exploration specific equipment, and maximum comfort and crew support, someone even decided it would be safe enough to bring along the crew's civilian families. it was a bit of a guilded flagship, built to impress wile on diplomatic missions. a more utilitarion, more military focused layout is just as capable of being installed in a galaxy
its likely that the sovereign has a higher % of its space taken up by tactical systems, but again the sovereign is 2.4 times smaller. if it wasn't for the galaxy's hugeness, it wouldn't have room for its 2 massive torpedo launchers and its longest by far phaser arrays. those main phaser arrays can hit anything they have line of sight with at full power. thats part of why arrays are so great, they have unlimited fireing arc. any place the main array is in a blind spot of, theres 4 or 5 small arrays pointing at you.
its fine that the galaxy turns as poorly as it does in game, IF it had an advantage that made up for it, like a hugely powerfull phaser array with a 320 degree firing arc, like it has in canon. but it gets nothing, and a HORRIBLE station setup, its just has huge disadvantages and smaller ships like the excelsior simply don't have, the small ships give up nothing for their passable turn rate.
funny, i don't recall anyone ever stating that the enterprise E was the flagship, its just sort of what everyone decided to assume.
the sovereign is NOT a galaxy replacement, they are in completely different size tiers. the galaxy is the fleet's battleship, the sovereign is only a large heavy cruiser. the volume of the galaxy is actually 2.4 times greater then the sovereign, they arent even comparable.
the equipment the sovereign comes with being a bit more advanced is due in part that the design is about a decade newer, the scheduled major refits all ships have will even that out, throughout tng there was mention all the time of refits.
there was nothing fundamentally flawed about the galaxy, quite the opposite. its internal compartments were almost completely modular and could be swamped out as needed. the enterprise D even launched with 35% of its interior unutilized, ready for mission specific equipment and sections to be swapped in as needed. the galaxy class assembled during the ramp up to the dominian war had even less of their interior filled out.
the only galaxy we are very familiar with was the enterprise, and it was clearly loaded to the gills with scientific and exploration specific equipment, and maximum comfort and crew support, someone even decided it would be safe enough to bring along the crew's civilian families. it was a bit of a guilded flagship, built to impress wile on diplomatic missions. a more utilitarion, more military focused layout is just as capable of being installed in a galaxy
its likely that the sovereign has a higher % of its space taken up by tactical systems, but again the sovereign is 2.4 times smaller. if it wasn't for the galaxy's hugeness, it wouldn't have room for its 2 massive torpedo launchers and its longest by far phaser arrays. those main phaser arrays can hit anything they have line of sight with at full power. thats part of why arrays are so great, they have unlimited fireing arc. any place the main array is in a blind spot of, theres 4 or 5 small arrays pointing at you.
its fine that the galaxy turns as poorly as it does in game, IF it had an advantage that made up for it, like a hugely powerfull phaser array with a 320 degree firing arc, like it has in canon. but it gets nothing, and a HORRIBLE station setup, its just has huge disadvantages and smaller ships like the excelsior simply don't have, the small ships give up nothing for their passable turn rate.
These are it's main flaws in STO in my opinion.
The devs seem to regard low maneuverability a just a secondary disadvantage, which it isn't.
And i couldn't agree more about the BOFF layout, it's extremely improper for a multi role ship like the Galaxy Class. It it just too passive, making the ship nothing more than a flying targeting exercise for Klingon players in PvP with no means of fighting back. I wonder why some players even bother to equip that ship with weapons in the first place when going to PvP, it doesn't matter anyways.
In my opinion, the Galaxy Class should have tha most flexible BOFF layout of all Federation ships.
Additionally it should get a additional univerversal console slot.
But since this ship is already in the Game, the devs won't do anything we are suggesting here. (no $$)
Thats why i would like to see them making a special or a mirror version of that ship with a more "beefy" BOFF and Console Layout. Cryptic could make some money without much work, the "nay" sayers could keep their flying brick and we could finally have a useful and more worthy Galaxy Class.
Thank you for reading.
"...'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
That's why i am in favour of them making a "mirror" Galaxy Class. They would make money PLUS there would finally be a acceptable Galaxy Class in this game.
Hull HP, BOFF & Console Layout of the Regent Class, just the looks of a Galaxy. I think it would be awesome.
In exchange for its (still) low maneuverability this "mirror" Galaxy could keep it's Saucer Seperation function.
I would buy it instantly, twice. :cool:
Thank you for reading.
Why not just buy a Regent class? You get 99.9% of what you are asking for.
Comments
Since I'd have work to do, but are more invested in this at the moment XD:
http://imageshack.us/a/img840/5264/galor1.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img26/8729/galor2.jpg
That's 17 vessels on-screen crowding one galor. Since we are already in mid-battle and it's impossible to say which ships are shown when the camera angle changes I think we can safely call it "near two dozen" vessels. I correct my statement regarding that
That still means you need a swarm of these to threaten a not combat ready cruiser and still suffer avoidable losses. Sure, these are Maquis but I don't think it's that much different when you send Peregrine straight into enemy lines on battlestations (I don't want to do all this for sacrifice of angels, but plenty of them die and they manage to disable one ship on-screen - which is actually fine. I'll come to that.)
I know. Space combat started to get worse when CGI was introduced
I mentioned the Peregrine above. And it is pretty much the same as the Maquis uses, it's based on a civillian design. If you talk about the Defiant, she is supposed to be nimble and devestating, though even she engages almost exclusively small enemy vessels equaling her size while the cruisers engage the other cruisers.
You know, commanding a small wing of Peregrines or KDF fighters which warp in on the battlefield, strike and damage/disable a single target and then get the hell out of there would be a cool feature to have. But carrying fighters into battle is not a good plan. So I'm not opposing small craft. In fact I once saw an Atrox in-game who launched Runabouts - that was pretty cool, actually. The Atrox stays a ugly piece of scrap, though.
Well, if we argue that way then those fighters in TNG only inflicted damage because they had to show the Maquis as a serious threat in the DMZ. Hell, so many things in the show were purely for dramatic reasons, ships had plot-shielding all the time, so if we discard everything on-screen as evidence there are only the "facts" left we collect in those threads. And they hardly speak for fightercraft but can fortify the reason why a cruiser should pack a bigger punch than escorts.
I was never demanding the best ship ever. I just want a frigging universal ensign on the Gal-R, that was all XD And I like the heavy-beam-array idea which would be a new kind of weapon available to all T5 cruisers, yes even the red side although technically none of them should have beam arrays at all but emitters. They were never shown using arrays. But I'm not going into that one XD
I agree. The saucer-seperation is a very stupid concept if you think about it for too long, at least for the purpose it should have. That does not however negate the overall capability of the whole Galaxy nor the limited use of small vessels
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
death star phasers? thats kind of funny. its actually similar to what happens during prefire. it also makes the galaxy X completely pointless. it already had the biggest gun, with the best packaging, fireing arc, and space efficiency it could possibly have. then they strap on this huge, low fireing arc, outboard death ray, which disregards all the innovation of the array for no reason. with the way the array was able to damage the borg ship in q who, a stranded galaxy with just its main arrays should have been able to inflict similar damage to those klingon cruisers in AGT, especially if its early 25th century teched out. but they would never let a galaxy stomp a mud hole like that wile not looking altered, even though the sum of its parts would give it the ability too.
To be fair, those avoidable losses aren't really so bad. I mean, they're picking a fight with a cruiser, and only a FEW of them get shot down.
Compare that against if they had been able to afford an actual cruiser (let's face it, the Maquis are a bunch of rebels and therefore cannot afford real ships), how many of them would have been killed by exploding consoles or collapsing ceilings?
When a fighter is shot down in one shot, one, and only one, person dies. Maybe. He might have been able to eject. How many people die when consoles start exploding left and right with each hit and random power conduits start spraying FIRE across the decks, hrm?
Besides, fighters sort of suck it hard when someone uses FAW here, too.
This is absolutely true. But even in TNG close-quarter-combat, I prefer models over CGI since these actually move like Id imagine a spaceship to move and not pull stupid stunts. It's always great to see a wing of BoP which are models sticked together fly in a tight formation
That FAW entirely kills the idea of fighters is probably in this discussion from the beginning, yet it's always ignored for some reason. Anyway, sure less losses are better than huge losses but to be honest, sending fighters against cruisers is equal to putting those men in their cascets right away. Starfleet just wouldn't do it outright since even when all consoles on a ship explode (why again? XD) your chances are better on a ship with decent matters of defense than in a tiny metal case which has to be fitted with humongous generators to constantly create the weapon output needed to actually HURT a cruiser which features in comparision to your small pet impenetrable shields and astronomous firepower. It's not that in star Trek, the enemies turbolasers are too slow to hit your fighters...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Yeah, but you see, when you're a young male, fighters let you show off your coolness and swagger to the females. YOU are the top gun. That, or you die in a flaming heap, but the youth were never good with risk assessment. And honestly, your odds of death aren't significantly worse than they were as Faceless Redshirt #232, and dying in a fast fighter is a hell of a lot more cool a death than being CRUSHED BY A PIECE OF FALLING CEILING DEBRIS. In SPACE. Seriously, that's a totally unnecessary death. You're being killed by your own ship's stupid artificial gravity there. There's no good reason for stuff to FALL on you in SPACE. Besides, have you SEEN what happens to your 800+ man crew on your ship anytime you get in a fight? Within the first opening volleys, HALF OF THEM ARE DEAD. I'll take my chances on a fighter, thanks.
Plus, the fighter pilots probably get a tube to pee in. Do you see any bathrooms on the SHIP? No! I'm pretty sure that people volunteer to be fighter pilots just so they can pee in that tube rather than holding it in forever.
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
You forgot the inside your shower, under your bed, and inside the closet. Must give that evil monkey nightmares knowing what's right next to it's sleeping area. XD
And who says small craft are useless? They make wonderful gnats and distractions for the larger ships. Just like the zerg, you send in the zerglings to cause a little chaos while the hydralisks (which are bigger and slower) get into position and then finish off everythign else.
Actually, upgraded Zerglings rip a siege tank to bits in seconds XD No need for Hydralisks anymore.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I mean, consoles shouldn't need to transmit any large amount of power. They just need to compute and give orders to the ship. You don't need massive amounts of energy that can explode to do this.
Neither do most things. Realistically, we would see space combat just like that written in Honor Harrington novels. Massive hulks of ships blasting at insane ranges.
Just so you understand, my main ships ARE cruisers, I have no idea where you assumed (and we all know what that does) that I am a solid escort player. I just think the steps asked to take to make a balances here are over the top. I might not beat escorts every time in a 1v1, but I sure put a pounding on them, and I rarely fight 1v1 anyways. Honestly, I actually have better success against escorts than I do cruisers.
If you want balance, this is what I suggest:
A proportional balance between hull strength and turn rate/inertia. The worse it turns the stronger the hull is from damage.
Escorts could use one less weapon (probably in the aft).
And up the damage a smidge on the single cannons to make them more attractive for players to use.
Well, maybe you can consider the Fleet Galaxy to be the DS9 one, with more hull, use less shield and aux power and go straight to weapons and the extra engineer console could be for more weapons power or something.
It was there as soon as actually put up the stats for a HBA idea and also the flagship Aura/Buff. :P
And I stand by both of those ideas as a good way to bring balance in for the tier 5 cruisers in general (if you are just joining us, it's back on page 16 or 17 I believe).
That's not true. What idiot ONLY puts siege tanks? I automatically assumed there were bunkers and turrets and PFs (if it's WoL). Oh, and of course the supply depot wall. So sorry bro, still need dem hydralisks to get in. But if it's at the point where you have kraklings (sue me, I always say it like that... after all usual online SN is Krakmonkey, but they didn't let me use it -.-) then you would probably have switched to ultralisks for the added epicness and insane survivability, in which case you STILL need hydralisks. In fact, I can't think of a time that hydralisks aren't useful. Ever. Unless this is Brood War and they have reavers. Or the siege tank ball. THEN you're boned. But everything else is cool lol.
Edit:
P.S. You can tell we are TRUE nerds because we are making connections between StarCraft and Star Trek Online XD.
It was clear to me the minute I realised I spent more time on these forums to discuss Starfleets uniform policy and ship specifications and how it all sucks in STO as opposed to write something about the actual game XD
But I never played SC on a competative level. The few times I did my swarm of zerglings brought havoc upon my enemies. I'm more of a DoW player, though XD
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
You're still right, 7 or 8 zerglings will defeat a single tank every time, seven or eight marines will kill a single broodlord every time, 7 or 8 zealots will kill an ultralisk every time. Swarming is a legitimate strategy. What the other guy said was true too, there are always encampments, and varied unit structures.
The interesting thing is that in SC you will always see marines zealots and lings in the end game because they are so versatile and cheap. This is the reason that I think justifies their existence in Star trek. Yes they will likely get one beamed in battle, buts thats a beam thats not hitting a vessel, and time/focus/energy being taken away from a tactical officer. The ships already have the space for them because of other duties, and the civilian sector is already making them for whatever reasons, so why not add that extra little advantage. Its really one of those cold commander in chief style decisions
But thats in a game absolutely dedicated to balance, I always hope theres some pro gaming fans in cryptic to help work out this mess.
That's not true. What idiot ONLY puts siege tanks? I automatically assumed there were bunkers and turrets and PFs (if it's WoL). Oh, and of course the supply depot wall. So sorry bro, still need dem hydralisks to get in. But if it's at the point where you have kraklings (sue me, I always say it like that... after all usual online SN is Krakmonkey, but they didn't let me use it -.-) then you would probably have switched to ultralisks for the added epicness and insane survivability, in which case you STILL need hydralisks. In fact, I can't think of a time that hydralisks aren't useful. Ever.
[/QUOTE]
Actually Hydrolisks were considered the worst unit for zerg in the pro scene for a long time. They were only ever used for base defense vs. air and a timing attack against protoss gateway play. This is the reason they are adding a speed upgrade to hydras in the upcoming HOTS expansion in an effort to make them viable again, the unit used for the situations you describe was usually the roach or an infestor. Ultralisks were also considered pretty worthless, they are getting a burrow charge ability in HOTS to help prevent kiting.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
Wings of Liberty Hydralisks were terrible. I agree. Slow, squishy, TIER 2 and cost 2 supply. And expensive. Not a good unit.
BROOD WAR Hydralisks on the other hand... Fast, still squishy, TIER 1 RANGED, 1 supply, and CHEAP. They were great support/assault units. You combine them with zerglings and you just cannot stop that easily early game. Lings were the cheap meatwall that you threw at the enemy defenses to gain aggro, then you took them out with Hydralisks. Cannons were boned, Bunkers got wasted, and even other zerg hives weren't really able to hold off that combo easily.
But alas, Wings of Liberty... took away the move speed (crucial in the high speed high adrenaline gameplay I see there), took away the lower tier (again crucial in WoL online play), and took away their cheapness in supply. That was the real hit. Combine that with the increased resource cost, and hydralisks were no longer the primary zerg ground combat unit. It hurt to see them derped in that way, and tbh, I will take a brood war hydralisk any day over this Roach business.
As for ultralisks, yes, they took away the nightmares of brood war and replaced them with these slow things that they expect us to keep calling ultras. Brood War ultralisk may not have had AoE blade attacks, but they had HIGH movement speed (faster than upgraded zealots) and THICK armor (which thankfully they were allowed to keep). But it was close to impossible for many ground units to kite the Brood War ultralisk, and combine a dozen of them with Hydralisks and Guardians, and whatever it was you were attacking was pretty much screwed.
I mean, come on guys, just make the Galaxys Eng. ensing and its Sci. Lt. into a ensign and Lt. unversal. I'm already on a point where i would be glad about this, even without a third tac. console. (althrough it would be nice, too)
If Starfleet Escorts can get a +1 Maneuverability, the Galaxy can get a slight BOFF buff.
Devs? hello?
Hello...
Edit: It's more a discussion on the new DOff and how they affect cruiser gameplay.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=401171
But that still doesn't address many issues brought up here.
Seriously, do we want something entirely impossible?
Would it turn the ship "balance" upside down?
Maybe it would be too much work?
Are we too few, maybe they think no one else cares about the Galaxy Class?
Would a Galaxy Class that is more versatile become a threat to their beloved Escorts?
Or do they just think there is nothing to gain from making the Galaxy Class a more fun to fly ship?
What do you think?
Thank you for reading.
New lockbox Items?
new ships?
Balance and fix old ships?
New content?
Fix KDF?
And Lockbox will always win. Look at the amount of stuff in the new lockbox. From ships to Consoles with Set Bonuses. That you HAVE to have lobi for to purchase.
Fixing/Balancing old stuff is stuff people already bought. How much would they make fixing old ships that were account wide unlocks VS making new stuff thats locked to one character?
And making Set bonuses where you want more then just the Grand prize out of the Lockbox, you want more then one thing outta the gamble, its a good win/win for cash flow I'm sure.
And Im not a F2P guy, I've spent plenty. But now at that point where I have to choose if I support this single character system much. Im not throwing out the kinda cash it would take to get a gamble console set for each toon I run.
I did buy several C-Store and fleet ships. I wanted each toon to be their own experience. But, not paying to gamble on each toon. So to continue means I gotta pick what 1 toon is my main. And the DPS way the game is focused means Tac is all that matters in my eyes.
Hull HP, BOFF & Console Layout of the Regent Class, just the looks of a Galaxy. I think it would be awesome.
In exchange for its (still) low maneuverability this "mirror" Galaxy could keep it's Saucer Seperation function.
I would buy it instantly, twice. :cool:
Thank you for reading.
Yes, that they do
With regard to this, Starfleet had developed new technology that the Galaxy class just wasn't capable of running (the sovi had better shields, impulse drive, power system, warp drive, tactical systems and sensor arrays) and as we all know the flagship ALWAYS hosts the fleets best technology, it's more of a test bed that some of the high end science ships. Not only that but Starfleet was working on a new look as well, a more streamlined and sleek design for their ships (which turned out to be an improvement upon their combat capability and as it happens their ability to drive into other ships, it also showed development of their own rather than using their neighbours designs for inspiration (see klingon ships then look at the Galaxy class)), frankly the bulky Galaxy design was just that, bulky, which was it's primary design flaw as it wasn't a brilliant turner and should an enemy escape the forward phaser banks the Galaxy was at an immediate and severe disadvantage, which happens to be the reason the galaxy was only the flagship for 7 years (compared to other more successful designs (such as the Excelsior) which were far longer).
I'm sorry to say that the Galaxy turn rate is close to right in game, I think it could use an extra point but it should never be fast due to it's bulk, I think what it is missing is that 90 degree arc of death in front of it (all the ships weaknesses but none of it's strengths), with it's low turn rate and speed it more than pays for the hull it has and fire-power it lacks.
Just my 2 pence
Have you ever seen Star Trek on TV? Take a look at a sharp and fast turn when escaping the Borg cube.
Ok I don't remember when I found this out it's been a while since I did watch the show or the films for that matter, however I believe it was more efficient (just because it can't reach higher speeds doesn't mean it isn't better).
I'm talking as standard, unless it HAD to turn fast (in which case they pulled off some clever engineering trick prolonged use of which I believe to be dangerous). I have watched every episode of TNG, DS9 and VOY on different occasions however that is a lot of detail to remember and sadly it has been a while as well so I will happily admit my info may not be perfectly accurate
This is how I was hoping at least Fed fighters would work, so instead of fighter bays you'd have "Subspace Comms" or somesuch to call in warp capable fighters and gunships. So instead of "Carriers", Starfleeet would have "Command and Control" ships. All it'd take is for destroyed fighters to warp out instead of blow up when they pass a damage threshold.
funny, i don't recall anyone ever stating that the enterprise E was the flagship, its just sort of what everyone decided to assume.
the sovereign is NOT a galaxy replacement, they are in completely different size tiers. the galaxy is the fleet's battleship, the sovereign is only a large heavy cruiser. the volume of the galaxy is actually 2.4 times greater then the sovereign, they arent even comparable.
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg
the equipment the sovereign comes with being a bit more advanced is due in part that the design is about a decade newer, the scheduled major refits all ships have will even that out, throughout tng there was mention all the time of refits.
there was nothing fundamentally flawed about the galaxy, quite the opposite. its internal compartments were almost completely modular and could be swamped out as needed. the enterprise D even launched with 35% of its interior unutilized, ready for mission specific equipment and sections to be swapped in as needed. the galaxy class assembled during the ramp up to the dominian war had even less of their interior filled out.
the only galaxy we are very familiar with was the enterprise, and it was clearly loaded to the gills with scientific and exploration specific equipment, and maximum comfort and crew support, someone even decided it would be safe enough to bring along the crew's civilian families. it was a bit of a guilded flagship, built to impress wile on diplomatic missions. a more utilitarion, more military focused layout is just as capable of being installed in a galaxy
its likely that the sovereign has a higher % of its space taken up by tactical systems, but again the sovereign is 2.4 times smaller. if it wasn't for the galaxy's hugeness, it wouldn't have room for its 2 massive torpedo launchers and its longest by far phaser arrays. those main phaser arrays can hit anything they have line of sight with at full power. thats part of why arrays are so great, they have unlimited fireing arc. any place the main array is in a blind spot of, theres 4 or 5 small arrays pointing at you.
its fine that the galaxy turns as poorly as it does in game, IF it had an advantage that made up for it, like a hugely powerfull phaser array with a 320 degree firing arc, like it has in canon. but it gets nothing, and a HORRIBLE station setup, its just has huge disadvantages and smaller ships like the excelsior simply don't have, the small ships give up nothing for their passable turn rate.
These are it's main flaws in STO in my opinion.
The devs seem to regard low maneuverability a just a secondary disadvantage, which it isn't.
And i couldn't agree more about the BOFF layout, it's extremely improper for a multi role ship like the Galaxy Class. It it just too passive, making the ship nothing more than a flying targeting exercise for Klingon players in PvP with no means of fighting back. I wonder why some players even bother to equip that ship with weapons in the first place when going to PvP, it doesn't matter anyways.
In my opinion, the Galaxy Class should have tha most flexible BOFF layout of all Federation ships.
Maybe something like this:
Engineering: Cmdr
Engineering: Lt.
Universal: Lt. Cmdr
Universal: Lt.
Universal: Ensign
Additionally it should get a additional univerversal console slot.
But since this ship is already in the Game, the devs won't do anything we are suggesting here. (no $$)
Thats why i would like to see them making a special or a mirror version of that ship with a more "beefy" BOFF and Console Layout. Cryptic could make some money without much work, the "nay" sayers could keep their flying brick and we could finally have a useful and more worthy Galaxy Class.
Thank you for reading.
That can be done now in game; EPTE (1,2 or 3), Aux to ID (1,2,3) and Evasive Manuevers. I do it all the time with my Gal-X
Why not just buy a Regent class? You get 99.9% of what you are asking for.