now you contradict yourself.
pure economics would be supply & demand.
according to you there i an army of people saying "make this good then take our money for it" to which cryptic are saying "no", for economics.
do you now see how daft you are being with that attempt at an economic argument?
that means you just made another of your snide insinuations that apply more to you than those you direct it at.
so, ipoint out i dont use or specifically care about the galaxy, and to you that makes me a "galaxy fanboy".
i suppose you dont see how vapid that is?
im not insulting you for your 'viewpoint on the discussion', im insulting you for having no point! and when you do have one, its internally conflicting.
and for having unwittingly hoist yourself by your own petard several times.
No calling me ignorant is an insult, and at least have the courage to admit that. If it's not, then I should be able to call you ignorant as well without any problems, right? Grow up.
And if STO is NOT about ECONOMICS, then what IS it about?
And again, the bottom line is that your useless arguments and insults haven't changed ANYTHING. At the end of the day, the Galaxy STILL sucks. What do you have to show for your snarkyness with regards to improvements for the Galaxy? Nothing. So go put your sobbing and whining energies to something else, or at LEAST be adult enough to accept the consequences of your crappy actions and decisions.
now you contradict yourself.
pure economics would be supply & demand.
according to you there i an army of people saying "make this good then take our money for it" to which cryptic are saying "no", for economics.
do you now see how daft you are being with that attempt at an economic argument?
that means you just made another of your snide insinuations that apply more to you than those you direct it at.
so, ipoint out i dont use or specifically care about the galaxy, and to you that makes me a "galaxy fanboy".
i suppose you dont see how vapid that is?
im not insulting you for your 'viewpoint on the discussion', im insulting you for having no point! and when you do have one, its internally conflicting.
and for having unwittingly hoist yourself by your own petard several times.
You know, the LAST time you guys came with all of these insults and bad behavior, the moderator threaten to shut this thread down. Is that the road that you guys REALLY want to go down? If it is, then DON'T complain if that consequence occurs.
Guys guys, I keep telling you not to feed the troll.
Every time you argue with him he has achieved his desired goal, he wants you to disagree with him, he has no interest in the ship itself, his only interest is in you and your response.
Ignore him and get back to discussing the Galaxy.
Just off topic slightly, its nice to see some of the bigger fleets support the notion of a better galaxy. So thank you
Guys guys, I keep telling you not to feed the troll.
Every time you argue with him he has achieved his desired goal, he wants you to disagree with him, he has no interest in the ship itself, his only interest is in you and your response.
Ignore him and get back to discussing the Galaxy.
that what i suggested when he first come up in this thread, but now i don't want that.
it is obvious that he is not a big fan of the galaxy:P and since he give much energy trying to ( i think ) discredit us, i have found him to be very valuable in many aspect.
the first, he make me laft, really, and don't take that as an insult!
furthemore, and that is more important, no matter what i bielieve or what you guy bielieve, as a "non galaxy fanboy" and even as a suppose troll that desire to shut the thread, his opinion could be quite refreshing indeed.
since it appear that you are agree with us that the galaxy suck
At the end of the day, the Galaxy STILL sucks
let said, i am Q, and i give you total control over sto development.
what would be your solution as a non biased " galaxy fanboy" to not make the galaxy suck?
don't worry this is not a trick question to then mocking any solution you can give us.
and even if you have the intention to troll the response i am still interested in whatever you will respond.
you have demonstrate that you can give much energy to defend your point of view ( and even if the intervention you made so far really look like some troll intervention it daes not shadow the will behind it )
so i am very curious to see the result in this energy being use at a creative solution rather than what i have seen until now.
yes, however, it is in your case accurate.
the galaxy, is not sub-par due to 'economics', i already explained why that idea is daft, its due to the 'game model'.
yes, i am calling you out on your behaviour since you joined this thread.
i have no need to do any of that, my prometheus is rather nothing like a galaxy, you troll.
i am however, able to see where a game dynamic is lacking, and leaves one groups of players disadvanteged for no good reason other than a flawed set of stats, which is the case that the galaxy embodies and given comparisons to the new dex's with 2 cmdr slots, it is entirely obvious that the games mechanics are not dealing with new content.
old content is not being updated/balanced for new content when its released.
this is not an economic issue, its a development issue to do with balancing ingame items/powers/units.
im guessing that would be your actual motivation tbh.
Your bizzare arguments have gotten you ,where exactly? Oh that's right, it has gotten you a weak ship that you Galaxy fanboys have been sobbing in your milk about for the last THREE years. There's no point for me to go back and forth on certain points when the RESULTS are quite clear: the Galaxy is a substandard "warship" ship that even CBS has given up on.
The very fact that Cryptic has to STILL negotiate with CBS after THREE years regarding obtaining CBS's permission to increase the Galaxy's lackluster performance is quite telling. And the "story" that it tells is NOT good news for you Galaxy fanboys. It appears that the execs at CBS also saw "Tin Man", "Rascals", "Darmok", etc., and decided that the ship was good for cateloging gaseous anomolies, but as far as it being a VIABLE warship, forget it.
So why don't you Galaxy fanboys send CBS copies of the "Tech Manual" that you so religiously adhere to (when it's conveient, of course), and try to make your "case" that way? Good luck.
Guys guys, I keep telling you not to feed the troll.
Every time you argue with him he has achieved his desired goal, he wants you to disagree with him, he has no interest in the ship itself, his only interest is in you and your response.
Ignore him and get back to discussing the Galaxy.
You know what? If my intention was to shut down this thread, it would be a piece of cake to do since you Galaxy fanboys are such emotional "wildcards" when it comes to desenting viewpoints. I actually think that it's IMPOSSIBLE for you guys NOT to engage in the disrepctful manner that you do when there are discenting viewpoints.
So I can GUARANTEE you that they won't listen to you, and are MORE than willing to get this thead shut down so that they can have the "last disrespectful word". As I said before, you Galaxy fanboys are your worst enemies, and I'm sure that this will be proven true regarding the "future" (or lack thereof) of this thread.
Guys guys, I keep telling you not to feed the troll.
Every time you argue with him he has achieved his desired goal, he wants you to disagree with him, he has no interest in the ship itself, his only interest is in you and your response.
Ignore him and get back to discussing the Galaxy.
Exactly!
...and please stop quoting him. I blacklisted him but I still get his post through quotes
A lot of hate in this thread based on the misguided view that the people who want the ship "fixed" want it to be the end all of cruisers. I know that I personally am not of that view, and I like to believe most others are not either. We'd just like the ship to be competitive. In my opinion based on age the Galaxy should most likely be one of the top three fed cruisers. The Odyssey and Sovereign being newer should be better, but the Galaxy should be superior to both the Ambassador and Excelsior (and this coming from someone who flies the Excelsior as her main). For the record the Galaxy is not my favorite ship. With that said I think it's a little silly that ships that predate the Galaxy are superior. At one point the Enterprise was the flagship of the Federation fleet. You don't make a weak ship that is outperformed by older ships the flagship and you don't replace an existing model with one that is inferior. That makes no sense. I'm not sure what else to say at this point. Obviously those that think the ship is fine as is will not be convinced that this isn't the case, logical arguments have been made and apparently ignored so there's not much else to say. I will just wish the Galaxy lovers luck and hope that someday the devs do something to make the ship better. Peace out!
A lot of hate in this thread based on the misguided view that the people who want the ship "fixed" want it to be the end all of cruisers. I know that I personally am not of that view, and I like to believe most others are not either. We'd just like the ship to be competitive. In my opinion based on age the Galaxy should most likely be one of the top three fed cruisers. The Odyssey and Sovereign being newer should be better, but the Galaxy should be superior to both the Ambassador and Excelsior (and this coming from someone who flies the Excelsior as her main). For the record the Galaxy is not my favorite ship. With that said I think it's a little silly that ships that predate the Galaxy are superior. At one point the Enterprise was the flagship of the Federation fleet. You don't make a weak ship that is outperformed by older ships the flagship and you don't replace an existing model with one that is inferior. That makes no sense. I'm not sure what else to say at this point. Obviously those that think the ship is fine as is will not be convinced that this isn't the case, logical arguments have been made and apparently ignored so there's not much else to say. I will just wish the Galaxy lovers luck and hope that someday the devs do something to make the ship better. Peace out!
Agreed; although I doubt anything will change.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
i didnt say it was impossible, i said thats a basic watermark.
something escorts can do afk with green gear, and that most cruisers, let alone the galaxy, will fail at 99% of the time.
So now, because an escort can solo it that means the Galaxy should? How about my Nebula or my Regent? Or by your standards, should the Galaxy just be better then them all?
and you 2 are posting a2b & lobi cheese to counter what? you are just proving my point about how far you have to go to get BASIC ingame functionality from this thing.
Ummmmm......
1) I said I can do it without a2b/ep2a purple technician and warp doffs trick.
2) Even if I did use it, a2b and ep2a are engineer boff skills, something that the Galaxy has an excess of, which is taking an advantage of the ships set-up.
if i put as escort together with the same investment it could solo an stf, let alone function as part of one.
*facepalm*
yea... pvp being pretty much borked to the point that attempting to balance for it, breaks THE ENTIRETY OF THE REST OF THE GAME. thanks to abilities getting fubar to stop them too much for the cheese vs cheese...
I'm all for letting escorts being uber dps but glass cannons at the same time, is that what you are after, or is it just making the Galaxy the dps equivalent to an escort with more tanking ability?
Then why not look at the source material, there are TNG and DS9 Tech manuals and it EVEN STATES the mission profile of the Galaxy in there. Cryptic just cannot admit that they simply got it wrong and take steps to correct it. One of these steps would be the elimination of this ignorant and stubborn dev who is standing in the way of representing True Star Trek.
Cryptic are not Star Trek, their ships are not canon and I won't fly a bastardization over an original canon design.
Representing "true Trek" or some peoples opinion of "true Trek" based on information made up to go along with T.V. shows? There wasn't as much effort put into "non-T.V." show ships (such as the Soveriegn and others) because they werent in and out of production for nearly a decade each.
So because the mission profile of a ship when launched, does that mean it will be able to perform that roll to the same level of efficiency when compared to 40+ years later? Probably not. What do the tech manuals say about the Regent class?
Representing "true Trek" or some peoples opinion of "true Trek" based on information made up to go along with T.V. shows? There wasn't as much effort put into "non-T.V." show ships (such as the Soveriegn and others) because they werent in and out of production for nearly a decade each.
So because the mission profile of a ship when launched, does that mean it will be able to perform that roll to the same level of efficiency when compared to 40+ years later? Probably not. What do the tech manuals say about the Regent class?
Not to mention the Galaxy, no matter how powerful it is, would get shredded by a Klingon Battlecruiser firing their cannons (DHC or whatever) and Torpedoes. Also, didn't the Galaxy regularly get itself whopped like a red-headed step-child?
Not to mention the Galaxy, no matter how powerful it is, would get shredded by a Klingon Battlecruiser firing their cannons (DHC or whatever) and Torpedoes. Also, didn't the Galaxy regularly get itself whopped like a red-headed step-child?
Yep.
Just like the Sovereign does.
In actual ship to ship combat the Sovereign has a pitiful record.
It was Picard's presence, not the Enterprise, that brought down the Borg Cube. So can't count that.
4 QT into an unshielded Sphere that was in the process of beaming drones aboard your own ship. 1-0-0
Against the Son'a Vessels it was Riker that outmatched the enemy ships commanders to defeat them. No display of the Sovereigns combat capabilities. 1-0-1
Against a smaller frigate of the Son'a Riker took the Enterprise within the enemy ships shields and fired a few short quick bursts designed to take out the life support systems.
Again, no real combat prowess displayed. 1-0-2
In Nemesis we see her get owned by the Scimitar.
Dealing no weapon damage to the Scimitar over the course of the entire fight.
In fact we see more pressure put on the Scimitar by the IRW Valdore than the Enterprise ever does. And she runs out of weapon power in a very short fight. 1-1-2
In actual ship to ship combat the only ship victory that the Sovereign can claim is an unshielded Borg Sphere.
Against the Son'a she likely would have lost due to the Isolytic subspace weapons that they were equipped with.
And against the Scimitar she had to physically ram the ship to inflict any damage on it.
An action that took the Enterprise out of commission while only slowing, not preventing, the Scimitar's main goal. It took the sacrifice of Lt. Cmd. Data to take the ship out.
Crew is 4 wins 0 loses 0 draw/no-show
Ship is 1 win 1 lose 2 draw/no-show
Call my evaluation of the movies whatever kind of bias you want, its just what is seen in the movies.
Believe I am being whatever you wish, it won't matter if God himself tells you otherwise.
I personally love the Sovereign design. I love the detail that was put into her, and the over the top number of weapon placements all over the ship design. The way the neck curves from the QT launcher and wraps around the deflector dish is amazing!
She just doesn't have that impressive of a combat record in the movies.
Looks pretty freaking amazing regardless though +)
So here is the trick to the Double Lance Dreadnought. You are using Beam Overload 2 AND the Spinal Lance. Wait, you say, how can you do that they share a cooldown? This is true but the BO2 remains charged for 30 seconds and puts the Lance on 15 second cooldown. I am sure you can see where this is going
When you acquire a target first thing to do is hit BO2. Then keep your target in range whilst you wait for the CD on the lance to finish. At about 5 seconds start to cycle your other buffs. So hit TS1, TT1, APA, DEM, TacFleet. You are now ready to jump, don't waste time or you will lose the DEM. JUMP. Hit Borg tractor and Graviton Pulse generator, those two will basically hold any ship dead. Then hit FOMM and the Lance, then finally fire all weapons.
This is what happens to the target. First he is held by the tractor and the graviton generator pulse, then he is hit by the first shot from the lance taking down a shield facing and some hull. Then he is hit by the second shot from the lance which will either kill him or take him very low. Now your other weapons are firing and because you use the DEM/Marion combination your weapon power from the Lance shot has not dropped at all. He is then hit by your fully buffed BO2 which alone can and often hit for 25K, it can crit much higher and as your crit chance is already high you are likely to get a crit on him. If he still somehow survives that, the quantum salvo will catch up to him and finish him off. In the event you are tackling a strong tank you can run over him with warp plasma and drop the breen.
Almost no ship can survive all that unless their captain is extremely quick at hitting the right buffs.
Watch the target's buffs, wait till his TT is down before jumping.
By now his mates have seen him vape and are a little pissed off so they are homing in on you quickly, so hit RSP, evasive and Emp2E, add in Deuterium if you have it and the Rom singularity cloak if you need it. In the event you are unable to escape, cycle your aux to bat to keep your buffs up and you will have wide angle torp and BO2 hitting them quite often. You will mostly survive and probably take out another BoP on the way.
I love the Gal-X and as it seems the Fleet version is never to be made we'll have to stick with this.
Note: The above was written before the LoR changes and so the Warp Core has not been included, neither have any of the Rep passives, but basically you are going for accuracy and crit (acc goes to crit over and above target's defence value.
Yep.
Just like the Sovereign does.
In actual ship to ship combat the Sovereign has a pitiful record.
It was Picard's presence, not the Enterprise, that brought down the Borg Cube. So can't count that.
4 QT into an unshielded Sphere that was in the process of beaming drones aboard your own ship. 1-0-0
Against the Son'a Vessels it was Riker that outmatched the enemy ships commanders to defeat them. No display of the Sovereigns combat capabilities. 1-0-1
Against a smaller frigate of the Son'a Riker took the Enterprise within the enemy ships shields and fired a few short quick bursts designed to take out the life support systems.
Again, no real combat prowess displayed. 1-0-2
In Nemesis we see her get owned by the Scimitar.
Dealing no weapon damage to the Scimitar over the course of the entire fight.
In fact we see more pressure put on the Scimitar by the IRW Valdore than the Enterprise ever does. And she runs out of weapon power in a very short fight. 1-1-2
In actual ship to ship combat the only ship victory that the Sovereign can claim is an unshielded Borg Sphere.
Against the Son'a she likely would have lost due to the Isolytic subspace weapons that they were equipped with.
And against the Scimitar she had to physically ram the ship to inflict any damage on it.
An action that took the Enterprise out of commission while only slowing, not preventing, the Scimitar's main goal. It took the sacrifice of Lt. Cmd. Data to take the ship out.
Crew is 4 wins 0 loses 0 draw/no-show
Ship is 1 win 1 lose 2 draw/no-show
Call my evaluation of the movies whatever kind of bias you want, its just what is seen in the movies.
Believe I am being whatever you wish, it won't matter if God himself tells you otherwise.
I personally love the Sovereign design. I love the detail that was put into her, and the over the top number of weapon placements all over the ship design. The way the neck curves from the QT launcher and wraps around the deflector dish is amazing!
She just doesn't have that impressive of a combat record in the movies.
Looks pretty freaking amazing regardless though +)
IRW Valdore with Commander Donatra (according to Memory Alppha) at the helm?!
You mean to tell me that's the exact same IRW Valdore (maybe, sorta, who knows) with an Assimilated Donatra from Nemesis?!
I know people who have demonstrated 20K DPS to me in STFs. If you call that sub par, I think your goals are far too high for dps.
Do realize that not everyone looks at their goals the same way, so just because it is less for you, doesn't mean it's for others.
In short, each to their own. I suppose for you the Galaxy is a useless ship, but for many people out there, it isn't - even with its current set up. :cool:
Join www.UFPlanets.com
5 FED Fleets | 3 KDF Fleets - T5 Colony on both factions
none of which counter tac abilities or negate the point you already agreed to, that the galaxy is demonstrably sub par
The Galaxy suffers for being an early game design, created when the designers themselves didn't understand what they wanted and/or the planned meta for the game was far different. All the iconic ships suffer from that. The Defiant and Intrepid classes with their over abundance of tac and sci boff slots respectively suffer slightly less as there is less redundancy as there is for the galaxy. These days the best ships have very flexible boff layouts by using universal boff slots or have a nice mix of tac/engi/sci boff slots and are nothing like the hyper specialized Galaxy, Defiant, and Intrepid classes.
Personally I don't see why Cryptic can't just make the ensign or the lt. boff station be universal, or at least offer a way for a player to change them to tac or sci. It could be a consumable and I wouldn't mind as it'd make a lot of the older designs competitive. Or maybe that's just it, if the iconic ships were competitive they couldn't continue to rely on their ship-centric economic model could they? If a Defiant could have a similar boff layout as a patrol escort or a advnaced escort how many people would still pine for the bugship, it'd still be superior but not AS superior.
if their economic model is ship centric,
why make 2 out of 3 of them red headed step children?
excluding all who dont want to play in the predefined "derp gets tehs tacth in teh esthcoth! den maek teh moar dakkas!!" way is implementing a 'ship based economic model?
that is litterally one of the singularly most obviously self defeating arguments someoine can make on the forums.
"ship based economic model" vs "dont make ships people really want viable ingame so the dont/wont spend"?
you serious?
Are you?
How new are you anyway? I'm pretty sure I've seen your name around the forums before. By now you must have realized that Cryptic's big non dil moneymakers are ships. Ships move lockbox key sales. Ships are the big prizes and ships are the big lobi store items. Ships get put in the c-store more than anything and even to the exclusion of other things.
The reason they wouldn't want to make the iconic ships competitive is that it'd be another barrier to people buying more ships. Cryptic doesn't want you to buy one iconic ship, they want you try to get lockbox or lobi ships. And to keep trying as new lockbox ships come out. If people could make the Iconics competitive they would have to get over their love for their iconic ship before deciding to start going after a lockbox/lobi ship like crazy.
I listened to too many interviews back in the day. They hated the way the ship was presented back in the classic Trek era with Kirk. The primary reason the Galaxy was shown as so weak on film and screen in the TNG era onward was that the writers and more influential actors felt that for good story telling the Enterprise really needed to be threatened in order to build tension and drama for a tense viewing experience.
What they all forgot was that for such trickery of writing to be meaningful you had to build the ship up as powerful to begin with on the screen rather than simply ?talking it up? as the Federation?s best. So we ended up with a lot of scenes where the Enterprise got beat up but really had no context of the ship as powerful to give those scenes meaning or make the enemies as threatening as they wanted us to see them. Show don?t tell...
As an aside in the TNG era (and onward) I think the only time they succeeded in making an enemy truly threatening to the viewer was with the first few episodes involving the Borg. They were originally written as a force of nature with a humanoid face that we were not meant to relate too personally. Later writers proved themselves hacks by trying to humanize the Borg for cheap drama inducing character stories rather than working out the means to good man vs. nature tales as they simply didn't seem to know how to write them.
I think one real and unsolvable problem in the game comes from the compromises made to the IP in order to make Star Trek into a traditional mmo game. Trek doesn?t really fit the classic design well. Almost everything we do in game involves killing something and taking its stuff where the Enterprise was a ship for exploration and defense.
The Enterprise was presented as a battleship with additional support abilities from the naval era of big gun warfare with the national value of a modern carrier. It brought the big guns to the fight where the smaller ships supported. It's what we expect of a Galaxy class ship but we ended up with a game where the escorts are actually the big gun ships. It?s no wonder people are upset.
I do think the Galaxy is underpowered and some things simply can?t be fixed with the current game model. They want cruisers as support rather than as gun ships and that's that. However, I think ship balancng in STO is pretty wonky right now due to power creep from the cash shop over the past years and that a real top to bottom ship rebalancing pass is needed to bring everything into line and that?s a bigger subject than this thread covers.
I also think a class balancing pass is needed in an era where DPS is unarguably king in play where it seems only science can nay say in PVP only... Or perhaps I mean a SCI ship like the Karfi with a Tac captain.
all of that is easily solved with bridge & system refit tokens.
hell, the ability to retrofit a lockbox ships bridge setup onto the ship you want would make the things more appealing to people who think one ship or another are ugly as sin but still want the functionality.
making only dil & special ships refitable, rather than the generic mirror ships would also make the dil ships more valuable again.
this is why i reject the 'ship-economy' argument, because if thats what is being done, its being done so incompetently its ridiculous.
but, yet again, you dodging the question.
if their economic model is ship centric, why are 2 out of 3 of them deliberately made sub par purchases?
if the model was just 'ship centric', they would be tripping over themselves to monetise the bloody obvious demand for a competent galaxy class. and there would be a 50 buck galaxy package in the c-store.
What obvious demand? Just because there is a small, vocal minority who keep this thread alive doesn't mean it actually represents some sort of grassroots movement. If you think about it, the only people who might benefit from a change to the Galaxy are either people who use the Galaxy now but are dissatisfied with it, or people who would use the Galaxy if it were "better", but currently don't. Neither group is necessarily especially large, and even if Cryptic did want to adjust the Boff seating on the ship (no small feat - remember that during the big ship adjustment in the LoR beta, they did a character wipe rather than muck about with trying to patch over characters who had the 'old ships'), there is no consensus on what change would be "right", and thus no way for Cryptic to please those players as a whole, even if they felt compelled to try by threads like this.
Even if they could find the "perfect solution", however, I think you are grossly overestimating how easy it would be to make money from implementing it. The only way Cryptic profits by upgrading the Galaxy is by selling more of them, but currently one of the two target markets for this change (people who have the ship, but aren't happy with it) already owns the ship, so no money made there. In addition, a fair number of people get the Galaxy class for "Free" through veterans tokens, so that, too, reduces potential sales. To pay for the development time it takes to do this, then, Cryptic has to rely on the subset of people who want the Galaxy but don't currently own it AND who won't get it for free through a VA token. Probably not that many people, at this point.
Now, of course, Cryptic could fix this problem by attempting to widen the customer base through one or both of the following techniques: First, they could create an entirely new Galaxy class - new model, new stats, everything, and sell that, while leaving the current Galaxy variants alone. This has the virtue of allowing them to sell fresh ships to every Galaxy fan in the game, but would likely be seen both as a "Cash Grab" and a "Slap in the face" to people who had already purchased the ship once (or twice, or even three times if you count the Fleet Galaxy and the Venture).
Second, they could make the Galaxy so good that it draws in players who aren't Galaxy fans, but who are willing to play a ship for its stats, rather than its aesthetic qualities. This again allows Cryptic to widen the potential market, but again risks alienating a different segment of the player base, by "forcing" them to play a ship they don't like to get the stats they want. Thus, instead of quelling the complaining about the Galaxy, they have simply exchanged one unhappy group for another. Probably not a net gain for our fair city.
Now, this is the point where people say "But nobody should have to play a ship they don't like to get the stats they want, because perfect balance is possible and here's my suggestion how to do it...", and let me just stop you there. Stop and examine where we are for a minute, and it will demonstrate why these changes are extremely unlikely: You are now suggesting that in order to appease a small subset of players (the Galaxy fans), Cryptic ultimately needs to overhaul and rebalance the entire game. If that doesn't drive home the economics (or lack thereof), I don't know what will.
You may feel that your idea would make the game better for everyone, and you may even be right, but that's still missing the point - the question is if it would make the game ENOUGH better to justify the huge cost in development time. I mean, would I like the option to, say, switch around my Boff slots a little? Sure, maybe, but honestly unless it allowed me to do something totally broken like slot two full commanders and two lts, I wouldn't pay for it, because my ship is fine as it is. If it did allow me to do something broken? Well then you've created a balance problem, AND you've widened the skill gap between players, neither of which improves the health of the game.
only reason i am hare is because i can see an obvious disparity which i blame on inflexable game mechanics and the dumbest use of the rpg trinity i can think of in any active game, though at least the warbirgs showed a glimmer of hope that the devs are getting past that.
So are you talking about the Trinity/game mechanics applied to the Galaxy-class, or the Galaxy-class applied to the Trinity/game mechanics?
Seeing the content you have been writing in your last couple posts, it seems as if you are focusing on the latter. If the Galaxy-class is only an example to prove the flaw of this game/s trinity or game mechanics, then this is the wrong thread to be posting in.
there will never bee a perfect solution to please everyone, but at least the ideas i come up with are suggestions on how to offset established systems that need fixing, without adding class specific power creep, and my idea of refitable boff layouts means that people get the "option" to change something while letting those that dont keep what they have, does it help that boff powers themselves are STUPIDLY dakka oriented? no, that is yet another issue to be discussed.
quite, a new set of galaxy derived skinns could be a solution, its one i would suggest for a replacement connie with something to add to the game, though it'd be superfluous to the game the idea of turn offset by range and refitable boff layouts would get instant normalising effects, it would just be a matter of adjusting ratios of those stats. then to go work out the boff powers... because they REALLY need seeing too.
that fear of the galaxy being made an uberflotte ship being a primary source of fare for many... yet ignored by most who are benefitting from the big ships getting the short end of the stick. people complaining about the bugship for example, that is example of something as op as what you seem to fear. yet that too is sign or bad balance & needs adjusted.
as i keep saying, i want to see ships that are the same tier, with the same grade gear, be capable of handling content to the same level of competance. which the just cant.
You're right, there is no perfect solution to satisfy, what is it, 2 million players or something? (There was some kind of player number Cryptic released months ago, but I forgot what it was.)
The ideas you are pitching are great ideas, don't get me wrong. Cryptic would be wise to implement them. But, as we all know, PWE/Cryptic won't do anything that doesn't get them money or a better rep (which nets more players, which results in more paying players... so it's back to money :P ). Other than corrections, such as the EPtA Cloak Detection bug, they won't invest money in paying the staff members to revise the game's mechanics. So we might as well live with what we've got - which includes the current STO Galaxy-class.
this thread exists, because the galaxy has many of the wost elements this game can provide with no offset.
slow
cant turn
cant dps
cant by used outside of being a target.
that this thread focuses on the galaxy is a side effect of all that TRIBBLE in one.
Slow? True.
Can't turn (fast)? True.
Can't deal sufficient damage (compared to almost every other cruiser)? True.
Can't be used, other than being a target? False.
I've already commented on this issue before, about 10 to 20 pages back. The Galaxy-class has sufficient boff space to take up a side job, whether it be Holding, small healing, etc. It does have other uses besides being a giant bulls-eye.
not only that, you are ignoring, and i can only guess deliberately, this entire game DOES need rebalancing, the pvp is a joke of cheese vs cheese
...
this is why i hate the bs on these forums.
you cant make a simple post without it getting strawmanned, or getting some red herring response. or some 'im teh l33t sk1llz' kid saying learn to play.
Again, this seems to be more related to the game itself, and not this ship.
Also. If that last sentence is a reference to me: You are walking a fine line.
"What is your beef with the Galaxy Cryptic?" is the name of this thread; and not "What is your beef with players who don't share your viewpoint?"
nowhere did i say fully customize the boff slots in a may that would be that exploitable.
most i have ever said is to be able to buy the boff stationing of any of the 6 RA dil ships or to apply the bridge layout of any box ship you own to the RA ships or above.
and it that breaks the game, then that box ship shouldnt have had the stats it did in the first place
I agree. Having the ability to change up your boff stations would be a welcome feature, even if it costs a huge amount of ingame or paid resources to do it. Like you, I would like to see some more flexibility in STO's Galaxy-class. Note I said "like to see", not "expect to see" - I doubt the ship's existing boff/console setup would be changed.
I've also suggested on numerous occasions, to implement a "Universal" console slot (similar to "Universal" bridge officer seats), where you can put any console in that slot. It would help alleviate a lot of issues with players complaining that there is insufficient damage output due to only 2 tactical console slots in the Fleet Galaxy.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
What obvious demand? Just because there is a small, vocal minority who keep this thread alive doesn't mean it actually represents some sort of grassroots movement.
i am sorry, but i completely disagree with you on this, i bielieve that they are many player that would love an improvement on galaxy ship, but many of them are not vocal about it.
and just like bauld state in a thread concerning the galaxy x on october it is not alway the the same one like you might bielieve in the first place.
fresh week, fresh galaxy x thread...atleast not always from the same circle of persons.
i wonder if the devs will take it into consideration...probabaly not.
PS: yes for me the week starts on saturday evening...it's part of my religious believe, Pastafarianism. Deal with it!
and it is the same for the galaxy retrofit thread.
i follow them both.
how many new name i see demanding for improvement on these ship?
how many are beeing slap in the face by veteran forum who told them it never happened, then you never see them again.
daes it mean that their opinion or demand don't count anymore?
how many just don't said anything in the forum about it?
how many have just give up about it?
yes there is only a few of us that are still fighting for it in the forum, daes that mean that in the entire player base they are not much more?
i am absolutely certain that they are.
i see it in zone chat, i see it in my own fleet, i see it in OPVPchannel, i see it in every thread these ships generate on this forum.
there is no ship that have generate that much thread than these one.
and that not counting the one that would try this ship if they were not told to do otherwhise by veteran player, me included, in the game.
and the one that are just voiceless about it but daesn't think less.
we are just the tip of the iceberg.
this week there is the DDeridex ship feature in the new pages of the site, i remember 2 or 3 motnh ago when they feature the galaxy dreadnought... 98% of the comment were people complaining about it or stating that they will never put money on something like this, and the name that appear then was not the same that the one that make threads about it here.
and even if Cryptic did want to adjust the Boff seating on the ship (no small feat - remember that during the big ship adjustment in the LoR beta, they did a character wipe rather than muck about with trying to patch over characters who had the 'old ships')
they did not wipe character on LOR because they were afraid to patch old ship, it just the way they do when there is a big update and that they want you to test it entirely.
they did wipe all tribble character before the "free to play" move of the game, just before season 5 when they wanted us to test the new free to play progression from beguining to the end including the new ( at the time ) doff system, they were many reward that was given and these one were given of the level your toon have achieve in tribble and the tiers you achieve in the doff system.
and that is something i remember quite well having at the time 15 copie of my toon for build testing... all wiped out.
so it is completely unrelated
I think you are grossly overestimating how easy it would be to make money from implementing it
yes, on that point it is obviously something that will not make money right away.
even if i can come with the argument that the people that will switch back to these ship will generate money by purchasing special console and gear for them, it is still a long shot.
so in any case nothing very solid to undergo major development team.
but... unless you are speaking about making a special episode and a 3 pack ship cstore i don't see how transforming a bo slot into universal required any developement team.
and in any case, dstahl confirmed the opinion of cryptic in that matter in one of his last interview, that they are agree that some old ship need an overhaul and that they are talking about it.
Second, they could make the Galaxy so good that it draws in players who aren't Galaxy fans, but who are willing to play a ship for its stats, rather than its aesthetic qualities
HAHAHAH, ho boy, if that could only be true! but i think we are safe from such a things to happen, hehehe.
and frankly it don't need to be an other "bug ship stats" to be competitive.
something like the ambassador would do it, and this ship isn't consider like the "must have" cruiser, even if it a very good one.
I mean, would I like the option to, say, switch around my Boff slots a little? Sure, maybe, but honestly unless it allowed me to do something totally broken like slot two full commanders and two lts, I wouldn't pay for it, because my ship is fine as it is. If it did allow me to do something broken? Well then you've created a balance problem, AND you've widened the skill gap between players, neither of which improves the health of the game.
why there is alway extreme example in people argument in this forum, you guy don't known middle ground?
they are improvement that can be made to this ship and they don't need to be broken to make it better and to be apreciate.
and i dont buy a ship because it broken, but because i like it, i guess it a different way of thinking.
i can see the appeal of universal boff stations... but thats from using a bop and realising how powerful a resource these are, thats why i shy away from the idea of making it more common, and suggest the ra boff slots be selectable at perchase and refitable (for dil or zen) later
And how many times in the last three years have they dangled this "carrot" in front of you Galaxy fanboys in the last THREE years? Quite often. However, even if they do show them "some love", I guarantee you that THEIR version of "love" is STILL going to be different than you Galaxy fanboys version of "love".
It WON'T have FIVE tactical console slots as many of you Galaxy Fanboys want. It WON'T be as powerful as the escorts such as the Defiant, Andorian ships, Jem'Haddar Attack ships. It WON'T have the turn rate as the Sov. They MAY throw in another tactical console slot and a universal officer station and a"special feature console", but that's it. They will NOT make the Gal this "super ship" as MANY of you Galaxy fanboys seem to be arguing for. And as soon as they don't, you Galaxy fanboys will be back here sobbing and whining again. Guaranteed.
the model of the ship has been updated 3 times the console lay out was changed to make it 9 instead of 8 when the saucer sep was made into a console.
there track record seems to be pretty good int he last 3 years no idea what you are tying to get at
and if you honestly think that's what we want form the galaxy i suggest taking some jr. high reading comprehension classes.... or 4
Comments
No calling me ignorant is an insult, and at least have the courage to admit that. If it's not, then I should be able to call you ignorant as well without any problems, right? Grow up.
And if STO is NOT about ECONOMICS, then what IS it about?
And again, the bottom line is that your useless arguments and insults haven't changed ANYTHING. At the end of the day, the Galaxy STILL sucks. What do you have to show for your snarkyness with regards to improvements for the Galaxy? Nothing. So go put your sobbing and whining energies to something else, or at LEAST be adult enough to accept the consequences of your crappy actions and decisions.
You know, the LAST time you guys came with all of these insults and bad behavior, the moderator threaten to shut this thread down. Is that the road that you guys REALLY want to go down? If it is, then DON'T complain if that consequence occurs.
Just off topic slightly, its nice to see some of the bigger fleets support the notion of a better galaxy. So thank you
that what i suggested when he first come up in this thread, but now i don't want that.
it is obvious that he is not a big fan of the galaxy:P and since he give much energy trying to ( i think ) discredit us, i have found him to be very valuable in many aspect.
the first, he make me laft, really, and don't take that as an insult!
furthemore, and that is more important, no matter what i bielieve or what you guy bielieve, as a "non galaxy fanboy" and even as a suppose troll that desire to shut the thread, his opinion could be quite refreshing indeed.
since it appear that you are agree with us that the galaxy suck
let said, i am Q, and i give you total control over sto development.
what would be your solution as a non biased " galaxy fanboy" to not make the galaxy suck?
don't worry this is not a trick question to then mocking any solution you can give us.
and even if you have the intention to troll the response i am still interested in whatever you will respond.
you have demonstrate that you can give much energy to defend your point of view ( and even if the intervention you made so far really look like some troll intervention it daes not shadow the will behind it )
so i am very curious to see the result in this energy being use at a creative solution rather than what i have seen until now.
care to try?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Your bizzare arguments have gotten you ,where exactly? Oh that's right, it has gotten you a weak ship that you Galaxy fanboys have been sobbing in your milk about for the last THREE years. There's no point for me to go back and forth on certain points when the RESULTS are quite clear: the Galaxy is a substandard "warship" ship that even CBS has given up on.
The very fact that Cryptic has to STILL negotiate with CBS after THREE years regarding obtaining CBS's permission to increase the Galaxy's lackluster performance is quite telling. And the "story" that it tells is NOT good news for you Galaxy fanboys. It appears that the execs at CBS also saw "Tin Man", "Rascals", "Darmok", etc., and decided that the ship was good for cateloging gaseous anomolies, but as far as it being a VIABLE warship, forget it.
So why don't you Galaxy fanboys send CBS copies of the "Tech Manual" that you so religiously adhere to (when it's conveient, of course), and try to make your "case" that way? Good luck.
You know what? If my intention was to shut down this thread, it would be a piece of cake to do since you Galaxy fanboys are such emotional "wildcards" when it comes to desenting viewpoints. I actually think that it's IMPOSSIBLE for you guys NOT to engage in the disrepctful manner that you do when there are discenting viewpoints.
So I can GUARANTEE you that they won't listen to you, and are MORE than willing to get this thead shut down so that they can have the "last disrespectful word". As I said before, you Galaxy fanboys are your worst enemies, and I'm sure that this will be proven true regarding the "future" (or lack thereof) of this thread.
Well, since you guyts haven't answers MY questions, I don't think so. Next?
You guys are SO predictable (and funny).:D
...and please stop quoting him. I blacklisted him but I still get his post through quotes
Your post pretty much sums things up
Agreed; although I doubt anything will change.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Lag Watch:
Delta Rising: Warning
Anniversary Event: Severe
Iconian Season: Critical
So now, because an escort can solo it that means the Galaxy should? How about my Nebula or my Regent? Or by your standards, should the Galaxy just be better then them all?
Ummmmm......
1) I said I can do it without a2b/ep2a purple technician and warp doffs trick.
2) Even if I did use it, a2b and ep2a are engineer boff skills, something that the Galaxy has an excess of, which is taking an advantage of the ships set-up.
I'm all for letting escorts being uber dps but glass cannons at the same time, is that what you are after, or is it just making the Galaxy the dps equivalent to an escort with more tanking ability?
Representing "true Trek" or some peoples opinion of "true Trek" based on information made up to go along with T.V. shows? There wasn't as much effort put into "non-T.V." show ships (such as the Soveriegn and others) because they werent in and out of production for nearly a decade each.
So because the mission profile of a ship when launched, does that mean it will be able to perform that roll to the same level of efficiency when compared to 40+ years later? Probably not. What do the tech manuals say about the Regent class?
Not to mention the Galaxy, no matter how powerful it is, would get shredded by a Klingon Battlecruiser firing their cannons (DHC or whatever) and Torpedoes. Also, didn't the Galaxy regularly get itself whopped like a red-headed step-child?
Yep.
Just like the Sovereign does.
In actual ship to ship combat the Sovereign has a pitiful record.
It was Picard's presence, not the Enterprise, that brought down the Borg Cube. So can't count that.
4 QT into an unshielded Sphere that was in the process of beaming drones aboard your own ship. 1-0-0
Against the Son'a Vessels it was Riker that outmatched the enemy ships commanders to defeat them. No display of the Sovereigns combat capabilities. 1-0-1
Against a smaller frigate of the Son'a Riker took the Enterprise within the enemy ships shields and fired a few short quick bursts designed to take out the life support systems.
Again, no real combat prowess displayed. 1-0-2
In Nemesis we see her get owned by the Scimitar.
Dealing no weapon damage to the Scimitar over the course of the entire fight.
In fact we see more pressure put on the Scimitar by the IRW Valdore than the Enterprise ever does. And she runs out of weapon power in a very short fight. 1-1-2
In actual ship to ship combat the only ship victory that the Sovereign can claim is an unshielded Borg Sphere.
Against the Son'a she likely would have lost due to the Isolytic subspace weapons that they were equipped with.
And against the Scimitar she had to physically ram the ship to inflict any damage on it.
An action that took the Enterprise out of commission while only slowing, not preventing, the Scimitar's main goal. It took the sacrifice of Lt. Cmd. Data to take the ship out.
Crew is 4 wins 0 loses 0 draw/no-show
Ship is 1 win 1 lose 2 draw/no-show
Call my evaluation of the movies whatever kind of bias you want, its just what is seen in the movies.
Believe I am being whatever you wish, it won't matter if God himself tells you otherwise.
I personally love the Sovereign design. I love the detail that was put into her, and the over the top number of weapon placements all over the ship design. The way the neck curves from the QT launcher and wraps around the deflector dish is amazing!
She just doesn't have that impressive of a combat record in the movies.
Looks pretty freaking amazing regardless though +)
You mean to tell me that's the exact same IRW Valdore (maybe, sorta, who knows) with an Assimilated Donatra from Nemesis?!
Crazy eh +)
In the game the new IRW is a Scimitar Dreadnought, while in the movie she is in the Valdore/Mogai/Norexan class of vessel.
Kinda bummed me out though. I really liked Donatra.
But they killed her off in the both the books and the games +(
Do realize that not everyone looks at their goals the same way, so just because it is less for you, doesn't mean it's for others.
In short, each to their own. I suppose for you the Galaxy is a useless ship, but for many people out there, it isn't - even with its current set up. :cool:
5 FED Fleets | 3 KDF Fleets - T5 Colony on both factions
The Galaxy suffers for being an early game design, created when the designers themselves didn't understand what they wanted and/or the planned meta for the game was far different. All the iconic ships suffer from that. The Defiant and Intrepid classes with their over abundance of tac and sci boff slots respectively suffer slightly less as there is less redundancy as there is for the galaxy. These days the best ships have very flexible boff layouts by using universal boff slots or have a nice mix of tac/engi/sci boff slots and are nothing like the hyper specialized Galaxy, Defiant, and Intrepid classes.
Personally I don't see why Cryptic can't just make the ensign or the lt. boff station be universal, or at least offer a way for a player to change them to tac or sci. It could be a consumable and I wouldn't mind as it'd make a lot of the older designs competitive. Or maybe that's just it, if the iconic ships were competitive they couldn't continue to rely on their ship-centric economic model could they? If a Defiant could have a similar boff layout as a patrol escort or a advnaced escort how many people would still pine for the bugship, it'd still be superior but not AS superior.
Are you?
How new are you anyway? I'm pretty sure I've seen your name around the forums before. By now you must have realized that Cryptic's big non dil moneymakers are ships. Ships move lockbox key sales. Ships are the big prizes and ships are the big lobi store items. Ships get put in the c-store more than anything and even to the exclusion of other things.
The reason they wouldn't want to make the iconic ships competitive is that it'd be another barrier to people buying more ships. Cryptic doesn't want you to buy one iconic ship, they want you try to get lockbox or lobi ships. And to keep trying as new lockbox ships come out. If people could make the Iconics competitive they would have to get over their love for their iconic ship before deciding to start going after a lockbox/lobi ship like crazy.
What they all forgot was that for such trickery of writing to be meaningful you had to build the ship up as powerful to begin with on the screen rather than simply ?talking it up? as the Federation?s best. So we ended up with a lot of scenes where the Enterprise got beat up but really had no context of the ship as powerful to give those scenes meaning or make the enemies as threatening as they wanted us to see them. Show don?t tell...
As an aside in the TNG era (and onward) I think the only time they succeeded in making an enemy truly threatening to the viewer was with the first few episodes involving the Borg. They were originally written as a force of nature with a humanoid face that we were not meant to relate too personally. Later writers proved themselves hacks by trying to humanize the Borg for cheap drama inducing character stories rather than working out the means to good man vs. nature tales as they simply didn't seem to know how to write them.
I think one real and unsolvable problem in the game comes from the compromises made to the IP in order to make Star Trek into a traditional mmo game. Trek doesn?t really fit the classic design well. Almost everything we do in game involves killing something and taking its stuff where the Enterprise was a ship for exploration and defense.
The Enterprise was presented as a battleship with additional support abilities from the naval era of big gun warfare with the national value of a modern carrier. It brought the big guns to the fight where the smaller ships supported. It's what we expect of a Galaxy class ship but we ended up with a game where the escorts are actually the big gun ships. It?s no wonder people are upset.
I do think the Galaxy is underpowered and some things simply can?t be fixed with the current game model. They want cruisers as support rather than as gun ships and that's that. However, I think ship balancng in STO is pretty wonky right now due to power creep from the cash shop over the past years and that a real top to bottom ship rebalancing pass is needed to bring everything into line and that?s a bigger subject than this thread covers.
I also think a class balancing pass is needed in an era where DPS is unarguably king in play where it seems only science can nay say in PVP only... Or perhaps I mean a SCI ship like the Karfi with a Tac captain.
What obvious demand? Just because there is a small, vocal minority who keep this thread alive doesn't mean it actually represents some sort of grassroots movement. If you think about it, the only people who might benefit from a change to the Galaxy are either people who use the Galaxy now but are dissatisfied with it, or people who would use the Galaxy if it were "better", but currently don't. Neither group is necessarily especially large, and even if Cryptic did want to adjust the Boff seating on the ship (no small feat - remember that during the big ship adjustment in the LoR beta, they did a character wipe rather than muck about with trying to patch over characters who had the 'old ships'), there is no consensus on what change would be "right", and thus no way for Cryptic to please those players as a whole, even if they felt compelled to try by threads like this.
Even if they could find the "perfect solution", however, I think you are grossly overestimating how easy it would be to make money from implementing it. The only way Cryptic profits by upgrading the Galaxy is by selling more of them, but currently one of the two target markets for this change (people who have the ship, but aren't happy with it) already owns the ship, so no money made there. In addition, a fair number of people get the Galaxy class for "Free" through veterans tokens, so that, too, reduces potential sales. To pay for the development time it takes to do this, then, Cryptic has to rely on the subset of people who want the Galaxy but don't currently own it AND who won't get it for free through a VA token. Probably not that many people, at this point.
Now, of course, Cryptic could fix this problem by attempting to widen the customer base through one or both of the following techniques: First, they could create an entirely new Galaxy class - new model, new stats, everything, and sell that, while leaving the current Galaxy variants alone. This has the virtue of allowing them to sell fresh ships to every Galaxy fan in the game, but would likely be seen both as a "Cash Grab" and a "Slap in the face" to people who had already purchased the ship once (or twice, or even three times if you count the Fleet Galaxy and the Venture).
Second, they could make the Galaxy so good that it draws in players who aren't Galaxy fans, but who are willing to play a ship for its stats, rather than its aesthetic qualities. This again allows Cryptic to widen the potential market, but again risks alienating a different segment of the player base, by "forcing" them to play a ship they don't like to get the stats they want. Thus, instead of quelling the complaining about the Galaxy, they have simply exchanged one unhappy group for another. Probably not a net gain for our fair city.
Now, this is the point where people say "But nobody should have to play a ship they don't like to get the stats they want, because perfect balance is possible and here's my suggestion how to do it...", and let me just stop you there. Stop and examine where we are for a minute, and it will demonstrate why these changes are extremely unlikely: You are now suggesting that in order to appease a small subset of players (the Galaxy fans), Cryptic ultimately needs to overhaul and rebalance the entire game. If that doesn't drive home the economics (or lack thereof), I don't know what will.
You may feel that your idea would make the game better for everyone, and you may even be right, but that's still missing the point - the question is if it would make the game ENOUGH better to justify the huge cost in development time. I mean, would I like the option to, say, switch around my Boff slots a little? Sure, maybe, but honestly unless it allowed me to do something totally broken like slot two full commanders and two lts, I wouldn't pay for it, because my ship is fine as it is. If it did allow me to do something broken? Well then you've created a balance problem, AND you've widened the skill gap between players, neither of which improves the health of the game.
That's not going to happen. We all know this by now. The Excelsior is what it is in this game. That's not changing.
It still is. And even shows up to help you in certain mission maps. It's an Odyssey now.
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~syberghost
Thats pretty much your answer...
Seeing the content you have been writing in your last couple posts, it seems as if you are focusing on the latter. If the Galaxy-class is only an example to prove the flaw of this game/s trinity or game mechanics, then this is the wrong thread to be posting in.
You're right, there is no perfect solution to satisfy, what is it, 2 million players or something? (There was some kind of player number Cryptic released months ago, but I forgot what it was.)
The ideas you are pitching are great ideas, don't get me wrong. Cryptic would be wise to implement them. But, as we all know, PWE/Cryptic won't do anything that doesn't get them money or a better rep (which nets more players, which results in more paying players... so it's back to money :P ). Other than corrections, such as the EPtA Cloak Detection bug, they won't invest money in paying the staff members to revise the game's mechanics. So we might as well live with what we've got - which includes the current STO Galaxy-class.
Slow? True.
Can't turn (fast)? True.
Can't deal sufficient damage (compared to almost every other cruiser)? True.
Can't be used, other than being a target? False.
I've already commented on this issue before, about 10 to 20 pages back. The Galaxy-class has sufficient boff space to take up a side job, whether it be Holding, small healing, etc. It does have other uses besides being a giant bulls-eye.
Again, this seems to be more related to the game itself, and not this ship.
Also. If that last sentence is a reference to me: You are walking a fine line.
"What is your beef with the Galaxy Cryptic?" is the name of this thread; and not "What is your beef with players who don't share your viewpoint?"
I agree. Having the ability to change up your boff stations would be a welcome feature, even if it costs a huge amount of ingame or paid resources to do it. Like you, I would like to see some more flexibility in STO's Galaxy-class. Note I said "like to see", not "expect to see" - I doubt the ship's existing boff/console setup would be changed.
I've also suggested on numerous occasions, to implement a "Universal" console slot (similar to "Universal" bridge officer seats), where you can put any console in that slot. It would help alleviate a lot of issues with players complaining that there is insufficient damage output due to only 2 tactical console slots in the Fleet Galaxy.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
i am sorry, but i completely disagree with you on this, i bielieve that they are many player that would love an improvement on galaxy ship, but many of them are not vocal about it.
and just like bauld state in a thread concerning the galaxy x on october it is not alway the the same one like you might bielieve in the first place.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=394971
and it is the same for the galaxy retrofit thread.
i follow them both.
how many new name i see demanding for improvement on these ship?
how many are beeing slap in the face by veteran forum who told them it never happened, then you never see them again.
daes it mean that their opinion or demand don't count anymore?
how many just don't said anything in the forum about it?
how many have just give up about it?
yes there is only a few of us that are still fighting for it in the forum, daes that mean that in the entire player base they are not much more?
i am absolutely certain that they are.
i see it in zone chat, i see it in my own fleet, i see it in OPVPchannel, i see it in every thread these ships generate on this forum.
there is no ship that have generate that much thread than these one.
and that not counting the one that would try this ship if they were not told to do otherwhise by veteran player, me included, in the game.
and the one that are just voiceless about it but daesn't think less.
we are just the tip of the iceberg.
this week there is the DDeridex ship feature in the new pages of the site, i remember 2 or 3 motnh ago when they feature the galaxy dreadnought... 98% of the comment were people complaining about it or stating that they will never put money on something like this, and the name that appear then was not the same that the one that make threads about it here.
they did not wipe character on LOR because they were afraid to patch old ship, it just the way they do when there is a big update and that they want you to test it entirely.
they did wipe all tribble character before the "free to play" move of the game, just before season 5 when they wanted us to test the new free to play progression from beguining to the end including the new ( at the time ) doff system, they were many reward that was given and these one were given of the level your toon have achieve in tribble and the tiers you achieve in the doff system.
and that is something i remember quite well having at the time 15 copie of my toon for build testing... all wiped out.
so it is completely unrelated
yes, on that point it is obviously something that will not make money right away.
even if i can come with the argument that the people that will switch back to these ship will generate money by purchasing special console and gear for them, it is still a long shot.
so in any case nothing very solid to undergo major development team.
but... unless you are speaking about making a special episode and a 3 pack ship cstore i don't see how transforming a bo slot into universal required any developement team.
and in any case, dstahl confirmed the opinion of cryptic in that matter in one of his last interview, that they are agree that some old ship need an overhaul and that they are talking about it.
HAHAHAH, ho boy, if that could only be true! but i think we are safe from such a things to happen, hehehe.
and frankly it don't need to be an other "bug ship stats" to be competitive.
something like the ambassador would do it, and this ship isn't consider like the "must have" cruiser, even if it a very good one.
why there is alway extreme example in people argument in this forum, you guy don't known middle ground?
they are improvement that can be made to this ship and they don't need to be broken to make it better and to be apreciate.
and i dont buy a ship because it broken, but because i like it, i guess it a different way of thinking.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
hmm, i like that idea too.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
the model of the ship has been updated 3 times the console lay out was changed to make it 9 instead of 8 when the saucer sep was made into a console.
there track record seems to be pretty good int he last 3 years no idea what you are tying to get at
and if you honestly think that's what we want form the galaxy i suggest taking some jr. high reading comprehension classes.... or 4