Ok, first off I do want a new refit of the Galaxy, it is in dire need of an upgrade, no argument there,The current Galaxy IS a great ship
how can you said that this ship is great but in the same time stating that he is in dire need of an upgrade?
that is something that don't fit well with your argument.
Fact is with the current galaxy you CAN make it a really tanky ship
and that shoudn't come as a surprise considering it is a heavie engie cruiser, so you point being? because in that area it is certainly not the best, not even second....or third.
but that sacrifices its firepower
well, there is not much left to sacrifice with just a lt tactical bo you known.
not the best in game by any means but she is an old girl now.
not older than the exelsior and the ambassador so again, your point beeing?
and note that the ambassador is more powerfull AND more tanky than a galaxy retrofit.
you CAN make that lance hit between 20 and 50k but it requires a lot of work and a very niche build.
this daes not required a lot of work, just a specialise build.
and galaxy x player shoudn't be force to use a niche build that use 2 or 3 consoles slot just to make the abilitie shine every 3 minute in kerrat.
the phaser lotus of the chimera and the javelin of the gurumba don't need that kind of compensation to work good on their own.
why should it be the case for the galaxy x? an other example of the special treatement this ship receives.
which might be a reason Cryptic have delayed the release of any new Gal' ship, along with KDF stuff, 'look at them moan they don't have it *feed KDF some stuff* look at them moan they only get breadcrumbs, is there any point in doing anything to please them or will they moan no matter what happens?
yes, you are right, we should certainly not notify cryptic that their is something wrong with it or they might noticed it, or worse, be offended and in 8 years old reaction never upgrade it as a result, that a brilliant strategy.
I'm not directing this at you guys but this is my general view of what goes on on the forums as a whole. No matter what they release in game there's a wave of people saying 'how dare you' 'you did it wrong' or 'that's not fair' and blah blah blah, seems no matter what Cryptic do there's less praise than moans...
well, if this isn't directed at us can you be kind to post it in the apropriate thread?
thank you.
"The Gal-X's can do a little bit of spike damage and is remotely useful" - presumably a reference to the Lance. The lance which, when I parked my Gal-X right next to a unimatrix ship buffed everything and fired said lance.... it STILL managed to miss. It missed the largest ship in the game, stood right next to it.
Nope - sorry, the lance isn't atually a fat lot of good at all.
the galaxy x got a lt tactical + an ensign tactical while the galaxy retrofit only got a lt tactical.
so yes, the galaxy dreadnought have the ability to do more spike damage more consistently.
when you got ships wich such a reduced number of tactical BO, adding just an ensign is a huge bonus, subjectively and objectively.
i had the lance miss wile i was TOUCHING i unimatrix ship with my nose. i was right on it it some how missed
i think there is something that haven't been taking into account when they designed the targetting mechanism of the lance, mine have apromiately 95% chance to miss the gate in KA, and that, no matter the distance at wich i fire it.
exeption of the cube, anything that is bigger got a hight chance of miss for some reason.
Yeah - am convinced that the lance is operated by a DOFF with the 'Always Drunk on Duty' ability.
Not only always drunk, but also self loock inside of battle bridge and no one can enter to kick him out of the fire controls
Maybe is time to give the Galaxy-X a extra weapon slot were ONLY can be placed the lance and also give to the fleet weapons store some lance version of all other energy types.
But back to the Galaxy-R that ship need some love but today....
On the Galaxy-X Dreadnought Cruiser, I personally think that making the Lance an equipable weapon, similar in some respect to the Kumari's wing cannons, would help out the ship somewhat. Making it less of an ability and more of an actual usable weapon, e.g. a Heavy Beam Array (Emitter) with a 45' arc. The current Lance super powerful shots could be an innate activatable ability with a 3 min cooldown. Or even a 2 set bonus ability when equipping the Lance and the Cloak.
Not only would this allow for more regular usage of the weapon, but it wouldn't lock players into using Phaser damage type so as to not gimp the Dreadnought's one "unique" ability. The Lance could be removed (again, like the Kumari's cannons) and replaced with any other weapon of choice, of any damage type. (Nanite Disruptor super cannon dakka spam build? Yes.)
I would prefer for an aft weapon slot to be switched for a fifth fore slot, as to make room for the change of the Lance into a weapon, though considering the Dreadnought's turn rate...
Anyway, just some thoughts I had on the matter of how to bring the Galaxy-X the level that our most recent ships are at. Feel free to tear this horrible idea to shreds and all that good stuff.
That, and a Fleet version getting the standard +10% hull and shield as well as an extra Tac console would be nice. Then the 6 base turn rate would make sense, considering the 44k base hull and 1.1 shield mod.
I was once DKnight1000, apparently I had taken my own name so now I'm DKnight0001. If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why. When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
Maybe is time to give the Galaxy-X a extra weapon slot were ONLY can be placed the lance and also give to the fleet weapons store some lance version of all other energy types.
But back to the Galaxy-R that ship need some love but today....
Honestly, the lance needs a realistic accuracy upgrade.
If they were to make it an equipable item, put the Galaxy-R and Galaxy-X together and give the lance "console-weapon" the appearance package to make it look like the X
Hey there guys! After spending way too much time going through this thread in it's entirety, I must say the number of great ideas for the game in general and improvements to cruisers should definitely catch the eye of some of the devs if you ask me. Whether they reply or not, they would certainly be wise to heed some of the ideas that have been pitched in here. So kudos to all of you, because this has certainly been a very interesting read for me.
I would also like to apologize in advance, as this will likely be a gargantuan post... But I've got a lot to say on the topic as this has definitely captured my interest over the last couple of days. There are an enormous amount of comments, so as a result I'm kind of replying to any and all of them. While there certainly isn't a true consensus for what exactly should be done, I'll just highlight some points that I think pretty much everybody agrees on:
1) The GCS needs at least a little bit more firepower.
2) The GCS needs to be less pigeon-holed by it's boff layout. (i.e. more versatile)
3) The Galaxy-X is also in need of some work, though to a lesser extent than the GCS.
4) While not perfectly relevant to STO, the fact that the Galaxy is so prolific in Federation history does lend at least a small amount of merit to increasing it's overall power... Though by no means should it overshadow what are now newer and better vessels.
Now before I say what I think would be a good approach to "rebuilding" these ships, I would like to mention that I have not purchased either starship. So my literal experience with the ship is nothing. That being said, I have always wanted to have one of my characters fly either the Galaxy or the Galaxy-X and should they make the ship more useful/interesting I will put my dollars down on the spot. So if Cryptic does read this, they should understand that there ARE players that are interested in buying this ship, but will not do so in the state that it is in.
I would also like to mention that I've made over 20 characters in this game, played all sorts of different types of Captains in all sorts of different types of ships. I love building ships and hold no preference as to it's type (i.e. Escort/Cruiser/Science). I'm not a player that slams a ship onto it's Captain, but rather: I take a ship and slam the right Captain into it for whatever type of build I'm looking to make. What I'm trying to say is that I feel like I'm pretty neutral on the subject, since I am neither looking to turn the Galaxy into a DPS monster nor am I expecting the most ultimate tank in the game. I just want the ship to be interesting, and giving it at least a place within the game as the ship really is outperformed by pretty much every other ship in the game.
By extention, the Galaxy Dreadnought also needs some help. Between the Excelsior, Regent, Odyssey and now Avenger class... The Dreadnought is by no means nearly as scary as any of these aforementioned ships. The fact is, I'm not willing to spend $25 on a less maneuverable but somewhat more glorified Assault Cruiser. It's not worth my time or my money to invest in the Dreadnought (and of course by the same token, the Galaxy-R).
So in my mind we're left with these facts: We've got two ships that are just simply outclassed and are more often than not laughed at by the majority of STO players. The fact that these ships are so severely outclassed even precludes them from holding a niche role... Since anything they can do another ship can do better. The fact that one is supposed to be a direct evolution from the other also means that if the Galaxy is to be changed, then the Dreadnought SHOULD be changed along with it.
Now to me, it seems obvious that neither one of these ships should be the "golden standard" for the future of STO in really any particular category. Fact is, these ARE retrofitted ships and not the shiny new top of the line vessels we're seeing today. So if the ships cannot be allowed to simply outperform other starships, then we need to find a way to make them a little different from these other ships without robbing them of usability. It's for this reason that I do not think that the Galaxy-R or the Dreadnought should receive any universal boffs. Giving a universal boff of any kind would allow either ship to be able to directly compete with too many other cruisers that are meant to be superior.
Side note: Hate to break this fact to some of you fanboys, but the Galaxy is no longer the big boy on the block... Bigger and meaner kids have since moved into the neighborhood so deal with it. I don't care what the technical manual says or what it showed in the series. Fact is: the past is the past and we are now in STO. While I do agree these ships aren't being represented accurately... They were not the ultimate power in the universe back in their prime, and they certainly should not be now.
So if I'm going to write off having universal boffs as an option, then we need to redefine the two ships altogether. Right now, the Galaxy-R is basically defined as a straight up tank and the Dreadnought is also a tank with a little more firepower (though compared to it's sister... it's a HELL of a lot more firepower). So before I spill the beans on how I think they should redesign these ships (I know I'm taking a while) I'll explain what I think should be the redefined roles for these starships.
To to begin: The baby we all know and love... The Galaxy Class. Up until now, it has been stuck with the role of "uber tank" by STO. Unfortunately, it is incapable of even truly living up to this name. So if the ship is incapable of being the "Uber tank" (as a result of it's boff layout, for which certain problems with engineering abilities are admittedly part of the issue) then it should be more of what it has been repeatedly shown to have been in the series: A giant hulking swiss army knife. How does this translate into STO terms? The way I figure it, if you want to make something of a "jack of all trades" then you need to have a pretty healthy balance between boff abilities and consoles in order to accomplish this.
So, if the Galaxy is suddenly no longer the "uber tank" and now a jack of all trades... The Dreadnought by extension should emulate this to a certain degree... Although obviously it will retain more emphasis on firepower (especially thanks to it's Phaser Lance which is admittedly quite awesome in it's own right). The fact that the Dreadnought does possess this powerful weapon as well as Cloak means that it's firepower can't really be pushed too much further than it already is at to ensure that it doesn't become an easy "I win" button (Because let's face it, it already does that in it's current form with the right build... I've witnessed it do crazy things in the past).
So if the Dreadnought can't really be pushed too hard in terms of DPS, then obviously it will need to be a little bit more helpful and useful to the team at large and have the ability to tank a wee bit better (though not hugely so, since it already tanks pretty effectively).
So, with what I've said now in mind... Here's what I propose to be the revamping of the Galaxy-R and the Galaxy-X:
Console Layout:
Engineering: 4 (+1 on Fleet Version when they finally make it)
Science: 2
Tactical: 3
Personally, I find these to layouts to be a nice solution for a lot of the problems behind both ships (namely of course the Galaxy-R). I think the turn rate should remain the same for these ships as well as the hull strength. Part of what appeals to me behind these layouts is that it's very reminiscent of the layout for the Nebula (In particular regards to the Galaxy-R) which makes a lot of "canonical sense".
What I particularly like about these layouts is that each ship doesn't really step on any toes. While the Galaxy-R does have two Lieutenant Tactical officers, keeping it's tactical console a step behind that of it's more offensively minded cruiser cousins helps keep it's damage potential in check when compared to those variants. So without going into fleet quality ships, the Galaxy-R is in no shape to try and do as much damage as Tactical Odyssey or even a regular Sovereign. The Lt. Commander Science also allows it to diversify it's role and become that "jack of all trades" that it should be... But with no universal bridge officer slot, it won't be the absolute best tank/healer either since a large portion of it's abilities are tactical boff slots.
If you look at the split: 5/12 of it's abilities are engineering, 4/12 are tactical and 3/12 are science. Overall, you get a pretty nice balance (especially once you factor in the power edge of a Lt. Commander Science) between all three with the emphasis still being on it's engineering abilities. This gives the ship a lot of versatility and options when it comes to loadouts and potential roles without infringing heavily on other available starships.
What I also like about this particular layout is that it really does feel like it's following the footsteps of the Ambassador class. While being fairly similar to it's older sibling, it still leaves the Ambassador some breathing room to shine... As the Fleet Ambassador would have a few more options available to it due to it's Lieutenant Universal that allow it to tilt into a more pronounced direction than the Galaxy could.
The Dreadnought is obviously very similar, but with a more aggressive focus in mind. With it's layout, it's obviously less capable when it comes to it's scientific abilities but not massively so. The Lt. Commander Tactical allows it to use higher level tactical abilities without giving it such abundance that it would be a DPS monster. To me it looks like something of a blend between the Excelsior and a Star Cruiser which is what the Dreadnought should be. A ship that is capable of dishing out good damage while offering good protection and help to it's team. Both of the aforementioned ships do exceed the Dreadnought in terms of their defined roles (The Fleet Excelsior will out DPS the Dreadnought, and the Fleet Star Cruiser would be more adept as a supporting craft as opposed to the Dreadnought).
The fact that the Dreadnought would be able to equip dual cannons, along with it's spinal lance and cloaking device give it some tactical edges as opposed to some of it's counterparts, but mitigated by the fact that it has a slower turn rate and slightly lower in terms of tactical consoles (compared to these same competitors).
It's my opinion that neither ship should exceed 3 Tactical consoles. By making the Galaxy retain 2 (+1 for fleet version) and the Dreadnought at 3 permanently, it guarantees that neither one of these ships can outshine their newer more aggressive counterparts in terms of damage performance. I think it's the Dreadnought that should receive a 5th Engineering slot for a fleet variation as that would not drastically increase it's overall power while giving players the option of going RCS Accelerator crazy to actually allow it to potentially use dual cannons.
I feel like both of these ships would be good and powerful in their own right, but as said: Not overshadowing some of the shinier new toys that we've been seeing. The fact that the Galaxy and Dreadnought are both slow turning boats inherently balances itself by a fair margin, even though they would both possess massive hull strength.
So I think I'll leave it at that. I'd love to hear what people think about these layouts as I think it would be a very elegant solution to a lot of the problems we've been having with both ships. I tried my absolute best to take into consideration all of the cruisers we already have at our disposal, and this is the healthiest middle ground I was able to find that would give both ships a place within the Federation fleet. The fact that these iconic and legendary vessels (obviously more in regards to the Galaxy itself) are hardly ever used really does sadden me... As I would love to see both these ships out in the field and actually accomplishing something.
If you've read this start to finish, thanks for your patience. Again, I'd love to hear what thoughts you have on my proposal. Hopefully one day I'll be able to fly both these ships the way I have envisioned them. =D
YES, we all know the KDF get too little, while the FED side gets too much...
I should have know that mentioning the KDF is like grabbing into a hornets' nest, lol.
(turning every topic in a FED vs KDF war.)
My point was that KDF got some stuff, slowly and much to little, but they did.
I think it was clear from the beginning that KDF faction will be the underdog, just because Klingons aren't that popular.
So Cryptic releasing less stuff for them was forseeable and since the Romulans are here, i think new released KDF stuff will be reduced to a bare minimum.
There underdog status and then there is the KDF. The worst part is when Cryptic rationalizes not releasing things for KDF because of the low number of KDF players, because Cryptic didn't put any real effort to make them a full faction. Very much a self-fulfilling proficy.
The GCS is just a symptom of how Cryptic treats all Star Trek ships in their game, you and i know that. Pulling it down to a GCS fans vs everyone else is just unworthy for all of us, don't you think?
-When the "GCS fans" acts as if the release of every new ship, such as the Avenger, is a slight against the TNG/GCS gods, they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" ask to be given the same layouts as other ships, thus taking away the otehr ships uniqueness, especially mentioning that they "don't care on who's toes they step on", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" trivialize a whole faction that has bigger content problems vs. the "GCS fans" one ship, such as the Fed's "GCS", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" suggest that their is a Cryptic, hate-filled, conspiracy against the "GCS", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" acknowledge that there is a problem with all cruisers, but they want their fixes first before putting any real effort to fix the real cruiser problems, they make it GCS vs everybody.
There is a great deal of divisiveness coming from the "GCS community" on its own to make it happen.
The GCS just shows the biggest flaws of Crpytics game design, fixing it is not just a mental exercise for GCS fans but also a try to help other ships too IMO.
(by showing whats wrong and how to fix it, in a good way)
Asking to get more tac/uni-boffs and more tactical consoles isn't a mental exercise, its asking to get the same stuff as other ships that already have them.
BTW. i am not the biggest Galaxy Class fan out there. I just hate how unworthy Cryptics treats everything that does not look like War and "cool" militarisation in Star Trek.
I'd go as far as to say you are one of the biggest fans in the thread. From your posts, the other ship offerings are either "ugly" or at least less attractive and couldn't/shouldn't match or be better than the ship, even with newer ships like the Ody'. You've referred to canon as evidence for your claims, but when someone else offers canon that refutes the point, its the fault of the writers. Not to mention that you wrote off the KDF factions problems as trivial in comparison to your poor, old Exploration Cruiser's woes, when there are other options out there.
Also, a lot of the ships in the game don't "look like war" or militarization. Or at least your opinion of war/militarization and mine differ dramatically.
People seem to repeatedly confuse the "dreadnought cruiser" with the Galaxy Class. Why? Because at least the Gal X can do a little bit of pike damage and is remotely useful. But not many people actually consider the Galaxy Class (Gal R) even a real option and thus automatically assume that this is about the "dreadnought"
While I agree with the Gal R being overlooked, correct me if I'm wrong but the Gal X is the upgrade is it not? Because if it's not then we need a Sau Paulo retrofit! I know the Gal X was only seen (to the best of my knowledge) in All Good Things but if we're talking STO storyline then "The Galaxy class was refitted at the turn of the 25th century, after the collapse of the Khitomer Accords in 2399. In response to increased hostility with the Klingons, the newly redesigned ship carries a cloaking device and a devastating spinal lance weapon." [STO Wiki], In an alternate future, refitted Galaxy-class ships (β) remained in service long after 2370, although some attempts had been made to decommission them. (TNG: "All Good Things...") [Memory Alpha].
how can you said that this ship is great but in the same time stating that he is in dire need of an upgrade?
that is something that don't fit well with your argument.
It is a great ship, doesn't mean it can't be better.
and that shoudn't come as a surprise considering it is a heavie engie cruiser, so you point being? because in that area it is certainly not the best, not even second....or third.
well, there is not much left to sacrifice with just a lt tactical bo you known.
This was a response to a prior post saying it's not tanky (and doesn't have niche build but you didn't cross that bridge yet), again it is tanky, I never said it was the best hence its need of an upgrade to bring it in line with modern ships.
not older than the exelsior and the ambassador so again, your point beeing?
and note that the ambassador is more powerfull AND more tanky than a galaxy retrofit.
Again supporting the point that it needs an upgrade, I didn't make the Ambassador or Excelsior did I? I don't agree that they should be better than the Gal, they should be worse as they are older ships.
this daes not required a lot of work, just a specialise build.
and galaxy x player shoudn't be force to use a niche build that use 2 or 3 consoles slot just to make the abilitie shine every 3 minute in kerrat.
the phaser lotus of the chimera and the javelin of the gurumba don't need that kind of compensation to work good on their own.
why should it be the case for the galaxy x? an other example of the special treatement this ship receives.
It doesn't require a specialised built, it just benefits from one as any ship does. The lance on my tanky build is negligible, my other build, built around the lance of course is different. I don't know about the Chim' as I don't have one but the Guramba Javelin also benefits from a specalised build, it will do far more damage if you build around it, but that's common knowledge, at least I thought it was. If you have a ship with a disruptor beam bank and a chroniton torpedo, putting points into torpedos in your skills and having chroniton consoles isn't going to improve the beam but will improve the torpedo, this is the same for all weapons, you don't have to specialise into it, but you can, it's your choice, just because you don't make your build around the lance doesn't make the ship any worse.
yes, you are right, we should certainly not notify cryptic that their is something wrong with it or they might noticed it, or worse, be offended and in 8 years old reaction never upgrade it as a result, that a brilliant strategy.
You seem to have missed my point that some of this community, no matter what is given to them they will not be happy with it and will just continue to moan
Again I expected it to be glossed over, instead I got a rather poorly thought out response, I think I'd have preferred the gloss over.
My overall point was that SOME people in this thread claim these ships are useless which is not true, they are a great ship, but as I said could really do with an upgrade to be brought in line with the new releases, Cryptic should also keep in mind when releasing old ships they should be worse than modern ships (although then why would anyone want to fly them?)
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan
............ If you've read this start to finish, thanks for your patience. Again, I'd love to hear what thoughts you have on my proposal. Hopefully one day I'll be able to fly both these ships the way I have envisioned them. =D
- CrAzEd MiKe
tks for yuors idea bro, im read all this (take some time since english is not mi primary languaje) and goin to think on this, some of yuor ideas like the doble Lt tac im already in use with mi nebula with focus on torpedo build (mi fleet have some members with very especific roles, im take the heavy bomber) so i can have some ideas for a galaxy-R with that setup.
i think if we fusion this idea with the proposal of dontdrunkimshoot we can get a very versatile GCS
all this need some meditation but i sence we are in the right track
Just as an FYI, the Galaxy X is discussed by Geko in the new podcast starting at around the 53:25ish point.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
There underdog status and then there is the KDF. The worst part is when Cryptic rationalizes not releasing things for KDF because of the low number of KDF players, because Cryptic didn't put any real effort to make them a full faction. Very much a self-fulfilling proficy.
TBH, i couldn't care less about the artificial KDF-FED war that takes place here on the forums.
Personally i am not surprised why the KDF isn't so popular in STO. Not just because the have less new ships or other stuff. I think it's just because the federation always where the good guys in the Shows, while the Klingons where just some barbarians in spaceships for most ppl.
-When the "GCS fans" acts as if the release of every new ship, such as the Avenger, is a slight against the TNG/GCS gods, they make it GCS vs everybody
No its Star Trek vs. Cryptics generic military sci fi concept.
-When "GSC fans" ask to be given the same layouts as other ships, thus taking away the otehr ships uniqueness, especially mentioning that they "don't care on who's toes they step on", they make it GCS vs everybody
Lol, just because someone suggests to give the GCS the same BOFF layout as another ship doesn't mean you would "steal" that ships uniqueness? There are still other stats, like Inertia, Weapons layout and so on.
Face it, there is only a limited amount of possible BOFF combinations and even less that make sense for the GCS or other ships to represent their unique "personality".
I think it's inevitable that some ships should have the same BOFF layout. But as game developers Cryptic should give those ships other things that make them unique.
-When "GSC fans" trivialize a whole faction that has bigger content problems vs. the "GCS fans" one ship, such as the Fed's "GCS", they make it GCS vs everybody
That was just a bad example, get over it.
Seriously, it gets really annoying. One false word against the KDF and everybody jumps at you.
As i said, i don't really care about the KDF. Cryptic should give them the stuff KDF players want, but i still don't care about it.
-When "GSC fans" acknowledge that there is a problem with all cruisers, but they want their fixes first before putting any real effort to fix the real cruiser problems, they make it GCS vs everybody.
Cryptic gave us their "fix" for cruisers with the new Comm Arrays. Just as YOU wanted it.
And what did it help the GCS or any other underpowered Starfleet Cruiser?
Nothing, at all. (just as i have said some weeks ago.)
All ships kept being as offensive or defensive as they where, nothing was changed at all.
Cryptic didn't even gave Starfleet Cruisers something that would make them even with KDF Battlecrusiers DHCs, Cloaks or higher turn rate. All we got are some rather less interesting Comm Array powers that aren't especially creative or interesting at all.
Asking to get more tac/uni-boffs and more tactical consoles isn't a mental exercise, its asking to get the same stuff as other ships that already have them.
It's about finding the RIGHT sollution, not just slapping a uni Station or hangar on it. OIf course if someone doesn't really care everything seems to be fine, of course.
I'd go as far as to say you are one of the biggest fans in the thread. From your posts, the other ship offerings are either "ugly" or at least less attractive and couldn't/shouldn't match or be better than the ship, even with newer ships like the Ody'. You've referred to canon as evidence for your claims, but when someone else offers canon that refutes the point, its the fault of the writers. Not to mention that you wrote off the KDF factions problems as trivial in comparison to your poor, old Exploration Cruiser's woes, when there are other options out there.
Also, a lot of the ships in the game don't "look like war" or militarization. Or at least your opinion of war/militarization and mine differ dramatically.
Thanks for the info, now i know better. lol.
Btw. i NEVER said the GCS should become more powerful the the Odyssey. It should become DIFFERENT to the Odyssey, maybe more science focussed.
Regarding canon:
Of course you can find a justification to make a ship the most passive one or the most offensive one, you just have to look for the right evidence. My point is that Cryptics devs did apply double standards when making the Galor and the Excelsior (both same age or even older than the GCS) some of the best cruisers in the game but making the GCS such a lackluster.
Militarisation:
For me the GCs stands for a Star Trek that isn't all about military. In TNG the Federation was much more peace-loving but still ready to strike back when needed. (Cryptic althrough just makes it a teethless tank without any ability to strike back.)
But later (and especially in STO) Trek focussed much more on militarisation instead of exploration.
The Writers and producers of Star Trek turned it more and more into a generic sci fi universe, ignoring and neglecting what made Trek so different to other Sci Fi universes. Now in STO we have ppl runnning around in armors and carrying miniguns, commanding Carriers and Escort/Science/Carriers, maybe it's just me but that's no Star Trek anymore.
The GCS is one of the last remnants of how Star Trek (and especially the Federation) once was.
I have aceppted that the GCS can't be the strongest ship in STO, especially since it is a MMO (NO ship should be the strongest IMO).
But keeping it the least offensive of all Starfleet cruisers is just wrong and should be corrected.
"...'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
Hey there guys! After spending way too much time going through this thread in it's entirety, I must say the number of great ideas for the game in general and improvements to cruisers should definitely catch the eye of some of the devs if you ask me. Whether they reply or not, they would certainly be wise to heed some of the ideas that have been pitched in here. So kudos to all of you, because this has certainly been a very interesting read for me.
I would also like to apologize in advance, as this will likely be a gargantuan post... But I've got a lot to say on the topic as this has definitely captured my interest over the last couple of days. There are an enormous amount of comments, so as a result I'm kind of replying to any and all of them. While there certainly isn't a true consensus for what exactly should be done, I'll just highlight some points that I think pretty much everybody agrees on:
1) The GCS needs at least a little bit more firepower.
2) The GCS needs to be less pigeon-holed by it's boff layout. (i.e. more versatile)
3) The Galaxy-X is also in need of some work, though to a lesser extent than the GCS.
4) While not perfectly relevant to STO, the fact that the Galaxy is so prolific in Federation history does lend at least a small amount of merit to increasing it's overall power... Though by no means should it overshadow what are now newer and better vessels.
[snip, length]
If you've read this start to finish, thanks for your patience. Again, I'd love to hear what thoughts you have on my proposal. Hopefully one day I'll be able to fly both these ships the way I have envisioned them. =D
- CrAzEd MiKe
Nice examination and i couldn't agree more.
There is no point in making the GCS partake in STOS power creep. It should get a niche on its own, similar to the Nebula Class in STO.
While it isn't the best of all time science ship it has its certain advantages and is still viable. The G -R is quite the opposite outgunned and without a place in this game. You proposals would greatly help keeping that ship interesting and fun to fly.
"...'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
There is no point in making the GCS partake in STOS power creep. It should get a niche on its own, similar to the Nebula Class in STO.
While it isn't the best of all time science ship it has its certain advantages and is still viable. The G -R is quite the opposite outgunned and without a place in this game. You proposals would greatly help keeping that ship interesting and fun to fly.
Honestly i think comm arrays are great for all the cruisers including the KDF battlecruisers and the flight deck cruisers. It gives them something you cant get with science or escorts. Though they really need to add more to the Federation whether its just more power to distrubute or making their beams have an acc bonus or even adding a defense bonus. Something to make them better offset and alittle more desirable vs Kdf better turn cloak and ability to load heavy cannons.
Cruisers and well Engineer heavy ships need help with their powers in general and don't think many would disagree. Simple solutions that have been said should be implemented like making certain powers lowered down to lower stations to give more diversity in their ensign slots. Adding the Shield distribution currently on tac team to engineer team and science team to make them more desirable and make tac team not so needed in so many builds that don't have many tac slots. Adding new powers for engineer. Things like this will help all cruisers and engineer heavy ships for all factions.
As far as a GCS it needs its boff seating and consoles changed up to make it modular as it suppose to be able to do many tasks but not the best at any in my opinion.
All podcasts and interviews are put into that section for people to check out.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Cryptic gave us their "fix" for cruisers with the new Comm Arrays. Just as YOU wanted it.
And what did it help the GCS or any other underpowered Starfleet Cruiser?
Nothing, at all. (just as i have said some weeks ago.)
All ships kept being as offensive or defensive as they where, nothing was changed at all.
Cryptic didn't even gave Starfleet Cruisers something that would make them even with KDF Battlecrusiers DHCs, Cloaks or higher turn rate. All we got are some rather less interesting Comm Array powers that aren't especially creative or interesting at all.
I will play the devil's advocate and argue this point on Comm Arrays for now.
At this moment the only ship with it is the Avenger, limiting any real analysis on what it does until other Cruisers gain it.
However from what I have been privileged to see so far when my Oddy was within range of the perks its substantial enough to be noticed. And that says something for a ship decked out with end-game content. My ship isn't peak, it cna be improved I know, but for something decked out with the best on the aim of how it feels that little perk is substantial enough when it happens I can't wait to see what the restul will be when I have it myself.
I would't be so quick to dismiss the effects of that Comm Array until we see it on every Cruiser, then we can find out how its effect on that class of ship really is.
I would't be so quick to dismiss the effects of that Comm Array until we see it on every Cruiser, then we can find out how its effect on that class of ship really is.
As someone who purchased the Avenger, I must say that I like the comm array abilities a lot. The bonuses they give may seem small... But they are certainly effective. I'm very eager to see how these abilities will change things up. I'm especially curious to see the draw fire ability stats when it comes out, namely in regards to the damage resistance buff it will provide.
Problem is, even with these new comm abilities I fear that the Galaxy will still be in the rut it is in now... Yeah it'll be great that it has some more tools at it's disposal... But that can be said for every other cruiser as well so I feel like it will be a moot point.
Mike, I think you've forgotten something about the Galaxy-X.
While it is indeed based on the older Galaxy frame, it is not exactly a ship that is just as old.
It's a hotrodded version of the Galaxy designed for combat, after certain events in recent STO cannon years. While it would have leftover engineering abilities and some science, it was refit with the idea that it would serve on the front lines as a big, badass scary vessel. It may not be as completely advanced as the Sovvie or Oddy, but it should be big, mean, and scary in it's own right. The Oddy seems to be the last, great, Starfleet exploration vessel, with some mods done to its fellow class members to help it in some areas. I see it as a heavily modified version of the already fairly powerful Galaxy, a big combat update. It should out-tank the smaller Sovvie, and keep up with an Oddy, both tanking and damage output.
Yes, it does have a powerful lance, but unless you set up a build around the lance, it's just a big party trick that spends most of it's time MISSING TARGETS IT SHOULDN'T MISS. (Even built around the lance, if it misses, you have to run and hide for 3 minutes until the cooldown is finished. Not Good.)
I love my Dreadnought, and stubbornly cling on to it because I love the design, and what it means. Right now, I'm trying to build it up as a beam boat brawler, and while it's far from ready to do that, it's come a long ways since I first bought it a month ago.
What I mean by this is that the X is a fair amount newer than it's base model, and should reflect that, and it's combat basis a fair bit more.
All things considered, even if you go RCS crazy on it, like I had at one point, unless you get 4 Mk XII Fleet RCS consoles, DCs/DHCs are still useless on it, and even with that many, it's still not a good idea. You'll be spending more time turning to face your target and shoot it than you will actually shooting it. I think it would be a good hint at what the X was meant for if it came with Heavy Beam Arrays standard.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
the comm arrays are great, and that drain resistance one can create some scary damage. the problem with all cruisers having it is that nothing changes in the cruiser hierarchy, the galaxy is still at the bottom. though any flight deck cruiser is gonna suck a fat one at dealing any damage, and the galaxyX has the least maneuverability flexibility of all cruisers, and less shield tanking potential too. for some reason it required its own category, because a galaxy has to suck more then everything else, its tradition.
TBH, i couldn't care less about the artificial KDF-FED war that takes place here on the forums.
Personally i am not surprised why the KDF isn't so popular in STO. Not just because the have less new ships or other stuff. I think it's just because the federation always where the good guys in the Shows, while the Klingons where just some barbarians in spaceships for most ppl.......But keeping it the least offensive of all Starfleet cruisers is just wrong and should be corrected.
As far as the KDF goes, should this be a one sided MMO? MMO's need living, breathing adversaries and each faction to have enough content to make them interesting and the players of each faction to remain interested, otherwise its not an MMO anymore.
The problem is that its some of the "GCS changers" are the ones who have gone to the extreme and made it GCS vs everyone. I also suspect that its this same group that is keeping Cryptic staff from posting here, or making any changes because they figure that, no matter what is done, there will be no satisfaction. If you want to blame someone about making the Exploration Cruiser so weak, blame Roddenberry and his decision to portray TNG as a utopian-kumbaya-land that pitted the Enterprise against enemies that would have had problems being able to even fend off a Constitution class (by the weakness of the enemy).
As far as the Cruiser commands, I can't really see what their effects are until they make them cruiser-wide, they pretty much were nowhere near the area most people were talking about, and honestly , I don't think they will work, but I will give them a chance. Even if they don't have a real effect, I won't talk about how Cryptic is out to get cruisers like people here talk about how members of Cryptic are out to get TNG fans. That attitude is what turns people off.
I feel your pain about the Excel' and Ambassador, but the Exploration cruiser should be much tankier than them and it wouldn't be very balanced (in MMO-land) if the ship was tankier and more dps. If there was a ship to be able to take the pounding, it should be this one. I just think its a mess that tanky ships like this can't hold out long enough to make dps intense ships feel the effects of its longevity with damage over time/pressure damage (not to be confused with DOT's)
And Star Trek isn't all about all about the military, but it mostly is, even in Starfleets hippie-ish ways. The TNG era wasn't as high of tension, between the empires, as the other shows, such as TOS, (and DS9) and many of us who grew up on TOS remember that. Voyager was more or less about survival, and Enterprise was about how the Federation was to be created (much of it in efforts to help each member race to decide they protect each other from outside threats.)
If STO had the same kind of "peaceful, exploration, content as in TNG, ala stellar cartography, and the Wesley psychodrama of the day and all that , it would surely have bored more than enough people to have made it a ghost town two weeks after the game would have been released, I am sorry that MMO's are based around action, but action does have as much of a place, if not more, in Star Trek as peaceful exploration.
Interesting interview. Up until the point he started taking out his TRIBBLE concerning the remaining ships left in the IP.
I actually tend to agree with him. Most of the rest of the Fed ships not already in the game are just kit-bashes that were on screen in background scenes all of about 10 seconds each. Most of them don't have a big enough fan-base to justify the amount of money and time required to make them.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
and the galaxyX has the least maneuverability flexibility of all cruisers, and less shield tanking potential too. for some reason it required its own category, because a galaxy has to suck more then everything else, its tradition.
The Bortas has the least maneuvering flexibility. The Dread'-cruiser feels like a sports-car compared to it.
As someone who purchased the Avenger, I must say that I like the comm array abilities a lot. The bonuses they give may seem small... But they are certainly effective. I'm very eager to see how these abilities will change things up. I'm especially curious to see the draw fire ability stats when it comes out, namely in regards to the damage resistance buff it will provide.
Problem is, even with these new comm abilities I fear that the Galaxy will still be in the rut it is in now... Yeah it'll be great that it has some more tools at it's disposal... But that can be said for every other cruiser as well so I feel like it will be a moot point.
Oh, I won't deny that. The poor old ship doesn't stand very well with its disproportionate BOFF layout more than anything else.
IF Engineering had some real offensive-oriented skills beyond Emergency Power to Weapons or Directed Energy Modulation that were half as useful as Tac skills in comparison to how well Tac Team is a defensive skill it would be another story. I'm speaking directly to lower Ensign and Lt level skill defectiveness.
Something in Ensign and Lt that could add to a DEM III and paired EPW III for output would be ideal, but I highly doubt any such skill will ever exist.
Until then I fear without a real overhaul in the Galaxy it won't ever see the same offensive ability needed to compete with nearly every other cruiser that exists.
I actually tend to agree with him. Most of the rest of the Fed ships not already in the game are just kit-bashes that were on screen in background scenes all of about 10 seconds each. Most of them don't have a big enough fan-base to justify the amount of money and time required to make them.
But i take thos3e kitbashes over the TRIBBLE Cryptic designs. for even those kitbases are better designed then what they put out. and how about New Orleans, PHOENIX Nebula. Then these is the fan made ships as well. ALL better designed then avenger.
Comments
how can you said that this ship is great but in the same time stating that he is in dire need of an upgrade?
that is something that don't fit well with your argument.
and that shoudn't come as a surprise considering it is a heavie engie cruiser, so you point being? because in that area it is certainly not the best, not even second....or third.
well, there is not much left to sacrifice with just a lt tactical bo you known.
not older than the exelsior and the ambassador so again, your point beeing?
and note that the ambassador is more powerfull AND more tanky than a galaxy retrofit.
this daes not required a lot of work, just a specialise build.
and galaxy x player shoudn't be force to use a niche build that use 2 or 3 consoles slot just to make the abilitie shine every 3 minute in kerrat.
the phaser lotus of the chimera and the javelin of the gurumba don't need that kind of compensation to work good on their own.
why should it be the case for the galaxy x? an other example of the special treatement this ship receives.
yes, you are right, we should certainly not notify cryptic that their is something wrong with it or they might noticed it, or worse, be offended and in 8 years old reaction never upgrade it as a result, that a brilliant strategy.
well, if this isn't directed at us can you be kind to post it in the apropriate thread?
thank you.
at this point, that thaught have cross my mind.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
the galaxy x got a lt tactical + an ensign tactical while the galaxy retrofit only got a lt tactical.
so yes, the galaxy dreadnought have the ability to do more spike damage more consistently.
when you got ships wich such a reduced number of tactical BO, adding just an ensign is a huge bonus, subjectively and objectively.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
i think there is something that haven't been taking into account when they designed the targetting mechanism of the lance, mine have apromiately 95% chance to miss the gate in KA, and that, no matter the distance at wich i fire it.
exeption of the cube, anything that is bigger got a hight chance of miss for some reason.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Yea i know well what yuo feel bro...
Not only always drunk, but also self loock inside of battle bridge and no one can enter to kick him out of the fire controls
Maybe is time to give the Galaxy-X a extra weapon slot were ONLY can be placed the lance and also give to the fleet weapons store some lance version of all other energy types.
But back to the Galaxy-R that ship need some love but today....
Not only would this allow for more regular usage of the weapon, but it wouldn't lock players into using Phaser damage type so as to not gimp the Dreadnought's one "unique" ability. The Lance could be removed (again, like the Kumari's cannons) and replaced with any other weapon of choice, of any damage type. (Nanite Disruptor super cannon dakka spam build? Yes.)
I would prefer for an aft weapon slot to be switched for a fifth fore slot, as to make room for the change of the Lance into a weapon, though considering the Dreadnought's turn rate...
Anyway, just some thoughts I had on the matter of how to bring the Galaxy-X the level that our most recent ships are at. Feel free to tear this horrible idea to shreds and all that good stuff.
That, and a Fleet version getting the standard +10% hull and shield as well as an extra Tac console would be nice. Then the 6 base turn rate would make sense, considering the 44k base hull and 1.1 shield mod.
It's actually the cross eyed gunner from Space Balls the Movie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNcDI_uBGUo
If I ask you a question it is not an insult but a genuine attempt to understand why.
When I insult you I won't be discreet about it, I will be precise and to the point stupid.
I've caught my Gal-X weaps officer watching Top Cat and downloading controversial videos from the internet when he should have been aiming the lance.
Honestly, the lance needs a realistic accuracy upgrade.
If they were to make it an equipable item, put the Galaxy-R and Galaxy-X together and give the lance "console-weapon" the appearance package to make it look like the X
I would also like to apologize in advance, as this will likely be a gargantuan post... But I've got a lot to say on the topic as this has definitely captured my interest over the last couple of days. There are an enormous amount of comments, so as a result I'm kind of replying to any and all of them. While there certainly isn't a true consensus for what exactly should be done, I'll just highlight some points that I think pretty much everybody agrees on:
1) The GCS needs at least a little bit more firepower.
2) The GCS needs to be less pigeon-holed by it's boff layout. (i.e. more versatile)
3) The Galaxy-X is also in need of some work, though to a lesser extent than the GCS.
4) While not perfectly relevant to STO, the fact that the Galaxy is so prolific in Federation history does lend at least a small amount of merit to increasing it's overall power... Though by no means should it overshadow what are now newer and better vessels.
Now before I say what I think would be a good approach to "rebuilding" these ships, I would like to mention that I have not purchased either starship. So my literal experience with the ship is nothing. That being said, I have always wanted to have one of my characters fly either the Galaxy or the Galaxy-X and should they make the ship more useful/interesting I will put my dollars down on the spot. So if Cryptic does read this, they should understand that there ARE players that are interested in buying this ship, but will not do so in the state that it is in.
I would also like to mention that I've made over 20 characters in this game, played all sorts of different types of Captains in all sorts of different types of ships. I love building ships and hold no preference as to it's type (i.e. Escort/Cruiser/Science). I'm not a player that slams a ship onto it's Captain, but rather: I take a ship and slam the right Captain into it for whatever type of build I'm looking to make. What I'm trying to say is that I feel like I'm pretty neutral on the subject, since I am neither looking to turn the Galaxy into a DPS monster nor am I expecting the most ultimate tank in the game. I just want the ship to be interesting, and giving it at least a place within the game as the ship really is outperformed by pretty much every other ship in the game.
By extention, the Galaxy Dreadnought also needs some help. Between the Excelsior, Regent, Odyssey and now Avenger class... The Dreadnought is by no means nearly as scary as any of these aforementioned ships. The fact is, I'm not willing to spend $25 on a less maneuverable but somewhat more glorified Assault Cruiser. It's not worth my time or my money to invest in the Dreadnought (and of course by the same token, the Galaxy-R).
So in my mind we're left with these facts: We've got two ships that are just simply outclassed and are more often than not laughed at by the majority of STO players. The fact that these ships are so severely outclassed even precludes them from holding a niche role... Since anything they can do another ship can do better. The fact that one is supposed to be a direct evolution from the other also means that if the Galaxy is to be changed, then the Dreadnought SHOULD be changed along with it.
Now to me, it seems obvious that neither one of these ships should be the "golden standard" for the future of STO in really any particular category. Fact is, these ARE retrofitted ships and not the shiny new top of the line vessels we're seeing today. So if the ships cannot be allowed to simply outperform other starships, then we need to find a way to make them a little different from these other ships without robbing them of usability. It's for this reason that I do not think that the Galaxy-R or the Dreadnought should receive any universal boffs. Giving a universal boff of any kind would allow either ship to be able to directly compete with too many other cruisers that are meant to be superior.
Side note: Hate to break this fact to some of you fanboys, but the Galaxy is no longer the big boy on the block... Bigger and meaner kids have since moved into the neighborhood so deal with it. I don't care what the technical manual says or what it showed in the series. Fact is: the past is the past and we are now in STO. While I do agree these ships aren't being represented accurately... They were not the ultimate power in the universe back in their prime, and they certainly should not be now.
So if I'm going to write off having universal boffs as an option, then we need to redefine the two ships altogether. Right now, the Galaxy-R is basically defined as a straight up tank and the Dreadnought is also a tank with a little more firepower (though compared to it's sister... it's a HELL of a lot more firepower). So before I spill the beans on how I think they should redesign these ships (I know I'm taking a while) I'll explain what I think should be the redefined roles for these starships.
To to begin: The baby we all know and love... The Galaxy Class. Up until now, it has been stuck with the role of "uber tank" by STO. Unfortunately, it is incapable of even truly living up to this name. So if the ship is incapable of being the "Uber tank" (as a result of it's boff layout, for which certain problems with engineering abilities are admittedly part of the issue) then it should be more of what it has been repeatedly shown to have been in the series: A giant hulking swiss army knife. How does this translate into STO terms? The way I figure it, if you want to make something of a "jack of all trades" then you need to have a pretty healthy balance between boff abilities and consoles in order to accomplish this.
So, if the Galaxy is suddenly no longer the "uber tank" and now a jack of all trades... The Dreadnought by extension should emulate this to a certain degree... Although obviously it will retain more emphasis on firepower (especially thanks to it's Phaser Lance which is admittedly quite awesome in it's own right). The fact that the Dreadnought does possess this powerful weapon as well as Cloak means that it's firepower can't really be pushed too much further than it already is at to ensure that it doesn't become an easy "I win" button (Because let's face it, it already does that in it's current form with the right build... I've witnessed it do crazy things in the past).
So if the Dreadnought can't really be pushed too hard in terms of DPS, then obviously it will need to be a little bit more helpful and useful to the team at large and have the ability to tank a wee bit better (though not hugely so, since it already tanks pretty effectively).
So, with what I've said now in mind... Here's what I propose to be the revamping of the Galaxy-R and the Galaxy-X:
Galaxy Class Retrofit -
Bridge Officer Layout:
Commander Engineer
Ensign Engineer
Lt. Commander Science
Lieutenant Tactical
Lieutenant Tactical
Console Layout:
Engineering: 4
Science: 3
Tactical: 2 (+1 on Fleet Version)
Galaxy-X Dreadnought -
Bridge Officer Layout
Commander Engineer
Lieutenant Engineer
Lt. Commander Tactical
Lieutenant Science
Ensign Science
Console Layout:
Engineering: 4 (+1 on Fleet Version when they finally make it)
Science: 2
Tactical: 3
Personally, I find these to layouts to be a nice solution for a lot of the problems behind both ships (namely of course the Galaxy-R). I think the turn rate should remain the same for these ships as well as the hull strength. Part of what appeals to me behind these layouts is that it's very reminiscent of the layout for the Nebula (In particular regards to the Galaxy-R) which makes a lot of "canonical sense".
What I particularly like about these layouts is that each ship doesn't really step on any toes. While the Galaxy-R does have two Lieutenant Tactical officers, keeping it's tactical console a step behind that of it's more offensively minded cruiser cousins helps keep it's damage potential in check when compared to those variants. So without going into fleet quality ships, the Galaxy-R is in no shape to try and do as much damage as Tactical Odyssey or even a regular Sovereign. The Lt. Commander Science also allows it to diversify it's role and become that "jack of all trades" that it should be... But with no universal bridge officer slot, it won't be the absolute best tank/healer either since a large portion of it's abilities are tactical boff slots.
If you look at the split: 5/12 of it's abilities are engineering, 4/12 are tactical and 3/12 are science. Overall, you get a pretty nice balance (especially once you factor in the power edge of a Lt. Commander Science) between all three with the emphasis still being on it's engineering abilities. This gives the ship a lot of versatility and options when it comes to loadouts and potential roles without infringing heavily on other available starships.
What I also like about this particular layout is that it really does feel like it's following the footsteps of the Ambassador class. While being fairly similar to it's older sibling, it still leaves the Ambassador some breathing room to shine... As the Fleet Ambassador would have a few more options available to it due to it's Lieutenant Universal that allow it to tilt into a more pronounced direction than the Galaxy could.
The Dreadnought is obviously very similar, but with a more aggressive focus in mind. With it's layout, it's obviously less capable when it comes to it's scientific abilities but not massively so. The Lt. Commander Tactical allows it to use higher level tactical abilities without giving it such abundance that it would be a DPS monster. To me it looks like something of a blend between the Excelsior and a Star Cruiser which is what the Dreadnought should be. A ship that is capable of dishing out good damage while offering good protection and help to it's team. Both of the aforementioned ships do exceed the Dreadnought in terms of their defined roles (The Fleet Excelsior will out DPS the Dreadnought, and the Fleet Star Cruiser would be more adept as a supporting craft as opposed to the Dreadnought).
The fact that the Dreadnought would be able to equip dual cannons, along with it's spinal lance and cloaking device give it some tactical edges as opposed to some of it's counterparts, but mitigated by the fact that it has a slower turn rate and slightly lower in terms of tactical consoles (compared to these same competitors).
It's my opinion that neither ship should exceed 3 Tactical consoles. By making the Galaxy retain 2 (+1 for fleet version) and the Dreadnought at 3 permanently, it guarantees that neither one of these ships can outshine their newer more aggressive counterparts in terms of damage performance. I think it's the Dreadnought that should receive a 5th Engineering slot for a fleet variation as that would not drastically increase it's overall power while giving players the option of going RCS Accelerator crazy to actually allow it to potentially use dual cannons.
I feel like both of these ships would be good and powerful in their own right, but as said: Not overshadowing some of the shinier new toys that we've been seeing. The fact that the Galaxy and Dreadnought are both slow turning boats inherently balances itself by a fair margin, even though they would both possess massive hull strength.
So I think I'll leave it at that. I'd love to hear what people think about these layouts as I think it would be a very elegant solution to a lot of the problems we've been having with both ships. I tried my absolute best to take into consideration all of the cruisers we already have at our disposal, and this is the healthiest middle ground I was able to find that would give both ships a place within the Federation fleet. The fact that these iconic and legendary vessels (obviously more in regards to the Galaxy itself) are hardly ever used really does sadden me... As I would love to see both these ships out in the field and actually accomplishing something.
If you've read this start to finish, thanks for your patience.
- CrAzEd MiKe
There underdog status and then there is the KDF. The worst part is when Cryptic rationalizes not releasing things for KDF because of the low number of KDF players, because Cryptic didn't put any real effort to make them a full faction. Very much a self-fulfilling proficy.
-When the "GCS fans" acts as if the release of every new ship, such as the Avenger, is a slight against the TNG/GCS gods, they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" ask to be given the same layouts as other ships, thus taking away the otehr ships uniqueness, especially mentioning that they "don't care on who's toes they step on", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" trivialize a whole faction that has bigger content problems vs. the "GCS fans" one ship, such as the Fed's "GCS", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" suggest that their is a Cryptic, hate-filled, conspiracy against the "GCS", they make it GCS vs everybody
-When "GSC fans" acknowledge that there is a problem with all cruisers, but they want their fixes first before putting any real effort to fix the real cruiser problems, they make it GCS vs everybody.
There is a great deal of divisiveness coming from the "GCS community" on its own to make it happen.
Asking to get more tac/uni-boffs and more tactical consoles isn't a mental exercise, its asking to get the same stuff as other ships that already have them.
I'd go as far as to say you are one of the biggest fans in the thread. From your posts, the other ship offerings are either "ugly" or at least less attractive and couldn't/shouldn't match or be better than the ship, even with newer ships like the Ody'. You've referred to canon as evidence for your claims, but when someone else offers canon that refutes the point, its the fault of the writers. Not to mention that you wrote off the KDF factions problems as trivial in comparison to your poor, old Exploration Cruiser's woes, when there are other options out there.
Also, a lot of the ships in the game don't "look like war" or militarization. Or at least your opinion of war/militarization and mine differ dramatically.
It is a great ship, doesn't mean it can't be better.
This was a response to a prior post saying it's not tanky (and doesn't have niche build but you didn't cross that bridge yet), again it is tanky, I never said it was the best hence its need of an upgrade to bring it in line with modern ships.
Again supporting the point that it needs an upgrade, I didn't make the Ambassador or Excelsior did I? I don't agree that they should be better than the Gal, they should be worse as they are older ships.
It doesn't require a specialised built, it just benefits from one as any ship does. The lance on my tanky build is negligible, my other build, built around the lance of course is different. I don't know about the Chim' as I don't have one but the Guramba Javelin also benefits from a specalised build, it will do far more damage if you build around it, but that's common knowledge, at least I thought it was. If you have a ship with a disruptor beam bank and a chroniton torpedo, putting points into torpedos in your skills and having chroniton consoles isn't going to improve the beam but will improve the torpedo, this is the same for all weapons, you don't have to specialise into it, but you can, it's your choice, just because you don't make your build around the lance doesn't make the ship any worse.
You seem to have missed my point that some of this community, no matter what is given to them they will not be happy with it and will just continue to moan
This fits in with the last point which is why I mentioned it.
Again I expected it to be glossed over, instead I got a rather poorly thought out response, I think I'd have preferred the gloss over.
My overall point was that SOME people in this thread claim these ships are useless which is not true, they are a great ship, but as I said could really do with an upgrade to be brought in line with the new releases, Cryptic should also keep in mind when releasing old ships they should be worse than modern ships (although then why would anyone want to fly them?)
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan
tks for yuors idea bro, im read all this (take some time since english is not mi primary languaje) and goin to think on this, some of yuor ideas like the doble Lt tac im already in use with mi nebula with focus on torpedo build (mi fleet have some members with very especific roles, im take the heavy bomber) so i can have some ideas for a galaxy-R with that setup.
i think if we fusion this idea with the proposal of dontdrunkimshoot we can get a very versatile GCS
all this need some meditation but i sence we are in the right track
and again sry for mi english
Personally i am not surprised why the KDF isn't so popular in STO. Not just because the have less new ships or other stuff. I think it's just because the federation always where the good guys in the Shows, while the Klingons where just some barbarians in spaceships for most ppl.
No its Star Trek vs. Cryptics generic military sci fi concept.
Lol, just because someone suggests to give the GCS the same BOFF layout as another ship doesn't mean you would "steal" that ships uniqueness? There are still other stats, like Inertia, Weapons layout and so on.
Face it, there is only a limited amount of possible BOFF combinations and even less that make sense for the GCS or other ships to represent their unique "personality".
I think it's inevitable that some ships should have the same BOFF layout. But as game developers Cryptic should give those ships other things that make them unique.
That was just a bad example, get over it.
Seriously, it gets really annoying. One false word against the KDF and everybody jumps at you.
As i said, i don't really care about the KDF. Cryptic should give them the stuff KDF players want, but i still don't care about it.
No, in reality it's a certain dev vs GCS fans.
Cryptic gave us their "fix" for cruisers with the new Comm Arrays. Just as YOU wanted it.
And what did it help the GCS or any other underpowered Starfleet Cruiser?
Nothing, at all. (just as i have said some weeks ago.)
All ships kept being as offensive or defensive as they where, nothing was changed at all.
Cryptic didn't even gave Starfleet Cruisers something that would make them even with KDF Battlecrusiers DHCs, Cloaks or higher turn rate. All we got are some rather less interesting Comm Array powers that aren't especially creative or interesting at all.
It's about finding the RIGHT sollution, not just slapping a uni Station or hangar on it. OIf course if someone doesn't really care everything seems to be fine, of course.
Thanks for the info, now i know better. lol.
Btw. i NEVER said the GCS should become more powerful the the Odyssey. It should become DIFFERENT to the Odyssey, maybe more science focussed.
Regarding canon:
Of course you can find a justification to make a ship the most passive one or the most offensive one, you just have to look for the right evidence. My point is that Cryptics devs did apply double standards when making the Galor and the Excelsior (both same age or even older than the GCS) some of the best cruisers in the game but making the GCS such a lackluster.
Militarisation:
For me the GCs stands for a Star Trek that isn't all about military. In TNG the Federation was much more peace-loving but still ready to strike back when needed. (Cryptic althrough just makes it a teethless tank without any ability to strike back.)
But later (and especially in STO) Trek focussed much more on militarisation instead of exploration.
The Writers and producers of Star Trek turned it more and more into a generic sci fi universe, ignoring and neglecting what made Trek so different to other Sci Fi universes. Now in STO we have ppl runnning around in armors and carrying miniguns, commanding Carriers and Escort/Science/Carriers, maybe it's just me but that's no Star Trek anymore.
The GCS is one of the last remnants of how Star Trek (and especially the Federation) once was.
I have aceppted that the GCS can't be the strongest ship in STO, especially since it is a MMO (NO ship should be the strongest IMO).
But keeping it the least offensive of all Starfleet cruisers is just wrong and should be corrected.
There is no point in making the GCS partake in STOS power creep. It should get a niche on its own, similar to the Nebula Class in STO.
While it isn't the best of all time science ship it has its certain advantages and is still viable. The G -R is quite the opposite outgunned and without a place in this game. You proposals would greatly help keeping that ship interesting and fun to fly.
What was said? A link would be appreciated.
Honestly i think comm arrays are great for all the cruisers including the KDF battlecruisers and the flight deck cruisers. It gives them something you cant get with science or escorts. Though they really need to add more to the Federation whether its just more power to distrubute or making their beams have an acc bonus or even adding a defense bonus. Something to make them better offset and alittle more desirable vs Kdf better turn cloak and ability to load heavy cannons.
Cruisers and well Engineer heavy ships need help with their powers in general and don't think many would disagree. Simple solutions that have been said should be implemented like making certain powers lowered down to lower stations to give more diversity in their ensign slots. Adding the Shield distribution currently on tac team to engineer team and science team to make them more desirable and make tac team not so needed in so many builds that don't have many tac slots. Adding new powers for engineer. Things like this will help all cruisers and engineer heavy ships for all factions.
As far as a GCS it needs its boff seating and consoles changed up to make it modular as it suppose to be able to do many tasks but not the best at any in my opinion.
All podcasts and interviews are put into that section for people to check out.
I will play the devil's advocate and argue this point on Comm Arrays for now.
At this moment the only ship with it is the Avenger, limiting any real analysis on what it does until other Cruisers gain it.
However from what I have been privileged to see so far when my Oddy was within range of the perks its substantial enough to be noticed. And that says something for a ship decked out with end-game content. My ship isn't peak, it cna be improved I know, but for something decked out with the best on the aim of how it feels that little perk is substantial enough when it happens I can't wait to see what the restul will be when I have it myself.
I would't be so quick to dismiss the effects of that Comm Array until we see it on every Cruiser, then we can find out how its effect on that class of ship really is.
As someone who purchased the Avenger, I must say that I like the comm array abilities a lot. The bonuses they give may seem small... But they are certainly effective. I'm very eager to see how these abilities will change things up. I'm especially curious to see the draw fire ability stats when it comes out, namely in regards to the damage resistance buff it will provide.
Problem is, even with these new comm abilities I fear that the Galaxy will still be in the rut it is in now... Yeah it'll be great that it has some more tools at it's disposal... But that can be said for every other cruiser as well so I feel like it will be a moot point.
Interesting interview. Up until the point he started taking out his TRIBBLE concerning the remaining ships left in the IP.
While it is indeed based on the older Galaxy frame, it is not exactly a ship that is just as old.
It's a hotrodded version of the Galaxy designed for combat, after certain events in recent STO cannon years. While it would have leftover engineering abilities and some science, it was refit with the idea that it would serve on the front lines as a big, badass scary vessel. It may not be as completely advanced as the Sovvie or Oddy, but it should be big, mean, and scary in it's own right. The Oddy seems to be the last, great, Starfleet exploration vessel, with some mods done to its fellow class members to help it in some areas. I see it as a heavily modified version of the already fairly powerful Galaxy, a big combat update. It should out-tank the smaller Sovvie, and keep up with an Oddy, both tanking and damage output.
Yes, it does have a powerful lance, but unless you set up a build around the lance, it's just a big party trick that spends most of it's time MISSING TARGETS IT SHOULDN'T MISS. (Even built around the lance, if it misses, you have to run and hide for 3 minutes until the cooldown is finished. Not Good.)
I love my Dreadnought, and stubbornly cling on to it because I love the design, and what it means. Right now, I'm trying to build it up as a beam boat brawler, and while it's far from ready to do that, it's come a long ways since I first bought it a month ago.
What I mean by this is that the X is a fair amount newer than it's base model, and should reflect that, and it's combat basis a fair bit more.
All things considered, even if you go RCS crazy on it, like I had at one point, unless you get 4 Mk XII Fleet RCS consoles, DCs/DHCs are still useless on it, and even with that many, it's still not a good idea. You'll be spending more time turning to face your target and shoot it than you will actually shooting it. I think it would be a good hint at what the X was meant for if it came with Heavy Beam Arrays standard.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
As far as the KDF goes, should this be a one sided MMO? MMO's need living, breathing adversaries and each faction to have enough content to make them interesting and the players of each faction to remain interested, otherwise its not an MMO anymore.
The problem is that its some of the "GCS changers" are the ones who have gone to the extreme and made it GCS vs everyone. I also suspect that its this same group that is keeping Cryptic staff from posting here, or making any changes because they figure that, no matter what is done, there will be no satisfaction. If you want to blame someone about making the Exploration Cruiser so weak, blame Roddenberry and his decision to portray TNG as a utopian-kumbaya-land that pitted the Enterprise against enemies that would have had problems being able to even fend off a Constitution class (by the weakness of the enemy).
As far as the Cruiser commands, I can't really see what their effects are until they make them cruiser-wide, they pretty much were nowhere near the area most people were talking about, and honestly , I don't think they will work, but I will give them a chance. Even if they don't have a real effect, I won't talk about how Cryptic is out to get cruisers like people here talk about how members of Cryptic are out to get TNG fans. That attitude is what turns people off.
I feel your pain about the Excel' and Ambassador, but the Exploration cruiser should be much tankier than them and it wouldn't be very balanced (in MMO-land) if the ship was tankier and more dps. If there was a ship to be able to take the pounding, it should be this one. I just think its a mess that tanky ships like this can't hold out long enough to make dps intense ships feel the effects of its longevity with damage over time/pressure damage (not to be confused with DOT's)
And Star Trek isn't all about all about the military, but it mostly is, even in Starfleets hippie-ish ways. The TNG era wasn't as high of tension, between the empires, as the other shows, such as TOS, (and DS9) and many of us who grew up on TOS remember that. Voyager was more or less about survival, and Enterprise was about how the Federation was to be created (much of it in efforts to help each member race to decide they protect each other from outside threats.)
If STO had the same kind of "peaceful, exploration, content as in TNG, ala stellar cartography, and the Wesley psychodrama of the day and all that , it would surely have bored more than enough people to have made it a ghost town two weeks after the game would have been released, I am sorry that MMO's are based around action, but action does have as much of a place, if not more, in Star Trek as peaceful exploration.
The Bortas has the least maneuvering flexibility. The Dread'-cruiser feels like a sports-car compared to it.
im speaking of the comm auras, the ones it does not get. the bortas actually will
Oh, I won't deny that. The poor old ship doesn't stand very well with its disproportionate BOFF layout more than anything else.
IF Engineering had some real offensive-oriented skills beyond Emergency Power to Weapons or Directed Energy Modulation that were half as useful as Tac skills in comparison to how well Tac Team is a defensive skill it would be another story. I'm speaking directly to lower Ensign and Lt level skill defectiveness.
Something in Ensign and Lt that could add to a DEM III and paired EPW III for output would be ideal, but I highly doubt any such skill will ever exist.
Until then I fear without a real overhaul in the Galaxy it won't ever see the same offensive ability needed to compete with nearly every other cruiser that exists.
But i take thos3e kitbashes over the TRIBBLE Cryptic designs. for even those kitbases are better designed then what they put out. and how about New Orleans, PHOENIX Nebula. Then these is the fan made ships as well. ALL better designed then avenger.