But I think at the very least we can agree on that it doesn't make much sense that two of it's presumed predecessors feature more firepower than this ship. I agree that we have learned through the course of this thread that there is no definitive canon support for anything.
1) You are assuming that the Galaxy was intended to have more firepower than the predecessors, which is not necessarily true.
2) Using this criteria for assigning Tac power doesn't work in the context of this game, because it leads to all sorts of silliness - So, now the Galaxy needs to have as much/greater firepower than the Amb/Excel, so... then the Sovereign needs to have even more? And then the Odyssey needs yet more than that? The game systems aren't really granular enough to support those gradations.
I want to note that, for me personally, much of what DDIS states sounds alright to me regarding the phaser debate and everything and much of it fits in my personal view of Star Trek, but I cannot agree on everything he states or on many things other people state so in the end it seems all very subjective.
No, objectively it doesn't sound alright. I'm sorry to be a prick about it, but honestly, the phaser thing is actively anti-knowledge. It makes sense only in the way that people presume a lead ball will fall faster than an aluminum one, because the lead ball is heavier. That "sounds alright", but in practice is provably wrong. Same with the phaser thing - Mike Okuda wrote something that sounds good only until you learn basic thermodynamics, and think about it for a second.
But the fact that the excelsior and the Ambassador feature more firepower (in terms of tactical consoles) makes no real sense. This is some "canon" I think all can agree on.
But that's merely a side note since "canon" in no way shape or form has any value in STO. It is a game and star Trek games have always made up their own rules, STO in particular is a good example of not even trying to resemble the shows or movies. So what's left are gameplay matters and the least basic bit we can agree on (I presume) is that it's odd why the (Fleet) Gal-R didn't recieve the same treatment as it's exact mirror KDF counterpart and that's the damn universal ensign
I get that people feel like the Galaxy is the worst overall ship, and I am even willing to agree with that to an extent, I just don't make the automatic assumption that this is a "problem" worthy of attention. Too often people make the leap from "slightly underperforming" to "totally useless", when the fact is that the vast, vast majority of players in the game have such under-optimized builds that the Eng Ensign on the Galaxy is the least of their problems. For the people who are obsessed with hyper-optimizing their builds to be the bestest fake starship captains, I find it hard to believe that there is any change that could be made to the Galaxy that would slake their thirst for optimal performance, short of making it the OP wunder-ship some people imagine it "should" be.
In other words, I think that making a change has no advantage for me, no meaningful advantage for anyone else, won't meaningfully increase sales, might result in a new level of power creep, will probably result in a slew of fans of OTHER ships wondering why only the Galaxy deserved to be brought up to the modern standard, and at the very least costs valuable dev time on an issue that, to me, ought to be solved by people realizing that focusing on optimization is a silly, self-defeating way to play the game.
People are certainly welcome to disagree with that assessment, but the flabbergasted pronouncements that OF COURSE there's a problem and OBVIOUSLY I don't know what I'm talking about are both untrue and non-persuasive. As long as one side acts like it has a lock on "the truth", and that any disagreement is necessarily unreasonable, then no discussion can happen.
Here, I'll put my money where my mouth is:
I don't think the Ensign Engineer is that big a deal, because I don't think being forced to take Eng team 1 is that bad. I believe this because my PvP experience has been that you can get away with popping tac team reactively if/when you need to, instead of just spamming it every time it's off cooldown. Further, I think that having Eng Team to clear VM is not a bad thing.
I also don't think it's that bad to not have a great BOFF setup for either A2B with Technicians, or even to run Damage Control Engineers to run two different "Emergency power to X III" powers. Instead, use those DOFF slots to run the Eng. Weapon officers that proc a CD reduction on the FAW II you are running, and then run the DOFFs that buff either Aux to Structural (chance of a HOT) or Aux to ID (giving a solid res bonus for tanking). You end up with a build that may not be mathematically optimal, but I suspect it is close enough to be respectable, even in PvP.
At least regarding point 1 I can say that ssumption is reinforced by on-screen statements. I'm sure they said that literally a few times and the ship's firepower was often a topic in first contact situations alone. Point 2 could be a large discussion (not in a bad way, I actually enjoy rambling about Trek tech ;D ) but that's not the point.
I think you have to keep in mind that we are talking about science fiction regarding that phaser issue. I understand that having that "glow" is not a good thing when you talk about real life energy conservation (though I'm a mere wildlife biologist and ecologist, not that much tech-know-how in that old targ skull ) but I actually don't think it's a thing in Trek-universe. But like I said, that's not really the point anyway since I don't think that debate advances the gameplay issues of that ship in any way.
While I don't think everything is fine with the Explorer (can't get over the ensign thing, at least.) I actually command one. I bought the ship some time ago and fly it on my pre F2P main to this day without an A2B build, even without tac team and still I prevail. And I enjoy it. But the third ensign in conjunction with the cooldown issue means that this BOFF set up limits you in a way to use EPtX x2 and ET x1 like no other "profession" does. It doesn't really matter if it makes sense to use ET 1 or not, but every other profession has more lvl 1 skills to choose from, besides the fact that the Explorer is a Eng/Sci cruiser basically (c-store Star Cruiser if you look at the Refit version) and that universal ensign would just feel good to me
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
At least regarding point 1 I can say that ssumption is reinforced by on-screen statements. I'm sure they said that literally a few times and the ship's firepower was often a topic in first contact situations alone. Point 2 could be a large discussion (not in a bad way, I actually enjoy rambling about Trek tech ;D ) but that's not the point.
I think you have to keep in mind that we are talking about science fiction regarding that phaser issue. I understand that having that "glow" is not a good thing when you talk about real life energy conservation (though I'm a mere wildlife biologist and ecologist, not that much tech-know-how in that old targ skull ) but I actually don't think it's a thing in Trek-universe. But like I said, that's not really the point anyway since I don't think that debate advances the gameplay issues of that ship in any way.
While I don't think everything is fine with the Explorer (can't get over the ensign thing, at least.) I actually command one. I bought the ship some time ago and fly it on my pre F2P main to this day without an A2B build, even without tac team and still I prevail. And I enjoy it. But the third ensign in conjunction with the cooldown issue means that this BOFF set up limits you in a way to use EPtX x2 and ET x1 like no other "profession" does. It doesn't really matter if it makes sense to use ET 1 or not, but every other profession has more lvl 1 skills to choose from, besides the fact that the Explorer is a Eng/Sci cruiser basically (c-store Star Cruiser if you look at the Refit version) and that universal ensign would just feel good to me
The biggest problem I see is that people use canon to argue a point that a ship in STO is inconsistent with the ship in the show, which itself in inconsistent. Star Trek canon, placed itself in even more inconsistency when every bit of the universe did not receive the same amount of attention to detail as other parts, even worse then assigned actually assigned numeric values and didn't check across the board for consistency. When numbers get assigned, disbelief becomes more prevalent, because liars figure, and figures lie (I am going to be clear that I am not saying anyone here is lying, just to get that out here).
Canon, at one moment argues bigger (longer) is better and then introduce a pocket warship that is able to match ships firepower many times over its size. It says a ship has a memory capability 300 years in the future that will be attainable in a few years.The second numbers get involved, the credibility takes a hit. One almost needs a religious commitment to it to have faith in it for belief.
If someone said that the Galaxy had very powerful weapons for its time, sure, I'll bite. But to then say that the Galaxy still has better firepower than a newer ship that is more tactically designed than it , I won't bite on that. Also, when a statistic that a ships interior is X% modular , while not addressing if other ships have a certain percentage of their ships interior as modular, doesn't add much value in the statement. How is the universe so comparably "canon" when the canonization process is so sloppy?
And I enjoy it. But the third ensign in conjunction with the cooldown issue means that this BOFF set up limits you in a way to use EPtX x2 and ET x1 like no other "profession" does. It doesn't really matter if it makes sense to use ET 1 or not, but every other profession has more lvl 1 skills to choose from...
The limit isn't exactly the same, but there's still a similar problem with Tac ensign powers and the Defiant - you have to include either a beam or a torp, because otherwise the only power available at ensign is Tac Team I. Basically, instead of being forced to take a power you may or may not want to take, Defiant captains are forced to take a weapon they may or may not want to take. I think at some level you have to sort of accept that it is what it is - having only one viable option for the third ensign slot is certainly not elegant, but as you say, it's not like the ship is impossible to use, it's just a little awkward.
The limit isn't exactly the same, but there's still a similar problem with Tac ensign powers and the Defiant - you have to include either a beam or a torp, because otherwise the only power available at ensign is Tac Team I. Basically, instead of being forced to take a power you may or may not want to take, Defiant captains are forced to take a weapon they may or may not want to take. I think at some level you have to sort of accept that it is what it is - having only one viable option for the third ensign slot is certainly not elegant, but as you say, it's not like the ship is impossible to use, it's just a little awkward.
I see the problem, although I think that it is avoidable to a certain degree. I understand that the Defiant, as another pre F2P ship, does also suffer from the old game mechanics, though in regards of the tactical BOFFs it's not that obvious; at least one could argue that a ship is sort of supposed to have at least a energy weapon and a torpedo weapon. It's just the same min/max mentality that made one-type weapon layouts viable that are to some people no issue when talking about the Explorer R because they just should go with it in that case. ?ersonally I would be fine with universal ensigns or even ensigns & lieutenants for all (fleet) pre F2P retrofits so they don't get hit as hard as they are now, all of them. And fact remains that they ARE the hero ships from the "TNG legacy" and as such should be at least considerable alternatives and by one or two low lvl universals they wouldn't "steal the show" from any more specialized ships. I mean, Cryptic even recognized the awkward BOFF layout with the Negh'Var and corrected it. Why not with the Explorer?
The ship isn't impossible to use, I do no matter what since I absolutely dislike "ship hopping" as well. Basically my characters command one ship, that's my own personal "tv show" in STO. That's my own personal? choice and I make the best from what I got. Though that one ensign at least is something that needs to be adressed. Everything beyond that is just speculating, in a fun way. I enjoy thinking about how the game would fit better into what I consider "canon" but I understand that this is not the same for everyone.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I think that a big part of the problem is that as is, the ship has no role - there's nothing it offers you can't get elsewhere. The Star Cruiser and Eng Odyssey tank better, the Ambassador and Sci Odyssey have much better support... there's just no reason to fly it other than wanting to fly a Galaxy. Even the pretty unremarkable Fleet Heavy Cruiser does occupy a certain niche, leaning a little towards Tactical but keeping the COM + LTCOM Eng that some players may like. The Galaxy, on the other hand? It's almost down an ensign ability, and to a lesser extent console slot (not much you can do with a 5th eng console on a 6 turn rate cruiser other than a universal). Polishing up Engineering abilities in general may help the Galaxy, but it needs to have something of its own. It needs to have a reason to exist in the playable ship lineup... and this has absolutely nothing with how the Galaxy was in canon.
After all, as others have mentioned, canon has only a tangential bearing on ships in STO, but I think the Galaxy in canon is a large part of the reason this thread exists. The Galaxy is the most seen ship in Star Trek. It's a ship that people are going to want to fly, and it's probably the worst ship you could choose to make so redundant. That this thread is so long is a testament to this fact - would people have complained so much about a Cryptic design like the Avenger or Star Cruiser being at the bottom of the food chain?
@hawke: Would it be some non-canon ship I certainly wouldn't care. But that's just me personally since I don't give a squeal about Cryptic's designs, be it ground or space items
Regarding canon treatment, I would even support a petition to TAKE AWAY tactical assets from the Nova and fleet Nova since they are supposed to be non-combatant vessels. But if I would suggest to reduce a ship's tactical assets in THIS game I'd probably be followed home and ambushed by rabid players
I just had a thought: What about, if one owns both the Refit and Retrofit of the explorer he or she could choose which BOFF layout the fleet version should have? I'm still more in favour of the universal fleet version since that's basically the same, but that would at least make the refit viable in some way.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The biggest problem I see is that people use canon to argue a point that a ship in STO is inconsistent with the ship in the show, which itself in inconsistent.
the problem is that EVERYONE use his own bias view of the canon to define what the ship should be in the game.
this ship should not be given somes stats according to what everyone think it should be in regard to canon.
when i said everyone, i said you, me AND the devs.
why do i said that?
here is what i think;
the galaxy have a 7 season ontime screen where at that time, and i think everyone will be agree with that, it was suppose to be the best thing starfleet ever created in term of firepower as well as sturdiness and durability.
this is important to anderstand for the rest because it printed on the minds of the people watching the show at that time a landmark of the ship potential.
then the sovereign class was introduced and again, in the most accepted "view", it was supposed to replace it.
it was supposed to replace it, and that, with all that entails notions that come with it, meaning, newer is better ( the fact that one bielieve in that is irrelevant because we are talking about the majority bielief here ).
so an other landmark was printed in the collective viewers mind of the tng show, that the sovereign is automaticaly better than the galaxy ( that this is true or not is also here of no importance ).
and these landmarks are that strong because they have the weight of more than 7 years ontime screen.
and everyone will then use this hierarchy to position these 2 ship in future game that will then be made.
that ok, if the general accepted view is that the sovereign must be superior to the galaxy, i don't see a problem with it, everyone is free to bielieve what he want.
that is also not much of a problem when designing a solo game where the player will have acces to these ship in that structure hierarchy.
it supported the generaly accepted canon view of the technology progression that these ship represented.
where it become a problem however, is when you try to stick with that concept in an MMO, where no ship is supposed to be better or less good than any other.
the star cruiser is not supposed to be more efficient or better than the exelsior, it is supposed to have a different use.
and that where the landmark i was talking before enter into play.
when they designed the galaxy family stats, they done it with the notion that it MUST, be, in the end inferior to the sovereign.
they don't design them with a different role in mind but with a efficiency line that these ship must not cross at all cost.
the galaxy dreadnought show this perfectly, at the time of it introduction he got the same bo layout as the free sovereign, wich show that it was a tactical version of the galaxy,because on paper he got the same potential firepower as a sovereign, but to not be equal with the sovereign potential, they give him a crappy turn and inertia, 1 less tactical console slot, and 1 less weapons slot in the back to "paid" for the integrated lance ( wich also beeing made a crappy weapon, yes at that time it base damage was lower by half of it present value ).
but even this bias view could be appropriate if it was something that was done all across the game.....but it is not.
the free ambassador do not suffer this problem, while being the galaxy predecessor it have the exact same firepower potential than the free sovereign AND at the same time a better tanking capabilities or crow control due to it lt commander sci.
same for the exelsior, the ship is even older than the ambassador but feel no shame to be superior in every point to the free sovereign when it was introduced into the game.
and there is not just these ships, they are many others.
you see how in the end the canon is use selectively, by everyone.
but i anderstand why it happened like that.
if the galaxy was an exelsior in the show, you can bet that the exelsior in sto would have been inferior in every way to the sovereign.
this is not a galaxy hate, it is just a biased point of view that have no room in an MMO.
and the majority of player that use the ship realized the unbalanced that this ship suffer.
and they are not neccesarly galaxy fan, they are just player that can't see the justification as why it is so subpart.
and that why you have a galaxy thread that pop up, every now and then in the forum, because those who give up to fight again the establish vision of the ship are beeing replaced by new player that have to deal with the same problem and thus, ask the same question, in essence: what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic?
we are not a thousand to continue the fight, because it is a tiresome one.
the players that came in the forum have been treated to ask for a god ship, to be selfish, to learn how to play, that it is not the ship but the captain, that if they want a better ship they should choose an other one, that they want a gigantic escort ect ect.
so yes in the end only the most dedicated player stay in the forum to support the ship revamp.
some progress have been made tho, it is now generally accepted that the ship is subpart, you will still have 1 or 2 forumer that will said that it is good as is.
the debate now turn around how an hypotetical revamp should be made, more than if it should be made ever.
so, to concluded, that is the probleme with the galaxy family, the selective use of canon that only apply to the ship, and that ship alone.
when people and cryptic anderstand that, and try to find him a role instead of the one to be a less good sovy, or one that i heard ( so funny btw ) to just be a galaxy skin, then i am sure that all these thread will reduce in intensity if not disappear.
we will have the normal thread like, help me to tune my galaxy, instead of can you please buff my galaxy cryptic.
I think that a big part of the problem is that as is, the ship has no role - there's nothing it offers you can't get elsewhere. The Star Cruiser and Eng Odyssey tank better, the Ambassador and Sci Odyssey have much better support... there's just no reason to fly it other than wanting to fly a Galaxy. Even the pretty unremarkable Fleet Heavy Cruiser does occupy a certain niche, leaning a little towards Tactical but keeping the COM + LTCOM Eng that some players may like. The Galaxy, on the other hand? It's almost down an ensign ability, and to a lesser extent console slot (not much you can do with a 5th eng console on a 6 turn rate cruiser other than a universal). Polishing up Engineering abilities in general may help the Galaxy, but it needs to have something of its own. It needs to have a reason to exist in the playable ship lineup... and this has absolutely nothing with how the Galaxy was in canon.
After all, as others have mentioned, canon has only a tangential bearing on ships in STO, but I think the Galaxy in canon is a large part of the reason this thread exists. The Galaxy is the most seen ship in Star Trek. It's a ship that people are going to want to fly, and it's probably the worst ship you could choose to make so redundant. That this thread is so long is a testament to this fact - would people have complained so much about a Cryptic design like the Avenger or Star Cruiser being at the bottom of the food chain?
I completely agree with your assesment, those are exactly my feelings and opinions on this subject as well.
I have nothing much to add to this, I think you hit the nail on the head here.
I agree, as much as I like my Avenger for it's sheer TRIBBLE kicking potential the Galaxy is something I always go back to. I flew the Avenger for about a week or two then I kind of got bored of the looks and and back in my Galaxy-R atm... and the performance difference is shocking lol.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
I honestly don't care if the layout stays the same. I understand that Captain Geko has a specific niche set aside for the endgame Exploration Cruiser. The problem is that his theoretical role for the ship is completely redundant and not supported by the game mechanics. In order for the existing configuration to be viable, the following needs to happen:
Engineering consoles need to have options that increase damage so that a shortage of Tactical slots isn't an issue.
Ensign-level Engineering powers need more variety, so that the ship doesn't get tripped up by global cooldowns.
cryptic just released another ship that has a LTC and LT uni, that also allows you to forgo completely 1 of the 3 station types. not to mention theres 2 LTC station, ones even universal for christ sake.
the other ship, the cruiser, has a station setup similar to what some people have asked for the galaxy as well. scratch that configuration off the list.
COM eng LTC sci LT tac LT uni
ENS uni
my proposed galaxy setup looks more reasonable every day
As far as canon goes the Nova was a short range science vessel with limited speed but that does not mean it could not be upgraded nor was it not capable of combat. Yes it's not the ideal ship but it has Phasers and Photons and I'd argue still preferred over a Miranda.
The USS Nova was part of the fleet waiting for the Enterprise-E in Nemesis. If it were incapable of combat at all why would it be there?
Then we see Harry Kim fighting a Neghvar in the USS Rhode Island in the last episode of Voyager. A Nova class variant.
Originally the Nova design was part of the Pathfinder project to combat the borg and the design was almost the Defiant class. Since then the design was retooled and repurposed towards a more scientific role but it's origins are of a combat vessel.
However yes in STO there should be no way a Fleet Galaxy should be outgunned by a Fleet Nova.
the USS Galaxy was also part of the same fleet with the Nova.
In a game filled with Lockboxes and now Dinosaurs, I kind of now feel that the Galaxy would be out of place. It doesn't fit STO or the path it's on anymore. If I'm going to be killing Dinosaurs for lockboxes, I feel like the only ship that fits that theme is the Risian Corvette. A hot pink Risian Corvette. But yeah, it's the star trek take on Cadillacs and Dinosaurs now moreso than an actual Star Trek universe.
So I've let go of my desire for more access to my favorite ships from actual Star Trek. I no longer want anything TOS (like a T5 Constitution) involved in this game. Nor do I feel that the classic TNG ship fits with this new future Dan and Al are building. So I'm ok with the Galaxy remaining kind of dated and useless. I mean, it's just not a dinosaur hunting kind of ship you know? It's more sleestack, and I need something more Turok, ya dig?
In a game filled with Lockboxes and now Dinosaurs, I kind of now feel that the Galaxy would be out of place. It doesn't fit STO or the path it's on anymore. If I'm going to be killing Dinosaurs for lockboxes, I feel like the only ship that fits that theme is the Risian Corvette. A hot pink Risian Corvette. But yeah, it's the star trek take on Cadillacs and Dinosaurs now moreso than an actual Star Trek universe.
So I've let go of my desire for more access to my favorite ships from actual Star Trek. I no longer want anything TOS (like a T5 Constitution) involved in this game. Nor do I feel that the classic TNG ship fits with this new future Dan and Al are building. So I'm ok with the Galaxy remaining kind of dated and useless. I mean, it's just not a dinosaur hunting kind of ship you know? It's more sleestack, and I need something more Turok, ya dig?
I'm sorry to say it, but unfortunately you're absolutely right on that one.
In a game filled with Lockboxes and now Dinosaurs, I kind of now feel that the Galaxy would be out of place. It doesn't fit STO or the path it's on anymore. If I'm going to be killing Dinosaurs for lockboxes, I feel like the only ship that fits that theme is the Risian Corvette. A hot pink Risian Corvette. But yeah, it's the star trek take on Cadillacs and Dinosaurs now moreso than an actual Star Trek universe.
So I've let go of my desire for more access to my favorite ships from actual Star Trek. I no longer want anything TOS (like a T5 Constitution) involved in this game. Nor do I feel that the classic TNG ship fits with this new future Dan and Al are building. So I'm ok with the Galaxy remaining kind of dated and useless. I mean, it's just not a dinosaur hunting kind of ship you know? It's more sleestack, and I need something more Turok, ya dig?
what beter to bring order to chaos then something sensible like a galaxy class
In a Star Trek universe, I'd wholeheartedly agree with you.
In a world populated by Romulan Farmers fighting dinosaurs and what not, I'm just too confused.
If I stop being lazy, I'll probably change my signature too. As it's extremely dated in this brave new world of STO.
I see, you are just as enthusiastic about STO as i am lately.
Cryptic really should drop the whole Star Trek thing and make something on their own.
Star Trek deserves better IMO.
"...'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
In a game filled with Lockboxes and now Dinosaurs, I kind of now feel that the Galaxy would be out of place. It doesn't fit STO or the path it's on anymore. If I'm going to be killing Dinosaurs for lockboxes, I feel like the only ship that fits that theme is the Risian Corvette. A hot pink Risian Corvette. But yeah, it's the star trek take on Cadillacs and Dinosaurs now moreso than an actual Star Trek universe.
So I've let go of my desire for more access to my favorite ships from actual Star Trek. I no longer want anything TOS (like a T5 Constitution) involved in this game. Nor do I feel that the classic TNG ship fits with this new future Dan and Al are building. So I'm ok with the Galaxy remaining kind of dated and useless. I mean, it's just not a dinosaur hunting kind of ship you know? It's more sleestack, and I need something more Turok, ya dig?
I... um... eh... am afraid YOU hit the nail on the head this time. I haven't even played S8 content yet, but the new lockbox ships and what I saw and heard from tribble... I can't push myself to log in at the moment...
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I guess it's a wrap, then. Cryptic has finally removed the last remaining Star Trek from PW's online space gambling game. Dinosaurs.
The whole length and breadth of Star Trek lore spanning decades and a multitude of possibilities, and they chose to settle on one of the most universally reviled and detested obscure episodes of Voyager.
Dinosaurs.
I think that about does it for me. I know the servers are going to be up tomorrow or whenever they manage to finish introducing the new bugs they'll ignore until the game goes offline, but I'm really not feeling compelled to even log in to see it.
I... um... eh... am afraid YOU hit the nail on the head this time. I haven't even played S8 content yet, but the new lockbox ships and what I saw and heard from tribble... I can't push myself to log in at the moment...
Space adventure zones is ok, imo. But a bit confusing at the first glance (at least for me, i'm not the youngest anymore, lol.).
Seriously try the Origin bridge, it is really nice.
Apart from that i haven't found anything especially trekkish in S8, sadly.
I was really shocked when i saw the T-Rex in ground combat, i haven't thought that Cryptics devs are really going that far :eek:.
(i always thought ppl where exaggerating.)
I don't know, after killing it all this doesn't feel like Star Trek anymore...
also those ships where suppose to be involved with the fight with the scimitar but do to budget reasons they just had the ent-e and the 2 valdors
i think that would have been awesome to see a galaxy class one more time on the big screen dishing it out
It would have been a grand farewell for it indeed.
But as much as i know the producers, they would let just the GCS die to show how dangerous the scimitar is. :mad:
"...'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
put about 8 hours into the new DS content and saw it all
Poor rewards will make this fade faster than new romulas did
I guess we need a Harpoon on the Bow of the Galaxy class for this new content..............
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Space adventure zones is ok, imo. But a bit confusing at the first glance (at least for me, i'm not the youngest anymore, lol.).
Seriously try the Origin bridge, it is really nice.
Apart from that i haven't found anything especially trekkish in S8, sadly.
I was really shocked when i saw the T-Rex in ground combat, i haven't thought that Cryptics devs are really going that far :eek:.
(i always thought ppl where exaggerating.)
I don't know, after killing it all this doesn't feel like Star Trek anymore...
It would have been a grand farewell for it indeed.
But as much as i know the producers, they would let just the GCS die to show how dangerous the scimitar is. :mad:
all the hero ships where there the intrepid (voyager) valiant (defiant) and galaxy (ent-D) and a few others hood (excelsior) Aires (renaissance... also misspelled as it should be aries) Archer (miranda)
and then the nova would of been interesting bets are the excelsior and miranda would of been taken out in seconds followed by the intrepid and valiant then the galaxy being last
I like to ask you guys for a favor. If anyone has the Galaxy bridge pack, could you please post some screenshots from the bridge after the S8 changes to the consoles?
I don't have it and I've been using the generic Galaxy bridge (whatever it's called), but I was considering getting the pack for my Galaxy-R. It's just about the only enhancement that she's missing. So I was wondering how it looks with the latest changes before I buy, cause I wouldn't want to be suprised in a negative way after I dished out the Zen and purchased it.
And this thread seemed like the most apropriate place to ask, there's bound to be one Galaxy Captain that has the bridge pack here.
I like to ask you guys for a favor. If anyone has the Galaxy bridge pack, could you please post some screenshots from the bridge after the S8 changes to the consoles?
I don't have it and I've been using the generic Galaxy bridge (whatever it's called), but I was considering getting the pack for my Galaxy-R. It's just about the only enhancement that she's missing. So I was wondering how it looks with the latest changes before I buy, cause I wouldn't want to be suprised in a negative way after I dished out the Zen and purchased it.
And this thread seemed like the most apropriate place to ask, there's bound to be one Galaxy Captain that has the bridge pack here.
No changes with the GCS bridge Pack (justice, Order and triumph Bridges)
"...'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
the problem is that EVERYONE use his own bias view of the canon to define what the ship should be in the game.
this ship should not be given somes stats according to what everyone think it should be in regard to canon.
when i said everyone, i said you, me AND the devs.
I agree, everyone does have bias, especially based on their own personal experiences. The problem with Star Trek canon is that canon is only as good as the effort put into each "chapter."In Star Trek, not all aspects of canon are equal, some were given more effort than others were and that's where much of the problem is regarding interpretation of canon, that and some peoples suspension of disbelief (or lack thereof).
but even this bias view could be appropriate if it was something that was done all across the game.....but it is not.
the free ambassador do not suffer this problem, while being the galaxy predecessor it have the exact same firepower potential than the free sovereign AND at the same time a better tanking capabilities or crow control due to it lt commander sci.
same for the exelsior, the ship is even older than the ambassador but feel no shame to be superior in every point to the free sovereign when it was introduced into the game.
and there is not just these ships, they are many others.
you see how in the end the canon is use selectively, by everyone.
but i anderstand why it happened like that.
if the galaxy was an exelsior in the show, you can bet that the exelsior in sto would have been inferior in every way to the sovereign.
this is not a galaxy hate, it is just a biased point of view that have no room in an MMO.
and the majority of player that use the ship realized the unbalanced that this ship suffer.
and they are not neccesarly galaxy fan, they are just player that can't see the justification as why it is so subpart.
and that why you have a galaxy thread that pop up, every now and then in the forum, because those who give up to fight again the establish vision of the ship are beeing replaced by new player that have to deal with the same problem and thus, ask the same question, in essence: what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic?
we are not a thousand to continue the fight, because it is a tiresome one.
the players that came in the forum have been treated to ask for a god ship, to be selfish, to learn how to play, that it is not the ship but the captain, that if they want a better ship they should choose an other one, that they want a gigantic escort ect ect.
so yes in the end only the most dedicated player stay in the forum to support the ship revamp.
some progress have been made tho, it is now generally accepted that the ship is subpart, you will still have 1 or 2 forumer that will said that it is good as is.
the debate now turn around how an hypotetical revamp should be made, more than if it should be made ever.
so, to concluded, that is the probleme with the galaxy family, the selective use of canon that only apply to the ship, and that ship alone.
I'll buy that with the conditional statement that the selective use of canon is across the board, not just by Cryptic, not just by those who aren't in line with a certain belief by some players on what the ship should be, but by all.
when people and cryptic anderstand that, and try to find him a role instead of the one to be a less good sovy, or one that i heard ( so funny btw ) to just be a galaxy skin, then i am sure that all these thread will reduce in intensity if not disappear.
we will have the normal thread like, help me to tune my galaxy, instead of can you please buff my galaxy cryptic.
I agree that this ship should have a role, and I think that role should be an engineer-heavy cruiser, but Cryptic really needs to revamp the way that engineer BOff skills and consoles work to bring them to parity with the other classes. It can be done, and I think that there would be many more options of current ships that people have and could use more effectively if parity between the classes/ship was addressed.
Comments
1) You are assuming that the Galaxy was intended to have more firepower than the predecessors, which is not necessarily true.
2) Using this criteria for assigning Tac power doesn't work in the context of this game, because it leads to all sorts of silliness - So, now the Galaxy needs to have as much/greater firepower than the Amb/Excel, so... then the Sovereign needs to have even more? And then the Odyssey needs yet more than that? The game systems aren't really granular enough to support those gradations.
No, objectively it doesn't sound alright. I'm sorry to be a prick about it, but honestly, the phaser thing is actively anti-knowledge. It makes sense only in the way that people presume a lead ball will fall faster than an aluminum one, because the lead ball is heavier. That "sounds alright", but in practice is provably wrong. Same with the phaser thing - Mike Okuda wrote something that sounds good only until you learn basic thermodynamics, and think about it for a second.
I get that people feel like the Galaxy is the worst overall ship, and I am even willing to agree with that to an extent, I just don't make the automatic assumption that this is a "problem" worthy of attention. Too often people make the leap from "slightly underperforming" to "totally useless", when the fact is that the vast, vast majority of players in the game have such under-optimized builds that the Eng Ensign on the Galaxy is the least of their problems. For the people who are obsessed with hyper-optimizing their builds to be the bestest fake starship captains, I find it hard to believe that there is any change that could be made to the Galaxy that would slake their thirst for optimal performance, short of making it the OP wunder-ship some people imagine it "should" be.
In other words, I think that making a change has no advantage for me, no meaningful advantage for anyone else, won't meaningfully increase sales, might result in a new level of power creep, will probably result in a slew of fans of OTHER ships wondering why only the Galaxy deserved to be brought up to the modern standard, and at the very least costs valuable dev time on an issue that, to me, ought to be solved by people realizing that focusing on optimization is a silly, self-defeating way to play the game.
People are certainly welcome to disagree with that assessment, but the flabbergasted pronouncements that OF COURSE there's a problem and OBVIOUSLY I don't know what I'm talking about are both untrue and non-persuasive. As long as one side acts like it has a lock on "the truth", and that any disagreement is necessarily unreasonable, then no discussion can happen.
Here, I'll put my money where my mouth is:
I don't think the Ensign Engineer is that big a deal, because I don't think being forced to take Eng team 1 is that bad. I believe this because my PvP experience has been that you can get away with popping tac team reactively if/when you need to, instead of just spamming it every time it's off cooldown. Further, I think that having Eng Team to clear VM is not a bad thing.
I also don't think it's that bad to not have a great BOFF setup for either A2B with Technicians, or even to run Damage Control Engineers to run two different "Emergency power to X III" powers. Instead, use those DOFF slots to run the Eng. Weapon officers that proc a CD reduction on the FAW II you are running, and then run the DOFFs that buff either Aux to Structural (chance of a HOT) or Aux to ID (giving a solid res bonus for tanking). You end up with a build that may not be mathematically optimal, but I suspect it is close enough to be respectable, even in PvP.
At least regarding point 1 I can say that ssumption is reinforced by on-screen statements. I'm sure they said that literally a few times and the ship's firepower was often a topic in first contact situations alone. Point 2 could be a large discussion (not in a bad way, I actually enjoy rambling about Trek tech ;D ) but that's not the point.
I think you have to keep in mind that we are talking about science fiction regarding that phaser issue. I understand that having that "glow" is not a good thing when you talk about real life energy conservation (though I'm a mere wildlife biologist and ecologist, not that much tech-know-how in that old targ skull
While I don't think everything is fine with the Explorer (can't get over the ensign thing, at least.) I actually command one. I bought the ship some time ago and fly it on my pre F2P main to this day without an A2B build, even without tac team and still I prevail. And I enjoy it. But the third ensign in conjunction with the cooldown issue means that this BOFF set up limits you in a way to use EPtX x2 and ET x1 like no other "profession" does. It doesn't really matter if it makes sense to use ET 1 or not, but every other profession has more lvl 1 skills to choose from, besides the fact that the Explorer is a Eng/Sci cruiser basically (c-store Star Cruiser if you look at the Refit version) and that universal ensign would just feel good to me
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The biggest problem I see is that people use canon to argue a point that a ship in STO is inconsistent with the ship in the show, which itself in inconsistent. Star Trek canon, placed itself in even more inconsistency when every bit of the universe did not receive the same amount of attention to detail as other parts, even worse then assigned actually assigned numeric values and didn't check across the board for consistency. When numbers get assigned, disbelief becomes more prevalent, because liars figure, and figures lie (I am going to be clear that I am not saying anyone here is lying, just to get that out here).
Canon, at one moment argues bigger (longer) is better and then introduce a pocket warship that is able to match ships firepower many times over its size. It says a ship has a memory capability 300 years in the future that will be attainable in a few years.The second numbers get involved, the credibility takes a hit. One almost needs a religious commitment to it to have faith in it for belief.
If someone said that the Galaxy had very powerful weapons for its time, sure, I'll bite. But to then say that the Galaxy still has better firepower than a newer ship that is more tactically designed than it , I won't bite on that. Also, when a statistic that a ships interior is X% modular , while not addressing if other ships have a certain percentage of their ships interior as modular, doesn't add much value in the statement. How is the universe so comparably "canon" when the canonization process is so sloppy?
The limit isn't exactly the same, but there's still a similar problem with Tac ensign powers and the Defiant - you have to include either a beam or a torp, because otherwise the only power available at ensign is Tac Team I. Basically, instead of being forced to take a power you may or may not want to take, Defiant captains are forced to take a weapon they may or may not want to take. I think at some level you have to sort of accept that it is what it is - having only one viable option for the third ensign slot is certainly not elegant, but as you say, it's not like the ship is impossible to use, it's just a little awkward.
I see the problem, although I think that it is avoidable to a certain degree. I understand that the Defiant, as another pre F2P ship, does also suffer from the old game mechanics, though in regards of the tactical BOFFs it's not that obvious; at least one could argue that a ship is sort of supposed to have at least a energy weapon and a torpedo weapon. It's just the same min/max mentality that made one-type weapon layouts viable that are to some people no issue when talking about the Explorer R because they just should go with it in that case. ?ersonally I would be fine with universal ensigns or even ensigns & lieutenants for all (fleet) pre F2P retrofits so they don't get hit as hard as they are now, all of them. And fact remains that they ARE the hero ships from the "TNG legacy" and as such should be at least considerable alternatives and by one or two low lvl universals they wouldn't "steal the show" from any more specialized ships. I mean, Cryptic even recognized the awkward BOFF layout with the Negh'Var and corrected it. Why not with the Explorer?
The ship isn't impossible to use, I do no matter what since I absolutely dislike "ship hopping" as well. Basically my characters command one ship, that's my own personal "tv show" in STO. That's my own personal? choice and I make the best from what I got. Though that one ensign at least is something that needs to be adressed. Everything beyond that is just speculating, in a fun way. I enjoy thinking about how the game would fit better into what I consider "canon" but I understand that this is not the same for everyone.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
After all, as others have mentioned, canon has only a tangential bearing on ships in STO, but I think the Galaxy in canon is a large part of the reason this thread exists. The Galaxy is the most seen ship in Star Trek. It's a ship that people are going to want to fly, and it's probably the worst ship you could choose to make so redundant. That this thread is so long is a testament to this fact - would people have complained so much about a Cryptic design like the Avenger or Star Cruiser being at the bottom of the food chain?
Regarding canon treatment, I would even support a petition to TAKE AWAY tactical assets from the Nova and fleet Nova since they are supposed to be non-combatant vessels. But if I would suggest to reduce a ship's tactical assets in THIS game I'd probably be followed home and ambushed by rabid players
I just had a thought: What about, if one owns both the Refit and Retrofit of the explorer he or she could choose which BOFF layout the fleet version should have? I'm still more in favour of the universal fleet version since that's basically the same, but that would at least make the refit viable in some way.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
the problem is that EVERYONE use his own bias view of the canon to define what the ship should be in the game.
this ship should not be given somes stats according to what everyone think it should be in regard to canon.
when i said everyone, i said you, me AND the devs.
why do i said that?
here is what i think;
the galaxy have a 7 season ontime screen where at that time, and i think everyone will be agree with that, it was suppose to be the best thing starfleet ever created in term of firepower as well as sturdiness and durability.
this is important to anderstand for the rest because it printed on the minds of the people watching the show at that time a landmark of the ship potential.
then the sovereign class was introduced and again, in the most accepted "view", it was supposed to replace it.
it was supposed to replace it, and that, with all that entails notions that come with it, meaning, newer is better ( the fact that one bielieve in that is irrelevant because we are talking about the majority bielief here ).
so an other landmark was printed in the collective viewers mind of the tng show, that the sovereign is automaticaly better than the galaxy ( that this is true or not is also here of no importance ).
and these landmarks are that strong because they have the weight of more than 7 years ontime screen.
and everyone will then use this hierarchy to position these 2 ship in future game that will then be made.
that ok, if the general accepted view is that the sovereign must be superior to the galaxy, i don't see a problem with it, everyone is free to bielieve what he want.
that is also not much of a problem when designing a solo game where the player will have acces to these ship in that structure hierarchy.
it supported the generaly accepted canon view of the technology progression that these ship represented.
where it become a problem however, is when you try to stick with that concept in an MMO, where no ship is supposed to be better or less good than any other.
the star cruiser is not supposed to be more efficient or better than the exelsior, it is supposed to have a different use.
and that where the landmark i was talking before enter into play.
when they designed the galaxy family stats, they done it with the notion that it MUST, be, in the end inferior to the sovereign.
they don't design them with a different role in mind but with a efficiency line that these ship must not cross at all cost.
the galaxy dreadnought show this perfectly, at the time of it introduction he got the same bo layout as the free sovereign, wich show that it was a tactical version of the galaxy,because on paper he got the same potential firepower as a sovereign, but to not be equal with the sovereign potential, they give him a crappy turn and inertia, 1 less tactical console slot, and 1 less weapons slot in the back to "paid" for the integrated lance ( wich also beeing made a crappy weapon, yes at that time it base damage was lower by half of it present value ).
but even this bias view could be appropriate if it was something that was done all across the game.....but it is not.
the free ambassador do not suffer this problem, while being the galaxy predecessor it have the exact same firepower potential than the free sovereign AND at the same time a better tanking capabilities or crow control due to it lt commander sci.
same for the exelsior, the ship is even older than the ambassador but feel no shame to be superior in every point to the free sovereign when it was introduced into the game.
and there is not just these ships, they are many others.
you see how in the end the canon is use selectively, by everyone.
but i anderstand why it happened like that.
if the galaxy was an exelsior in the show, you can bet that the exelsior in sto would have been inferior in every way to the sovereign.
this is not a galaxy hate, it is just a biased point of view that have no room in an MMO.
and the majority of player that use the ship realized the unbalanced that this ship suffer.
and they are not neccesarly galaxy fan, they are just player that can't see the justification as why it is so subpart.
and that why you have a galaxy thread that pop up, every now and then in the forum, because those who give up to fight again the establish vision of the ship are beeing replaced by new player that have to deal with the same problem and thus, ask the same question, in essence: what is your beef with the galaxy cryptic?
we are not a thousand to continue the fight, because it is a tiresome one.
the players that came in the forum have been treated to ask for a god ship, to be selfish, to learn how to play, that it is not the ship but the captain, that if they want a better ship they should choose an other one, that they want a gigantic escort ect ect.
so yes in the end only the most dedicated player stay in the forum to support the ship revamp.
some progress have been made tho, it is now generally accepted that the ship is subpart, you will still have 1 or 2 forumer that will said that it is good as is.
the debate now turn around how an hypotetical revamp should be made, more than if it should be made ever.
so, to concluded, that is the probleme with the galaxy family, the selective use of canon that only apply to the ship, and that ship alone.
when people and cryptic anderstand that, and try to find him a role instead of the one to be a less good sovy, or one that i heard ( so funny btw ) to just be a galaxy skin, then i am sure that all these thread will reduce in intensity if not disappear.
we will have the normal thread like, help me to tune my galaxy, instead of can you please buff my galaxy cryptic.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
I completely agree with your assesment, those are exactly my feelings and opinions on this subject as well.
I have nothing much to add to this, I think you hit the nail on the head here.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
Engineering consoles need to have options that increase damage so that a shortage of Tactical slots isn't an issue.
Ensign-level Engineering powers need more variety, so that the ship doesn't get tripped up by global cooldowns.
COM sci
LTC eng
LTC uni
LT uni
cryptic just released another ship that has a LTC and LT uni, that also allows you to forgo completely 1 of the 3 station types. not to mention theres 2 LTC station, ones even universal for christ sake.
the other ship, the cruiser, has a station setup similar to what some people have asked for the galaxy as well. scratch that configuration off the list.
COM eng
LTC sci
LT tac
LT uni
ENS uni
my proposed galaxy setup looks more reasonable every day
COM eng
LTC uni
LT uni
TL sci
ENS sci
the USS Galaxy was also part of the same fleet with the Nova.
So I've let go of my desire for more access to my favorite ships from actual Star Trek. I no longer want anything TOS (like a T5 Constitution) involved in this game. Nor do I feel that the classic TNG ship fits with this new future Dan and Al are building. So I'm ok with the Galaxy remaining kind of dated and useless. I mean, it's just not a dinosaur hunting kind of ship you know? It's more sleestack, and I need something more Turok, ya dig?
I'm sorry to say it, but unfortunately you're absolutely right on that one.
what beter to bring order to chaos then something sensible like a galaxy class
In a Star Trek universe, I'd wholeheartedly agree with you.
In a world populated by Romulan Farmers fighting dinosaurs and what not, I'm just too confused.
If I stop being lazy, I'll probably change my signature too. As it's extremely dated in this brave new world of STO.
I see, you are just as enthusiastic about STO as i am lately.
Cryptic really should drop the whole Star Trek thing and make something on their own.
Star Trek deserves better IMO.
I... um... eh... am afraid YOU hit the nail on the head this time. I haven't even played S8 content yet, but the new lockbox ships and what I saw and heard from tribble... I can't push myself to log in at the moment...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
also those ships where suppose to be involved with the fight with the scimitar but do to budget reasons they just had the ent-e and the 2 valdors
i think that would have been awesome to see a galaxy class one more time on the big screen dishing it out
The whole length and breadth of Star Trek lore spanning decades and a multitude of possibilities, and they chose to settle on one of the most universally reviled and detested obscure episodes of Voyager.
Dinosaurs.
I think that about does it for me. I know the servers are going to be up tomorrow or whenever they manage to finish introducing the new bugs they'll ignore until the game goes offline, but I'm really not feeling compelled to even log in to see it.
Seriously try the Origin bridge, it is really nice.
Apart from that i haven't found anything especially trekkish in S8, sadly.
I was really shocked when i saw the T-Rex in ground combat, i haven't thought that Cryptics devs are really going that far :eek:.
(i always thought ppl where exaggerating.)
I don't know, after killing it all this doesn't feel like Star Trek anymore...
It would have been a grand farewell for it indeed.
But as much as i know the producers, they would let just the GCS die to show how dangerous the scimitar is. :mad:
Poor rewards will make this fade faster than new romulas did
I guess we need a Harpoon on the Bow of the Galaxy class for this new content..............
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
all the hero ships where there the intrepid (voyager) valiant (defiant) and galaxy (ent-D) and a few others hood (excelsior) Aires (renaissance... also misspelled as it should be aries) Archer (miranda)
and then the nova would of been interesting bets are the excelsior and miranda would of been taken out in seconds followed by the intrepid and valiant then the galaxy being last
I don't have it and I've been using the generic Galaxy bridge (whatever it's called), but I was considering getting the pack for my Galaxy-R. It's just about the only enhancement that she's missing. So I was wondering how it looks with the latest changes before I buy, cause I wouldn't want to be suprised in a negative way after I dished out the Zen and purchased it.
And this thread seemed like the most apropriate place to ask, there's bound to be one Galaxy Captain that has the bridge pack here.
Order
Justice
Triumph
I agree, everyone does have bias, especially based on their own personal experiences. The problem with Star Trek canon is that canon is only as good as the effort put into each "chapter."In Star Trek, not all aspects of canon are equal, some were given more effort than others were and that's where much of the problem is regarding interpretation of canon, that and some peoples suspension of disbelief (or lack thereof).
I'll buy that with the conditional statement that the selective use of canon is across the board, not just by Cryptic, not just by those who aren't in line with a certain belief by some players on what the ship should be, but by all.
I agree that this ship should have a role, and I think that role should be an engineer-heavy cruiser, but Cryptic really needs to revamp the way that engineer BOff skills and consoles work to bring them to parity with the other classes. It can be done, and I think that there would be many more options of current ships that people have and could use more effectively if parity between the classes/ship was addressed.