and again, no.
unless you told me that the devs delibaratly made this ship to be the less effective in the game, the only ship that can't do something as good or better than any other ship.
i don't like to go into the "conspiracy" territory, but if that was the devs intention, well it would look like that indeed.
I'm sad that you still haven't comprehended the point.
The devs, I am sure, did not deliberately set out to make the Galaxy less effective. They made sure it had the baselines all T5 ships have (right number of slots, etc). They distributed those baselines according to the ship's assigned niche. And they applied the rules of thumb they have for Federation ships and cruisers. They may have given the result a once over to make sure that it all worked mechanically. What I don't think they would have tested is performance. As long as it fitted the mould prepared for it, the performance would be irrelevant.
Put my briches back in a good old non-fleet galaxy again.
I made it unkillable, but i couldnt scratch the surface of other ships easily. And because of the Escorts kept pulling the threat off me.
Whats the point in a tank if the damage pros just pull the threat right away from you.
The only time i can hold the threat is if i am holding attract fire in an area that those escorts are in. Even then the cube fires at everyone anyways.
But anything i can do in the Galaxy i can do in the Odd Duck, and i can do it with Flair. Tank and CC.
TRIBBLE i can heal/tank/cc in a Vesta too. Galaxy is just a sad sad panda.
Inertia just means you can do Powerslides in you carrier!
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
In DS9 the Jem'Hadar Dreadnought had no equal amongst the Alpha Quadrant ships. Even the massive D'deridex which is roughly the same size was still a paper tiger in the Dominion war (see Battle of the Omarion Nebula).
Of course in a MMO where all endgame ships must be relatively in the same ballpark in terms of hitpoints and firepower, the JHDC is stuck being the paper tiger. If it were to be show-accurate, it would have triple the hitpoints and double the weapon slots. In DS9 a lone Galaxy would get pasted by a JHDC. In STO, a good player flying a Galaxy with the right setup can probably beat another good player flying a JHDC.
I don't know about that because they ultimately didn't change the outcome of the war into Dominion favor. The only ship that went 1v1 was the USS Valient( Defiant Class). I think the hull would have gave it an advantage over the Galaxy but not in firepower. That ship did not display very much other than sitting in the background firing ocasionally.
Dear Dev's please can you fix other cruisers to be brought inline with the Galaxy class. Its not that you made the Galaxy bad . It just looks bad compared to every other cruiser that can out turn it, out tank it, out dps it, and offer better crowd control and team support than it.
Cruiser command abilities were a nice touch but i think attract fire is broken as in several ISE and KASE i have run i have failed to attract the attention of either Tactical cubes despite parking and broadsiding at a 3km range whilst my team were outside of 7km.
A Obelisk carrier in my last ISE run was able to hold the Tact cubes aggro over my Galaxy despite again parking and broadsiding within 3km whilst he was outside of 7km and not broadsiding.
So my 7 beams Aux2Bat, EPTW 3, DEM 3, 3 marion doffs and 8-9.5k dps build Galaxy failed to hold aggro against 4 beams.
I have no issues holding aggro with a Galaxy in PVP as most teams know that they can pound on me without the threat of retaliation making me a easy kill or taking me out of being able to offer team support.
So in conclusion Galaxy is good, the other cruisers are overpowered, power creepers that need NERFING.
I'm sad that you still haven't comprehended the point.
The devs, I am sure, did not deliberately set out to make the Galaxy less effective. They made sure it had the baselines all T5 ships have (right number of slots, etc). They distributed those baselines according to the ship's assigned niche. And they applied the rules of thumb they have for Federation ships and cruisers. They may have given the result a once over to make sure that it all worked mechanically. What I don't think they would have tested is performance. As long as it fitted the mould prepared for it, the performance would be irrelevant.
if it happened like that, it is indeed really sad.
you make people paid for a ship that you didn't even conceive with a role in mind but with rules and spreadsheet, and a pretty borked one for that matter.
the result isn't surprising.
and that is even more sad when you don't find this ship equivalent in any other faction.
so it mean that these rules are applying to this ship, and this ship alone.
it may be time to change that now that the game is almost 4 years old.
galaxy player shoudn't be the victim of old rules that never really applies to any other ship in the game.
I don't know about that because they ultimately didn't change the outcome of the war into Dominion favor.
A mere handful of enormous battleships rarely do affect the outcome of a war. There's a reason why most military historians agree that the one class of vehicle that ensures allied victory in WWII more than any other was the Douglas DC-3, and not the King George V-class battleship.
Besides which, I said the JHDC had no equal amongst and single alpha quadrant ship. That doesn't mean it was a ship class that could have turned the tide. History has taught that a big powerful battleship is always a big priority target, and the nation who owns a few can't risk the demoralizing and economic blow of losing even one.
The only ship that went 1v1 was the USS Valient( Defiant Class). I think the hull would have gave it an advantage over the Galaxy but not in firepower. That ship did not display very much other than sitting in the background firing ocasionally.
To quote Jake Sisko referencing the Valiant's sensor logs, the JHDC is "Twice the size of a Galaxy class starship and three times as powerful". Just because we didn't see it open up with all its main weapons on screen doesn't mean it was a paper tiger in canon.
If I were to venture a tactical explanation for why we saw the really big dominion ships sitting in the background firing occasionally rather than getting stuck in at the front of the line, it would be that you don't risk your big expensive assets at the front where they will be priority targets. You send your waves of smaller attack ships first as fodder and keep the big guns in the back, so that by the time the enemy has waded though your screen of small ships and taken heavy losses, they will be damaged and diminished with exhausted and wounded crews, and they will be facing your nice big heavy and completely unscathed battleships.
A mere handful of enormous battleships rarely do affect the outcome of a war. There's a reason why most military historians agree that the one class of vehicle that ensures allied victory in WWII more than any other was the Douglas DC-3, and not the King George V-class battleship.
Besides which, I said the JHDC had no equal amongst and single alpha quadrant ship. That doesn't mean it was a ship class that could have turned the tide. History has taught that a big powerful battleship is always a big priority target, and the nation who owns a few can't risk the demoralizing and economic blow of losing even one.
To quote Jake Sisko referencing the Valiant's sensor logs, the JHDC is "Twice the size of a Galaxy class starship and three times as powerful". Just because we didn't see it open up with all its main weapons on screen doesn't mean it was a paper tiger in canon.
If I were to venture a tactical explanation for why we saw the really big dominion ships sitting in the background firing occasionally rather than getting stuck in at the front of the line, it would be that you don't risk your big expensive assets at the front where they will be priority targets. You send your waves of smaller attack ships first as fodder and keep the big guns in the back, so that by the time the enemy has waded though your screen of small ships and taken heavy losses, they will be damaged and diminished with exhausted and wounded crews, and they will be facing your nice big heavy and completely unscathed battleships.
I never said the Jem Dreadnought was a paper tiger. I said the Jem Battleships were fodder. I meant the Battle cruisers were fodder because they were the ones blowing up all the time. When you look them up, it does call the type, "battleship."
Ok, we're going to take Jake Sico's(amature reporter) tactical analysis on ships and capabilities? The Jem'Hadar Dreadnoughts were formidable carriers but they were not armed with any super weapons or had overwealming power like a Borg cube. Big guns can be questionable since it is armed with only 10 torpedoe launchers and every ship in the shows that had spectacular firpower or abilites at least shown it once. Torpedoes can be electronicly jammed so they can miss their target. The 3 times as powerful reference is not specified so that could mean anything. It could mean that the ship had overwhelming hull strength, or shields. It can't be Warp power because the thing was only seen going warp 4.7. Most of those torp launchers are facing forward because the USS Valient was not taking fire when it was to the rear and underneath the Dreadnought. The Jem Dreadnoughts didn't show anything other than presence and firing some torpedoes. The Cubes shown their abilities, the Scimitar shown its, the Galaxy, Excelsior, Vorcha, Negh'Var, K'Vort battlecruisers, B'rel, Sovereign, Defiant, Akira, Nebula, Keldons, D'Deridex, etc. All those ships showed something special they can do. The Galaxy could easy out manuver the Jem Dread and stay on its rear or ventral side and pound it's hull to till it breaks. The Galaxy does come with 12 phasers arrays and 250 torpedoes to work with and actively use it's science systems to jam or confuse its targets. That is too bigg of a flaw to ignore about Jem'Hadar ship. You can weaken the shields with a 5 torpedoe spread and hit the hull with a powerful phaser blast or more topedoe volleys to seal the deal. The Jem'Hadar Battleships just buit overconfidnence in the Dominion, displayed by their Vorta and Founders. Why else would you build a big ship with all one type of foward facing weapons and have a bare underside wih no point defense weapons. Overconfidence is the answer.
I never said the Jem Dreadnought was a paper tiger. I said the Jem Battleships were fodder. I meant the Battle cruisers were fodder because they were the ones blowing up all the time. When you look them up, it does call the type, "battleship."
Ok, we're going to take Jake Sico's(amature reporter) tactical analysis on ships and capabilities? The Jem'Hadar Dreadnoughts were formidable carriers but they were not armed with any super weapons or had overwealming power like a Borg cube. Big guns can be questionable since it is armed with only 10 torpedoe launchers and every ship in the shows that had spectacular firpower or abilites at least shown it once. Torpedoes can be electronicly jammed so they can miss their target. The 3 times as powerful reference is not specified so that could mean anything. It could mean that the ship had overwhelming hull strength, or shields. It can't be Warp power because the thing was only seen going warp 4.7. Most of those torp launchers are facing forward because the USS Valient was not taking fire when it was to the rear and underneath the Dreadnought. The Jem Dreadnoughts didn't show anything other than presence and firing some torpedoes. The Cubes shown their abilities, the Scimitar shown its, the Galaxy, Excelsior, Vorcha, Negh'Var, K'Vort battlecruisers, B'rel, Sovereign, Defiant, Akira, Nebula, Keldons, D'Deridex, etc. All those ships showed something special they can do. The Galaxy could easy out manuver the Jem Dread and stay on its rear or ventral side and pound it's hull to till it breaks. The Galaxy does come with 12 phasers arrays and 250 torpedoes to work with and actively use it's science systems to jam or confuse its targets. That is too bigg of a flaw to ignore about Jem'Hadar ship. You can weaken the shields with a 5 torpedoe spread and hit the hull with a powerful phaser blast or more topedoe volleys to seal the deal. The Jem'Hadar Battleships just buit overconfidnence in the Dominion, displayed by their Vorta and Founders. Why else would you build a big ship with all one type of foward facing weapons and have a bare underside wih no point defense weapons. Overconfidence is the answer.
those battleships didn't seem to be terribly impressive, they might have been built to be as expendable as the bug ships or something.
the dreadknot the valiant fought though, it wasn't even harmed in the slightest by their attack, and they shot it down with what seemed like a half hearted effort. i can picture the vorta captain laughing at them through the whole fight, saying just shoot torpedoes at them till they did, dont even bother fireing any other weapons, lol.
Mary Sue Mary Sue where are you? Oh there you are!
I found several mary sues.
Excelsior, Galor, Regent, D'Kora, Monbosh, Jem'Hadar Bug Ship, Scimitar, Fleet Kamarag, Fleet Tor'Kaht, Fleet Nova almost any (canon) ship in STO.
But please don't think i reacted on your poor try to troll. I just wanted to say something too.
"...'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
those battleships didn't seem to be terribly impressive, they might have been built to be as expendable as the bug ships or something.
the dreadknot the valiant fought though, it wasn't even harmed in the slightest by their attack, and they shot it down with what seemed like a half hearted effort. i can picture the vorta captain laughing at them through the whole fight, saying just shoot torpedoes at them till they did, dont even bother fireing any other weapons, lol.
The stats did say it is only armed with 10 torpedo launchers. I didn't make that up. Plus the Valient Captain was a stupid bullheaded cadet who was more interested in self glory than fighting smart or just follow the orders.
Trolling is statement without purpose.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
Trolling is statement without purpose.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
Agreed.
Even if the GCS was that good, STO is clearly NOT the game to ask for it to become that good.
But on the other hand, other ships are ok to be OP... just saying.
"...'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
Trolling is statement without purpose.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
You have a valid point. This discussion is running circles because there is no real consent what a better in-game representation of the ship would be and suddenly BAM someone suggests 5 tac consoles again. For the record, I'm entirely certain that if this game was not the dps race it is nobody would demand more tactical capabilities to "improve" the ship. Just in the same way that nobody demands less tac capabilities on the Nova class )because it would be nonsense to demand something like that in STO).
^ 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
Trolling is statement without purpose.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
Hold up!!!!!!! You complaining about sombody wanting the Galaxy to be a god ship but why aren't you or anybody complaining about the Jem'Hadar Bug ship being OP? The game vesion of the ship is way off canon and is the most op and tanking ship out of all escorts. Some people want keep the cruisers nerfed so they can continue to fly their escorts unchallenged. Maybe, you should complain about that godship bug first, then try to block a competitive Galaxy later.
Almost every version of the Galaxy R is a total joke in comparison to other cruisers. The so called engineering heavy BOFF setup is one major problem for it in healing and removing debuffs because there are no duration of ENG team like Tac Team. Hazard Emitters has a duration of healing and the higher the power, the longer the duration. Tac Team and Hazard emitters also buff against damage during the duration. There are no ENG powers that buff against anything. That shows that an ENG heavy boff setup is not practical unless the Devs change the mechanics of ENG powers.
The console setup is also weak because the ship lacks a 3rd weapon console slot, putting it behind all the cruisers, save the Star Cruiser, in DPS. Without enough DPS you can't ward off an attack from escorts or even other cruisers, and you loose the chance to get good end game loot in PVE fleet actions. The heaviest damage dealers get all the very rare items while low DPS Cruisers is lucky to come in 3rd place and get green or blue items. There is no way a cruiser with 2 Weapon consoles can stand up to ships with 3 or more weapon consoles. Engineering consolse don't boost weapon damage or even make shields more resistant to damage. They just boost power levels that don't really help much if your ship is maxed out on desired power levels.
The mockery of TNG, is that every cruiser, new and old, is more well rounded and better at everyting than the Galaxy R. They all heal faster, move faster(keeping defense level high), turn rate higher, and DPS higher than the Galaxy. Even the Fleet version is not a real upgrade for the C-store version because the BOFF set up is the exact same and a weapon slot is not added to improve the DPS. This is great disregard for the TNG fan base, for we had to grind very hard in fleets to get our fleet starbases and shipyards to tier 4 to access the fleet exlorer class.
The Galaxy should get revamped and get the same BOFF setup as the Galaxy X. It is basicly the same ship minus a lance and cannons. The C-store version should move the 3rd science console slot to be a 3rd Tac console slot because the Galaxy is not a science ship, so you don't need more than two science console slots. The fleet version should of get the 5th Eng console slot changed to be a3rd or 4th Tac slot giving a beam boat more teeth to ward off attack. The BOFF setup for the fleet version should get rid of the Eng ensign BOFF and chang to a LTC tac power so the cruiser can enjoy level 3 tac powers or manuvers.
All the powers like saucer separation shold be returned to inate abilty just like the lance and cloaks of alen ships.
It's hard to be a TNG fan and to play STO.
As much as i agree with you, this thread is going to be ignored by the devs as any other Galaxy -R thread.
Let's face it Cryptics devs just hate the Galaxy Class and TNG for some reason.
As someone that became a Trek fan with TNG, it is very hard to play STO without being annoyed by Cryptics attitude towards TNG related things. Heck, they even gave the D'D a imaginable useless BOFF layout that makes the use of A2B pretty hard.
You know that i support a reworked Galaxy Class for years now, but as long as the same people are in charge at Cryptic, there won't be any useful or at least equal strong Galaxy Class in game.
"...'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
For the record, I'm entirely certain that if this game was not the dps race it is nobody would demand more tactical capabilities to "improve" the ship. Just in the same way that nobody demands less tac capabilities on the Nova class )because it would be nonsense to demand something like that in STO).
I wouldn't be so sure about that.
At least i am very dipleased about the "role" Cryptic gave the GCS.
Obviously their intention was to make the GCS the best tank. Even if that wouldn't have completely failed, i wouldn't want her to be like that. The GCS is a much more versatile than just a flying brick IMO and so she should be represented in STO, too.
"...'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 stats did say it is only armed with 10 torpedo launchers. I didn't make that up. Plus the Valient Captain was a stupid bullheaded cadet who was more interested in self glory than fighting smart or just follow the orders.
what stats say that? theres no way to know what its actual armament was, you cant just count arrays on it like you could a fed ship. no mater what the valient did, it couldn't harm that dreadnought, not alone. sorta like how 3 bug ships could shoot at a shieldless galaxy for 10 minutes and not really do all that much damage too it
Trolling is statement without purpose.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
we were talking about canon, not setting an in game mandate. we want a competitive galaxy, and when you look at the source materiel it shows a very large and powerful ship
it really shouldn't be a surprise that the biggest fed ship with the biggest guns is a bit of a juggernaut. but a sue comparison, really? :rolleyes: the word your looking for is underdog, thats how the ship was written in every story, not as the biggest and most powerful federation ship like it actually was. they cant seem to tell a story if the ship wasn't getting jobbed at every turn, or fighting something unbeatable like the borg or a ship mentally projected by some god like alien.
Almost every version of the Galaxy R is a total joke in comparison to other cruisers. The so called engineering heavy BOFF setup is one major problem for it in healing and removing debuffs because there are no duration of ENG team like Tac Team. Hazard Emitters has a duration of healing and the higher the power, the longer the duration. Tac Team and Hazard emitters also buff against damage during the duration. There are no ENG powers that buff against anything. That shows that an ENG heavy boff setup is not practical unless the Devs change the mechanics of ENG powers.
The console setup is also weak because the ship lacks a 3rd weapon console slot, putting it behind all the cruisers, save the Star Cruiser, in DPS. Without enough DPS you can't ward off an attack from escorts or even other cruisers, and you loose the chance to get good end game loot in PVE fleet actions. The heaviest damage dealers get all the very rare items while low DPS Cruisers is lucky to come in 3rd place and get green or blue items. There is no way a cruiser with 2 Weapon consoles can stand up to ships with 3 or more weapon consoles. Engineering consolse don't boost weapon damage or even make shields more resistant to damage. They just boost power levels that don't really help much if your ship is maxed out on desired power levels.
The mockery of TNG, is that every cruiser, new and old, is more well rounded and better at everyting than the Galaxy R. They all heal faster, move faster(keeping defense level high), turn rate higher, and DPS higher than the Galaxy. Even the Fleet version is not a real upgrade for the C-store version because the BOFF set up is the exact same and a weapon slot is not added to improve the DPS. This is great disregard for the TNG fan base, for we had to grind very hard in fleets to get our fleet starbases and shipyards to tier 4 to access the fleet exlorer class.
The Galaxy should get revamped and get the same BOFF setup as the Galaxy X. It is basicly the same ship minus a lance and cannons. The C-store version should move the 3rd science console slot to be a 3rd Tac console slot because the Galaxy is not a science ship, so you don't need more than two science console slots. The fleet version should of get the 5th Eng console slot changed to be a3rd or 4th Tac slot giving a beam boat more teeth to ward off attack. The BOFF setup for the fleet version should get rid of the Eng ensign BOFF and chang to a LTC tac power so the cruiser can enjoy level 3 tac powers or manuvers.
All the powers like saucer separation shold be returned to inate abilty just like the lance and cloaks of alen ships.
Dont get me wrong, I love TNG.
I believe you want to change the Galaxy R in accordance to your playstyle.
The Boff setup and the console setup of the galaxy X is ENG heavy setup and maximizing this ship with an ENG toon. The best role for this ship is a tank/healer.
It is not meant to do sci control crowd stuff nor dps like the other cruisers. The 2 Sci boff slots are enough for a tank/healer Fleet Galaxy R on the ENG side. With its current tac and sci slots, you can slot TT, HE and TSS. All the complaints that you say that the Galaxy R is utterly lacking.
ENG boffs have also the best resistance when you compare EPTS vs TSS or Aux2Sif vs HE.
ENG boffs have still the best burst heals out there -> EPTS vs TSS or Aux2Sif VS HE.
2 Tac console and boffs are enough to be above average(2 times) your DPS PUG in pve.
It is still one of the best pvp ships out their for its role.
When it comes to defense, all cruisers have the same base defense % rate. Only escorts have higher defense % rate than any cruiser. For speed, all fed fleet cruisers have the same impulse modifier. So where did you get your info?
Turn rate? Are you kidding? This is one of the largest ships out there in STO. This ship is not meant do bring DHCs. Nor have the same playstyle as an Avenger, assault cruisers or Escorts. Why make it have better Turn rate when you can heal anyone even at your back?
The only buffs that I would probably agree on the Fleet Galaxy R are increase in hull and shield modifier due to more and more ships are having near or better than its hull and shield hp even though those ships roles are not for tanking.
what stats say that? theres no way to know what its actual armament was, you cant just count arrays on it like you could a fed ship. no mater what the valient did, it couldn't harm that dreadnought, not alone. sorta like how 3 bug ships could shoot at a shieldless galaxy for 10 minutes and not really do all that much damage too it
we were talking about canon, not setting an in game mandate. we want a competitive galaxy, and when you look at the source materiel it shows a very large and powerful ship
it really shouldn't be a surprise that the biggest fed ship with the biggest guns is a bit of a juggernaut. but a sue comparison, really? :rolleyes: the word your looking for is underdog, thats how the ship was written in every story, not as the biggest and most powerful federation ship like it actually was. they cant seem to tell a story if the ship wasn't getting jobbed at every turn, or fighting something unbeatable like the borg or a ship mentally projected by some god like alien.
Fleet Galaxy R is a very competitive ship for its role. It is an excellent tank/healer. It is a decent pve ship and an excellent pvp ship.
Its not competitive when you want to play it like an assault cruiser, escort or a sci control ship build or ship playstyle. It is not even meant to be versatile ship but Fleet Galaxy R excels on its role as long the player knows how to play and build the Fleet galaxy R.
Absent of Ramming the ship, If you want it to hull tank 3 bug ships and not get destroyed, this ship becomes more powerful than the lockbox ships and Voth dreadnoughts, tac cubes. 3 well built, well played BUG ships can destroy all those mobs. Hence, that kind of build would make this an OP ship.
It is not meant to do sci control crowd stuff nor dps like the other cruisers. The 2 Sci boff slots are enough for a tank/healer Fleet Galaxy R on the ENG side. With its current tac and sci slots, you can slot TT, HE and TSS. All the complaints that you say that the Galaxy R is utterly lacking.
No, the only thing this ship is meant to be in STO is to suck.
EDIT: either that, or Cryptics devs are the most incompetent game developers ever, not even understanding their own game, lol.
(which i do not belive)
Turn rate? Are you kidding? This is one of the largest ships out there in STO. This ship is not meant do bring DHCs. Nor have the same playstyle as an Avenger, assault cruisers or Escorts. Why make it have better Turn rate when you can heal anyone even at your back?
Odyssey, Scimitar, Voth Bastion, Star Cruiser, Atrox, D'Deridex, Haakona, Ha'feh, Ha'apax, Monbosh, Jem'Hadar Dreadnought, Obelisk, Negh'Var, Bortas, Vo'Quv, Kar'Fi. All these ships are at least equal or way bigger than the GCS -R (and some have a rediculus high turn rate).
As for the GCS being meant to heal/tank, thats only Cryptics "interpretation" of the Galaxy class, because the obvioulsy wanted her to be rather boring comared to other ships like the defiant or Sovereign.
If they cared at least a bit about canon they where forced to make the GCS much more versatile.
"...'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
As an quite active contributor to the Galaxy thread I have to say that I am not in-line with the proposed changes.
I personally don't want to play a battleship when I play a Galaxy Class. I like the Star Cruiser theme, I would want a bit more room for sci abilities, though. If you want a Galaxy with 4 tac consoles and 2 sci consoles I'd be okay with the Dreadnaught filling that role but I would be upset if my R got it's 3rd sci slot removed.
The Galaxy is a balanced command ship. Either go 3/3/3 consoles and Star Cruiser BOFF layout for the R and 4/3/3 + one universal station for the fleet variant or even 4/4/2 (eng/sci/tac that is) and a LTC sci but I'm against the tactical powerhouse route just because that's the flavour of the game. That's why there is a "Dreadnaught". I mean even the heavy battlecruisers of the KDF have a eng heavy set-up (minus the recent power creep additions).
Turnrate has never been an issue for me personally and I don't get the obsession about it. You are free to seperate and/or use RCS consoles, that's what those are for. I absolutely get that you cannot compensate the lack of damage, but you can compensate the turnrate issue by in-game means.
I'm all for improving engineering skills across the board, however. Engineering skills are all about energy levels (rather obsolete now that every console and item boost power levels) and hull resistance. What about improvements to accuracy, damage, debuffs, drains, anything? I'd like some of that in the engineering branch and I'd love to see egnineering consoles improving damage so that a eng heavy ship can generate enough aggro to tank, if that's what it's supposed to be doing.
^ 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
Blame not the galaxy retrofit's boff layout blame engineer skills for not being better. This ship is part of the original trinity and is meant to do engy stuff and only engy stuff just as the defiant is TAC and more TAC and the intrepid us Sci and more Sci. Now if those other two get an updated boff layout then you cab expect the galxy to also get an update but otherwise it will NOT happen.
Comments
I'm sad that you still haven't comprehended the point.
The devs, I am sure, did not deliberately set out to make the Galaxy less effective. They made sure it had the baselines all T5 ships have (right number of slots, etc). They distributed those baselines according to the ship's assigned niche. And they applied the rules of thumb they have for Federation ships and cruisers. They may have given the result a once over to make sure that it all worked mechanically. What I don't think they would have tested is performance. As long as it fitted the mould prepared for it, the performance would be irrelevant.
I made it unkillable, but i couldnt scratch the surface of other ships easily. And because of the Escorts kept pulling the threat off me.
Whats the point in a tank if the damage pros just pull the threat right away from you.
The only time i can hold the threat is if i am holding attract fire in an area that those escorts are in. Even then the cube fires at everyone anyways.
But anything i can do in the Galaxy i can do in the Odd Duck, and i can do it with Flair. Tank and CC.
TRIBBLE i can heal/tank/cc in a Vesta too. Galaxy is just a sad sad panda.
I am Il Shadow and i approve these Shennanigans!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I don't know about that because they ultimately didn't change the outcome of the war into Dominion favor. The only ship that went 1v1 was the USS Valient( Defiant Class). I think the hull would have gave it an advantage over the Galaxy but not in firepower. That ship did not display very much other than sitting in the background firing ocasionally.
Cruiser command abilities were a nice touch but i think attract fire is broken as in several ISE and KASE i have run i have failed to attract the attention of either Tactical cubes despite parking and broadsiding at a 3km range whilst my team were outside of 7km.
A Obelisk carrier in my last ISE run was able to hold the Tact cubes aggro over my Galaxy despite again parking and broadsiding within 3km whilst he was outside of 7km and not broadsiding.
So my 7 beams Aux2Bat, EPTW 3, DEM 3, 3 marion doffs and 8-9.5k dps build Galaxy failed to hold aggro against 4 beams.
I have no issues holding aggro with a Galaxy in PVP as most teams know that they can pound on me without the threat of retaliation making me a easy kill or taking me out of being able to offer team support.
So in conclusion Galaxy is good, the other cruisers are overpowered, power creepers that need NERFING.
if it happened like that, it is indeed really sad.
you make people paid for a ship that you didn't even conceive with a role in mind but with rules and spreadsheet, and a pretty borked one for that matter.
the result isn't surprising.
and that is even more sad when you don't find this ship equivalent in any other faction.
so it mean that these rules are applying to this ship, and this ship alone.
it may be time to change that now that the game is almost 4 years old.
galaxy player shoudn't be the victim of old rules that never really applies to any other ship in the game.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
A mere handful of enormous battleships rarely do affect the outcome of a war. There's a reason why most military historians agree that the one class of vehicle that ensures allied victory in WWII more than any other was the Douglas DC-3, and not the King George V-class battleship.
Besides which, I said the JHDC had no equal amongst and single alpha quadrant ship. That doesn't mean it was a ship class that could have turned the tide. History has taught that a big powerful battleship is always a big priority target, and the nation who owns a few can't risk the demoralizing and economic blow of losing even one.
To quote Jake Sisko referencing the Valiant's sensor logs, the JHDC is "Twice the size of a Galaxy class starship and three times as powerful". Just because we didn't see it open up with all its main weapons on screen doesn't mean it was a paper tiger in canon.
If I were to venture a tactical explanation for why we saw the really big dominion ships sitting in the background firing occasionally rather than getting stuck in at the front of the line, it would be that you don't risk your big expensive assets at the front where they will be priority targets. You send your waves of smaller attack ships first as fodder and keep the big guns in the back, so that by the time the enemy has waded though your screen of small ships and taken heavy losses, they will be damaged and diminished with exhausted and wounded crews, and they will be facing your nice big heavy and completely unscathed battleships.
I never said the Jem Dreadnought was a paper tiger. I said the Jem Battleships were fodder. I meant the Battle cruisers were fodder because they were the ones blowing up all the time. When you look them up, it does call the type, "battleship."
Ok, we're going to take Jake Sico's(amature reporter) tactical analysis on ships and capabilities? The Jem'Hadar Dreadnoughts were formidable carriers but they were not armed with any super weapons or had overwealming power like a Borg cube. Big guns can be questionable since it is armed with only 10 torpedoe launchers and every ship in the shows that had spectacular firpower or abilites at least shown it once. Torpedoes can be electronicly jammed so they can miss their target. The 3 times as powerful reference is not specified so that could mean anything. It could mean that the ship had overwhelming hull strength, or shields. It can't be Warp power because the thing was only seen going warp 4.7. Most of those torp launchers are facing forward because the USS Valient was not taking fire when it was to the rear and underneath the Dreadnought. The Jem Dreadnoughts didn't show anything other than presence and firing some torpedoes. The Cubes shown their abilities, the Scimitar shown its, the Galaxy, Excelsior, Vorcha, Negh'Var, K'Vort battlecruisers, B'rel, Sovereign, Defiant, Akira, Nebula, Keldons, D'Deridex, etc. All those ships showed something special they can do. The Galaxy could easy out manuver the Jem Dread and stay on its rear or ventral side and pound it's hull to till it breaks. The Galaxy does come with 12 phasers arrays and 250 torpedoes to work with and actively use it's science systems to jam or confuse its targets. That is too bigg of a flaw to ignore about Jem'Hadar ship. You can weaken the shields with a 5 torpedoe spread and hit the hull with a powerful phaser blast or more topedoe volleys to seal the deal. The Jem'Hadar Battleships just buit overconfidnence in the Dominion, displayed by their Vorta and Founders. Why else would you build a big ship with all one type of foward facing weapons and have a bare underside wih no point defense weapons. Overconfidence is the answer.
those battleships didn't seem to be terribly impressive, they might have been built to be as expendable as the bug ships or something.
the dreadknot the valiant fought though, it wasn't even harmed in the slightest by their attack, and they shot it down with what seemed like a half hearted effort. i can picture the vorta captain laughing at them through the whole fight, saying just shoot torpedoes at them till they did, dont even bother fireing any other weapons, lol.
R.I.P
Excelsior, Galor, Regent, D'Kora, Monbosh, Jem'Hadar Bug Ship, Scimitar, Fleet Kamarag, Fleet Tor'Kaht, Fleet Nova almost any (canon) ship in STO.
But please don't think i reacted on your poor try to troll. I just wanted to say something too.
The stats did say it is only armed with 10 torpedo launchers. I didn't make that up. Plus the Valient Captain was a stupid bullheaded cadet who was more interested in self glory than fighting smart or just follow the orders.
My statement had purpose. It was my response to the last three pages of the thread that again seems to want the Galaxy to be the Ark of the Covenent of fed vessels.
Undefeatable, Unchallengeable and throwing death to all whom see it.
I have nothing against the Galaxy getting love but the roller coaster of concepts is hard to enjoy.
R.I.P
Agreed.
Even if the GCS was that good, STO is clearly NOT the game to ask for it to become that good.
But on the other hand, other ships are ok to be OP... just saying.
You have a valid point. This discussion is running circles because there is no real consent what a better in-game representation of the ship would be and suddenly BAM someone suggests 5 tac consoles again. For the record, I'm entirely certain that if this game was not the dps race it is nobody would demand more tactical capabilities to "improve" the ship. Just in the same way that nobody demands less tac capabilities on the Nova class )because it would be nonsense to demand something like that in STO).
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Hold up!!!!!!! You complaining about sombody wanting the Galaxy to be a god ship but why aren't you or anybody complaining about the Jem'Hadar Bug ship being OP? The game vesion of the ship is way off canon and is the most op and tanking ship out of all escorts. Some people want keep the cruisers nerfed so they can continue to fly their escorts unchallenged. Maybe, you should complain about that godship bug first, then try to block a competitive Galaxy later.
The console setup is also weak because the ship lacks a 3rd weapon console slot, putting it behind all the cruisers, save the Star Cruiser, in DPS. Without enough DPS you can't ward off an attack from escorts or even other cruisers, and you loose the chance to get good end game loot in PVE fleet actions. The heaviest damage dealers get all the very rare items while low DPS Cruisers is lucky to come in 3rd place and get green or blue items. There is no way a cruiser with 2 Weapon consoles can stand up to ships with 3 or more weapon consoles. Engineering consolse don't boost weapon damage or even make shields more resistant to damage. They just boost power levels that don't really help much if your ship is maxed out on desired power levels.
The mockery of TNG, is that every cruiser, new and old, is more well rounded and better at everyting than the Galaxy R. They all heal faster, move faster(keeping defense level high), turn rate higher, and DPS higher than the Galaxy. Even the Fleet version is not a real upgrade for the C-store version because the BOFF set up is the exact same and a weapon slot is not added to improve the DPS. This is great disregard for the TNG fan base, for we had to grind very hard in fleets to get our fleet starbases and shipyards to tier 4 to access the fleet exlorer class.
The Galaxy should get revamped and get the same BOFF setup as the Galaxy X. It is basicly the same ship minus a lance and cannons. The C-store version should move the 3rd science console slot to be a 3rd Tac console slot because the Galaxy is not a science ship, so you don't need more than two science console slots. The fleet version should of get the 5th Eng console slot changed to be a3rd or 4th Tac slot giving a beam boat more teeth to ward off attack. The BOFF setup for the fleet version should get rid of the Eng ensign BOFF and chang to a LTC tac power so the cruiser can enjoy level 3 tac powers or manuvers.
All the powers like saucer separation shold be returned to inate abilty just like the lance and cloaks of alen ships.
As much as i agree with you, this thread is going to be ignored by the devs as any other Galaxy -R thread.
Let's face it Cryptics devs just hate the Galaxy Class and TNG for some reason.
As someone that became a Trek fan with TNG, it is very hard to play STO without being annoyed by Cryptics attitude towards TNG related things. Heck, they even gave the D'D a imaginable useless BOFF layout that makes the use of A2B pretty hard.
You know that i support a reworked Galaxy Class for years now, but as long as the same people are in charge at Cryptic, there won't be any useful or at least equal strong Galaxy Class in game.
At least i am very dipleased about the "role" Cryptic gave the GCS.
Obviously their intention was to make the GCS the best tank. Even if that wouldn't have completely failed, i wouldn't want her to be like that. The GCS is a much more versatile than just a flying brick IMO and so she should be represented in STO, too.
what stats say that? theres no way to know what its actual armament was, you cant just count arrays on it like you could a fed ship. no mater what the valient did, it couldn't harm that dreadnought, not alone. sorta like how 3 bug ships could shoot at a shieldless galaxy for 10 minutes and not really do all that much damage too it
we were talking about canon, not setting an in game mandate. we want a competitive galaxy, and when you look at the source materiel it shows a very large and powerful ship
it really shouldn't be a surprise that the biggest fed ship with the biggest guns is a bit of a juggernaut. but a sue comparison, really? :rolleyes: the word your looking for is underdog, thats how the ship was written in every story, not as the biggest and most powerful federation ship like it actually was. they cant seem to tell a story if the ship wasn't getting jobbed at every turn, or fighting something unbeatable like the borg or a ship mentally projected by some god like alien.
Dont get me wrong, I love TNG.
I believe you want to change the Galaxy R in accordance to your playstyle.
The Boff setup and the console setup of the galaxy X is ENG heavy setup and maximizing this ship with an ENG toon. The best role for this ship is a tank/healer.
It is not meant to do sci control crowd stuff nor dps like the other cruisers. The 2 Sci boff slots are enough for a tank/healer Fleet Galaxy R on the ENG side. With its current tac and sci slots, you can slot TT, HE and TSS. All the complaints that you say that the Galaxy R is utterly lacking.
ENG boffs have also the best resistance when you compare EPTS vs TSS or Aux2Sif vs HE.
ENG boffs have still the best burst heals out there -> EPTS vs TSS or Aux2Sif VS HE.
2 Tac console and boffs are enough to be above average(2 times) your DPS PUG in pve.
It is still one of the best pvp ships out their for its role.
When it comes to defense, all cruisers have the same base defense % rate. Only escorts have higher defense % rate than any cruiser. For speed, all fed fleet cruisers have the same impulse modifier. So where did you get your info?
Turn rate? Are you kidding? This is one of the largest ships out there in STO. This ship is not meant do bring DHCs. Nor have the same playstyle as an Avenger, assault cruisers or Escorts. Why make it have better Turn rate when you can heal anyone even at your back?
The only buffs that I would probably agree on the Fleet Galaxy R are increase in hull and shield modifier due to more and more ships are having near or better than its hull and shield hp even though those ships roles are not for tanking.
Fleet Galaxy R is a very competitive ship for its role. It is an excellent tank/healer. It is a decent pve ship and an excellent pvp ship.
Its not competitive when you want to play it like an assault cruiser, escort or a sci control ship build or ship playstyle. It is not even meant to be versatile ship but Fleet Galaxy R excels on its role as long the player knows how to play and build the Fleet galaxy R.
Absent of Ramming the ship, If you want it to hull tank 3 bug ships and not get destroyed, this ship becomes more powerful than the lockbox ships and Voth dreadnoughts, tac cubes. 3 well built, well played BUG ships can destroy all those mobs. Hence, that kind of build would make this an OP ship.
EDIT: either that, or Cryptics devs are the most incompetent game developers ever, not even understanding their own game, lol.
(which i do not belive)
Odyssey, Scimitar, Voth Bastion, Star Cruiser, Atrox, D'Deridex, Haakona, Ha'feh, Ha'apax, Monbosh, Jem'Hadar Dreadnought, Obelisk, Negh'Var, Bortas, Vo'Quv, Kar'Fi. All these ships are at least equal or way bigger than the GCS -R (and some have a rediculus high turn rate).
As for the GCS being meant to heal/tank, thats only Cryptics "interpretation" of the Galaxy class, because the obvioulsy wanted her to be rather boring comared to other ships like the defiant or Sovereign.
If they cared at least a bit about canon they where forced to make the GCS much more versatile.
I personally don't want to play a battleship when I play a Galaxy Class. I like the Star Cruiser theme, I would want a bit more room for sci abilities, though. If you want a Galaxy with 4 tac consoles and 2 sci consoles I'd be okay with the Dreadnaught filling that role but I would be upset if my R got it's 3rd sci slot removed.
The Galaxy is a balanced command ship. Either go 3/3/3 consoles and Star Cruiser BOFF layout for the R and 4/3/3 + one universal station for the fleet variant or even 4/4/2 (eng/sci/tac that is) and a LTC sci but I'm against the tactical powerhouse route just because that's the flavour of the game. That's why there is a "Dreadnaught". I mean even the heavy battlecruisers of the KDF have a eng heavy set-up (minus the recent power creep additions).
Turnrate has never been an issue for me personally and I don't get the obsession about it. You are free to seperate and/or use RCS consoles, that's what those are for. I absolutely get that you cannot compensate the lack of damage, but you can compensate the turnrate issue by in-game means.
I'm all for improving engineering skills across the board, however. Engineering skills are all about energy levels (rather obsolete now that every console and item boost power levels) and hull resistance. What about improvements to accuracy, damage, debuffs, drains, anything? I'd like some of that in the engineering branch and I'd love to see egnineering consoles improving damage so that a eng heavy ship can generate enough aggro to tank, if that's what it's supposed to be doing.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!