My point is that when you compare the Fleet Galaxy to other ships that cost the same modules and/or zen purchase for the discount, it is out performed by all of them on every level, with the very tiny exception of hull HP.
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Advanced Heavy
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+250 Crew
-2 Turn
-20 Inertia
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
+Lt Tac/-Lt Eng
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Assault
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+200 Crew
-1 Turn
-10 Inertia
-5 Weapon Power/+5 Engine Power
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
-En Tac/+En Eng
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Avenger
+2750 base Hull (3575 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+500 Crew
-3 Turn
-30 Inertia
-1 Fore Weapon/+1 Aft Weapon
+Cruiser Command: Attract Fire
-5 Weapon Power/-5 Engine Power/+5 Aux Power/+5 Shield Power
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
-En Tac/+En Eng
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Heavy
+4400 base Hull (5720 hull with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+500 Crew
-2 Turn
-10 Inertia
-1 Tac Console/+1 Eng Console
-Ensign Tac/+Ensign Eng
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Star
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
-1 Turn
+5 Inertia
+1 Eng Console/-1 Sci Console
+Ensign Eng/-Ensign Sci
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Support
+550 base Hull (715 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+300 Crew
-1 Turn
-20 Inertia
-1 Tac Console/+1 Eng Console
-Ensign Tac/+Ensign Eng
+LCdr Eng/-LCdr Sci
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
It's the Engineering Cruiser...so with folks picturing things as Tac > Sci > Eng...it's going to be considered the worst Cruiser. If the content existed for such a ship in STO, then it wouldn't be the case.
That content doesn't exist though...so yeah...they should, imho, make the Galaxy/Exploration more Star-like and the Gal-X more Assault-like...
Folks said that with TNG. Folks said that with VOY, ENT, DS9. Folks said that with several of the movies before we got into JJTrek. Heck, some folks that were fine with ST2009 still said that with Into Darkness...lol.
Star Trek isn't just about some plot device...it's about everything else. Don't mistake the bottle for what it holds, eh? That's what Cryptic's trying to stick with, imho - ehhhh, not doing the best job of it, but trying. :P
Folks said that with TNG. Folks said that with VOY, ENT, DS9. Folks said that with several of the movies before we got into JJTrek. Heck, some folks that were fine with ST2009 still said that with Into Darkness...lol.
Star Trek isn't just about some plot device...it's about everything else. Don't mistake the bottle for what it holds, eh? That's what Cryptic's trying to stick with, imho - ehhhh, not doing the best job of it, but trying. :P
Sure they said that, but each new series showed a modicum of intelligence in its presentation. What did the new ones bring? Action space movie. Now granted almost every Star Trek movie was bad for various reasons, but most of them at least got the basics right.
The new ones were good movies, but they weren't good Trek. So from here on out, people have been exposed to this new Trek, while the old version of which we have grown fond of is slowly forgotten.
This new era here with this reboot is doing things in reverse. It will be hard now to do a show that is of the same caliber as any of the series now that the movies have set the bar as far as action vs. story goes.
In an era of television and movies where everything is made to appeal to the lowest common denominator, old Trek has less and less of a place. It makes me sad.
It's the Engineering Cruiser...so with folks picturing things as Tac > Sci > Eng...it's going to be considered the worst Cruiser. If the content existed for such a ship in STO, then it wouldn't be the case.
That content doesn't exist though...so yeah...they should, imho, make the Galaxy/Exploration more Star-like and the Gal-X more Assault-like...
As far as your comparison goes, I am curious then, what is the determining factor in classifying the Galaxy as the Engineer cruiser? The 5th engineering console? the Hull? The Ensign?
Take any one of those factors, and you can point at another ship, and then see that it is more useful. Off the top of my head, I would say the Odd OP Cruiser, the D'D, and the Excelsior, respectively.
If there was content in STO for a tank, I would get any one of those over the Galaxy, functionality wise. Even pure Fed, I would take the Ops cruiser or a Star Cruiser over the Gal, considering how little a couple thousand hull hp makes.
I know we are splitting hairs here, but I guess I am just curious, what is the fine line that makes it the "Engineer cruiser", and yet be less effective than any other of its type?
Okay so if I buy the Dreadnought with when the release is live, is the Venture skin is free with it? Also, does the fleet version of the latter come with the separation console? Thanks to Cryptic for the much needed improvements!
As far as your comparison goes, I am curious then, what is the determining factor in classifying the Galaxy as the Engineer cruiser? The 5th engineering console? the Hull? The Ensign?
Take any one of those factors, and you can point at another ship, and then see that it is more useful. Off the top of my head, I would say the Odd OP Cruiser, the D'D, and the Excelsior, respectively.
If there was content in STO for a tank, I would get any one of those over the Galaxy, functionality wise. Even pure Fed, I would take the Ops cruiser or a Star Cruiser over the Gal, considering how little a couple thousand hull hp makes.
I know we are splitting hairs here, but I guess I am just curious, what is the fine line that makes it the "Engineer cruiser", and yet be less effective than any other of its type?
VD is not going to be able to best the argument that the X deserves a lt cmdr tac station(or uni) even if he's good at painting horses a different color and continuing to beat the same.
Irrefutable facts at hand:
Lance is still pathetic and I doubt a "Shotgun" variant is going to make up for it.
A marginally useful ensign station doused into a universal with 0 purpose.
Devs are asking us to sacrifice 2 invaluable console slots to gain marginal benefits.
Sure they said that, but each new series showed a modicum of intelligence in its presentation. What did the new ones bring? Action space movie. Now granted almost every Star Trek movie was bad for various reasons, but most of them at least got the basics right.
The new ones were good movies, but they weren't good Trek. So from here on out, people have been exposed to this new Trek, while the old version of which we have grown fond of is slowly forgotten.
This new era here with this reboot is doing things in reverse. It will be hard now to do a show that is of the same caliber as any of the series now that the movies have set the bar as far as action vs. story goes.
In an era of television and movies where everything is made to appeal to the lowest common denominator, old Trek has less and less of a place. It makes me sad.
It's a generational thing, imho. It's not just Trek - it's pretty much everything. Whether one is talking TV, movies, books, music - you name it...well, yeah - it's hard to find stuff not to call garbage. Which is kind of odd, because I can't joke that it was like with my parents talking about the stuff I watched and listened to as a kid being garbage...because much of what they liked was included in what I liked. But in the past 5-10 years, things have just - wow - really?
It's kind of funny thinking about the speed of the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, and even the 2000s...but the 2010s - meh, it's just twisted insanity that's reflected in where media is going.
As far as your comparison goes, I am curious then, what is the determining factor in classifying the Galaxy as the Engineer cruiser? The 5th engineering console? the Hull? The Ensign?
Take any one of those factors, and you can point at another ship, and then see that it is more useful. Off the top of my head, I would say the Odd OP Cruiser, the D'D, and the Excelsior, respectively.
If there was content in STO for a tank, I would get any one of those over the Galaxy, functionality wise. Even pure Fed, I would take the Ops cruiser or a Star Cruiser over the Gal, considering how little a couple thousand hull hp makes.
I know we are splitting hairs here, but I guess I am just curious, what is the fine line that makes it the "Engineer cruiser", and yet be less effective than any other of its type?
Okay, first of all - there's a major misunderstanding regarding those differences in hull. In a recent post, I pointed out how those numbers change with skills - they're also going to change based on resistances, etc, etc, etc.
Let's look at the F.Gal-R vs. Op Ody, eh? You look at them and you see a difference of 2000 hull. Let's add in 9 Structural Integrity, eh? That 2000 is now a difference of ~2600. Since we're talking "tank" - let's add in the T2 Nukara +5% Hull as well, eh? So we're looking at ~2700 at this point. Say we go 2pc MACO, including the MACO Deflector - we're looking at another 17.2 SI for ~104 more to take us to ~2804.
What about damage resistance, eh? @30%, we're now looking at a difference of ~4006. @40%, we're at ~4673. @50%, we're at ~5608. @60%, we're at ~7010 difference.
@35%, that 42k became ~90602 and the 44k became ~94915. Sure, it's "only" ~4313...but it's not just a couple thou.
That's kind of a drawn out way of saying that like most Cryptic math, it's a pervasive ratio.
44000 / 42000 = 1.0476
94915 / 90602 = 1.0476
It's not that it has 2k more hull, it's pretty much always going to have 4.76% more hull. So in comparing it to the Op Ody, you're comparing 15% more shields vs. 4.76% more hull. Since the ship blows up when the hull goes and the hull's going to be a larger number than the shields...well, I tend to favor hull over shields.
As for why I would deem it an Engineering Cruiser rather than Tactical or Science comes down some basic things...
X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X X, X
X, X
X X, X, X, X
X, X, X X, X
X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X X, X
X
The only thing different about those three BOFF layouts is the Ensign. The second is the base Assault Cruiser (Tac) and the third is the base Star Cruiser (Sci).
Heading off to Fleet-land with the three of them, we see...
2 - 5 - 3
4 - 4 - 2
2 - 4 - 4
Where the Fleet Assault (Tac) is 4/4/2, the Fleet Star (Sci) is 2/4/4, and the Fleet Gal-R is 2/5/3.
When I say "Engineering Cruiser" - I'm not talking about the Cruiser you put an Eng in. I'm talking about a Cruiser where most things point to Engineering compared to other ships where they may point Tac or Sci. The Engineering Cruiser just doesn't point that way like others do.
Two Cruisers that definitely stand out as oddities are the Heavy Retro and Support Retro/Fleet Support, eh? The Heavy Retro with the Assault BOFFs and Star Consoles, uh huh...er...yeah.
VD is not going to be able to best the argument that the X deserves a lt cmdr tac station(or uni) even if he's good at painting horses a different color and continuing to beat the same.
Why would VD be trying to best the argument that he's been making? Go back and look...I've been saying that the Gal-X should get something akin to the Bulwark BOFF layout. If it doesn't get that in the blog next week, then folks need to break out a herd of cows all over Cryptic.
X, X X, X, X, X X, X X, X, X
X
That the F.Gal-X receive the addition of the LCdr Uni to the En Uni which has been given to the Gal-X.
Could see them going...
X, X, X X, X, X, X X, X X, X
X
Which would tie into what I've been saying for the F.Gal-R as well with...
X, X X, X, X, X X, X, X X, X
X
Where I've said the Gal-X should go Assault-like and the Gal-R should go Star-like (or Support-like if some prefer). Basically that with no content for an Engineering Cruiser in the game, that the boats should go the Tac/Sci that does exist.
I haven't been arguing against the Gal-R needing changes...I've been arguing against folks wanting to make a Gal-R better than a Scimitar. I haven't been arguing against the Gal-X needing changes, I've been saying that we need to see what the blog actually says next week and arguing against the folks that want to make it better than a Scimitar.
I mean...I've been saying that over and over...the Tac/Sci thing, no Eng/Tank content (please don't add any, I hate the Trinity in games, etc, etc, etc)...some folks are making reasonable suggestions and some folks are outright lunatics...
edit: And yeah, if Cryptic just +1 Eng the F.Gal-X so that it's the same garbage as the F.Negh'Var with it's Uni Ensign...then yeah, rip into them hardcore. Cause to be honest, I don't really care about the Galaxy-class. I never liked it. I watched and enjoyed TNG despite it. It's a fugly ship, imho. There are enough similarities between the Galaxy and Negh'Var...that it's a case of hoping for some decent changes for folks for the Galaxy, so that some of that thought my bleed through over for the Negh'Var.
I like the M.Negh'Var, and imho that's what both the Gal-R and Negh'Var should have been from the start. There's still talk here and there of the Fleet Assault Negh'Var/etc/etc/etc...and I doubt the forums would be tolerable if we got that while the F.Gal-X ended up like a F.Negh'Var, eh? Thus pushing for the LCdr Tac or LCdr Uni (akin to the Bulwark, the other Dreadnought Cruiser in the game) sort of layout so that at least on the forums there can be some peace...
I didn't say the Galaxies aren't powerfull. They are amongst the toughest ships, but they still can be destroyed very easily if you know how.
And the Dominion War Galaxies were upgraded a short time before. And it also helped that the Mirandas, Excelsiors, Akiras etc. were cannonfodder
pretty much in DS9 the galaxy was used as a stationary siege weapon. they also had full wings of galaxies (it is never stated hwo many ships where in each wing but provably 3 to 4)
look at most fo the battles with the defiant zipping around and excelsior there is 1 or 2 galaxies just sitting there shooting away and destroying galors with one or 2 shots of the main phaser array
this is why i have no issue with the slow turn with the saucer attached as it was never shown as very nimble in the show but it brought the fire power when it needed too
Why do you people keep referring to the Saucer Separation and Antimatter spread consoles as marginal or useless in any sense? Do you really hate them so much and never use them? I already use both when I can (or at least the AMS) and love them! The added bonus just adds even more to them. You may be giving up two slots for them, but they are already staples for me (and for some other players I'm betting too).
Not everybody hates the Galaxies, the consoles or the changes. Some of us really like this, even if it isn't quite perfect. Can't you understand that and stop griping? Or does everything have to be about what YOU and your like minded friends want?
Cause if that is the case, and you can't compromise a little, you'll never be happy with anything Cryptic does. This is their game. They will do what they want to do or can do. Sometimes they may listen to us players, but not always. They can't do everything everybody wants. And even sometimes when they could, they have their reasons and won't. Yes we give them feedback and suggestion we feel would be better. But we shouldn't be so upset when they don't listen. And that doesn't mean you complainers need to fill up the forums with complaints and jump all over them. They have made their decision, we can continue to SUGGEST changes but let us not jump all over them and each other any more. I made this mistake over what I felt was a folly with turning the Anniversary into a grind event, but I finally got past it. Please see past this and understand some of us see this reboot as a good thing, or at least maybe a step in the right direction.
Ok, I went a little overboard in this post. Sorry but I had to vent. Now I'm truly done with this thread. Can't stand it anymore.....
Been Playing STO as much as I can for 11+ Years!
"Never Surrender! Never give up Hope!"
"Prosperity and Success in everything you do."
"To Boldly go.........well punch it already!"
"To Be or Not To Be"....Alas, the Foundry is Not To Be. We Shall miss Thee, dear Friend!
"Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?"- Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Thank You, Cryptic......even when I don't agree with all your decisions....Thank You for Star Trek Online!
Why do you people keep referring to the Saucer Separation and Antimatter spread consoles as marginal or useless in any sense? Do you really hate them so much and never use them? I already use both when I can (or at least the AMS) and love them! The added bonus just adds even more to them. You may be giving up two slots for them, but they are already staples for me (and for some other players I'm betting too).
Hrmm, that's something that I really haven't seen mentioned in the thread (not that I've read every post in this thread - haven't read any posts in the other thread (kind of surprised it hasn't been merged already))...
+20 Starship Hull Plating = 3 Kinetic DRR = 2.9% Kinetic DR
+20 Starship Armor Reinforcements = 3 Energy DRR = 2.9% Energy DR
With DR being subject to such painful diminishing returns, would it simply be a case of looking to free up the SP that would have been spent on each of those? Figure dropping SHP from 3 to 2 and dropping SAR from 6 to 4...thus freeing up 8k SP to be spent elsewhere?
The previous lines of discussion were based off of the zen buy for the current model and ensuring the lt cmdr slot. Not solely what the T5 would look like. As for the zen buy, all they're doing is slapping on a hangar, asking you to sacrifice 2 slots for the 2pc which does little to nothing and dousing an ensign slot. So for those of us who wasted the zen in the first place got a pat on the head.
Addendum:
I just saw your last post. Yeah it was mentioned before that you could get a lot more out of using 2 fleet engie consoles with +Turn while skipping AMS and saucer separation. What ticks people off about that is that the lance has no mention of a rehaul. It hits half the time and for a weapon with one of the most narrow arcs they just simply didn't listen to the 6000+ posts of people demanding that.
So the "reboot" comes out to be a white wash of little to no benefit even if it gains +10% hp/shield modding.
Why do you people keep referring to the Saucer Separation and Antimatter spread consoles as marginal or useless in any sense? Do you really hate them so much and never use them? I already use both when I can (or at least the AMS) and love them! The added bonus just adds even more to them. You may be giving up two slots for them, but they are already staples for me (and for some other players I'm betting too).
Not everybody hates the Galaxies, the consoles or the changes. Some of us really like this, even if it isn't quite perfect. Can't you understand that and stop griping? Or does everything have to be about what YOU and your like minded friends want?
Cause if that is the case, and you can't compromise a little, you'll never be happy with anything Cryptic does. This is their game. They will do what they want to do or can do. Sometimes they may listen to us players, but not always. They can't do everything everybody wants. And even sometimes when they could, they have their reasons and won't. Yes we give them feedback and suggestion we feel would be better. But we shouldn't be so upset when they don't listen. And that doesn't mean you complainers need to fill up the forums with complaints and jump all over them. They have made their decision, we can continue to SUGGEST changes but let us not jump all over them and each other any more. I made this mistake over what I felt was a folly with turning the Anniversary into a grind event, but I finally got past it. Please see past this and understand some of us see this reboot as a good thing, or at least maybe a step in the right direction.
Ok, I went a little overboard in this post. Sorry but I had to vent. Now I'm truly done with this thread. Can't stand it anymore.....
so, only because u r fine with the so called "reboot" others should obey the logical flaws?
- ams is one of my most behated cons in pvp (see: u like, i don't :P)! cheesy and makes every non-skiller feeling like a hulk (got it, yet never used it though it has been used several hundred times on me)
- nothing changes the fact that it is a logical flaw to give a ship (gal-x) the ability to carry dhc's without the possibility to slot the boffskills needed to run a cannonboat
(edited false satement that i'm not aware of others ships ingame fitting this. indeed, like stated below, over the half of klink-battlecruisers seem to fit in here as well . thx vd ).
- nothing changes the fact that on the show the gal-r has been a good mix of all roles (may comparitive to a d'kora ingame). an exploration cruiser should be everything but a pure tank. (sci-leaned in my opinion with a good capability to holds its own and to punch bad guys off).
- nothing changes the fact that it is a logical flaw to give a ship (gal-x) the ability to carry dhc's without the possibility to slot the boffskills needed to run a cannonboat (i don't know of a single other ship that fit this ingame).
edit: It's kind of twisted, there are 3 KDF Battle Cruisers with a LCdr Tac (Mogh/Fleet Mogh & Fleet Tor'Kaht) out of 16 and another 4 (3x Bortasqu' and the Bortas) that could use a LCdr Uni for that LCdr Tac...but there are 5 of 5 KDF Carriers with a LCdr Tac.
edit2: Given the Gal-X was supposed to approximate the KDF Battle Cruiser, the Lt/En Tac pretty much approximates them...the Fleet Gal-X, as a newer boat on the other hand, should lean toward that LCdr Tac, eh?
so, only because u r fine with the so called "reboot" others should obey the logical flaws?
- ams is one of my most behated cons in pvp (see: u like, i don't :P)! cheesy and makes every non-skiller feeling like a hulk (got it, yet never used it though it has been used several hundred times on me)
- nothing changes the fact that it is a logical flaw to give a ship (gal-x) the ability to carry dhc's without the possibility to slot the boffskills needed to run a cannonboat (i don't know of a single other ship that fit this ingame).
- nothing changes the fact that on the show the gal-r has been a good mix of all roles (may comparitive to a d'kora ingame). an exploration cruiser should be everything but a pure tank. (sci-leaned in my opinion with a good capability to holds its own and to punch bad guys off).
Yup and this.. It's got DHC capacity and it was a selling point for the original buy. I even remember the advertisement showcasing that in bold, yet when folks tried to use cannons they found out that they'd be stuck with scatter volley 1 or rapid fire 1 which was a waste. Furthermore moving the rig into beams was also as equally frustrating because at the time FAW was a tripe mess of a skill to begin with and has only been fixed most recently.
And to compound it even further, the lack in turn is the most appropriate balance as-is for use of cannons on this class. There is absolutely 0 sense keeping the current zen purchase absent of a lt cmdr slot.
So for the few thinking they're high and mighty as if they just got through a mess of people who are just whining.. I think they need to sit on their hands and be forced to examine the facts at hand before they run their mouths at why they're done with this thread. Be done with it but don't think we can't see how vacant of logical thought their brains were fuming on.
oops didoo :eek:.... got me. sucks as well i'd say... i apologize for my flaws in information regarding klink battlecruisers and now i know again why i don't fly em on my klink (xcept mogh)
edit: It's kind of twisted, there are 3 KDF Battle Cruisers with a LCdr Tac (Mogh/Fleet Mogh & Fleet Tor'Kaht) out of 16 and another 4 (3x Bortasqu' and the Bortas) that could use a LCdr Uni for that LCdr Tac...but there are 5 of 5 KDF Carriers with a LCdr Tac.
Honestly a lot of ships need revisiting. I don't think a weighted list of underperforming ships speak adversely to what we all should be aware of as power creep. I think we can all agree that this was their time to shine on revisiting the past but they blew us dust bunnies instead.
yep, it should. let's see what we get regarding the fact we've to deal with cryptic :rolleyes:
In the end, they want to make money...something like the Bulwark BOFF layout would make them more money than leaving it with the Fleet Negh'Var BOFF layout.
edit: Course, they're dealing with an iconic ship - so one can't help but feel they're preying on that to an extent.
Honestly a lot of ships need revisiting. I don't think a weighted list of underperforming ships speak adversely to what we all should be aware of as power creep. I think we can all agree that this was their time to shine on revisiting the past but they blew us dust bunnies instead.
It raises a question, imho though, about the cost of things.
Say you visit a car dealership (ugh, pesky car analogies) - and you're looking to buy a new car. It's entirely possible that they've not only got new 2014 models - but they may likely have 2013 and possibly even the odd 2012 around, eh? Are the 2012 and 2013's going to cost the same as the 2014's?
It's a tough one, looking at it, eh?
If power creep did not exist, then one might have expected Cryptic to increase the prices on all ships - even the older ships - because they'd still be at current power levels. This would just reflect inflation and how the price of everything goes up.
But power creep does exist. So one might expect either the newer ships to cost more or the older ships to cost less...but er...that didn't happen either. Prices remained the same - with a player getting more bang for their buck by buying newer ships instead of older ships.
I find this kind of perplexing. It's not like, well - had they reduced the prices of older ships - did they think they would offend folks that had spent the money? As opposed to offending them by offering newer and better ships at the same price?
Is it a simple case as Geko mentioned when he was surprised that more folks didn't buy and fly more ships - that they figure newer players will just buy the newer ships and that the older players that want to keep up will also buy the newer ships? Do they consider the bad feelings that this will generate with veteran players is an acceptable loss in a game where they've stated that the priority is not retention but rather new players? (That wasn't Geko, that was D'Angelo.)
Does it come back to the intended audience for the game - which is not min/maxers, which is not PvPers, which is not "hardcore" PvE folks, etc, etc, etc...where in the end it doesn't really matter what hodgepodge build of a ship somebody's sporting, they're going to have a blast doing the content? Cause yeah, 5x Gal-R with broken builds and flaky gearing can still accidentally complete ISE with optionals by randomly tapping fingers on the keyboard...
I was never really a fan of the carrot 'n stick powercreep gear progression that took place in many games, but it's amazing how a game like this - without the content progression to go along with all the powercreep can make you long for the carrot 'n stick, eh?
Now I'm just rambling and babbling...it appears I forgot to sleep last night. Meh...later, all...
Where we are with STO is where Star Trek is...like it or not.
Was TNG like TOS? Was VOY, DS9, ENT like TNG and TOS? This is STO...this is where Star Trek is now.
Eh....no, not quite. This is STO - a game based on Star Trek that unfortunatley just vaguely resembles Star Trek as of late.
This is not where Star Trek is now. Star Trek now is in one of 3 places (depending on how you observe it). It either is in Nemesis (going by Trek chronology), in ENT (going by our own chronology) or in J.J. Into Darkness (if you don't mind the whole another universe/timeline thing).
However, STO? It's just a game based on Trek. It's not where Star Trek is really and it never was.
I still think for the cost of the ship (dread) the changes dont go nearly far enough, n that they dont address the core problems of the ship which make it so woefully inadequate.
Since Cryptic said they were "bringing it in line with other dreadnaughts" lets compare it to the other Z-Store dreadnaught, the scimitar, for costs and rewards.
Scimitar: one variant costs 2500 zen for account unlock. Doesn't need fleet starbase as its already a 10 console ship. Opsauce for reasons discussed many times before.
In addition, it gets a unique awesome hangar pet. Slavishly detailed and refined models. 5 fore weapons which actually work, unlike the lance.
Dread: 2500 zen for account unlock. Will need a FSM per character to reach fleet level, as well as the substantial resource cost of a T4 shipyard and 20,000 fc.
Non- fleet version sucks competitively for reasons stated previously.
No unique hangar pet. Both models haven't been touched in years and suffer from a number of inaccuracies and rough edges (the firing points burn my soul). Venture looks pretty though, unlike most cryptic designs.
Yes, it can cloak. But to get the cloak means you have to spend another 2,000 zen.
Now to have a look at the 3 packs: Scim 5,000 zen, Gal=4,000 zen. To break it down:
Scimitar 3 pack:
3 T5 Ships, all very viable depending on profession.
2 consoles are usable even at end game (fire while cloaked, shields while cloaked). The 2 piece set bonus for this gives a substantial boost to manevarability, and more importantly lets you keep the inherent +Turn of Romcloak for the full duration of your ambush, the length of which can be enhanced thanks to Reman infiltrator trait.
Equipping both is certainly a viable choice, especially for those who lack the Valdore console and Plasmonic Leech. Much better bonuses individually and together, even as placeholders for other consoles (like techyokinetic converter) they rock.
Galaxy 3 Pack:
One T4 Ship. 2 T5 Ships, one of which (Gar-R) sucks even at fleet level. Unlike the Scimitar 3 pack, an additional 500 zen per character is needed to upgrade to 10 console standard (equates to an additional 1000 zen or 15 million ec per character if you want both ships at fleet level
Console wise, AMS is long cooldown cheese who serves to infuriate even casual PVPers by sucking so enormously whilst doing very little in most PVE environments (yes, I have tried it on a KDF toon so I know what I'm talking about). Saucer separation is nice from an rp perspective, but they have failed to make it worthwhile gameplay wise. Unlike the excellent Scim 2 piece, the set bonus this time is worthless since you get much more out of 2 Fleet engineering consoles, or even two universal consoles like Assimilated Module.
..................................................................................
Some brief numbers to back up my point:
Gal-X 2500 zen. Defiant for cloak: 2000 zen. 1 FSM (500 zen per character). Total = 5,000 zen, + 500 for each alt after the main.
If you go with the 3 pack this skyrockets to 6,500 zen + 500 zen for each alt after main.
One scimitar costs 2,500. 5,000 for the 3 pack. Either works awesomely out of the box, and you never need to worry about FSM's on alts.
If you want the cloak with the marginal "benefits" of the new 2 piece it'll set you back a whopping 1,500 zen more than the scimi 3 pack, assuming you're only running it on one character (heaven help you if you have alts).
Even with all that it would still be woefully inferior to almost every other T5 ship and steamrolled by a decent Scimitar, and to use all this would use up 3 console slots anyway.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Gal-X should surpass the Scimitar. I'm not saying it should be a carbon copy of the scimitar.
I'm saying it (and many other neglected ship designs) should be brought in line with it in terms of quality and ability to compete.
Sorry for the huge post everyone. I just dont like cryptic trying to fob us off with a complete dung heap and act like theyre doing us a favour.
Got a cat? Have 10 minutes to help someone make the best degree dissertation of all time?
Then please fill out my dissertation survey on feline attachment, it'd be a massive help (-:
This might have been said a dozen times already, not reading 65 pages, but if they want my attention then the the lt commander needs to be universal as well (similar to the oddy). 4 tac consoles on the fleet version is a must as well. Otherwise I will just stay in my current ships.
Honestly a lot of ships need revisiting. I don't think a weighted list of underperforming ships speak adversely to what we all should be aware of as power creep. I think we can all agree that this was their time to shine on revisiting the past but they blew us dust bunnies instead.
And there is only 3 of them that are Fleet Versions, and those are even far far better than the Galaxy. So, thanks virusdancer for proving our point.
Is there gunna be a new bridge for the Galaxy Class like for the Defiant Class a year or so ago? If so, how can players get that bridge who have the original T4.5 and T5 Retrofit Galaxy Class from the C-Store?
"Everything about the Jham'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris
Original Join Date: January 30th, 2010
Is there gunna be a new bridge for the Galaxy Class like for the Defiant Class a year or so ago? If so, how can players get that bridge who have the original T4.5 and T5 Retrofit Galaxy Class from the C-Store?
Did you read the Blog?
New Galaxy Bundle The Tier 4 Galaxy Exploration Cruiser Refit, Tier 5 Galaxy Exploration Cruiser Retrofit, and Tier 5 Galaxy Dreadnought will be available as a bundle for 4000 Zen. If you purchase the Galaxy Bundle, you can claim the Galaxy Bridge for Free in the C-Store.
There is no "new" Bridge. You can get the Galaxy Bridge Pack from years ago for free by buying the WHOLE Galaxy ship pack next week
Why do you people keep referring to the Saucer Separation and Antimatter spread consoles as marginal or useless in any sense? Do you really hate them so much and never use them? I already use both when I can (or at least the AMS) and love them! The added bonus just adds even more to them. You may be giving up two slots for them, but they are already staples for me (and for some other players I'm betting too).
Not everybody hates the Galaxies, the consoles or the changes. Some of us really like this, even if it isn't quite perfect. Can't you understand that and stop griping? Or does everything have to be about what YOU and your like minded friends want?
Cause if that is the case, and you can't compromise a little, you'll never be happy with anything Cryptic does. This is their game. They will do what they want to do or can do. Sometimes they may listen to us players, but not always. They can't do everything everybody wants. And even sometimes when they could, they have their reasons and won't. Yes we give them feedback and suggestion we feel would be better. But we shouldn't be so upset when they don't listen. And that doesn't mean you complainers need to fill up the forums with complaints and jump all over them. They have made their decision, we can continue to SUGGEST changes but let us not jump all over them and each other any more. I made this mistake over what I felt was a folly with turning the Anniversary into a grind event, but I finally got past it. Please see past this and understand some of us see this reboot as a good thing, or at least maybe a step in the right direction.
Ok, I went a little overboard in this post. Sorry but I had to vent. Now I'm truly done with this thread. Can't stand it anymore.....
Nobody here hates Galaxies, that's not even close to true. Our issue is that we don't feel it's been given a fair shake. When older designs can operate better in the current paradigm we feel that there's something wrong and sixty five pages of comments aren't just complaining, but stating how we feel these ships can be better. You don't seek to improve things you hate, you try to fix things that you love. We're trying to squeeze all the horsepower we can out of the 57 Chevy engine. Sure we have a new Lambo sitting next to it in the garage...but we love the Chevy, and she hasn't been running right lately.
When you constantly compromise and the other party gives up nothing, that's called a surrender. When you want to compromise and you need one thing and are offered another, it still doesn't solve your initial problem. It's like that diplomacy mission on Starbase 39, everybody needed one thing in order to move forward and nobody budged.
The issue here isn't an unwillingness to compromise at all. But it doesn't mean much when we don't get what we need out of the deal. The vast majority of us need a Lcdr tac slot. Not a hangar, and many of us don't think that the 2 console bonus will mean that much overall. I'll use the space for Neutroniums normally....or RCS consoles.
This is somewhat a step in the right direction as at least they're doing something with a ship that has been largely left on the back burner.
But NOW is the time for us to step up and say, you didn't go far enough.
And it's not like it's these aren't the changes we wanted. A lot of us are saying, these changes...don't actually do anything significant. That ensign universal is going to still be a tac. Because no one is going to run a Dreadnaught with two tactical abilities. It's just like on my Regent, the Universal is a science officer. Because there's no engineer ability that's going to cover not having Hazard Emitters against the Borg.
edit: It's kind of twisted, there are 3 KDF Battle Cruisers with a LCdr Tac (Mogh/Fleet Mogh & Fleet Tor'Kaht) out of 16 and another 4 (3x Bortasqu' and the Bortas) that could use a LCdr Uni for that LCdr Tac...but there are 5 of 5 KDF Carriers with a LCdr Tac.
edit2: Given the Gal-X was supposed to approximate the KDF Battle Cruiser, the Lt/En Tac pretty much approximates them...the Fleet Gal-X, as a newer boat on the other hand, should lean toward that LCdr Tac, eh?
I would like to point out that those Klingon ships have a dedicated bonus to +10 weapons bonus that the Gal-X doesn't have.
But this is an update correct? We're not trying to update it to the levels of it's contemporaries, but the current status quo.
That said, those ships only having access to a Lt tac slot isn't exactly a good idea either.
But I use a Bird of Prey Klingon side.
On the subject of the Galaxy-R, I think the LtCdr universal is the best possible idea and truly captures the spirit of the Galaxy class which was the top of the line go anywhere do anything ship.
"THAT is a Galaxy class starship we're no match for them."
"This ship is a ship of exploration, our mission is peaceful"
If it needs to be able to fight then you can go tac, if it needs to be able to heal and crowd control then you can pop sci, and for everyone who loves being the damage sponge you can keep it LtCdr. But the Galaxy class was all those things.
I also think that implementing the Dyson Science ship tech into the Saucer Separation mode is genius. The same as they're going to add Breen Heavy Frigate flanking to the other raiders. New mechanics for existing and beloved ships.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
The ensign universal slot is a half descent idea but why not go as far as making the eng Lt. Cmdr an universal as per the Odyssey class. It would at lease give it some more flexibility.
The ensign universal slot is a half descent idea but why not go as far as making the eng Lt. Cmdr an universal as per the Odyssey class. It would at lease give it some more flexibility.
wut. a half decent idea?
no its not. Its dumb.
Making the LTcom engineer and LT tac switch places would have been acceptable.
I want to fly a Galaxy Class. Not a three nacelled kit-bash. I do like the Venture variant of the Dreadnaught mind you.
Setting aside stats and cost, this is why I am unhappy:
I want to fly a Galaxy Class, but every time I jump into one I gimp myself and hold back my team by not jumping into something else.
That right there is the problem for me, and for most of the people who have been pleading qith cryptic over this issue for years. We can argue with each other and with cryptic over stats and cost until the targs come home, but the root problem is opportunity cost, and The proposed changes do nothing to resolve this.
The Dev blog claims this is a Galaxy class Reboot, but its not, its a Dreadnaught Reboot. The Galaxy Class is still getting mostly ignored.
The changes to the Dreadnaught are nice enough. But any situation we could put the dreadnaught in we could still do better in an Avenger.
Comments
R.I.P. Star Trek as we knew it.
You died in 2009 with the reboot.
You will be missed.
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Advanced Heavy
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+250 Crew
-2 Turn
-20 Inertia
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
+Lt Tac/-Lt Eng
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Assault
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+200 Crew
-1 Turn
-10 Inertia
-5 Weapon Power/+5 Engine Power
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
-En Tac/+En Eng
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Avenger
+2750 base Hull (3575 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+500 Crew
-3 Turn
-30 Inertia
-1 Fore Weapon/+1 Aft Weapon
+Cruiser Command: Attract Fire
-5 Weapon Power/-5 Engine Power/+5 Aux Power/+5 Shield Power
-2 Tac Consoles/+1 Eng Console/+1 Sci Console
-LCdr Tac/+LCdr Eng
-En Tac/+En Eng
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Heavy
+4400 base Hull (5720 hull with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+500 Crew
-2 Turn
-10 Inertia
-1 Tac Console/+1 Eng Console
-Ensign Tac/+Ensign Eng
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Star
+1100 base Hull (1430 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
-1 Turn
+5 Inertia
+1 Eng Console/-1 Sci Console
+Ensign Eng/-Ensign Sci
Fleet Exploration vs. Fleet Support
+550 base Hull (715 with 9 SI, etc, etc, etc)
+300 Crew
-1 Turn
-20 Inertia
-1 Tac Console/+1 Eng Console
-Ensign Tac/+Ensign Eng
+LCdr Eng/-LCdr Sci
+Lt Sci/-Lt Uni
It's the Engineering Cruiser...so with folks picturing things as Tac > Sci > Eng...it's going to be considered the worst Cruiser. If the content existed for such a ship in STO, then it wouldn't be the case.
That content doesn't exist though...so yeah...they should, imho, make the Galaxy/Exploration more Star-like and the Gal-X more Assault-like...
Um...
Folks said that with TNG. Folks said that with VOY, ENT, DS9. Folks said that with several of the movies before we got into JJTrek. Heck, some folks that were fine with ST2009 still said that with Into Darkness...lol.
Star Trek isn't just about some plot device...it's about everything else. Don't mistake the bottle for what it holds, eh? That's what Cryptic's trying to stick with, imho - ehhhh, not doing the best job of it, but trying. :P
Sure they said that, but each new series showed a modicum of intelligence in its presentation. What did the new ones bring? Action space movie. Now granted almost every Star Trek movie was bad for various reasons, but most of them at least got the basics right.
The new ones were good movies, but they weren't good Trek. So from here on out, people have been exposed to this new Trek, while the old version of which we have grown fond of is slowly forgotten.
This new era here with this reboot is doing things in reverse. It will be hard now to do a show that is of the same caliber as any of the series now that the movies have set the bar as far as action vs. story goes.
In an era of television and movies where everything is made to appeal to the lowest common denominator, old Trek has less and less of a place. It makes me sad.
As far as your comparison goes, I am curious then, what is the determining factor in classifying the Galaxy as the Engineer cruiser? The 5th engineering console? the Hull? The Ensign?
Take any one of those factors, and you can point at another ship, and then see that it is more useful. Off the top of my head, I would say the Odd OP Cruiser, the D'D, and the Excelsior, respectively.
If there was content in STO for a tank, I would get any one of those over the Galaxy, functionality wise. Even pure Fed, I would take the Ops cruiser or a Star Cruiser over the Gal, considering how little a couple thousand hull hp makes.
I know we are splitting hairs here, but I guess I am just curious, what is the fine line that makes it the "Engineer cruiser", and yet be less effective than any other of its type?
VD is not going to be able to best the argument that the X deserves a lt cmdr tac station(or uni) even if he's good at painting horses a different color and continuing to beat the same.
Irrefutable facts at hand:
Lance is still pathetic and I doubt a "Shotgun" variant is going to make up for it.
A marginally useful ensign station doused into a universal with 0 purpose.
Devs are asking us to sacrifice 2 invaluable console slots to gain marginal benefits.
And that isn't science fiction, at all.
It's a generational thing, imho. It's not just Trek - it's pretty much everything. Whether one is talking TV, movies, books, music - you name it...well, yeah - it's hard to find stuff not to call garbage. Which is kind of odd, because I can't joke that it was like with my parents talking about the stuff I watched and listened to as a kid being garbage...because much of what they liked was included in what I liked. But in the past 5-10 years, things have just - wow - really?
It's kind of funny thinking about the speed of the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, and even the 2000s...but the 2010s - meh, it's just twisted insanity that's reflected in where media is going.
Okay, first of all - there's a major misunderstanding regarding those differences in hull. In a recent post, I pointed out how those numbers change with skills - they're also going to change based on resistances, etc, etc, etc.
Let's look at the F.Gal-R vs. Op Ody, eh? You look at them and you see a difference of 2000 hull. Let's add in 9 Structural Integrity, eh? That 2000 is now a difference of ~2600. Since we're talking "tank" - let's add in the T2 Nukara +5% Hull as well, eh? So we're looking at ~2700 at this point. Say we go 2pc MACO, including the MACO Deflector - we're looking at another 17.2 SI for ~104 more to take us to ~2804.
What about damage resistance, eh? @30%, we're now looking at a difference of ~4006. @40%, we're at ~4673. @50%, we're at ~5608. @60%, we're at ~7010 difference.
@35%, that 42k became ~90602 and the 44k became ~94915. Sure, it's "only" ~4313...but it's not just a couple thou.
That's kind of a drawn out way of saying that like most Cryptic math, it's a pervasive ratio.
44000 / 42000 = 1.0476
94915 / 90602 = 1.0476
It's not that it has 2k more hull, it's pretty much always going to have 4.76% more hull. So in comparing it to the Op Ody, you're comparing 15% more shields vs. 4.76% more hull. Since the ship blows up when the hull goes and the hull's going to be a larger number than the shields...well, I tend to favor hull over shields.
As for why I would deem it an Engineering Cruiser rather than Tactical or Science comes down some basic things...
X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X
X, X
X, X
X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X, X
X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X, X
X
The only thing different about those three BOFF layouts is the Ensign. The second is the base Assault Cruiser (Tac) and the third is the base Star Cruiser (Sci).
Heading off to Fleet-land with the three of them, we see...
2 - 5 - 3
4 - 4 - 2
2 - 4 - 4
Where the Fleet Assault (Tac) is 4/4/2, the Fleet Star (Sci) is 2/4/4, and the Fleet Gal-R is 2/5/3.
When I say "Engineering Cruiser" - I'm not talking about the Cruiser you put an Eng in. I'm talking about a Cruiser where most things point to Engineering compared to other ships where they may point Tac or Sci. The Engineering Cruiser just doesn't point that way like others do.
Two Cruisers that definitely stand out as oddities are the Heavy Retro and Support Retro/Fleet Support, eh? The Heavy Retro with the Assault BOFFs and Star Consoles, uh huh...er...yeah.
Why would VD be trying to best the argument that he's been making? Go back and look...I've been saying that the Gal-X should get something akin to the Bulwark BOFF layout. If it doesn't get that in the blog next week, then folks need to break out a herd of cows all over Cryptic.
X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X
X, X, X
X
That the F.Gal-X receive the addition of the LCdr Uni to the En Uni which has been given to the Gal-X.
Could see them going...
X, X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X
X, X
X
Which would tie into what I've been saying for the F.Gal-R as well with...
X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X, X
X
Where I've said the Gal-X should go Assault-like and the Gal-R should go Star-like (or Support-like if some prefer). Basically that with no content for an Engineering Cruiser in the game, that the boats should go the Tac/Sci that does exist.
I haven't been arguing against the Gal-R needing changes...I've been arguing against folks wanting to make a Gal-R better than a Scimitar. I haven't been arguing against the Gal-X needing changes, I've been saying that we need to see what the blog actually says next week and arguing against the folks that want to make it better than a Scimitar.
I mean...I've been saying that over and over...the Tac/Sci thing, no Eng/Tank content (please don't add any, I hate the Trinity in games, etc, etc, etc)...some folks are making reasonable suggestions and some folks are outright lunatics...
edit: And yeah, if Cryptic just +1 Eng the F.Gal-X so that it's the same garbage as the F.Negh'Var with it's Uni Ensign...then yeah, rip into them hardcore. Cause to be honest, I don't really care about the Galaxy-class. I never liked it. I watched and enjoyed TNG despite it. It's a fugly ship, imho. There are enough similarities between the Galaxy and Negh'Var...that it's a case of hoping for some decent changes for folks for the Galaxy, so that some of that thought my bleed through over for the Negh'Var.
I like the M.Negh'Var, and imho that's what both the Gal-R and Negh'Var should have been from the start. There's still talk here and there of the Fleet Assault Negh'Var/etc/etc/etc...and I doubt the forums would be tolerable if we got that while the F.Gal-X ended up like a F.Negh'Var, eh? Thus pushing for the LCdr Tac or LCdr Uni (akin to the Bulwark, the other Dreadnought Cruiser in the game) sort of layout so that at least on the forums there can be some peace...
pretty much in DS9 the galaxy was used as a stationary siege weapon. they also had full wings of galaxies (it is never stated hwo many ships where in each wing but provably 3 to 4)
look at most fo the battles with the defiant zipping around and excelsior there is 1 or 2 galaxies just sitting there shooting away and destroying galors with one or 2 shots of the main phaser array
this is why i have no issue with the slow turn with the saucer attached as it was never shown as very nimble in the show but it brought the fire power when it needed too
Not everybody hates the Galaxies, the consoles or the changes. Some of us really like this, even if it isn't quite perfect. Can't you understand that and stop griping? Or does everything have to be about what YOU and your like minded friends want?
Cause if that is the case, and you can't compromise a little, you'll never be happy with anything Cryptic does. This is their game. They will do what they want to do or can do. Sometimes they may listen to us players, but not always. They can't do everything everybody wants. And even sometimes when they could, they have their reasons and won't. Yes we give them feedback and suggestion we feel would be better. But we shouldn't be so upset when they don't listen. And that doesn't mean you complainers need to fill up the forums with complaints and jump all over them. They have made their decision, we can continue to SUGGEST changes but let us not jump all over them and each other any more. I made this mistake over what I felt was a folly with turning the Anniversary into a grind event, but I finally got past it. Please see past this and understand some of us see this reboot as a good thing, or at least maybe a step in the right direction.
Ok, I went a little overboard in this post. Sorry but I had to vent. Now I'm truly done with this thread. Can't stand it anymore.....
"Never Surrender! Never give up Hope!"
"Prosperity and Success in everything you do."
"To Boldly go.........well punch it already!"
"To Be or Not To Be"....Alas, the Foundry is Not To Be. We Shall miss Thee, dear Friend!
"Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?"- Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Thank You, Cryptic......even when I don't agree with all your decisions....Thank You for Star Trek Online!
Hrmm, that's something that I really haven't seen mentioned in the thread (not that I've read every post in this thread - haven't read any posts in the other thread (kind of surprised it hasn't been merged already))...
+20 Starship Hull Plating
+20 Starship Armor Reinforcements
+1 Turn
Well, looking at the first two...
+20 Starship Hull Plating = 3 Kinetic DRR = 2.9% Kinetic DR
+20 Starship Armor Reinforcements = 3 Energy DRR = 2.9% Energy DR
With DR being subject to such painful diminishing returns, would it simply be a case of looking to free up the SP that would have been spent on each of those? Figure dropping SHP from 3 to 2 and dropping SAR from 6 to 4...thus freeing up 8k SP to be spent elsewhere?
The previous lines of discussion were based off of the zen buy for the current model and ensuring the lt cmdr slot. Not solely what the T5 would look like. As for the zen buy, all they're doing is slapping on a hangar, asking you to sacrifice 2 slots for the 2pc which does little to nothing and dousing an ensign slot. So for those of us who wasted the zen in the first place got a pat on the head.
Addendum:
I just saw your last post. Yeah it was mentioned before that you could get a lot more out of using 2 fleet engie consoles with +Turn while skipping AMS and saucer separation. What ticks people off about that is that the lance has no mention of a rehaul. It hits half the time and for a weapon with one of the most narrow arcs they just simply didn't listen to the 6000+ posts of people demanding that.
So the "reboot" comes out to be a white wash of little to no benefit even if it gains +10% hp/shield modding.
so, only because u r fine with the so called "reboot" others should obey the logical flaws?
- ams is one of my most behated cons in pvp (see: u like, i don't :P)! cheesy and makes every non-skiller feeling like a hulk (got it, yet never used it though it has been used several hundred times on me)
- nothing changes the fact that it is a logical flaw to give a ship (gal-x) the ability to carry dhc's without the possibility to slot the boffskills needed to run a cannonboat
(edited false satement that i'm not aware of others ships ingame fitting this. indeed, like stated below, over the half of klink-battlecruisers seem to fit in here as well
- nothing changes the fact that on the show the gal-r has been a good mix of all roles (may comparitive to a d'kora ingame). an exploration cruiser should be everything but a pure tank. (sci-leaned in my opinion with a good capability to holds its own and to punch bad guys off).
Seriously?
Lt Tac
Negh'Var
Mirror Vor'cha Retro
Lt/En Tac
Gal-X
Fleet Negh'Var
Mirror Negh'Var
Vor'cha Retro
Kamarag Retro
K't'inga Retro
Fleet K't'inga Retro
Lt/En Tac & Lt Uni
Fleet Kamarag
More than half the KDF Battle Cruisers can't.
edit: It's kind of twisted, there are 3 KDF Battle Cruisers with a LCdr Tac (Mogh/Fleet Mogh & Fleet Tor'Kaht) out of 16 and another 4 (3x Bortasqu' and the Bortas) that could use a LCdr Uni for that LCdr Tac...but there are 5 of 5 KDF Carriers with a LCdr Tac.
edit2: Given the Gal-X was supposed to approximate the KDF Battle Cruiser, the Lt/En Tac pretty much approximates them...the Fleet Gal-X, as a newer boat on the other hand, should lean toward that LCdr Tac, eh?
Yup and this.. It's got DHC capacity and it was a selling point for the original buy. I even remember the advertisement showcasing that in bold, yet when folks tried to use cannons they found out that they'd be stuck with scatter volley 1 or rapid fire 1 which was a waste. Furthermore moving the rig into beams was also as equally frustrating because at the time FAW was a tripe mess of a skill to begin with and has only been fixed most recently.
And to compound it even further, the lack in turn is the most appropriate balance as-is for use of cannons on this class. There is absolutely 0 sense keeping the current zen purchase absent of a lt cmdr slot.
So for the few thinking they're high and mighty as if they just got through a mess of people who are just whining.. I think they need to sit on their hands and be forced to examine the facts at hand before they run their mouths at why they're done with this thread. Be done with it but don't think we can't see how vacant of logical thought their brains were fuming on.
oops didoo :eek:.... got me. sucks as well i'd say... i apologize for my flaws in information regarding klink battlecruisers and now i know again why i don't fly em on my klink (xcept mogh)
org post edited, thx vd
Honestly a lot of ships need revisiting. I don't think a weighted list of underperforming ships speak adversely to what we all should be aware of as power creep. I think we can all agree that this was their time to shine on revisiting the past but they blew us dust bunnies instead.
yep, it should. let's see what we get regarding the fact we've to deal with cryptic :rolleyes:
In the end, they want to make money...something like the Bulwark BOFF layout would make them more money than leaving it with the Fleet Negh'Var BOFF layout.
edit: Course, they're dealing with an iconic ship - so one can't help but feel they're preying on that to an extent.
It raises a question, imho though, about the cost of things.
Say you visit a car dealership (ugh, pesky car analogies) - and you're looking to buy a new car. It's entirely possible that they've not only got new 2014 models - but they may likely have 2013 and possibly even the odd 2012 around, eh? Are the 2012 and 2013's going to cost the same as the 2014's?
It's a tough one, looking at it, eh?
If power creep did not exist, then one might have expected Cryptic to increase the prices on all ships - even the older ships - because they'd still be at current power levels. This would just reflect inflation and how the price of everything goes up.
But power creep does exist. So one might expect either the newer ships to cost more or the older ships to cost less...but er...that didn't happen either. Prices remained the same - with a player getting more bang for their buck by buying newer ships instead of older ships.
I find this kind of perplexing. It's not like, well - had they reduced the prices of older ships - did they think they would offend folks that had spent the money? As opposed to offending them by offering newer and better ships at the same price?
Is it a simple case as Geko mentioned when he was surprised that more folks didn't buy and fly more ships - that they figure newer players will just buy the newer ships and that the older players that want to keep up will also buy the newer ships? Do they consider the bad feelings that this will generate with veteran players is an acceptable loss in a game where they've stated that the priority is not retention but rather new players? (That wasn't Geko, that was D'Angelo.)
Does it come back to the intended audience for the game - which is not min/maxers, which is not PvPers, which is not "hardcore" PvE folks, etc, etc, etc...where in the end it doesn't really matter what hodgepodge build of a ship somebody's sporting, they're going to have a blast doing the content? Cause yeah, 5x Gal-R with broken builds and flaky gearing can still accidentally complete ISE with optionals by randomly tapping fingers on the keyboard...
I was never really a fan of the carrot 'n stick powercreep gear progression that took place in many games, but it's amazing how a game like this - without the content progression to go along with all the powercreep can make you long for the carrot 'n stick, eh?
Now I'm just rambling and babbling...it appears I forgot to sleep last night. Meh...later, all...
Eh....no, not quite. This is STO - a game based on Star Trek that unfortunatley just vaguely resembles Star Trek as of late.
This is not where Star Trek is now. Star Trek now is in one of 3 places (depending on how you observe it). It either is in Nemesis (going by Trek chronology), in ENT (going by our own chronology) or in J.J. Into Darkness (if you don't mind the whole another universe/timeline thing).
However, STO? It's just a game based on Trek. It's not where Star Trek is really and it never was.
I still think for the cost of the ship (dread) the changes dont go nearly far enough, n that they dont address the core problems of the ship which make it so woefully inadequate.
Since Cryptic said they were "bringing it in line with other dreadnaughts" lets compare it to the other Z-Store dreadnaught, the scimitar, for costs and rewards.
Scimitar: one variant costs 2500 zen for account unlock. Doesn't need fleet starbase as its already a 10 console ship. Opsauce for reasons discussed many times before.
In addition, it gets a unique awesome hangar pet. Slavishly detailed and refined models. 5 fore weapons which actually work, unlike the lance.
Dread: 2500 zen for account unlock. Will need a FSM per character to reach fleet level, as well as the substantial resource cost of a T4 shipyard and 20,000 fc.
Non- fleet version sucks competitively for reasons stated previously.
No unique hangar pet. Both models haven't been touched in years and suffer from a number of inaccuracies and rough edges (the firing points burn my soul). Venture looks pretty though, unlike most cryptic designs.
Yes, it can cloak. But to get the cloak means you have to spend another 2,000 zen.
Now to have a look at the 3 packs: Scim 5,000 zen, Gal=4,000 zen. To break it down:
Scimitar 3 pack:
3 T5 Ships, all very viable depending on profession.
2 consoles are usable even at end game (fire while cloaked, shields while cloaked). The 2 piece set bonus for this gives a substantial boost to manevarability, and more importantly lets you keep the inherent +Turn of Romcloak for the full duration of your ambush, the length of which can be enhanced thanks to Reman infiltrator trait.
Equipping both is certainly a viable choice, especially for those who lack the Valdore console and Plasmonic Leech. Much better bonuses individually and together, even as placeholders for other consoles (like techyokinetic converter) they rock.
Galaxy 3 Pack:
One T4 Ship. 2 T5 Ships, one of which (Gar-R) sucks even at fleet level. Unlike the Scimitar 3 pack, an additional 500 zen per character is needed to upgrade to 10 console standard (equates to an additional 1000 zen or 15 million ec per character if you want both ships at fleet level
Console wise, AMS is long cooldown cheese who serves to infuriate even casual PVPers by sucking so enormously whilst doing very little in most PVE environments (yes, I have tried it on a KDF toon so I know what I'm talking about). Saucer separation is nice from an rp perspective, but they have failed to make it worthwhile gameplay wise. Unlike the excellent Scim 2 piece, the set bonus this time is worthless since you get much more out of 2 Fleet engineering consoles, or even two universal consoles like Assimilated Module.
..................................................................................
Some brief numbers to back up my point:
Gal-X 2500 zen. Defiant for cloak: 2000 zen. 1 FSM (500 zen per character). Total = 5,000 zen, + 500 for each alt after the main.
If you go with the 3 pack this skyrockets to 6,500 zen + 500 zen for each alt after main.
One scimitar costs 2,500. 5,000 for the 3 pack. Either works awesomely out of the box, and you never need to worry about FSM's on alts.
If you want the cloak with the marginal "benefits" of the new 2 piece it'll set you back a whopping 1,500 zen more than the scimi 3 pack, assuming you're only running it on one character (heaven help you if you have alts).
Even with all that it would still be woefully inferior to almost every other T5 ship and steamrolled by a decent Scimitar, and to use all this would use up 3 console slots anyway.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Gal-X should surpass the Scimitar. I'm not saying it should be a carbon copy of the scimitar.
I'm saying it (and many other neglected ship designs) should be brought in line with it in terms of quality and ability to compete.
Sorry for the huge post everyone. I just dont like cryptic trying to fob us off with a complete dung heap and act like theyre doing us a favour.
Then please fill out my dissertation survey on feline attachment, it'd be a massive help (-:
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/87XKSGH
And there is only 3 of them that are Fleet Versions, and those are even far far better than the Galaxy. So, thanks virusdancer for proving our point.
Division Hispana
www.divisionhispana.com
Original Join Date: January 30th, 2010
Did you read the Blog?
New Galaxy Bundle The Tier 4 Galaxy Exploration Cruiser Refit, Tier 5 Galaxy Exploration Cruiser Retrofit, and Tier 5 Galaxy Dreadnought will be available as a bundle for 4000 Zen. If you purchase the Galaxy Bundle, you can claim the Galaxy Bridge for Free in the C-Store.
There is no "new" Bridge. You can get the Galaxy Bridge Pack from years ago for free by buying the WHOLE Galaxy ship pack next week
Nobody here hates Galaxies, that's not even close to true. Our issue is that we don't feel it's been given a fair shake. When older designs can operate better in the current paradigm we feel that there's something wrong and sixty five pages of comments aren't just complaining, but stating how we feel these ships can be better. You don't seek to improve things you hate, you try to fix things that you love. We're trying to squeeze all the horsepower we can out of the 57 Chevy engine. Sure we have a new Lambo sitting next to it in the garage...but we love the Chevy, and she hasn't been running right lately.
When you constantly compromise and the other party gives up nothing, that's called a surrender. When you want to compromise and you need one thing and are offered another, it still doesn't solve your initial problem. It's like that diplomacy mission on Starbase 39, everybody needed one thing in order to move forward and nobody budged.
The issue here isn't an unwillingness to compromise at all. But it doesn't mean much when we don't get what we need out of the deal. The vast majority of us need a Lcdr tac slot. Not a hangar, and many of us don't think that the 2 console bonus will mean that much overall. I'll use the space for Neutroniums normally....or RCS consoles.
This is somewhat a step in the right direction as at least they're doing something with a ship that has been largely left on the back burner.
But NOW is the time for us to step up and say, you didn't go far enough.
And it's not like it's these aren't the changes we wanted. A lot of us are saying, these changes...don't actually do anything significant. That ensign universal is going to still be a tac. Because no one is going to run a Dreadnaught with two tactical abilities. It's just like on my Regent, the Universal is a science officer. Because there's no engineer ability that's going to cover not having Hazard Emitters against the Borg.
I would like to point out that those Klingon ships have a dedicated bonus to +10 weapons bonus that the Gal-X doesn't have.
But this is an update correct? We're not trying to update it to the levels of it's contemporaries, but the current status quo.
That said, those ships only having access to a Lt tac slot isn't exactly a good idea either.
But I use a Bird of Prey Klingon side.
On the subject of the Galaxy-R, I think the LtCdr universal is the best possible idea and truly captures the spirit of the Galaxy class which was the top of the line go anywhere do anything ship.
"THAT is a Galaxy class starship we're no match for them."
"This ship is a ship of exploration, our mission is peaceful"
If it needs to be able to fight then you can go tac, if it needs to be able to heal and crowd control then you can pop sci, and for everyone who loves being the damage sponge you can keep it LtCdr. But the Galaxy class was all those things.
I also think that implementing the Dyson Science ship tech into the Saucer Separation mode is genius. The same as they're going to add Breen Heavy Frigate flanking to the other raiders. New mechanics for existing and beloved ships.
wut. a half decent idea?
no its not. Its dumb.
Making the LTcom engineer and LT tac switch places would have been acceptable.
Setting aside stats and cost, this is why I am unhappy:
I want to fly a Galaxy Class, but every time I jump into one I gimp myself and hold back my team by not jumping into something else.
That right there is the problem for me, and for most of the people who have been pleading qith cryptic over this issue for years. We can argue with each other and with cryptic over stats and cost until the targs come home, but the root problem is opportunity cost, and The proposed changes do nothing to resolve this.
The Dev blog claims this is a Galaxy class Reboot, but its not, its a Dreadnaught Reboot. The Galaxy Class is still getting mostly ignored.
The changes to the Dreadnaught are nice enough. But any situation we could put the dreadnaught in we could still do better in an Avenger.