test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Galaxy class

1424345474864

Comments

  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited April 2015

    and the abomination takes it's rightful place in obscurity, and there was much rejoicing. as long as that thing exists, the real galaxy will always have to be made intentionally worse.

    HAHAHA! You naugthy boy! I love the gal x! :D
  • willamsheridanwillamsheridan Member Posts: 1,187 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Definitely - you won't get any argument from me that it needs a Lt-Cmdr Tactical BOFF. Personally, though, I remain convinced that it won't get better than Lieutenant Tac.

    Although I will say that I would dearly LOVE to be wrong....

    If it only has a Lt. Tac (i hope that won´t happen) i hope that we at least get a Sacuer Sep. ability with a useful saucer with good weapons (phasers, torps). It would be disappointing if the new Andromeda/Galaxy (now is that a wordplay for the new Iconian Storyline?) doesn´t have the Seperation ability
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    SUUUUUEY! *squeals in joy*

    Really, I am... happy. Not angry. Maybebecause I am completely fine with a pathfinder layout those ships will probably have. But I am... not angry... XD

    happytarg? :confused: :eek: :P :D
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • knightnbluknightnblu Member Posts: 101 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The Galaxy is at best an O.K. ship. Now, if you want a viable end game variant, you want the Fleet Dreadnaught. That one will deliver an interesting game experience.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,005 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    If they decide to change the layout I could see it having a similar layout to the Guardian...whether it's better or worse remains to be seen.
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 10,928 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    shpoks wrote: »
    happytarg? :confused: :eek: :P : D

    So much I will christen my Negh'Var the IKS TarghQuch :D (As opposed to my Mogh which is named TarghQeH)
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • royalsovereignroyalsovereign Member Posts: 1,344 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    If it only has a Lt. Tac (i hope that won´t happen) i hope that we at least get a Sacuer Sep. ability with a useful saucer with good weapons (phasers, torps). It would be disappointing if the new Andromeda/Galaxy (now is that a wordplay for the new Iconian Storyline?) doesn´t have the Seperation ability
    You'll still have to have bought the older Galaxy with the separation console, or will have to buy it, based upon the way they've handled similar things to date.
    "You Iconians just hung a vacancy sign on your asses and my foot's looking for a room!"
    --Red Annorax
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 905 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Personally, I would not mind if the t6 galaxy got a eng tinted pathfinder layout with:

    Com. Eng
    Lt. Com. Eng
    Lt. Tac (hybrid?)
    Lt. Sci (hybrid?)
    Lt. Universal.

    My biggest problem with the galaxy's that have come before wasn't just underwhelming tactical consoles but that it simply didn't have enough tactical slots for tac team and at least a torp, beam, and attack pattern to be onboard. With two lieutenants set to tac, I think that would be a reasonable compromise of giving it plenty of tactical potential but keeping the strong eng focus.

    I agree with the suspicions that they won't let this ship be too tac heavy... probably no 4 tac consoles or lt.com tac on this puppy. Not just because the Gal-X exists and might at some point make an appearance as a t6 do-over, but the sovereign and possibly even the excelsior might make t6 appearances as well. The devs have rather ridiculously made the excelsior a war beast in this game... I imagine because of the lakota from DS9 being upgraded out the whazoo to go toe to toe with the "uber battleship" the defiant. But I imagine that decision failed to consider what could have been done with a much larger galaxy class being upgraded specifically to be the best war ship it could be (not involving the rabbit eared, lance-a-lot makeover). But it's so popular and apparently not vetoed for end game that it will likely make a re-appearance and would doubtful be put in its correct place beneath the galaxy in tactical capability.

    So with the potential future sovereign and gal-x and excelsior, they'll probably reserve the lt.com tac and may also reserve the 4 tac consoles. Though making this either by fleet or default have a 3 tac 5 eng 3 sci layout would make it the third cruiser to already have that layout... but there's only so much they can do with their current console/boff layout rules based on ship category. Unless of course they introduce that mythical, mystical, magical "universal console SLOT." Then one could make the ship 4 tac, 4 sci, or 5 eng depending on what they want... but we all know that would be too versatile... too epic. So no. :P

    Hmm... if others are right on this ship getting the eng-tinted pathfinder layout, I wonder if the defiant will eventually emerge with the tactical tinted version... that would actually be rather pleasantly symmetrical of them.
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Personally, I would not mind if the t6 galaxy got a eng tinted pathfinder layout with:

    Com. Eng
    Lt. Com. Eng
    Lt. Tac (hybrid?)
    Lt. Sci (hybrid?)
    Lt. Universal.

    My biggest problem with the galaxy's that have come before wasn't just underwhelming tactical consoles but that it simply didn't have enough tactical slots for tac team and at least a torp, beam, and attack pattern to be onboard. With two lieutenants set to tac, I think that would be a reasonable compromise of giving it plenty of tactical potential but keeping the strong eng focus.

    I agree with the suspicions that they won't let this ship be too tac heavy... probably no 4 tac consoles or lt.com tac on this puppy. Not just because the Gal-X exists and might at some point make an appearance as a t6 do-over, but the sovereign and possibly even the excelsior might make t6 appearances as well. The devs have rather ridiculously made the excelsior a war beast in this game... I imagine because of the lakota from DS9 being upgraded out the whazoo to go toe to toe with the "uber battleship" the defiant. But I imagine that decision failed to consider what could have been done with a much larger galaxy class being upgraded specifically to be the best war ship it could be (not involving the rabbit eared, lance-a-lot makeover). But it's so popular and apparently not vetoed for end game that it will likely make a re-appearance and would doubtful be put in its correct place beneath the galaxy in tactical capability.

    So with the potential future sovereign and gal-x and excelsior, they'll probably reserve the lt.com tac and may also reserve the 4 tac consoles. Though making this either by fleet or default have a 3 tac 5 eng 3 sci layout would make it the third cruiser to already have that layout... but there's only so much they can do with their current console/boff layout rules based on ship category. Unless of course they introduce that mythical, mystical, magical "universal console SLOT." Then one could make the ship 4 tac, 4 sci, or 5 eng depending on what they want... but we all know that would be too versatile... too epic. So no. :P

    Hmm... if others are right on this ship getting the eng-tinted pathfinder layout, I wonder if the defiant will eventually emerge with the tactical tinted version... that would actually be rather pleasantly symmetrical of them.


    Funny thing is: i'd b totally ok with a tac light variant, if they give access to the pilot skills that enhance dps XD.
  • ufpterrellufpterrell Member Posts: 736 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I would actually like to see it have a couple Lt Comm slots like the Guardian, then it can at least be flexible in it's seating. I really don't understand why after years of moaning its too eng heavy we have folks asking for a comm eng and lt comm eng? Give me a Lt Comm sci and tac any day of the week over that.
    Terrell.png

    Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,495 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I'd probably go with Cmdr Engineering/Specialization; Lt. Cmdr Science; Lt. Cmdr Universal for the main seats. Either way let's hope that the officially released stats aren't an April Fools. :P
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • willamsheridanwillamsheridan Member Posts: 1,187 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    You'll still have to have bought the older Galaxy with the separation console, or will have to buy it, based upon the way they've handled similar things to date.

    I have the Gal-R, Gal-X, Venture from the Galaxy pack and even the Fleet-Gal-R (not the fleet dreadnought until they fix the lance and release it as T6 ) so i can suse the Galaxy 2-piece set if it can be used on the Andromeda.
  • jer5488jer5488 Member Posts: 506 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I have the Gal-R, Gal-X, Venture from the Galaxy pack and even the Fleet-Gal-R (not the fleet dreadnought until they fix the lance and release it as T6 ) so i can suse the Galaxy 2-piece set if it can be used on the Andromeda.

    The 2 piece can be used on the Andromeda - it's labeled "Any Exploration Cruiser variant" in game now. Though I'm really starting to doubt that it'll 3 piece with the new console with it being available to all 3 factions.
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 905 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    ufpterrell wrote: »
    I would actually like to see it have a couple Lt Comm slots like the Guardian, then it can at least be flexible in it's seating. I really don't understand why after years of moaning its too eng heavy we have folks asking for a comm eng and lt comm eng? Give me a Lt Comm sci and tac any day of the week over that.

    It seems unlikely to me that they would put out a ship with the pilot spec on it before releasing the actual spec or the pilot ships that go with it. If these ships are actually coming out this thursday, they will probably have command hybrids on them which would be rather appropriate given their command nature in cannon. Though I too would prefer the hybrid seat to not be one of the lt. seats. The lt.com or com being hybrid command spec would be nice... help lighten up that "too much engineering" by at least giving the option of using something else

    Of course, they may choose to repeat the guardian boff layout rather than repeating the concorde, especially considering the concorde JUST came out, so repeating the guardian from at least a little further in the past might go over better. Not to mention they may even decide to slip in both of the current specializations which would make this ship entirely different from the guardian, or even the concorde if they slipped hybrids into that, but I could totally see:

    Com. Eng.
    Lt.Com. Tac/Command
    Lt.Com Sci/Intel
    Lt. Eng
    Ensign Universal.

    However... that might be too epic... but my goodness I just excited myself, lol.
  • hyperionx09hyperionx09 Member Posts: 1,709 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    There is the possibility DD will keep its exclusive seating, with the Ensign Uni turned Lt Uni/Hybrid (like the JHSS lower Hybrid seat), if not the Ensign Tac turned Lt Tac/Hybrid, while the Negh and Andromeda get the Pathfinder-style seating.

    While not a perfect example, the Flagship trio also have this setup; both the Fed and KDF flagships share a seat loadout, whereas the Romulan Scimitar has its own unique layout, geared more towards offense.
  • stardestroyer001stardestroyer001 Member Posts: 2,615 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Anyone else excited that the Galaxy costume is finally getting a do-over?!? Hopefully they remember to fix the Gal-X lance too.
    stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
    Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
    My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    There is the possibility DD will keep its exclusive seating, with the Ensign Uni turned Lt Uni/Hybrid (like the JHSS lower Hybrid seat), if not the Ensign Tac turned Lt Tac/Hybrid, while the Negh and Andromeda get the Pathfinder-style seating.

    While not a perfect example, the Flagship trio also have this setup; both the Fed and KDF flagships share a seat loadout, whereas the Romulan Scimitar has its own unique layout, geared more towards offense.
    That'd be really lame.
    I would prefer a much more versatile and straight forward BOFF layout than the pathfinder version.

    There where literary hundreds (maybe thousands) of pages over the years about how to improve the GCS, and most ppl agree that the GCS and Negh Var should have got the same or similar treatment like the D'D or Guardian (I'd prefer Guardian).
    If they give it a Pathfinder like station setup, the devs will AGAIN show that they just don't care what ppl wish.

    For me it's a make or break situation. If they goof it up like before they'll simply show that they are not interested in making the game good (simple said). Then there's no much reason to stay and watch their DS9/Defiant fanboy fantasy become real again.

    Sorry for the harsh words, but that's how i think about it.
    "...'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

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Anyone else excited that the Galaxy costume is finally getting a do-over?!? Hopefully they remember to fix the Gal-X lance too.

    1. Ofcourse we are, that's one of the focal points of this release.

    2. They're not doing anything with the Galaxy-X at the moment, Thomas confirmed this on twitter.
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • reynoldsxdreynoldsxd Member Posts: 977 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    That'd be really lame.
    I would prefer a much more versatile and straight forward BOFF layout than the pathfinder version.

    There where literary hundreds (maybe thousands) of pages over the years about how to improve the GCS, and most ppl agree that the GCS and Negh Var should have got the same or similar treatment like the D'D or Guardian (I'd prefer Guardian).
    If they give it a Pathfinder like station setup, the devs will AGAIN show that they just don't care what ppl wish.

    For me it's a make or break situation. If they goof it up like before they'll simply show that they are not interested in making the game good (simple said). Then there's no much reason to stay and watch their DS9/Defiant fanboy fantasy become real again.

    Sorry for the harsh words, but that's how i think about it.


    Pretty much. And i do not see a reason to deny a decent boff seating.
    I mean the LTcom primary and ltcom tac/sci has been used on many ships by now. Heck, even the excelsror got a ltc tac, just by trading in one meaningless ltcom engineering station, and that was YEARS ago.
    The Ambassador of course blew the doors open. Why was that ship, predecessor to the Galaxy, so much better? That boff seating is imho ideal for most ships. It gives plenty of flexibility. You can add and switch and do stuff with universals or hybrid slots. But the core setup is just way to compelling.

    If it weren't for the scimitar, my romulan would still sit in his fleet d'deridex.
  • lan451lan451 Member Posts: 3,386 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Stats are up.

    Edit: omg

    Bridge Officer Stations: 1 Lieutenant Commander Tactical, 1 Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Command, 1 Commander Engineering, 1 Lieutenant Science, 1 Ensign Universal
    JWZrsUV.jpg
    Mine Trap Supporter
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    1 Lieutenant Commander Tactical, 1 Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Command, 1 Commander Engineering, 1 Lieutenant Science, 1 Ensign Universal

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wod-MudLNPA
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,495 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    lan451 wrote: »
    Stats are up.

    Edit: omg

    Bridge Officer Stations: 1 Lieutenant Commander Tactical, 1 Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Command, 1 Commander Engineering, 1 Lieutenant Science, 1 Ensign Universal

    Also:

    Console Modifications: 3 Tactical, 4 Engineering, 3 Science
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • lan451lan451 Member Posts: 3,386 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    You guys...I'm about to cry. Our ship is finally here.
    JWZrsUV.jpg
    Mine Trap Supporter
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    TRIBBLE
    XXXX
    TRIBBLE
    XX
    X

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjbUu5MaEEg

    :D:D:D

    Sorry for spamming, but I have to spam!!!! :eek:
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • jer5488jer5488 Member Posts: 506 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    It's so beautiful.... /sniff.

    If this isn't an April fools joke, it's all been worth it.

    And the most amazing/shocking part...

    Q: Will there be fleet versions of these ships?

    A: Yes! Each of these ships gain +1 Engineering console slot and +10% Maximum hull hit points and +10% Maximum shield capacity. They will be made available upon release of these three new ships. They are unlocked upon reaching tier 4 in your starbase’s shipyard.

    It should be noted that Fleet Tier 6 ships do not come with a 5th level of Starship Mastery and thus do not have a Starship Trait.
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 905 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I must admit I am quite surprised that they gave the lt.com tac but... I guess they finally decided to just let the galaxy out of the "no tac for you" box. lol.

    I know this is the galaxy thread... but I would have rathered that command hybrid been on the DD's sci rather than tac... :/
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Enhanced Engineering Systems Set

    Equipping multiple consoles from the Exploration Cruiser Refit, Exploration Cruiser Retrofit and Exploration Cruiser [T6] will bestow set bonuses to your starship.

    Consoles in this set:
    •Console – Universal – Antimatter Spread
    •Console – Universal – Saucer Separation
    •Console – Universal – Molecular Cohesion Nullifier

    Set Bonuses:
    •Enhanced Structural Systems (2pc) - Passive ◦+All Damage Resistance
    ◦+Turn Rate
    ◦+Engine Power

    •Reinforced Shielding (3pc) – Passive ◦+Maximum Shield Capacity
    ◦+Shield Regeneration
    ◦Reduces energy damage to shields

    .........

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Sxv-sUYtM

    *Dances in front of PC*
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • sonnikkusonnikku Member Posts: 77 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Wow I'm thrilled. The only thing that would have made it "perfect" would have been a fourth tactical console slot, or at the very least the chance to pick up a fourth tactical slot upon acquiring the fleet version. But alas, more engineering to start, even more engineering after upgrade. 4/4/3 would have been pretty balanced.
Sign In or Register to comment.