View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
02-06-2011, 03:51 PM
Speaking as a person who plays KDF 98% of the time I normally don't cheer for Fed ships to get buffed. But I really have to agree in the case of the Gal-X, it really took 2-3 cool ideas and mixed them without seeing if they'd be compatible ideas. It can use cannons, but it turns slower than a Neghvar(which I rarely see use cannons because of their turn rate). It's got a spinal mount phaser lance, which reduces their weapons loadout to 3 fore and 3 aft on a cruiser reducing their ability to broadside(which is what many cruiser do to double their effective energy weapon arcs).

I mean I hate to compare it to KDF ships, Cryptic has really almost all but flat out stated they want distinct differences between the KDF and Fed ships. So comparisons will always be off.

But look at a Gal-X and a Vorcha Refit.

Galaxy X
Cost: 2000 tokens
3 fore/aft weapon slots
Cloak
39k base hull (3k more than Vorcha-R)
4 device slots (1 more than Vorcha-R)
Phaser Lance-Unique
4 Eng/2 Sci/2 Tac consoles
6 deg/sec turn rate


Vorcha Refit
Cost:Same as any other normal T5 ship. Free if you snag it with a token when you hit Brigadier General(RA).
4 fore/aft weapon slots (1 more than Gal-X on fore, 1 more than Gal-X on aft)
Cloak
36k base hull
3 device slots
4 Eng/2 Sci/ 3 Tac consoles (An extra Tac console more than the Gal-X)
10 deg/sec turn rate (Just under twice the turning speed of a Gal-X)


I have not bought the Gal-X, and probably will not. And it is not my intention to start a nerf-cry fest over OP KDF ships. Merely to indicate that a freely earned ship is (imo) outclassing a ship you pay 2000 tokens for. I've not used the spinal lance and I've rarely ever seen it used. I think I can count the number of times I've ever seen it used on me on one hand. And I don't need any hands to count the number of times I've ever seen the lance as a threat.

I sadly have no ideas of how to make the Gal-X better beyond what has probably been stated a billion times in other posts in other threads. But it is clear to me it needs to get better. I never see it in PvP which I consider a bit of a shame because I think it's a rather nifty ship other then the game mechanics aspect of it.

Likes has been said before in this thread I think it'd be a good idea to leave the cloak where it is on the ship. And probably remove the cannons. That or give it maybe an innate cannon unique to it that levels up as you do with maybe a single Cannon's firing arc but a DHC's damage. I really don't think that'd make it dastardly OP. Possibly hardwire 2 into the front and don't make the Lance count as a weapon slot. (It is my understanding that the Lance counts as a weapon slot, making the customizable layout of the ship 3 fore and 3 aft, not the listed 4 fore and 3 aft. If I am wrong I'd like to be corrected but politely so, I will change my post to reflect it) With the two hardwired in and the lance not counting as a weapon slot you'd have 2 fore and 3 aft customizable weapon slots, plus the two "extended arc DHC's", plus the Phaser Lance. I can honestly say I don't think that'd be OP if you leave everything else alone.

If that was done you could maybe put in a DBB for Beam Overload or Target Subsystems, or two Cannons in fore and use turrets in back for an effective Cannon Rapid Fire on the Gal-X. Anything anywhere in the front 180 arc would be hit by 2 DHC's, 2 Cannons, and 3 turrets. Seeing as people already have hyper agile escorts with 3 DHC's, 1 beam weapon, and 2-3 turrets and can keep that firepower on you for alot of the time anyways, I don't think giving a slower moving ship a wider arc with the same weapons is out of the question as it's supposed to be a special ship.