Captain
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,243
# 441
03-06-2014, 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgecrysger View Post
I always loved the Galaxy desing.. but seriously?? is anybody paying to buy this pack??
Yo!

You should see ESD, it's crawling with these things! At 2:18 PM EST, I've found 18 of these things (one of them sporting the whinefest title "U.S.S. Reboot Fail"; seriously, grow up). This is being sold, bub.
Career Officer
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 969
# 442
03-06-2014, 12:46 PM
I dont really know whats more sad.. That they make such a bad revamp or that ppl actually are buying it as is.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,786
# 443
03-06-2014, 01:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattjohnsonva View Post
It was Cambridge in TNG. It's Oxford in STO's version.

And the articles are all written as Star Trek Online stories, by Cryptic staff.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 587
# 444
03-06-2014, 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gofasternow View Post
Yo!

You should see ESD, it's crawling with these things! At 2:18 PM EST, I've found 18 of these things (one of them sporting the whinefest title "U.S.S. Reboot Fail"; seriously, grow up). This is being sold, bub.
err no.

Thats actually mostly old players who already had the ship. some of em gonna go grab the fleet version since its basically for free for them.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,590
# 445
03-06-2014, 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by caasicam View Post
Personally, I think that a Cmdr Tactical BOff seat is a bit much for a Dreadnought Cruiser, at least not at the expense of a Cmdr Engineering. Anything less than the best Engineering, and I feel as though it takes away from the "lol wat ur shootin at me m8?" that happened in the shows.

Damage dealing tank = yes

Big tanky escort = no

Besides, Cryptic seems to have a Arc/Turnrate vs damage thing going, so I'd rather see this ship get bigger guns than bigger engines.

(I realise what the Scimitar basically is, and no I'm not happy with it).
Commander Engineer is what makes a cruiser.

LtCdr tac is fine. It allows you to use cannons decently and it allows you to maximize usage of beam arrays.

The funny thing is that by being called dreadnaught it means, biggest guns, toughest armor. If we're looking at balance the niche that G-X should be filling is the mighty glacier. It's huge, it's nigh invincible (hyperbole) and it hits hard. It just doesn't hit hard enough.




Quote:
Originally Posted by abystander0 View Post
I was using those ships as an example. You can use the dual heavy cannons on the Lt level escort. You do not NEED a Lt commander tactical slot to be able to use cannons. It certainly makes them better, but you can use cannons without Lt commander level skills.
Of course you can, that doesn't mean that you should though.

Quote:
This goes back to the false expectations the ability to mount cannons on the Galaxy-X gives. You can use them, but you cannot use them efficiently. Even if you had a Lt Commander tactical slot, people would still be upset because of the ship's poor maneuvering. Cannons are best used on ships that can maneuver to keep the target in their firing arc, in addition they also have steeper damage drop off over distance than beams do. I just don't see any practical reason to use them on the Galaxy-X over beams.

The cannons and whether or not it has a Lt commander level tactical bridge officer seat have nothing to do with it being a top tier ship.

If you want to use cannons on a Fed cruiser, grab the Avenger.
The turn rate, is a matter of play style and build. I'll slap two fleet RCS consoles on it if I really want to turn. I intend to use it on a Tac, so it would be attack pattern Alpha. Those problems can be worked around. Play it as a sniper and alpha strike from the cloak.

I may have gotten the Avenger if I could stand to look at it. But the Avenger isn't the Galaxy-X.

Quote:
Those emplacements can be many things since there is no schematics that are canon, so people are free to use their imaginations, which in this case, is a bad thing.
You asked a question and I answered, doesn't mean I agree with it. When I first saw the ship my initial though was some kind of comm array. They do look like cannons up close, but I think it's a silly place. Like they destroyed a Bird of Prey and stuck the wings on either side of the bridge for a trophy.


I prefer the Defiants integrated cannons myself. On the other hand it's not like there isn't space in a Galaxy class for those.


Quote:
I think Cryptic blew it with the spinal phaser. It should work just like in the show in my opinion. Five shot salvoes (5 shots hit the first Neghvar), then have a cooldown while the capacitors recharge. Direct energy modulation 3 could give you the shield penetration we see. The characteristics of the weapon is high penetrating damage, relatively fast rate of fire, and it seems to preclude the use of other weapons.
Absolutely.

Considering the Guramba's siege mode, the Phaser Lance shutting down the other arrays would make sense. Considering the size of that thing though I have started thinking that it has an independent power core in there.

What's your opinion on power drain?

Because currently the Phaser Lance burns something like 50 when you fire it normally. If it does that on the first hit, and the power continues to bleed out through the firing sequence like normal beam arrays it could be seriously crippling to what we're proposing.

Quote:
Are talking about the Federation's dedication to peaceful exploration? That never went away. Last I checked Starfleet was still a exploration and diplomacy force with defense capability. So what if the Federation is at war, how does that change it's mission, other than needing to reallocate ships from exploration roles to military ones? The Federation doesn't somehow magically transform into the Terran Empire. All those ships it builds will have to find a place in peacetime. The ships it uses for exploration, like the Galaxy class can also be used in a military role. Don't get me wrong, the Federation in not made of pansies, just people who look beyond how many ships can be blown up.
Of course. But you did not respond to the fact that the Federation for the last 60 years has been fielding more dedicated warship designs even in canon. That doesn't mean that they've stopped exploring, it means they've had to stay on top of things tactically.

But Starfleet has always had integrated platforms. There were a couple of episodes of DS9 where the Defiant was doing science stuff, planetary surveys.

And don't think that it doesn't go both ways.

The Galaxy being rebuilt into a dreadnaught is the same as the Nova, which was a design competitor with the Defiant design that was originally a heavy torpedo boat that was repurposed into a science ship.

And when the war is over Starfleet can pop off the phaser lance, tear out the extra torpedo stowage, reinstall the science labs, assign some new families and push her back out to the final frontier.

And it isn't like the Galaxy class as a whole is being turned into Dreadnaughts, just some.

But fielding a Dreadnaught retrofit of the Galaxy class does not make them the Terran Empire.

Quote:
Just because you want to fit the Galaxy-X into the overall scheme of things, doesn't mean it should be. Think of it this way, each player is an island in relation to the story, and has no bearing on the overall scope of things. So each player could have a Galaxy dreadnaught, but the Federation wouldn't have 100 dreadnaughts, no matter what you see in sector space, just like Starfleet wouldn't have 100 JHDC or Elachi Monbosh cruisers. They exist outside the narrative.
If it exists outside the narrative then why do you keep bringing up the narrative and the canonicity of the ship?

It's a dreadnaught.

If they didn't want us to expect dreadnaught firing capability they should've called it a heavy cruiser.

I think we had this same argument with the devs when they released the Fleet Assault Cruiser. It had assault in the title.

That said the Federation is 8000 light years across with rapidly approaching a trillion citizens. Starfleet is probably something like 20-30K starships strong. 100 dreadnaughts doesn't really seem unreasonable,

Quote:
As far as what is canon or not canon, show me any other reference that is licenced that has a description of the Galaxy-X. Mackenzie Calhoun, was a person, not a ship, and I don't think is relevant. The Vesta was in a book (which I haven't read), which I assume had some decent descriptions of what it could do. The Galaxy-X is a mystery...there is no information on it. All the information we have is what was shown on the screen. All we know about it is it could travel at warp 13, had cloaking device, and had the spinal phaser, and anything else is just projecting onto it abilities that you want it to have. The only reasonable thing, in my view is just to add these items to a Galaxy class hull.
The only other one that I know of that had it was the Birth of the Federation game.

The fact that it doesn't have crisply defined specs has nothing to do with its right to exist. What it means is the devs have to use their imagination. Not optimal I agree, but regardless of whether you hate it, it's still a part of Next Generation lore and is just as valid as anything else.

And I agree it should have innate base warp 13 transwarp.

Quote:
Yes, and that is what annoys me. The big problem with this is you have the constant power creep and the player desire to do ever more damage that in turn Cryptic feeds. There are no rules or mechanisms that can efficiently cope with or mitigate the damage that we are seeing, and players want to jump on that bandwagon, when there is absolutely no need for that kind of damage. Anything that doesn't meet this artificially high standard is considered "subpar". That is what is really afflicting the Galaxy and Galaxy-X. The view that they somehow are terrible ships is ludicrous when you can finish all of the content with them.

If players want to have the iconic look of the Galaxy, fine, they shouldn't demand that the Galaxy be made into something it isn't, and the same goes for the Galaxy dreadnaught.

Cryptic really needs to work on giving the player options (at least for Federation players) to resolve difficulties without shooting, which is another issue entirely.

This game needs a huge balance pass to close the discrepancy between ship damage vs utility.
Well we've been asking for that for years. Maybe they're gonna change directions in the future or near future and maybe not. I'd love more diplomacy. I would love for the rep system and your rank in the DOFF system to actually affect the way the world responds to you more. Not just if you're at ambassador rank you have an easier time negotiating with the ambassadors on DS9, or keeping the Acamar from killing each other (which should award you diplomatic points no matter how small, instead of it being trashed by getting jumped by the Romulans). If I'm tier 5 in Romulan rep the Tal Shiar should run or be willing to negotiate. If I have a top tier espionage rating I should get tips from my crew on who has what in the Nequencia trading mission. If my military rating is high....well Klingons and Hirogen should randomly attack me to take my hide as a trophy, accomplishments should matter.

But for now, that's not the case.
Yes I support This

"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"
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 183
# 446
03-06-2014, 04:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by captaind3 View Post
Commander Engineer is what makes a cruiser.

LtCdr tac is fine. It allows you to use cannons decently and it allows you to maximize usage of beam arrays.

The funny thing is that by being called dreadnaught it means, biggest guns, toughest armor. If we're looking at balance the niche that G-X should be filling is the mighty glacier. It's huge, it's nigh invincible (hyperbole) and it hits hard. It just doesn't hit hard enough.

I applaude you on being able to articulate my general sentiments in a way that my sleep-deprived brain could not.

That is exactly how I see the Dreadnought Cruiser. It's not a zippy 2fast4you raider doing 720s around shuttles, it's not a "mercilessly smash keybinds for ALL the attack patterns!" escort.

It's a brick most definitely, a solid hunk of metal. But a brick with more than a few BFGs attached to it, so I'd like to see people think twice before going after one. Should it be doing damage like an escort? Of course not, but should it be doing more damage than your run-of-the-mill cruiser? I'd like to think so.

On that note, is there any other ship in Star Trek canon that has a giant weapon built into the entire ship?

...Ooooooh wait, right.

(Rhymes with "Over-Powered".)
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 627
# 447
03-06-2014, 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwecaptainsmirk View Post
Yes, the feedback threads have been bookmarked, noted, and passed to the appropriate Devs, and they have also read/considered them.

Please keep in mind that we do listen to all feedback, and take what we can from what is constructive, and try to base future decisions on what we hear from our player community.

However, that does not mean that we can change everything in-game to what all players are asking for. There will always be the plain and simple truth that we cannot change everything to make everyone happy 100% of the time. But that doesn't mean we don't try to do things for the benefit of our players.

When we work on reboots such as the Galaxy reboot, and when we add Fleet versions of desired ships, we have our own internal reasons behind every decision. Sometimes, these decisions don't make sense to our players at the time, but all we ask is for your understanding and your patience in response to these changes, and changes to come.

Angry abusive posts wont get any of us anywhere, so keep in mind, the more pages upon pages of non-constructive posts will only bury constructive feedback posts, making it even harder to hear the things that could affect real change to our decision making process.

The last thing we want is any of you to feel that you are being ignored or that your voices are unheard. That being said, sometimes those voices need to understand that even though you really really want something to change, if we do not change things to accommodate your requests, this is nothing personal.

We will continue to listen to your feedback and take it into consideration.

We sincerely appreciate your support, as well as your passion for STO.

~CaptainSmirk
FOR THE LOVE OF Q!
All most of us wanted was a Lt Cmdr Tac slot! Why is that so hard to give us? All you just did was waste dev time updating a ship that hardly any of us want to bring out of mothballs. Stop acting like 5 yr olds Cryptic! You are a business, we are your CUSTOMERS! Do you hate money now? Does PW know how many things you guys could be making money off of that you refuse to give us? Youve blown all balance in this game to shambles, why pretend it still matters? All this does is show me the new again EP is no smarter than Stahl. This was a no brainer customer pleaser and you totally whiffed, ON PURPOSE. Dont come crying to us when Cryptic gets a bunch of layoffs because sales started plummeting. You all could be driving Hummers from the ridiculous amount of profitable ideas we've all given you over the years. When you are forced to shut STO down within 5 years, you will wish you had just listened to your customers. Cryptic has got to be the most stubborn dev team Ive ever seen.
STO: @AGNT009 Since Dec 2010
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Zorro
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 627
# 448
03-06-2014, 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aelfwin1 View Post
You're welcome to share your opinion on their Facebook page as well .
I shared my opinion once, and they banned my FB account from ever commenting on their Facebook page again.
STO: @AGNT009 Since Dec 2010
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Zorro
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,598
# 449
03-06-2014, 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubleohnine View Post
I shared my opinion once, and they banned my FB account from ever commenting on their Facebook page again.
Wondered why it wouldnt load for me.....lol
Captain
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 523
# 450
03-06-2014, 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gofasternow View Post
Yo!

You should see ESD, it's crawling with these things! At 2:18 PM EST, I've found 18 of these things (one of them sporting the whinefest title "U.S.S. Reboot Fail"; seriously, grow up). This is being sold, bub.
Would you stop trolling already? It's getting old.
May good management be with you.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:07 AM.