The Icon ship of the Federation for a great number of
Fans. A battleship
Cannot protect Kang on Elite
Can't tank and kill a cube at Kittomere Elite I'n a reasonable amount
Of time doesn't have the firepower to take out the generators and
Transformer then the gate to win the optional
It doesn't have the firepower to be worth it's team slot
On any Elite STF
One of the worst turn rates I'n the game only makes
These problems worse
Some say the ship is fine
I disagree with them 100%
It should be one of the best selling and common
Ships I'n the game but it isn't .
The only reason we see as many as we do is
Because of loyal fans
What you don't see are Gal Rs on Elite STF missions
Because they can't carry there weight and everyone
Knows it.
The ship needs more than just a turn rate buff
It needs a general refit to be the ship it is soposed to be.
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Thats not what i was saying. The galaxy had larger power systems but also a larger drain so the extra power available was not what people make it out to be. By comparison smaller ships with smaller warp cores never seemed to suffer from a lack of power so i put it to you that the amount of surplus energy remains constant in all vessels as a design feature and is not proportionate to the size of the power generator. Think of it like the engine in your car, you can have 2 vehicles with top speeds of 150mph and 0-60 times of 10 seconds but that does not mean that both cars have the same size engine since a lighter smaller vehicle does not need the same amount of power as a larger vehicle to achieve the desired performance. So you could end up with a 4 cylinder machine and an 8 cylinder machine with the same performance characteristics. Converslry you can take that 8 cylinder and jam it into the hole the 4 cylinder used and end up with somthing even faster. Like they did with the defiant.
I can answer that question very well. My car is a 4,100lb older car. I put a 650 horsepower Engine in my car and now I'm beating bikes in races. The sports bikes only weigh a few hundred pounds and would have an advantage on the take off, but my car out accelerated them and surpassed their tops speeds of 186 mph. I put a well powered drivetrain in my car so horse power to weight ratio would not be a problem when competing with newer lighter cars.
The same thing goes for the Galaxy power. The power is capable to of handling size many times its size. Its the only type of ship that has been shown capable of sealing subspace rifts that are enormous. (Enterprise-D, USS Challenger) Ref: All Good Things, Memory Alpha.
the core in the defiant is more likely its the core out of a saber class or maybe a steamrunner. thats still a huge core for a ship that small. but, the core in the defient may very well be galaxy class levels of power, im becoming more and more convinced that in large ships the core is just a secondary power source and mainly just runs the warp drive. on smaller ships that don't have room for large fusion reactors to accompany the impulse drive coil, its likely they are just fed by the plasma generated by the warp core, like everything else on the ship.
the competition with the intrepid was a competition about efficiency. power conversion level, thats the ratio for how much you get out of what you put in, that has nothing to do with the actual power generation. the intrepid core is seriously tiny, no way they could take such a mature piece of equipment and cut its size down to a 5th and have it produce more power then the most powerful active core around in a galaxy class. nothing on a galaxy is old ether. we are talking about less then a decade more advanced here, and dealing with all mature technology. there will be no quantum leaps in power or ability in that short amount of time for weapons, computing, warp cores, anything. break thoughts every now and then? sure bioneural computing, that liquid deuterium core. that might have served a niche purpose in some way but it didn't replace more stranded cores or anything.
its hard to figure out warp cores, what physical factors mater, what % of the ships power is run off them, how much tallness has to do with anything. these are some conclusions i have reached
tallness- might have something to do with long duration use, the connie refit has a core that goes all the way up its neck, the miranda's is 3 of 4 decks high. there does not seem to be a massive difference in power output, and the miranda is a more short range in boarders ship compared to the connie being an explorer. the defient certainty had a not tall core, its a short range ship too.
size of crystal chamber- this proboly has the most to do with power output. the intrepid's core is pretty shrimpy and doesn't really have one. somehow they don't need one and can have mater and antimater mingling together behind future metal/glass. must give good efficiency at the least.
% of the ships power from the core- even though the galaxy has a huge warp core, it looks pretty shrimpy in the cut away. the sov's core is at least a bit taller if i recall correctly, again proboly for long range durability. the sov has at least 2 HUGE impulse fusion reactors as well, and in it's last showing apparently could put up an impressive offense and defense running just off the power they provide, wile moving at full combat speed. the galaxy class has 2, reactors that are at least as big as the 2 the sovereign has, though the sov's exhaust ports look huge, there are basically the same size as the ports on a galaxy's saucer, just at a steep angle. and the main impulse reactor is larger still, it likely has 1.5 to 2 times as much fusion generated power then a soverign has. and thats appropriate, the galaxy is more the twice the volume of a sov.
the gal dwarfs the sov so hard its not even funny. 1 did not replace the other.
other conclusions- on some ships like the defiant, i think a totality of the ships power comes from the warp core, it simply wouldn't have room for impulse engines that doubled as fusion reactors too. thats why its core is so large, it runs everything. on ships like the galaxy or sov, the warp core proboly mainly just powers the warp drive, and is the secondary power to other systems. the sov's core is a bit larger because its the fastest ship, faster then the galaxy class. the core sizes corresponds with the flat out top speed of each.
regarding phasers, length of an array is what maters, not number of arrays. the galaxy's dorsal array has 200 emitters, each emitter acting like a capacitor and holding its own energy. when an array fires you see some or all of the emitters on the array transfer their energy sequentially toward the fireing location on the array, and the power of the shot depends on how many emitters took part of this charging effect.
so... ships with out arrays at all are in a bad way as far as phaser damage potential is concerned, wile the galaxy class is the king of phaser output. also king of torpedo output, being able to fire 10 torpedoes at a time from each bay, or 10 sequentially in a single second. thats just whats been observed, it could likely do more. the number of launchers on the sov that are much smaller and have much less burst potential can only hope to match a galaxy's torpedo salvo capacity, wile only having about half the phaser firepower, due to its longest array being much less then half the length of the longest galaxy array, but having more powerful emitters. even if the type 12 could contribute twice the energy as a type 10, the galaxy would still out gun the sov. on a technology as mature as phaser emitters, theres no way in hell the type 12 can channel twice the energy as a type 10.
and why should the sovereign be more powerful then the galaxy? the sov isn't even in the same league size wise, and wile a higher % of the sov is proboly devoted to tactical capability then a galaxy class is, its still less then half the size of a galaxy. its the size of the galaxy that allows for such massive phaser arrays as well, thats not all wasted space tactically. a ship 10 years newer but less then half the size is not going to be more powerful, thats just preposterous, and thats assuming the design thats 10 years older hasn't been constantly upgraded.
remember, in 3 full array phaser discharges, the enterprise D was able to disintegrate as much volume of a borg cube as there is volume of a galaxy class star ship. the saucer section would have fit nicely in one of those craters. but then thanks to plot railroading it cant obliterate a single bop or a flight of bug ships in a single shot or 3. see all the inconsistency for yourself.
I would just like to point out 2 things. First that its difficult to base any conclusion on what we saw on screen since it varys so much. There are times when the enterprise simply obliterates a target and times when the target simply ignores it. Just in that first video we see how the firepower varied from impressive to innefectual.
Second size isn't everything as most technology tends to get smaller as it advances the origional enterprises warp core took up the entire upper third of the secondary hull. Not saying your wrong but consider that a smaller emitter array made up of more efficient emitters may be equaly as powerful as the longer array. And since the real damage from a directed energy beam happens over time maybe the newer arrays are set up for longer duration charges transfering its energy to the target for a longer duration resulting in more energy on target. We do tend to see the D firing in shorter bursts than the E. Altho this may merely be a byproduct of special effects budgets since we also see longer firing cycles during the dominion war. Which you could argue are refit versions not really comparable to the D but the the D would have had those upgrades at that time anyway.
If you look at the size of the constitution next to the Galaxy and watch Probert's interview on "Star Trek Evolution," then you will see the size of the Enterprise-A warp core, also thinking about the size of the Galaxy's warp core. Keep in mind that the Galaxy has 42 decks.
In this game they tried to give equal power to all ships with the sizes making the difference in performance. In fact to keep this game legit, they need to make things more complicated than that. Ship sizes should dictate to what equipment is shared between ship classes. Also weapon DPS needs to be more balance than current. The reason why so many people rush to get cannons is because beams are made to be weak in this game. That can't be so because in the shows, they have exact same results.
its so nice to find a thread thats not full of defiant, prometheus and sovereign super fanboys for once. they can never accept that their favorite isn't the best at everything, and jump all over everything i posted trying fruitlessly to poke holes in it. ive yet to see any coherent argument that anything i posted is off base, when ever i make a post like that.
Cryptics ship system is just a simple MMO game mechanic.
The only thing they can do is to "bend" it, so Star Trek ships fit in somehow. Especially the Galaxy Class doesn't fit really into this system, because it is a multi purpose ship. So the best thing is to give it something to make it as versatile as possible (but without breaking the game balance). Now that there is the Regent Class which is having a Lt.Cmdr universal, my idea was to give the Galaxy class the same (maybe remove its lt. sc as a tradeoff), just to reflect its versality. the Gama balance surely isn't broken because of the Regent Class, as it wouldn't be if the Galaxy would get a similar BOFF layout IMHO.
Live long and prosper.
It's always fun if the people make proposals or even demand don't even have the slightest clue about the game they're playing. YOU ... you are a prime example!
All T5(+) ships except for the BoPs have the same basic pattern of bridge officers: Cmdr, LCdr, 2xLt, Ens. BoPs lose the Ens slot for their ability to field universal slots, along with a massive reduction in hull and shields. 'Only exception is the Fleet Ning'tao, which has one of its Lt slots updated to LCdr, at the price of having less shields and hull than a shuttle.
That's basics.
And you're asking/demanding to get an LCdr in exchange for an Ens or LT???
And call that not overpowered?
Not only that, you're asking for an LCdr universal!
The only cruisers at the moment fielding a universal LCdr are the Odyssey and the Bortasqu' - and both pay for it by being even worse bricks than the Galaxy-R (well, the Ody can work around that, by buying the 50$ version of the C-store. The Bortasqu' is just bad).
The only other cruiser able to field a LCdr Sci, which is usually considered the holy grail of cruisers, btw, is the Fleet Corsair (which still gets overshadowed by the Fleet Tor'Kaht, so you'll rarely see one of those, even though it's a damn good ship).
And you call that demand not overpowered?
Oh, and ... the regent has an Lt uni, not a LCdr ...
An Lt uni, btw, that in 99.9999999% of cases will just end up as Sci, as the ship has no other Sci slots, and running without HE in PvP is suicide, and in PvP ... well, TSS/PH/HE are still too strong to go without.
Basically, the Regent's uni slot is a noob-trap.
And to kill your "whaaaaw, Galaxy is supposed to be versatile, whaaaaw"-line:
What makes the Galaxy versatile in the show is the fact it's carrying around what's basically a small town: the whole saucer section is made up of laboratories, workshops, storage space, community facilities, meeting rooms, luxury quarters ... and civilian and semi-civilian personal to make use of them.
Its versatatily is based on bringing the right people to the right place at the right time. NOT by some magic ability to transform into a Battle Cruiser.
Just to the contrary, actually: the whole ship is designed to keep that small flying town save! It's tanky. A fortress. Not an assault cruiser!
'Seems you didn't even watch the show you're using for your arguments ...
TL;DR: You're a noob with entitlement issues and no clue about the game or the show. And this whole thread is a travesty.
The Icon ship of the Federation for a great number of
Fans. A battleship
Cannot protect Kang on Elite
Can't tank and kill a cube at Kittomere Elite I'n a reasonable amount
Of time doesn't have the firepower to take out the generators and
Transformer then the gate to win the optional
It doesn't have the firepower to be worth it's team slot
On any Elite STF
One of the worst turn rates I'n the game only makes
These problems worse
Some say the ship is fine
I disagree with them 100%
It should be one of the best selling and common
Ships I'n the game but it isn't .
The only reason we see as many as we do is
Because of loyal fans
What you don't see are Gal Rs on Elite STF missions
Because they can't carry there weight and everyone
Knows it.
The ship needs more than just a turn rate buff
It needs a general refit to be the ship it is soposed to be.
Try running this on the Gal-R:
Front:
1x DBB
1XTorp
2xBA
Rear:
1x Torp
3xBA
weap/shield batts devian item deut burn
2x blue mk xii rcs 2x armor of you choice
best shield capacity booster you can find, Borg console
tac console for energy beam type
HY1,FAW2(or BO2)
have emergency power to engines, aux to inertial dampers, eject warp plasma
in your mix
run 125 in weaps and boost engine power to taste.
you wont be a battleship but youll be throwing some crowd control love
I can answer that question very well. My car is a 4,100lb older car. I put a 650 horsepower Engine in my car and now I'm beating bikes in races. The sports bikes only weigh a few hundred pounds and would have an advantage on the take off, but my car out accelerated them and surpassed their tops speeds of 186 mph. I put a well powered drivetrain in my car so horse power to weight ratio would not be a problem when competing with newer lighter cars.
The same thing goes for the Galaxy power. The power is capable to of handling size many times its size. Its the only type of ship that has been shown capable of sealing subspace rifts that are enormous. (Enterprise-D, USS Challenger) Ref: All Good Things, Memory Alpha.
You are beating middle of the pack, daily driver bikes in DRAG races, not much else with a 4,100 pound car with 650 hp. Giving benefit of the doubt, that's probably mid 11's on a good day with an aggressive rear axle ratio IF (then no 186 top speed on an "older" cars aerodynamics and an engine revving lower than 8,000 rpm). Most run of the mill "sport bikes" run around there, get a stock 'busa and run into the nines stock.
Then comes the stopping or cornering, unless your "old car" is a Ferrari and literally nothing but 4,100 pounds suspension and engine you're not braking or cornering all that well.
The Icon ship of the Federation for a great number of
Fans. A battleship
Cannot protect Kang on Elite
Can't tank and kill a cube at Kittomere Elite I'n a reasonable amount
Of time doesn't have the firepower to take out the generators and
Transformer then the gate to win the optional
It doesn't have the firepower to be worth it's team slot
On any Elite STF
One of the worst turn rates I'n the game only makes
These problems worse
Some say the ship is fine
I disagree with them 100%
It should be one of the best selling and common
Ships I'n the game but it isn't .
The only reason we see as many as we do is
Because of loyal fans
What you don't see are Gal Rs on Elite STF missions
Because they can't carry there weight and everyone
Knows it.
The ship needs more than just a turn rate buff
It needs a general refit to be the ship it is soposed to be.
Hey, count your blessings, the TOS 1701 Constitution Class (you want to talk about a truely 'iconic' Star Trek 'hero ship'?)can't even get a T5 'refit' variant. And before you bring 'ship's age' into the equation, remember the Galaxy Class design is approching 50 years old (in game universe terms.)
If you were going for an aspect of 'realism' here (at least in terms of Star Trek universe consistency) - NEITHER ONE of these ships should be T5.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
the galaxy is only middle aged, they expect to get at least 100 years out of it, they got at least that out of the excelsior. it also still has no peer until the odyssey was launched. not sure what the point of the star cruiser was, there would have been no reason to build something like that with the galaxy of similar size, and then make the odyssey soon after that, that all makes 0 sense. there hasn't been any major tech break through that would be too difficult to incorporate into the galaxy class by 2409 ether, or other ships around its age.
they never went to the trouble of upgrading the the miranda and excelsior with phaser arrays, but kept them around. in the case of the ambassador, i can see it falling to the way side much easier. they would have to rebuild a lot of the saucer section to give it phaser arrays fitting a ship its size. the galaxy does not have that problem.
if capt logan had listened to my insistence on the phaser arrays on the odyssey being as long as possible or at least not all split up, we wouldn't have the galaxy's replacement with phaser arrays as short as a sovereign has :mad:
It's always fun if the people make proposals or even demand don't even have the slightest clue about the game they're playing. YOU ... you are a prime example!
....
TL;DR: You're a noob with entitlement issues and no clue about the game or the show. And this whole thread is a travesty.
All this rude behavior just because i was confusing a Lt.Cmdr with a Lt. universal?
I thought we are just discussing a game here... at least your post was entertaining.
In this game they tried to give equal power to all ships with the sizes making the difference in performance. In fact to keep this game legit, they need to make things more complicated than that. Ship sizes should dictate to what equipment is shared between ship classes. Also weapon DPS needs to be more balance than current. The reason why so many people rush to get cannons is because beams are made to be weak in this game. That can't be so because in the shows, they have exact same results.
What i would like to see is the introduction of different Warp Cores. I always found it a bit odd that all ships generate exactly the same amount of power in this game, if it is a Miranda or Odyssey.
the galaxy is only middle aged, they expect to get at least 100 years out of it, they got at least that out of the excelsior. it also still has no peer until the odyssey was launched. not sure what the point of the star cruiser was, there would have been no reason to build something like that with the galaxy of similar size, and then make the odyssey soon after that, that all makes 0 sense. there hasn't been any major tech break through that would be too difficult to incorporate into the galaxy class by 2409 ether, or other ships around its age.
I think it's the same as with the introduction of the Sovereign, the people in charge just wanted another ship.
In- universe I can understand the introduction of the Star cruiser more or less, i think it was meant a something like a mix between a Galaxy and Intrepid, but cryptics devs weren't consequent enough to give it higher Science BOFF slots, (maybe a Lt.Cmdr Sci, as a tradeoff of its eng.)
On the other Hand i don't see a reason to create the Odyssey, (in - universe) Starfleet just had to refit some ships (star cruiser, Assault Cruiser and Galaxy) to be more extreme. (meaning giving them a better BOFF slot in their field of action.
if capt logan had listened to my insistence on the phaser arrays on the odyssey being as long as possible or at least not all split up, we wouldn't have the galaxy's replacement with phaser arrays as short as a sovereign has :mad:
So much for the devs being experts.
Live long and prosper.
"...'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
This thread can be summed up pretty easily.
"Baaw, the tier 5 galaxy isn't the ship I want it to be."
If you take in the things we learned about ships in DS9, the movies, and Voyager you would be pretty ok with the Galaxy being one of the best tanks in the game. In STFC Geordi clearly states that Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in fleet in reference to a combat situation. Of course it is the modern tactically inclined cruiser.
At least you TNG fans get to have their Enterprise(s) at tier 5.
This thread can be summed up pretty easily.
"Baaw, the tier 5 galaxy isn't the ship I want it to be."
If you take in the things we learned about ships in DS9, the movies, and Voyager you would be pretty ok with the Galaxy being one of the best tanks in the game. In STFC Geordi clearly states that Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in fleet in reference to a combat situation. Of course it is the modern tactically inclined cruiser.
At least you TNG fans get to have their Enterprise(s) at tier 5.
most advanced =/= biggest, most powerful, all that. most advanced trickles down fast as well. the galaxy R is the worst cruiser in the game, it has every disadvantage a cruiser can have with no advantages. if you were capable of doing anything but hitting the space bar and killing npcs that would be painful obvious to you. it's representation in game is the opposite of what it was capable of doing in the show. in canon it had the most firepower and most flexibility, in game it has the least firepower and least flexibility. its like a joke is being played on us, its ridicules.
most advanced =/= biggest, most powerful, all that. most advanced trickles down fast as well. the galaxy R is the worst cruiser in the game, it has every disadvantage a cruiser can have with no advantages. if you were capable of doing anything but hitting the space bar and killing npcs that would be painful obvious to you. it's representation in game is the opposite of what it was capable of doing in the show. in canon it had the most firepower and most flexibility, in game it has the least firepower and least flexibility. its like a joke is being played on us, its ridicules.
For the record I was talking about how the fleet Gal will be one of the best tanks in the game.
As for having the most firepower and most flexibility? I love how TNG fans forget about everything that happened after TNG, like the Defiant and the Enterprise E. Galaxy class vessels are never shown in DS9 as being able to destroy bugs as fast as the defiant. They don't carry quantum torpedos, and Geordi who knew better than an anyone else in the field, recommended the E's presence at the battle of sector 001 because of its overall combat superiority to every other ship in the federation.
Do you really think Geordi was saying they should go because they could replicate some really tasty rations for the survivors. lolfanboyism
I also pvp all the time, I usually get 2nd or third or my team and have only lost one game since I got my fleet K'tinga.
You're comparing a personal handheld computer to a MATTER/ANTIMATTER REACTOR. You might as well say a tiny nuclear reactor designed today that could fit in a phonebooth could produce as much energy as Three Mile Island.
I never said they were I was refuting your claim that 10 years wasn't enough time for rapid advancement. Fact is you are talking about a method of powergeneration that only exists fictionaly and has little to no canonical technical data to back up any assumptions about how it works. So its entirely possible for a physicaly smaller generator to produce a largeramount of energy than a physicaly larger generator. Materials engineering could have advanced far enough to allow for smaller, thiner, or lighter components to be used thus reducing the size and power conversion technology could allow for less loss through conversion allowin for more power generation for less fuel expended. none of that requires a breakthrough in m\am reaction theory just better use of whats available. There are also the other systems like the necells, perhaps those have become more efficient and therefor produce a greater speed for less energy cost.
I can answer that question very well. My car is a 4,100lb older car. I put a 650 horsepower Engine in my car and now I'm beating bikes in races. The sports bikes only weigh a few hundred pounds and would have an advantage on the take off, but my car out accelerated them and surpassed their tops speeds of 186 mph. I put a well powered drivetrain in my car so horse power to weight ratio would not be a problem when competing with newer lighter cars.
The same thing goes for the Galaxy power. The power is capable to of handling size many times its size. Its the only type of ship that has been shown capable of sealing subspace rifts that are enormous. (Enterprise-D, USS Challenger) Ref: All Good Things, Memory Alpha.
I believe I covered your example in an earlier post and this post was in refrence to a seperate conversation. But in general yes IF they had a core that produced many orders of magnitude more power than the standard galaxy core and IF they installed such a thing in the galaxy then yes it could produce hot rod levels of power. but as far as I know such a thing does not exist.
[QUOTE=yreodred;5792311What i would like to see is the introduction of different Warp Cores. I always found it a bit odd that all ships generate exactly the same amount of power in this game, if it is a Miranda or Odyssey.[/QUOTE]
That is a genuinely interesting idea.
As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
the competition with the intrepid was a competition about efficiency. power conversion level, thats the ratio for how much you get out of what you put in, that has nothing to do with the actual power generation. the intrepid core is seriously tiny, no way they could take such a mature piece of equipment and cut its size down to a 5th and have it produce more power then the most powerful active core around in a galaxy class. nothing on a galaxy is old ether. we are talking about less then a decade more advanced here, and dealing with all mature technology. there will be no quantum leaps in power or ability in that short amount of time for weapons, computing, warp cores, anything. break thoughts every now and then? sure bioneural computing, that liquid deuterium core. that might have served a niche purpose in some way but it didn't replace more stranded cores or anything.
its hard to figure out warp cores, what physical factors mater, what % of the ships power is run off them, how much tallness has to do with anything. these are some conclusions i have reached
tallness- might have something to do with long duration use, the connie refit has a core that goes all the way up its neck, the miranda's is 3 of 4 decks high. there does not seem to be a massive difference in power output, and the miranda is a more short range in boarders ship compared to the connie being an explorer. the defient certainty had a not tall core, its a short range ship too.
size of crystal chamber- this proboly has the most to do with power output. the intrepid's core is pretty shrimpy and doesn't really have one. somehow they don't need one and can have mater and antimater mingling together behind future metal/glass. must give good efficiency at the least.
% of the ships power from the core- even though the galaxy has a huge warp core, it looks pretty shrimpy in the cut away. the sov's core is at least a bit taller if i recall correctly, again proboly for long range durability. the sov has at least 2 HUGE impulse fusion reactors as well, and in it's last showing apparently could put up an impressive offense and defense running just off the power they provide, wile moving at full combat speed. the galaxy class has 2, reactors that are at least as big as the 2 the sovereign has, though the sov's exhaust ports look huge, there are basically the same size as the ports on a galaxy's saucer, just at a steep angle. and the main impulse reactor is larger still, it likely has 1.5 to 2 times as much fusion generated power then a soverign has. and thats appropriate, the galaxy is more the twice the volume of a sov.
the gal dwarfs the sov so hard its not even funny. 1 did not replace the other.
other conclusions- on some ships like the defiant, i think a totality of the ships power comes from the warp core, it simply wouldn't have room for impulse engines that doubled as fusion reactors too. thats why its core is so large, it runs everything. on ships like the galaxy or sov, the warp core proboly mainly just powers the warp drive, and is the secondary power to other systems. the sov's core is a bit larger because its the fastest ship, faster then the galaxy class. the core sizes corresponds with the flat out top speed of each.
regarding phasers, length of an array is what maters, not number of arrays. the galaxy's dorsal array has 200 emitters, each emitter acting like a capacitor and holding its own energy. when an array fires you see some or all of the emitters on the array transfer their energy sequentially toward the fireing location on the array, and the power of the shot depends on how many emitters took part of this charging effect.
so... ships with out arrays at all are in a bad way as far as phaser damage potential is concerned, wile the galaxy class is the king of phaser output. also king of torpedo output, being able to fire 10 torpedoes at a time from each bay, or 10 sequentially in a single second. thats just whats been observed, it could likely do more. the number of launchers on the sov that are much smaller and have much less burst potential can only hope to match a galaxy's torpedo salvo capacity, wile only having about half the phaser firepower, due to its longest array being much less then half the length of the longest galaxy array, but having more powerful emitters. even if the type 12 could contribute twice the energy as a type 10, the galaxy would still out gun the sov. on a technology as mature as phaser emitters, theres no way in hell the type 12 can channel twice the energy as a type 10.
and why should the sovereign be more powerful then the galaxy? the sov isn't even in the same league size wise, and wile a higher % of the sov is proboly devoted to tactical capability then a galaxy class is, its still less then half the size of a galaxy. its the size of the galaxy that allows for such massive phaser arrays as well, thats not all wasted space tactically. a ship 10 years newer but less then half the size is not going to be more powerful, thats just preposterous, and thats assuming the design thats 10 years older hasn't been constantly upgraded.
remember, in 3 full array phaser discharges, the enterprise D was able to disintegrate as much volume of a borg cube as there is volume of a galaxy class star ship. the saucer section would have fit nicely in one of those craters. but then thanks to plot railroading it cant obliterate a single bop or a flight of bug ships in a single shot or 3. see all the inconsistency for yourself.
Of all the possible cruiser boff layouts to explore, SOMETHING had to end up being the worst of the lot. Otherwise it'd just be a clone of an existing ship. As luck would have it, the Gal-R wound up being the one with the losing layout. As even the most immature encrustling knows, there must always be one Spathi that picks the short Ta-Puun stick.
But fear not, Galaxy fans. There's a non-fail Galaxy variant out there for you! The AGT 3-engine version offers you all the smooth Galaxy stylings and a setup that doesn't totally suck, all while retaining the classic beached whale handling you know and love.
Ugh, do a little more research. Its official that the Galaxy classes performance against the jem hadar bugs was purposely done in the exact way you saw it. The writers wanted everyone to know that the jem hadar were more technologically advanced than any enemy the federation had gone against excluding the borg. The tech aspect of the face off was at the forefront of their minds during that episode. You can't just shrug stuff like that off as a mistake or effects discrepancy.
Ugh, do a little more research. Its official that the Galaxy classes performance against the jem hadar bugs was purposely done in the exact way you saw it. The writers wanted everyone to know that the jem hadar were more technologically advanced than any enemy the federation had gone against excluding the borg. The tech aspect of the face off was at the forefront of their minds during that episode. You can't just shrug stuff like that off as a mistake or effects discrepancy.
Ugh?
I'm not sure what you are talking about.
The Galaxy Class performance against the Dominion during the war was perfect. 0 losses unless you include novels.
She even one shots a Jem Hadar battlecruiser.
As for your prior post:
For the record I was talking about how the fleet Gal will be one of the best tanks in the game.
I'm thrilled to hear that the Galaxy will be one of the best tanks in a tankless game.
Truly.
As for having the most firepower and most flexibility? I love how TNG fans forget about everything that happened after TNG, easily forgotten like the Defiant little ship with rapid fire phasers... your point is? and the Enterprise E personal fav of mine actually, but still just a large battlecruiser with gimped arrays, not a BB like the Galaxy is. Galaxy class vessels are never shown in DS9 as being able to destroy bugs as fast as the defiant. You're right, they went after bigger game, like the Galor, Keldon and other Dominion Cruisers.
They don't carry quantum torpedos, and Geordi who knew better than an anyone else in the field, recommended the E's presence at the battle of sector 001 because of its overall combat superiority to every other ship in the federation.
Combat superiority is never mentioned.
What is mentioned that she is the most advanced ship in the Fleet.
Advanced does not equal more powerful. A 2013 Honda Accord is much more Advanced than 1993 Dodge Viper. But guess which is more powerful.
Do you really think Geordi was saying they should go because they could replicate some really tasty rations for the survivors. lolfanboyism (lolfanboyism)
I also pvp all the time, I usually get 2nd or third or my team and have only lost one game since I got my fleet K'tinga.
My responses in Red. :eek:
Further more I would like to include a post from a friend from another thread that deals in many ways with the so called "power" issue at hand.
Ilithi_Dragon:
Ah, phaser operations. This is quite interesting.
First, what an array is.
Per the TNG tech manual, which is consistent with the phaser operations in TNG through DS9 (surprise surprise, since it was written by the people who determined the phaser VFX), a phaser array is a long strip of phaser segments with two parts. The main part of each segment which actually generates the phaser energy from the plasma supplied from the reactors is unseen, submerged beneath the hull. The second part is the visible emitter, which we see as part of the array on the surface. Each emitter is linked to its neighbor, and when the phaser array charges each emitter discharges at its set Type wattage (we'll use the tech manual figures for this example, because while inaccurate, they are convenient), passing the discharged energy to the next emitter along the array, which discharges its own energy and passes the collected energy on to the next emitter, and on down the line in sequence to the firing point. This is called the Sequential Discharge Effect, or SDE.
The more emitters in the array, or the more emitters in the segment of the array that discharges, the more energy that will ultimately be discharged for a given emitter discharge time. The energy will also be discharged at a higher wattage.
For example, say we have an array with 100 Type-X emitters discharging at 5.1 MW each, with a pre-fire cycle (or 'charge-up') time of 0.5 second, with one emitter discharging at a time.
Since the SDE will take 0.5 second to move from the tips of the array to the central firing point, it takes the SDE 0.5 second to move across 50 emitters, so each emitter discharges for 0.5 second / 50 emitters = 0.01 second discharge per emitter.
Since each emitter discharges at 5.1 MW, a 0.01 second discharge will yield a discharge-per-emitter of 0.051 MJ.
Multiply that by 100 emitters and you have a total energy discharge of 5.1 MJ.
Most SDEs actually have multiple emitters discharging simultaneously, however, not just one on each side of the array. Let's take the same array with the same pre-fire cycle time of 0.5 second, but instead of 1 emitter discharging on each 'side', there are 10 emitters discharging simultaneously discharging on each 'side'.
This has the end result of increasing the emitter discharge time, and thus the ultimate discharge yield, by a factor of 10 (this is done without increasing the pre-fire cycle time at the cost of increasing the energy draw from the reactor; a long array with a weak reactor can achieve the same raw energy discharge as an equal array with a strong reactor by simply increasing the pre-fire cycle time, though logically there are practical hardware endurance limits to this).
The formula for this is as follows:
0.5 second SDE time / (100 emitters in array / 2) * 10 emitters discharging simultaneously = 0.1 second emitter discharge time
0.1 second emitter discharge time * 5.1 MW emitter discharge rate = 0.51 MJ discharge per emitter
0.51 MJ discharge per emitter * 100 emitters discharged in array = 51 MJ total discharge.
This main SDE charge is also discharged in the same amount of time it takes of the SDE glow to move across a single emitter, or the discharge time of a single emitter. This means that the wattage of any main SDE blast ALWAYS works out to equal the wattage of the emitter type times the number of emitters in the array (510 MW in this example case).
From a game perspective, I would imagine that a length of array could be given an emitter type, which would include the number of emitters per length of array (for example, the Type-X emitter on a Galaxy class is 0.8554 meters wide along the length of the array, the Type-XII emitter on the Sovereign class is 0.375 meters along the length of the array), and the wattage of each emitter (5.1 MW and 7.2 MW example outputs for Type-X and Type-XII emitters, respectively), with the firing sequence having an adjustable pre-fire cycle time and per-shot yield, with heat build-up generated by emitter firing time (thus causing heat build-up from faster rates of fire, faster firing cycles, and more powerful shots), a cool-down time for the emitters, would yield the most accurate simulation results. A reserve capacitor that stores energy for the phaser arrays could also be added, to allow for one or a handful of heavy-hitting shots above what the reactor can actually supply directly (which could also be adjusted with power management).
Ugh, do a little more research. Its official that the Galaxy classes performance against the jem hadar bugs was purposely done in the exact way you saw it. The writers wanted everyone to know that the jem hadar were more technologically advanced than any enemy the federation had gone against excluding the borg. The tech aspect of the face off was at the forefront of their minds during that episode. You can't just shrug stuff like that off as a mistake or effects discrepancy.
that battle is indefensible, the odyssey didn't even fire until the bugs were underneath its saucer. like i said with those vids i posted in the quoted post above, if a galaxy opened fire like this in every battle it lost, we never would have seen it lose on screen.
im going by its best showing, disintegrating more volume of a cube then there is volume of the enterprise in 3 shots, or the torpedo and phaser barrage against the husnock warship. not its worse showing, getting its TRIBBLE kicked and not fighting back against a bop or basically not putting up a fight against 3 bug ships 1/100 its size. any instance when it holds back from its best showing when the ship is in danger is a plot hole. its plot railroading by the writers.
I'm not sure what you are talking about.
The Galaxy Class performance against the Dominion during the war was perfect. 0 losses unless you include novels.
She even one shots a Jem Hadar battlecruiser.
I have watched every battle shown in the dominion war multiple times, never is a galaxy class shown one offing a dominion battleship or dreadnaught. In fact, they never one shot a single ship in the war. The Defiant destroys ships with single bursts on multiple occasions, with both pulse phasers and quantum torpedoes. A couple BOP shots combined with a couple defiant bursts destroy an entire dominion battle cruiser in Sisko's run, perhaps thats the scene you are confusing with a galaxy class.
As for your jolly edit of my post, the incorrect assumption there was that the sovereign is my favorite ship, that would be the connie refit, but the sovy is third on my fav enterprise design list, so you were kind of close. Finally, the Odyssey was in fact destroyed by the Dominion, it was the first battle of the factions. So the galaxy is actually 0/1 against the dominion.
Your wall of blue text is also nothing but fanon, it may come from a technical manuel or something, but that sadly does not make it fact. Also, there is no technical manuel with the deets on sovy phasers, so the argument isn't even complete.
that battle is indefensible, the odyssey didn't even fire until the bugs were underneath its saucer. like i said with those vids i posted in the quoted post above, if a galaxy opened fire like this in every battle it lost, we never would have seen it lose on screen.
im going by its best showing, disintegrating more volume of a cube then there is volume of the enterprise in 3 shots, or the torpedo and phaser barrage against the husnock warship. not its worse showing, getting its TRIBBLE kicked and not fighting back against a bop or basically not putting up a fight against 3 bug ships 1/100 its size. any instance when it holds back from its best showing when the ship is in danger is a plot hole. its plot railroading by the writers.
Yes you are going by its best showing, not its average. That should disqualify what you have said by itself, but let me take things a bit further with my previous statements. Technical manuels are not canon. The writers may be evil or stupid in your eyes, but what they put in star trek becomes canon whether you like it or not. The odyssey was being ripped apart and losing function in many systems during the brief time the battle waged on, they could barely even fire phasers.
The Enterprise E is the most important ship we could have at the most important battle in federation history, but dont take my word for it.
Ilithi_Dragon:
Ah, phaser operations. This is quite interesting.
First, what an array is.
Per the TNG tech manual, which is consistent with the phaser operations in TNG through DS9 (surprise surprise, since it was written by the people who determined the phaser VFX), a phaser array is a long strip of phaser segments with two parts. The main part of each segment which actually generates the phaser energy from the plasma supplied from the reactors is unseen, submerged beneath the hull. The second part is the visible emitter, which we see as part of the array on the surface. Each emitter is linked to its neighbor, and when the phaser array charges each emitter discharges at its set Type wattage (we'll use the tech manual figures for this example, because while inaccurate, they are convenient), passing the discharged energy to the next emitter along the array, which discharges its own energy and passes the collected energy on to the next emitter, and on down the line in sequence to the firing point. This is called the Sequential Discharge Effect, or SDE.
The more emitters in the array, or the more emitters in the segment of the array that discharges, the more energy that will ultimately be discharged for a given emitter discharge time. The energy will also be discharged at a higher wattage.
For example, say we have an array with 100 Type-X emitters discharging at 5.1 MW each, with a pre-fire cycle (or 'charge-up') time of 0.5 second, with one emitter discharging at a time.
Since the SDE will take 0.5 second to move from the tips of the array to the central firing point, it takes the SDE 0.5 second to move across 50 emitters, so each emitter discharges for 0.5 second / 50 emitters = 0.01 second discharge per emitter.
Since each emitter discharges at 5.1 MW, a 0.01 second discharge will yield a discharge-per-emitter of 0.051 MJ.
Multiply that by 100 emitters and you have a total energy discharge of 5.1 MJ.
Most SDEs actually have multiple emitters discharging simultaneously, however, not just one on each side of the array. Let's take the same array with the same pre-fire cycle time of 0.5 second, but instead of 1 emitter discharging on each 'side', there are 10 emitters discharging simultaneously discharging on each 'side'.
This has the end result of increasing the emitter discharge time, and thus the ultimate discharge yield, by a factor of 10 (this is done without increasing the pre-fire cycle time at the cost of increasing the energy draw from the reactor; a long array with a weak reactor can achieve the same raw energy discharge as an equal array with a strong reactor by simply increasing the pre-fire cycle time, though logically there are practical hardware endurance limits to this).
The formula for this is as follows:
0.5 second SDE time / (100 emitters in array / 2) * 10 emitters discharging simultaneously = 0.1 second emitter discharge time
0.1 second emitter discharge time * 5.1 MW emitter discharge rate = 0.51 MJ discharge per emitter
0.51 MJ discharge per emitter * 100 emitters discharged in array = 51 MJ total discharge.
This main SDE charge is also discharged in the same amount of time it takes of the SDE glow to move across a single emitter, or the discharge time of a single emitter. This means that the wattage of any main SDE blast ALWAYS works out to equal the wattage of the emitter type times the number of emitters in the array (510 MW in this example case).
From a game perspective, I would imagine that a length of array could be given an emitter type, which would include the number of emitters per length of array (for example, the Type-X emitter on a Galaxy class is 0.8554 meters wide along the length of the array, the Type-XII emitter on the Sovereign class is 0.375 meters along the length of the array), and the wattage of each emitter (5.1 MW and 7.2 MW example outputs for Type-X and Type-XII emitters, respectively), with the firing sequence having an adjustable pre-fire cycle time and per-shot yield, with heat build-up generated by emitter firing time (thus causing heat build-up from faster rates of fire, faster firing cycles, and more powerful shots), a cool-down time for the emitters, would yield the most accurate simulation results. A reserve capacitor that stores energy for the phaser arrays could also be added, to allow for one or a handful of heavy-hitting shots above what the reactor can actually supply directly (which could also be adjusted with power management).
Thats the way I figured it worked for arrays. Altho technicaly doesn't that make it a phased array since each part is fully capeable of independant operation but are linked together to perform above individual limitations?
As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Your wall of blue text is also nothing but fanon, it may come from a technical manuel or something, but that sadly does not make it fact. Also, there is no technical manuel with the deets on sovy phasers, so the argument isn't even complete.
according to a quote of the directer of viacom, tech manuals written by the creators of the show are held in the same regard as the canon its self. but what does he know. the sov uses phaser arrays with a slightly newer grade of emitter, they function exactly the same.
all thats certain is that the more emitters there are in an array, the more powerful the arrays best shot can be. emitters have an additive effect on the power output. the SDE theory is simply very likely, with no evidence against it being correct.
Yes you are going by its best showing, not its average. That should disqualify what you have said by itself, but let me take things a bit further with my previous statements. Technical manuels are not canon. The writers may be evil or stupid in your eyes, but what they put in star trek becomes canon whether you like it or not. The odyssey was being ripped apart and losing function in many systems during the brief time the battle waged on, they could barely even fire phasers.
The Enterprise E is the most important ship we could have at the most important battle in federation history, but dont take my word for it.
disqualify? thats not how canon works. you cant explain away the best showing like you can the worst. oh yes, against the bop, the bug ships, and the handful of ferengi in a few bops capturing the enterprise, that can all be blamed on a stupefying level of incompetence.
every time a galaxy lost, it was because the plot demanded it. every time a galaxy was able to flex its muscles, it was able to do it against an invincible target. there is no denying that. at the same time the defiant and voyager were written as the underdogs, because they actually were. they finally had ships they could write underdog stories for like they always wanted, no longer did they have to make the federation flagship the underdog every story. :rolleyes:
So a guy in charge of the company in charge of the company that makes star trek said they are canon. I did not know that, thanks for that bit. But at the same time the writers and people actually in charge of star trek the work of fiction did not consider them canon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon
In this case I will believe in the people who actually molded the world of Star Trek and not some hokey pokey dude trying to help sell some merchandise. Besides, there is still no data on what phasers and power levels the sovereign class uses. So any sort of mathematical comparison is fundamentally flawed. All we can do is trust Geordis words.
I didn't use the word disqualify in any reference to the word canon, when taking notes in an effort to support a hypothesis you can't just look at the choice examples, you have to observe all the data you can. There could be all sorts of reasons different combative methods were used in different episodes. You are only choosing to measure the Galaxy class by its greatest accomplishments, and deliberately obstructing reference to anything else. Thats the furthest end you could be from objectivity.
Oh and every time a Galaxy lived was because the plot demanded it, what a stupid argument.
So a guy in charge of the company in charge of the company that makes star trek said they are canon. I did not know that, thanks for that bit. But at the same time the writers and people actually in charge of star trek the work of fiction did not consider them canon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon
In this case I will believe in the people who actually molded the world of Star Trek and not some hokey pokey dude trying to help sell some merchandise. Besides, there is still no data on what phasers and power levels the sovereign class uses. So any sort of mathematical comparison is fundamentally flawed. All we can do is trust Geordis words.
I didn't use the word disqualify in any reference to the word canon, when taking notes in an effort to support a hypothesis you can't just look at the choice examples, you have to observe all the data you can. There could be all sorts of reasons different combative methods were used in different episodes. You are only choosing to measure the Galaxy class by its greatest accomplishments, and deliberately obstructing reference to anything else. Thats the furthest end you could be from objectivity.
Oh and every time a Galaxy lived was because the plot demanded it, what a stupid argument.
regardless of what some guy said, the tech manual was made by the person that overseas tech consistency on the show. he creates canon, and he created the tech manual.
you used the word disqualify on an instance that you arbitrarily think doesn't count. the instances were the galaxy fights arent numbers you can add up and then divide, thay are set in stone occurrences. the best showing is the base line, period. a poorer showing for no good reason is an anomaly. if it didn't fight to its observed potential and lost, something is very wrong. does this really need explaining?
Maybe they should turn the Galaxys Lt science just into a Lt universal. So it would be just like the Nebula Class more versatile and useful.
Although there are other and better ships than the nebula in the Game, it is still much more useable as the Galaxy Class. (Btw. The universal Lt. has nothing to do with the mission pod, other ships have universal BOFFs too without having anything like a mission pod.)
I was just testing different kinds of Galaxy BOFF builds but no matter what you do one Lt. tactical is just too little. I could even live with this ship having just 2 tac consoles, but one Lt. tactical is just not acceptable in my opinion.
Compared to other ships like a single Galor class (which didn't pose a thread in the series) the Galaxy Class offensive capabilities are simply underpowered.
Let me just compare the Nebula and Galaxy BOFF layout.
I would be willing to give up the Engineering Ensign and Science Lieutenant in exchange of a universal Lieutenant.
Curiously no one is raging about having the Nebula a Lt. Universal althrough it is just as old as the Galaxy Class (or even a bit older). No one seems to be bothered that this ship is much more versatile and useable than a Galaxy Class.
The same is to be said about the Ferengi D'Kora or Cardassian Galor which are at least as old as the Galaxy Class. No one seems to be bothered that those ships have a much better BOFF & Console layout than a Galaxy. (I was seriously thinking about quitting when i saw a FERENGI marauder having more attack power than a Galaxy Class. The devs must have some bizarre sense of humor.)
IMHO, the devs should just release a "Mirror Galaxy Class" with the BOFF & Console layout of a Ferengi D'Kora.
Live long and prosper.
"...'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
Comments
Fans. A battleship
Cannot protect Kang on Elite
Can't tank and kill a cube at Kittomere Elite I'n a reasonable amount
Of time doesn't have the firepower to take out the generators and
Transformer then the gate to win the optional
It doesn't have the firepower to be worth it's team slot
On any Elite STF
One of the worst turn rates I'n the game only makes
These problems worse
Some say the ship is fine
I disagree with them 100%
It should be one of the best selling and common
Ships I'n the game but it isn't .
The only reason we see as many as we do is
Because of loyal fans
What you don't see are Gal Rs on Elite STF missions
Because they can't carry there weight and everyone
Knows it.
The ship needs more than just a turn rate buff
It needs a general refit to be the ship it is soposed to be.
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
I can answer that question very well. My car is a 4,100lb older car. I put a 650 horsepower Engine in my car and now I'm beating bikes in races. The sports bikes only weigh a few hundred pounds and would have an advantage on the take off, but my car out accelerated them and surpassed their tops speeds of 186 mph. I put a well powered drivetrain in my car so horse power to weight ratio would not be a problem when competing with newer lighter cars.
The same thing goes for the Galaxy power. The power is capable to of handling size many times its size. Its the only type of ship that has been shown capable of sealing subspace rifts that are enormous. (Enterprise-D, USS Challenger) Ref: All Good Things, Memory Alpha.
you couldn't of said it better.
If you look at the size of the constitution next to the Galaxy and watch Probert's interview on "Star Trek Evolution," then you will see the size of the Enterprise-A warp core, also thinking about the size of the Galaxy's warp core. Keep in mind that the Galaxy has 42 decks.
its so nice to find a thread thats not full of defiant, prometheus and sovereign super fanboys for once. they can never accept that their favorite isn't the best at everything, and jump all over everything i posted trying fruitlessly to poke holes in it. ive yet to see any coherent argument that anything i posted is off base, when ever i make a post like that.
It's always fun if the people make proposals or even demand don't even have the slightest clue about the game they're playing. YOU ... you are a prime example!
All T5(+) ships except for the BoPs have the same basic pattern of bridge officers: Cmdr, LCdr, 2xLt, Ens. BoPs lose the Ens slot for their ability to field universal slots, along with a massive reduction in hull and shields. 'Only exception is the Fleet Ning'tao, which has one of its Lt slots updated to LCdr, at the price of having less shields and hull than a shuttle.
That's basics.
And you're asking/demanding to get an LCdr in exchange for an Ens or LT???
And call that not overpowered?
Not only that, you're asking for an LCdr universal!
The only cruisers at the moment fielding a universal LCdr are the Odyssey and the Bortasqu' - and both pay for it by being even worse bricks than the Galaxy-R (well, the Ody can work around that, by buying the 50$ version of the C-store. The Bortasqu' is just bad).
The only other cruiser able to field a LCdr Sci, which is usually considered the holy grail of cruisers, btw, is the Fleet Corsair (which still gets overshadowed by the Fleet Tor'Kaht, so you'll rarely see one of those, even though it's a damn good ship).
And you call that demand not overpowered?
Oh, and ... the regent has an Lt uni, not a LCdr ...
An Lt uni, btw, that in 99.9999999% of cases will just end up as Sci, as the ship has no other Sci slots, and running without HE in PvP is suicide, and in PvP ... well, TSS/PH/HE are still too strong to go without.
Basically, the Regent's uni slot is a noob-trap.
And to kill your "whaaaaw, Galaxy is supposed to be versatile, whaaaaw"-line:
What makes the Galaxy versatile in the show is the fact it's carrying around what's basically a small town: the whole saucer section is made up of laboratories, workshops, storage space, community facilities, meeting rooms, luxury quarters ... and civilian and semi-civilian personal to make use of them.
Its versatatily is based on bringing the right people to the right place at the right time. NOT by some magic ability to transform into a Battle Cruiser.
Just to the contrary, actually: the whole ship is designed to keep that small flying town save! It's tanky. A fortress. Not an assault cruiser!
'Seems you didn't even watch the show you're using for your arguments ...
TL;DR: You're a noob with entitlement issues and no clue about the game or the show. And this whole thread is a travesty.
Try running this on the Gal-R:
Front:
1x DBB
1XTorp
2xBA
Rear:
1x Torp
3xBA
weap/shield batts devian item deut burn
2x blue mk xii rcs 2x armor of you choice
best shield capacity booster you can find, Borg console
tac console for energy beam type
HY1,FAW2(or BO2)
have emergency power to engines, aux to inertial dampers, eject warp plasma
in your mix
run 125 in weaps and boost engine power to taste.
you wont be a battleship but youll be throwing some crowd control love
You are beating middle of the pack, daily driver bikes in DRAG races, not much else with a 4,100 pound car with 650 hp. Giving benefit of the doubt, that's probably mid 11's on a good day with an aggressive rear axle ratio IF (then no 186 top speed on an "older" cars aerodynamics and an engine revving lower than 8,000 rpm). Most run of the mill "sport bikes" run around there, get a stock 'busa and run into the nines stock.
Then comes the stopping or cornering, unless your "old car" is a Ferrari and literally nothing but 4,100 pounds suspension and engine you're not braking or cornering all that well.
Hey, count your blessings, the TOS 1701 Constitution Class (you want to talk about a truely 'iconic' Star Trek 'hero ship'?)can't even get a T5 'refit' variant. And before you bring 'ship's age' into the equation, remember the Galaxy Class design is approching 50 years old (in game universe terms.)
If you were going for an aspect of 'realism' here (at least in terms of Star Trek universe consistency) - NEITHER ONE of these ships should be T5.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
they never went to the trouble of upgrading the the miranda and excelsior with phaser arrays, but kept them around. in the case of the ambassador, i can see it falling to the way side much easier. they would have to rebuild a lot of the saucer section to give it phaser arrays fitting a ship its size. the galaxy does not have that problem.
if capt logan had listened to my insistence on the phaser arrays on the odyssey being as long as possible or at least not all split up, we wouldn't have the galaxy's replacement with phaser arrays as short as a sovereign has :mad:
I thought we are just discussing a game here... at least your post was entertaining.
What i would like to see is the introduction of different Warp Cores. I always found it a bit odd that all ships generate exactly the same amount of power in this game, if it is a Miranda or Odyssey.
I think it's the same as with the introduction of the Sovereign, the people in charge just wanted another ship.
In- universe I can understand the introduction of the Star cruiser more or less, i think it was meant a something like a mix between a Galaxy and Intrepid, but cryptics devs weren't consequent enough to give it higher Science BOFF slots, (maybe a Lt.Cmdr Sci, as a tradeoff of its eng.)
On the other Hand i don't see a reason to create the Odyssey, (in - universe) Starfleet just had to refit some ships (star cruiser, Assault Cruiser and Galaxy) to be more extreme. (meaning giving them a better BOFF slot in their field of action. So much for the devs being experts.
Live long and prosper.
"Baaw, the tier 5 galaxy isn't the ship I want it to be."
If you take in the things we learned about ships in DS9, the movies, and Voyager you would be pretty ok with the Galaxy being one of the best tanks in the game. In STFC Geordi clearly states that Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in fleet in reference to a combat situation. Of course it is the modern tactically inclined cruiser.
At least you TNG fans get to have their Enterprise(s) at tier 5.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
most advanced =/= biggest, most powerful, all that. most advanced trickles down fast as well. the galaxy R is the worst cruiser in the game, it has every disadvantage a cruiser can have with no advantages. if you were capable of doing anything but hitting the space bar and killing npcs that would be painful obvious to you. it's representation in game is the opposite of what it was capable of doing in the show. in canon it had the most firepower and most flexibility, in game it has the least firepower and least flexibility. its like a joke is being played on us, its ridicules.
For the record I was talking about how the fleet Gal will be one of the best tanks in the game.
As for having the most firepower and most flexibility? I love how TNG fans forget about everything that happened after TNG, like the Defiant and the Enterprise E. Galaxy class vessels are never shown in DS9 as being able to destroy bugs as fast as the defiant. They don't carry quantum torpedos, and Geordi who knew better than an anyone else in the field, recommended the E's presence at the battle of sector 001 because of its overall combat superiority to every other ship in the federation.
Do you really think Geordi was saying they should go because they could replicate some really tasty rations for the survivors. lolfanboyism
I also pvp all the time, I usually get 2nd or third or my team and have only lost one game since I got my fleet K'tinga.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
I never said they were I was refuting your claim that 10 years wasn't enough time for rapid advancement. Fact is you are talking about a method of powergeneration that only exists fictionaly and has little to no canonical technical data to back up any assumptions about how it works. So its entirely possible for a physicaly smaller generator to produce a largeramount of energy than a physicaly larger generator. Materials engineering could have advanced far enough to allow for smaller, thiner, or lighter components to be used thus reducing the size and power conversion technology could allow for less loss through conversion allowin for more power generation for less fuel expended. none of that requires a breakthrough in m\am reaction theory just better use of whats available. There are also the other systems like the necells, perhaps those have become more efficient and therefor produce a greater speed for less energy cost.
I believe I covered your example in an earlier post and this post was in refrence to a seperate conversation. But in general yes IF they had a core that produced many orders of magnitude more power than the standard galaxy core and IF they installed such a thing in the galaxy then yes it could produce hot rod levels of power. but as far as I know such a thing does not exist.
[QUOTE=yreodred;5792311What i would like to see is the introduction of different Warp Cores. I always found it a bit odd that all ships generate exactly the same amount of power in this game, if it is a Miranda or Odyssey.[/QUOTE]
That is a genuinely interesting idea.
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
Now this is more like it!
Nice to see another who knows these things.
(Quoted because its worth knowing)
But fear not, Galaxy fans. There's a non-fail Galaxy variant out there for you! The AGT 3-engine version offers you all the smooth Galaxy stylings and a setup that doesn't totally suck, all while retaining the classic beached whale handling you know and love.
Ugh, do a little more research. Its official that the Galaxy classes performance against the jem hadar bugs was purposely done in the exact way you saw it. The writers wanted everyone to know that the jem hadar were more technologically advanced than any enemy the federation had gone against excluding the borg. The tech aspect of the face off was at the forefront of their minds during that episode. You can't just shrug stuff like that off as a mistake or effects discrepancy.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
Ugh?
I'm not sure what you are talking about.
The Galaxy Class performance against the Dominion during the war was perfect. 0 losses unless you include novels.
She even one shots a Jem Hadar battlecruiser.
As for your prior post:
My responses in Red. :eek:
Further more I would like to include a post from a friend from another thread that deals in many ways with the so called "power" issue at hand.
Ilithi_Dragon:
Ah, phaser operations. This is quite interesting.
First, what an array is.
Per the TNG tech manual, which is consistent with the phaser operations in TNG through DS9 (surprise surprise, since it was written by the people who determined the phaser VFX), a phaser array is a long strip of phaser segments with two parts. The main part of each segment which actually generates the phaser energy from the plasma supplied from the reactors is unseen, submerged beneath the hull. The second part is the visible emitter, which we see as part of the array on the surface. Each emitter is linked to its neighbor, and when the phaser array charges each emitter discharges at its set Type wattage (we'll use the tech manual figures for this example, because while inaccurate, they are convenient), passing the discharged energy to the next emitter along the array, which discharges its own energy and passes the collected energy on to the next emitter, and on down the line in sequence to the firing point. This is called the Sequential Discharge Effect, or SDE.
The more emitters in the array, or the more emitters in the segment of the array that discharges, the more energy that will ultimately be discharged for a given emitter discharge time. The energy will also be discharged at a higher wattage.
For example, say we have an array with 100 Type-X emitters discharging at 5.1 MW each, with a pre-fire cycle (or 'charge-up') time of 0.5 second, with one emitter discharging at a time.
Since the SDE will take 0.5 second to move from the tips of the array to the central firing point, it takes the SDE 0.5 second to move across 50 emitters, so each emitter discharges for 0.5 second / 50 emitters = 0.01 second discharge per emitter.
Since each emitter discharges at 5.1 MW, a 0.01 second discharge will yield a discharge-per-emitter of 0.051 MJ.
Multiply that by 100 emitters and you have a total energy discharge of 5.1 MJ.
Most SDEs actually have multiple emitters discharging simultaneously, however, not just one on each side of the array. Let's take the same array with the same pre-fire cycle time of 0.5 second, but instead of 1 emitter discharging on each 'side', there are 10 emitters discharging simultaneously discharging on each 'side'.
This has the end result of increasing the emitter discharge time, and thus the ultimate discharge yield, by a factor of 10 (this is done without increasing the pre-fire cycle time at the cost of increasing the energy draw from the reactor; a long array with a weak reactor can achieve the same raw energy discharge as an equal array with a strong reactor by simply increasing the pre-fire cycle time, though logically there are practical hardware endurance limits to this).
The formula for this is as follows:
0.5 second SDE time / (100 emitters in array / 2) * 10 emitters discharging simultaneously = 0.1 second emitter discharge time
0.1 second emitter discharge time * 5.1 MW emitter discharge rate = 0.51 MJ discharge per emitter
0.51 MJ discharge per emitter * 100 emitters discharged in array = 51 MJ total discharge.
This main SDE charge is also discharged in the same amount of time it takes of the SDE glow to move across a single emitter, or the discharge time of a single emitter. This means that the wattage of any main SDE blast ALWAYS works out to equal the wattage of the emitter type times the number of emitters in the array (510 MW in this example case).
From a game perspective, I would imagine that a length of array could be given an emitter type, which would include the number of emitters per length of array (for example, the Type-X emitter on a Galaxy class is 0.8554 meters wide along the length of the array, the Type-XII emitter on the Sovereign class is 0.375 meters along the length of the array), and the wattage of each emitter (5.1 MW and 7.2 MW example outputs for Type-X and Type-XII emitters, respectively), with the firing sequence having an adjustable pre-fire cycle time and per-shot yield, with heat build-up generated by emitter firing time (thus causing heat build-up from faster rates of fire, faster firing cycles, and more powerful shots), a cool-down time for the emitters, would yield the most accurate simulation results. A reserve capacitor that stores energy for the phaser arrays could also be added, to allow for one or a handful of heavy-hitting shots above what the reactor can actually supply directly (which could also be adjusted with power management).
that battle is indefensible, the odyssey didn't even fire until the bugs were underneath its saucer. like i said with those vids i posted in the quoted post above, if a galaxy opened fire like this in every battle it lost, we never would have seen it lose on screen.
im going by its best showing, disintegrating more volume of a cube then there is volume of the enterprise in 3 shots, or the torpedo and phaser barrage against the husnock warship. not its worse showing, getting its TRIBBLE kicked and not fighting back against a bop or basically not putting up a fight against 3 bug ships 1/100 its size. any instance when it holds back from its best showing when the ship is in danger is a plot hole. its plot railroading by the writers.
I have watched every battle shown in the dominion war multiple times, never is a galaxy class shown one offing a dominion battleship or dreadnaught. In fact, they never one shot a single ship in the war. The Defiant destroys ships with single bursts on multiple occasions, with both pulse phasers and quantum torpedoes. A couple BOP shots combined with a couple defiant bursts destroy an entire dominion battle cruiser in Sisko's run, perhaps thats the scene you are confusing with a galaxy class.
As for your jolly edit of my post, the incorrect assumption there was that the sovereign is my favorite ship, that would be the connie refit, but the sovy is third on my fav enterprise design list, so you were kind of close. Finally, the Odyssey was in fact destroyed by the Dominion, it was the first battle of the factions. So the galaxy is actually 0/1 against the dominion.
Your wall of blue text is also nothing but fanon, it may come from a technical manuel or something, but that sadly does not make it fact. Also, there is no technical manuel with the deets on sovy phasers, so the argument isn't even complete.
Yes you are going by its best showing, not its average. That should disqualify what you have said by itself, but let me take things a bit further with my previous statements. Technical manuels are not canon. The writers may be evil or stupid in your eyes, but what they put in star trek becomes canon whether you like it or not. The odyssey was being ripped apart and losing function in many systems during the brief time the battle waged on, they could barely even fire phasers.
The Enterprise E is the most important ship we could have at the most important battle in federation history, but dont take my word for it.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
Thats the way I figured it worked for arrays. Altho technicaly doesn't that make it a phased array since each part is fully capeable of independant operation but are linked together to perform above individual limitations?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
according to a quote of the directer of viacom, tech manuals written by the creators of the show are held in the same regard as the canon its self. but what does he know. the sov uses phaser arrays with a slightly newer grade of emitter, they function exactly the same.
all thats certain is that the more emitters there are in an array, the more powerful the arrays best shot can be. emitters have an additive effect on the power output. the SDE theory is simply very likely, with no evidence against it being correct.
disqualify? thats not how canon works. you cant explain away the best showing like you can the worst. oh yes, against the bop, the bug ships, and the handful of ferengi in a few bops capturing the enterprise, that can all be blamed on a stupefying level of incompetence.
every time a galaxy lost, it was because the plot demanded it. every time a galaxy was able to flex its muscles, it was able to do it against an invincible target. there is no denying that. at the same time the defiant and voyager were written as the underdogs, because they actually were. they finally had ships they could write underdog stories for like they always wanted, no longer did they have to make the federation flagship the underdog every story. :rolleyes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon
In this case I will believe in the people who actually molded the world of Star Trek and not some hokey pokey dude trying to help sell some merchandise. Besides, there is still no data on what phasers and power levels the sovereign class uses. So any sort of mathematical comparison is fundamentally flawed. All we can do is trust Geordis words.
I didn't use the word disqualify in any reference to the word canon, when taking notes in an effort to support a hypothesis you can't just look at the choice examples, you have to observe all the data you can. There could be all sorts of reasons different combative methods were used in different episodes. You are only choosing to measure the Galaxy class by its greatest accomplishments, and deliberately obstructing reference to anything else. Thats the furthest end you could be from objectivity.
Oh and every time a Galaxy lived was because the plot demanded it, what a stupid argument.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
regardless of what some guy said, the tech manual was made by the person that overseas tech consistency on the show. he creates canon, and he created the tech manual.
you used the word disqualify on an instance that you arbitrarily think doesn't count. the instances were the galaxy fights arent numbers you can add up and then divide, thay are set in stone occurrences. the best showing is the base line, period. a poorer showing for no good reason is an anomaly. if it didn't fight to its observed potential and lost, something is very wrong. does this really need explaining?
Although there are other and better ships than the nebula in the Game, it is still much more useable as the Galaxy Class.
(Btw. The universal Lt. has nothing to do with the mission pod, other ships have universal BOFFs too without having anything like a mission pod.)
I was just testing different kinds of Galaxy BOFF builds but no matter what you do one Lt. tactical is just too little. I could even live with this ship having just 2 tac consoles, but one Lt. tactical is just not acceptable in my opinion.
Compared to other ships like a single Galor class (which didn't pose a thread in the series) the Galaxy Class offensive capabilities are simply underpowered.
Let me just compare the Nebula and Galaxy BOFF layout.
Nebula
Tactical: Lieutenant
Engineering: Lt. Cmdr.
Science: Commander
Science: Ensign
Universal: Lieutenant
Galaxy Class
Tactical: Lieutenant
Engineering: Commander
Engineering: Lt. Cmdr.
Engineering: Ensign
Science: Lieutenant
I would be willing to give up the Engineering Ensign and Science Lieutenant in exchange of a universal Lieutenant.
Curiously no one is raging about having the Nebula a Lt. Universal althrough it is just as old as the Galaxy Class (or even a bit older). No one seems to be bothered that this ship is much more versatile and useable than a Galaxy Class.
The same is to be said about the Ferengi D'Kora or Cardassian Galor which are at least as old as the Galaxy Class. No one seems to be bothered that those ships have a much better BOFF & Console layout than a Galaxy.
(I was seriously thinking about quitting when i saw a FERENGI marauder having more attack power than a Galaxy Class. The devs must have some bizarre sense of humor.)
IMHO, the devs should just release a "Mirror Galaxy Class" with the BOFF & Console layout of a Ferengi D'Kora.
Live long and prosper.