Why can't they just create a Mirror universe version of the Galaxy Class with the Console/BOFF layout of the Ambassador or Regent?
Would you really want the Ambassadors boff layout? Its pretty much in the same boat as the Galaxy as far as firepower. The Regent makes more sense, but you almost have to give up your sci slot to have a high rate of impact, and then whats the point of having the Regent?
What we saw in TNG was a ship outfitted for diplomatic missions at peace times. Cryptics designers took every excuse they could find to make the Galaxy as boring and weak (firepower) as possible. As i already said, thats not good game developement, thats just rediculus. I wouldn't had expect such a immature behaviour by a professional game studio.
I have seen LOTS of star trek mods for various games, that handle ships better than STO. Why do always people get to make (official) Star Trek games/Movies with no real idea about the francise?
Like you said, in the show, the Enterprise D was outfitted for diplomatic and exploration missions. It was the exemplar of the Galaxy class and the basis for the concept of what ships of that class were expected to be built as (a diplomatic exploration ship).
As far as blaming Cryptic. Is it Cryptic's fault that Gene Roddenberrys concept of the Federation in TNG as a bunch of goodie-goodies that go about telling people how much more dignified and evolved they are compared to other societies? The first four seasons or so was the most pure sense of how forget the concept of a franchise.
Is it Cryptics fault that a teenager almost destroys the flagship of the Federation every fourth episode? Is it Cryptics fault that some of the greatest challenges by other species were from the likes of Talarians and the overly mysterious "Sheliak"? The fact is that TNG needed to create the Borg so the Federation wasn't seen as only facing than a galaxy of "third-world" antagonists states. The show didn't give credibility to Starfleets ship/military superiority, but how weak its enemies were. Anyone adult can feel "mighty" when mercilessly defeating four poodles (kids don't try that at home, no animals were harmed in the creation of this example). If you want to point fingers and lay blame, blame Rodenberrys mid 1980's vision of a post-Kirk future of Star Trek.
I'm not going into this any further, Cryptic won't change anything relating the Galaxy Class anyway, they have the game exactly as they want it to be. (Escorts rule everything and Cruisers are just big slow target practices with no means to bite back.)
---Keep on fighting---
Why not work from the standpoint that all cruisers are gimped and work to get that fixed first, instead of complaining about the ship that you like the looks of the most? Saying that the way the Galaxy is "unfair" is to forget that in life, few things are fair. When I am in a position to affect change, I will be less inclined to give leeway to someone complaining about "fairness" because a persons concept of fairness is more like fair when it is to their advantage.
Why not work from the standpoint that all cruisers are gimped and work to get that fixed first, instead of complaining about the ship that you like the looks of the most? Saying that the way the Galaxy is "unfair" is to forget that in life, few things are fair. When I am in a position to affect change, I will be less inclined to give leeway to someone complaining about "fairness" because a persons concept of fairness is more like fair when it is to their advantage.
I completely agree. I feel that a large portion of us perceive a "fair" STO Galaxy-class to be like the one in the show. But it's not. It is what it is; an unfair, poor imitation of the Galaxy-class we have seen in the shows. But it's what we have, and it's not going to change.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Would you really want the Ambassadors boff layout? Its pretty much in the same boat as the Galaxy as far as firepower. The Regent makes more sense, but you almost have to give up your sci slot to have a high rate of impact, and then whats the point of having the Regent?
Because the Ambassador, is (was) a free to get ship. And it has a much better BOFF/Console Layout than the Galaxy-R.
So it wouldn't be such a problem to make something like a mirror version of the Galaxy with that BOFF/Console Layout.
Giving such a Ship the BOFF/Console Layout of the Regent would cause a lot of problems, because the Regent is a C-Store ship. Releasing such a ship in a Lockbox would be very stupid for Crypitc IMO.
Like you said, in the show, the Enterprise D was outfitted for diplomatic and exploration missions. It was the exemplar of the Galaxy class and the basis for the concept of what ships of that class were expected to be built as (a diplomatic exploration ship).
No, as i have said countless times before, the Galaxy Class was extremely versatile and adaptable.
IF cryptic had done some research about that ship, they would have known.
What we saw was a Battleships/Explorer modified for diplomatic/scientific missions.
DS9 Dominion War Battlescenes showed Galaxy Classes much more suited for Combat.
As far as blaming Cryptic. Is it Cryptic's fault that Gene Roddenberrys concept of the Federation in TNG as a bunch of goodie-goodies that go about telling people how much more dignified and evolved they are compared to other societies? The first four seasons or so was the most pure sense of how forget the concept of a franchise.
...
Is it Cryptics fault that some of the greatest challenges by other species were from the likes of Talarians and the overly mysterious "Sheliak"? The fact is that TNG needed to create the Borg so the Federation wasn't seen as only facing than a galaxy of "third-world" antagonists states. The show didn't give credibility to Starfleets ship/military superiority, but how weak its enemies were. Anyone adult can feel "mighty" when mercilessly defeating four poodles (kids don't try that at home, no animals were harmed in the creation of this example). If you want to point fingers and lay blame, blame Rodenberrys mid 1980's vision of a post-Kirk future of Star Trek.
Yeah, we get it, you like the Federation just any other Future Mankind in other Sci fi universes.
But making it a Utopia was one of the few obvious things that seperated Star Trek from other Sci fi universes. A better future with better people in it.
Utopia? Of course there is nothing wrong with it, it is just that people in the last 10-15 years wanted to see a more darker and dirtyer Federation, so their own lives didn't look so miserable anymore.
Why not work from the standpoint that all cruisers are gimped and work to get that fixed first, instead of complaining about the ship that you like the looks of the most? Saying that the way the Galaxy is "unfair" is to forget that in life, few things are fair. When I am in a position to affect change, I will be less inclined to give leeway to someone complaining about "fairness" because a persons concept of fairness is more like fair when it is to their advantage.
Of course all cruisers should be better, but this thread is about the Galaxy Class and not cruisers in general.
You didn't get it. It is about the three series (TNG,DS9, Voy) "hero" ships.
DS9 and Voy "hero" ships are very good (Defiant) and ok (Intrepid) but the Galaxy Class is just useless.
Don't missunderstand me, i am not a super huge Fan of the Galaxy Class, but i just hate how Cryptic made that ship in their game.
"...'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
Yeah, we get it, you like the Federation just any other Future Mankind in other Sci fi universes.
But making it a Utopia was one of the few obvious things that seperated Star Trek from other Sci fi universes. A better future with better people in it.
Utopia? Of course there is nothing wrong with it, it is just that people in the last 10-15 years wanted to see a more darker and dirtyer Federation, so their own lives didn't look so miserable anymore.
No. That is where you would be wrong.
The Original Series showed the Star Trek universe was a dangerous, dirty place where you couldn't talk your way out of every problem. Violence and warfare happened, and was sometimes unavoidable.
The only installment where "The Great Bird" had full discretion that was worth a damn was The Cage. But even then, Roddenberry was forced to compromise with NBC to get Star Trek aired.
Since then, every time Roddenberry tried to mold Star Trek into his vision of a perfect future, it wasn't a rousing success. The Motion Picture lacked the high, swashbuckling adventure of the Original Series. It was panned by critics and fans alike. After Roddenberry lost creative control, we got films like The Wrath of Khan that are still fan favorites and cultural icons.
The Next Generation was another example. The first two seasons, which adhered to Gene's vision of a utopian, understanding future, didn't have the highest ratings and was despised by many fans. The series didn't really take off until season three, when you had more adventure and grave threats to the Federation. After that, it was the most successful syndicated series during it's run and fans warmed up to it.
I admire Roddenberry for giving us Star Trek. But his ideals of a utopia where communication solves all and Humanity as perfect, peace loving, beings with "evolved sensibilities" doesn't sell. And to be frank, is a damned moonbat pipe dream.
Deep Space Nine and Voyager were the most realistic of the later installments from their beginnings. Outside of the Federation, with it's "New World Economy" and lofty ideals, things are not so cut and dried. Idealism is something to strive for, not the defining characteristic of life. And it doesn't always cut it. Sisko and Janeway figured that out over time.
So, no. The Federation and Star Trek isn't about living in a utopia. It's about exploration in dangerous, unknown regions of space. It's about warfare, politics, and diplomacy. It's a commentary on the modern, Human condition. It's a "wagon train to the stars" where the Indians are not always friendly and a kind word doesn't always placate them.
No matter what Gene might think if he lived today or however the ship performed in the shows, there is demand for an upgraded Version wich simply has a little more oumph.
I mean it wouldnt break the game if the Galaxy would get some attention in regard of firepower.
Sure it might not be meant to be a warship but considering other cruiser options the galaxy simply has very little to offer.
The good engineering abilities have shared cooldowns and there isnt much room for science abilities to make up for it.
And a ship with only one tactical Lt. is pretty much worthless unless it has at least a Lt. Cmdr science.
Even if we dont go into giving it more tac consoles or what else. I think a more flexible Boff seating through an Universal Ensign would help this ship alot.
Or maybe at least sensor analysis. It is an Exploration Cruiser after all but its very lacking in terms of science.
It wouldnt destroying its engineering focusm, keep old loadouts valid and give us the options to play with some nice abilities.
However id go even further by switcheng the Lt. Com Enginner and the tac Lt. and id have that Ensign be Universal. And maybe, just maybe add sensor analyses.
That would up the potential quite a bit. It would still be somewhat less powerfull in dps than the Assault Cruiser Refit and Excelsior beacause of the Boff Layout and it would not surpass the Support Cruiser in terms of Heals + decent firepower.
Or lets make a new Version alltogether at least for the Fleet version. Same layout as the
Fleet Excelsior but with an Universal Ensign and only 3 tac consoles but 4 engineering and 3 science consoles.
On top of the nacelles you add the phaser strips the Galaxy X has on its nacelles. There was a ship shown in DS9 that actually had those aditional phaser strips. And voila you got a wartime version of the Galaxy. I think in the Show it wass called Venture , same as the Galaxy variant you can buy in the Zen Store.
The Original Series showed the Star Trek universe was a dangerous, dirty place where you couldn't talk your way out of every problem. Violence and warfare happened, and was sometimes unavoidable.
The only installment where "The Great Bird" had full discretion that was worth a damn was The Cage. But even then, Roddenberry was forced to compromise with NBC to get Star Trek aired.
Since then, every time Roddenberry tried to mold Star Trek into his vision of a perfect future, it wasn't a rousing success. The Motion Picture lacked the high, swashbuckling adventure of the Original Series. It was panned by critics and fans alike. After Roddenberry lost creative control, we got films like The Wrath of Khan that are still fan favorites and cultural icons.
The Next Generation was another example. The first two seasons, which adhered to Gene's vision of a utopian, understanding future, didn't have the highest ratings and was despised by many fans. The series didn't really take off until season three, when you had more adventure and grave threats to the Federation. After that, it was the most successful syndicated series during it's run and fans warmed up to it.
I admire Roddenberry for giving us Star Trek. But his ideals of a utopia where communication solves all and Humanity as perfect, peace loving, beings with "evolved sensibilities" doesn't sell. And to be frank, is a damned moonbat pipe dream.
Deep Space Nine and Voyager were the most realistic of the later installments from their beginnings. Outside of the Federation, with it's "New World Economy" and lofty ideals, things are not so cut and dried. Idealism is something to strive for, not the defining characteristic of life. And it doesn't always cut it. Sisko and Janeway figured that out over time.
So, no. The Federation and Star Trek isn't about living in a utopia. It's about exploration in dangerous, unknown regions of space. It's about warfare, politics, and diplomacy. It's a commentary on the modern, Human condition. It's a "wagon train to the stars" where the Indians are not always friendly and a kind word doesn't always placate them.
you are confusing the star trek universe and the federation.
in gen's vision the humanity of that time have become better in every point ( yes it an utopia but, hey! it is science fiction!)
the fact that the rest of the universe is not ( or mostly ) daesn't diminish this axiom.
so the federation is about living in an utopia indeed.
starfleet, however will be confronted to hostile races and other people that do not share the same values, and that cool otherwhise it would have been quite boring.
first off, the galaxy was chosen as the flagship of the federation, this is a military term meaning it is the best and most powerful ship in the fleet.
Are you are aware that the USS Constellation (constructed in 1854) served as a flagship during WWII, it was certainly not the best and most powerful ship of its fleet. I was designated as a flagship because both Admiral Ernest J. King ( Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet. On 18 March 1942, he was appointed Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) at the time he commanded her) and then Vice Admiral Royal E. Ingersoll
2nd ALL starfleet ships are exploration ships (with one exception) 3rd, the nx connie excel ambassador and sov were all the pinnical of starfleet milatary and scientific tech when they were build. but when the galaxy is braught up all of a sudden its a pleasure ship pure explorer among other things, what did starfleet suddenly dicide to make a ship from the carnival fleet their flag ship?
Pretty much, her captain even looked like Captain Stubing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_wFEB4Oxlo If you watch TNG, the Federation had thought it had pretty much insulated itself from the threats of the Klingons ( a member of the Federation in the first season) and Romulans (reared the heads during the 2nd or third season to say "we are back"), and Cardassians ( a not fully developed or credulous enemy until the last two seasons of TNG)
The Original Series showed the Star Trek universe was a dangerous, dirty place where you couldn't talk your way out of every problem. Violence and warfare happened, and was sometimes unavoidable.
The only installment where "The Great Bird" had full discretion that was worth a damn was The Cage. But even then, Roddenberry was forced to compromise with NBC to get Star Trek aired.
Since then, every time Roddenberry tried to mold Star Trek into his vision of a perfect future, it wasn't a rousing success. The Motion Picture lacked the high, swashbuckling adventure of the Original Series. It was panned by critics and fans alike. After Roddenberry lost creative control, we got films like The Wrath of Khan that are still fan favorites and cultural icons.
The Next Generation was another example. The first two seasons, which adhered to Gene's vision of a utopian, understanding future, didn't have the highest ratings and was despised by many fans. The series didn't really take off until season three, when you had more adventure and grave threats to the Federation. After that, it was the most successful syndicated series during it's run and fans warmed up to it.
I admire Roddenberry for giving us Star Trek. But his ideals of a utopia where communication solves all and Humanity as perfect, peace loving, beings with "evolved sensibilities" doesn't sell. And to be frank, is a damned moonbat pipe dream.
Deep Space Nine and Voyager were the most realistic of the later installments from their beginnings. Outside of the Federation, with it's "New World Economy" and lofty ideals, things are not so cut and dried. Idealism is something to strive for, not the defining characteristic of life. And it doesn't always cut it. Sisko and Janeway figured that out over time.
So, no. The Federation and Star Trek isn't about living in a utopia. It's about exploration in dangerous, unknown regions of space. It's about warfare, politics, and diplomacy. It's a commentary on the modern, Human condition. It's a "wagon train to the stars" where the Indians are not always friendly and a kind word doesn't always placate them.
you are confusing the star trek universe and the federation.
in gen's vision the humanity of that time have become better in every point ( yes it an utopia but, hey! it is science fiction!)
the fact that the rest of the universe is not ( or mostly ) daesn't diminish this axiom.
so the federation is about living in an utopia indeed.
Living in Utopia would numb the senses. There is less awareness to the possibility that there really are dangerous threats because everything taken care of going so smootly. Its olnly when the truth sets through pain and loss that it is realized that the Utopian life people live are just illusions. The period of time where there were living in Utopia (circa TNG up until about season 4) , they decided to not be so dedicated to war or defense, but diplomacy and self realization. They were living a farce of a Candyland fantasy during the pajama uniformed first few seasons of TNG.
Are you are aware that the USS Constellation (constructed in 1854) served as a flagship during WWII, it was certainly not the best and most powerful ship of its fleet. I was designated as a flagship because both Admiral Ernest J. King ( Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet. On 18 March 1942, he was appointed Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) at the time he commanded her) and then Vice Admiral Royal E. Ingersoll
there was no admirals or flag officers on the D, yet it was the flag ship. im pretty sure the producers dont actually get what a flag ship really is.
Giving such a Ship the BOFF/Console Layout of the Regent would cause a lot of problems, because the Regent is a C-Store ship. Releasing such a ship in a Lockbox would be very stupid for Crypitc IMO.
Honestly, I'm not sold on the Regents Boff Layout being all that much better. I bought the Regent for her 180 torp for my Excel' and Nebulas. I won't even start on the lock box ships.
No, as i have said countless times before, the Galaxy Class was extremely versatile and adaptable.
IF cryptic had done some research about that ship, they would have known.
What we saw was a Battleships/Explorer modified for diplomatic/scientific missions.
DS9 Dominion War Battlescenes showed Galaxy Classes much more suited for Combat.
You might have had a better argument if you avoided saying it originated at a "battleship/explorer modified for diplomatic/scientific missions" and stuck with an explorer that also served as a diplomatic science mission ship and later modded for combat use. The Galaxy (or any other Federation design we see on TV/Screen) is not a battleship, nor was intended to be such.
Yeah, we get it, you like the Federation just any other Future Mankind in other Sci fi universes.
But making it a Utopia was one of the few obvious things that seperated Star Trek from other Sci fi universes. A better future with better people in it.
Utopia? Of course there is nothing wrong with it, it is just that people in the last 10-15 years wanted to see a more darker and dirtyer Federation, so their own lives didn't look so miserable anymore.
Far from the truth. It was never about it being a Utopian society as a separation. The separation was how hard humanity had worked to improve upon itself and look past the societal pitfalls of the era when the show aired. It was the hope that humanity had a future in a time where people thought that they were on the brink of nuclear war. The ability to follow MLK Jr.s dream of judging by a persons content and not by their skin. It was never about Utopia, but the relentless pursuit of self improvement and the existence OF a future for mankind. The TNG attainment of "Utopia" in TNG pretty much ruined the ideal of the pursuit in that universe.
You didn't get it. It is about the three series (TNG,DS9, Voy) "hero" ships.
DS9 and Voy "hero" ships are very good (Defiant) and ok (Intrepid) but the Galaxy Class is just useless.
Don't missunderstand me, i am not a super huge Fan of the Galaxy Class, but i just hate how Cryptic made that ship in their game.
I've got news for you, the majority of the cruisers are useless. I wouldn't take anything less than an Excel' hull into PvP and even then I am hesitant unless I team up with a good team that I can throw heals on and buff up. Also, the hero ship for TNG got replaced in the movis to the Sovy'. Its still the same cast and crew on the ship, which is what the story was about.
new eng skills are not a solution, and arent even realistic. what is needed is ether more of the existing sci or tac skills for the ship to be competitive in 1 way or the other.
any improvement that could be made would still leave the ship as crappy as all the other fed cruisers. that have little function in this game other then absorbing fire wile other ships actually accomplish things. often no one bothers to shoot at them abyway becase theres no reason too, and they are hardest to kill. cruiser healing can be easily accomplished with sci ships, and their CC and sci captain debuffs make them incredibly dangerous components of teams. that leaves cruisers laying down usefully strong pressure wile healing, in an attempt to be as useful as a sci ship. but, all power creep in this game has basically been anti pressure additions, leaving the pretty strong pressure fed cruisers can cause more and more marginalized.
in regards to fed cruisers, the galaxy is TRIBBLE poor. it should have the most flexibility, not the most restrictive build. and if it cant heal and CC, it better be able to heal and pressure, something that has little or no effect now.
a bit better turn rates, ether a DPS buff to beam arrays and singles, or a change in beam array and single fireing cycle so they deal damage in a more front loaded way, is needed. all that in addition to an overhaul to the galaxy
Yeah, we get it, you like the Federation just any other Future Mankind in other Sci fi universes.
But making it a Utopia was one of the few obvious things that seperated Star Trek from other Sci fi universes. A better future with better people in it.
Utopia? Of course there is nothing wrong with it, it is just that people in the last 10-15 years wanted to see a more darker and dirtyer Federation, so their own lives didn't look so miserable anymore.
What was presented as Utopia was so far removed from what a society could or would be as to be immediately seen a fanciful farce instead of a real better future for everyone.
Gene's Federation was the epitome of a house of cards that only worked because the writers said so, their suppossed better lives through technology, knowledge and understanding were never really showcased. If anything the writers went out of their way to show how fake and sterile it all was, as if saying "this is supposed to be utopian, but its actually soulless! yuk, yuk!".
there was no admirals or flag officers on the D, yet it was the flag ship. im pretty sure the producers dont actually get what a flag ship really is.
No they got it right.
Think about it. Today we have Flagship brands, stores, products, tv shows, foods, etc etc.
The Enterprise is the Federations Flagship ship. Lol.
She represents the ideals of the Federation. Her from her Captain to the last person on-board. It was a privilege to be assigned to the Enterprise in any capacity because of what she represented and continues to represent.
It didn't have anything to do with having the most firepower or toughest defenses or what flag officer was currently aboard.
It was about being a symbol to all that witnessed the ship.
As for the Galaxy.
To those against I would ask a few questions.
How would increasing the current turn rate of the Galaxy by as much as, but not more than, 2, create an imbalance in the game? And how?
Will altering the current bridge officer layout into something similar to the Ambassador or Fleet Excelsior cause a significant shift in PvE/PvP that will be detrimental to the game or its playerbase? And how?
Would introducing a single additional tactical console at the expense of an engineering console upset the current balance of the game? And how?
How would increasing the current turn rate of the Galaxy by as much as, but not more than, 2, create an imbalance in the game? And how?
Will altering the current bridge officer layout into something similar to the Ambassador or Fleet Excelsior cause a significant shift in PvE/PvP that will be detrimental to the game or its playerbase? And how?
Would introducing a single additional tactical console at the expense of an engineering console upset the current balance of the game? And how?
So you want an 8 turn rate. More tactical consoles and a better tactical BOFF layout?
In other words, you want to fly the Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin?
How about we uncripple this ship. Any other ship with such a low turn rate has something useful going for it, Hangers, or more tact slots or a better tactical boff setup.
Either give the fleet version the 3rd tact console and make the ensign eng uni or give her a turn buff to 8 to allow us to tank a bit better and rotate weakened shields out of line of fire.
The Galaxy is the most crippled ship in this game by its design.
Low turn rate.
Too many low eng engineering powers
Weak firepower
Saucer separation that has a 5 min cd
But i got a better idea, the Galaxy was supposed to be the benchmark for the tank part of the mmo trilogy in this game. How about we lower every other cruiser to a turn rate of 6. A lt tactical station a lt sci station and focus every cruiser solely on engineering and hull healing i mean the tank in the mmo trilogy isn't supposed to be a damage dealer, he is supposed to simply be the guy who takes the beating whilst Sci de-buffs and Tact blows it up.
So Vor'cha, Negh'var, Excelsior, Ambassador,Regent, D'Kora, Galor, D'Deridex and other cruiser captains you are now toothless punchbags, designed to be just that a punch bag, you're ships now nothing special, you have no sci abilities for crowd control, no tact abilities above Lt to do any damage and contribute to a fire fight, you are now a boring brick that can barely turn, and just sit and be hit.
Hey why should the Galaxy get special treatment after all its working as intended, the other cruisers in this game are the ones that are broken, so lets gimp i mean fix them
Living in Utopia would numb the senses. There is less awareness to the possibility that there really are dangerous threats because everything taken care of going so smootly. Its olnly when the truth sets through pain and loss that it is realized that the Utopian life people live are just illusions. The period of time where there were living in Utopia (circa TNG up until about season 4) , they decided to not be so dedicated to war or defense, but diplomacy and self realization. They were living a farce of a Candyland fantasy during the pajama uniformed first few seasons of TNG.
that is an opinion, not a fact.
that you found that this utopia is unrealistic or unplausible is irrelevent since you are not the author of that franchise.
human in the federation according to gen roddenberry " vision" are not dependant to money, profit, there is no poor anymore, everyone have food and acces to medecine.
everyone work for the better of all not for personal profit.
and that is not in place only in 3 first season of tng, it beguin with the TOS serie.
so i insist, the federation in star trek is about living in an utopia.
and, also... since the human race as of today never achieve an utopian society with theses criterias, on what experience do you conclude that this would lead to less awareness?
You want a cruiser with more of those, there's already a few to choose from. So ... round and round this whole silliness goes.
Want a tactical focused cruiser? Choose one of the ones that already does that.
that the reason of this thread, THEY ARE INDEED ship with more of those.
like the star cruiser for example, more science bo slot, better turn rate, and you known what it is even not a cstore ship.
so can we have a galaxy retrofit and galaxy x cstore ship that are at the level of other cstore ship?.
not boost T4 ship.
that mean a ship that is sligtly better than a non cstore ship, not the contrary.
because as of today the galaxy retrofit is slightly inferior to a simple star cruiser.
that is in contradiction with the cstore ship strategy of cryptic.
As I said in an earlier post, I don't particularly like the Sovereign class, regardless of it's in-game superiority. I'd rather fly the Galaxy class, though have settled on the Fleet Ambassador, since it's still superior to the Galaxy (which isn't really viable) and I prefer it over the Sovereign.
Your answer demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what this entire thread is about, either that or you sir are trolling.
For me, I have built what I believe to be the best Gal-X in the game, it can one-shot almost anyone who is not prepared but it can do it only every 3-4 min, rest of the time it is totally outgunned, out manouvred and outclassed. My Fleet Galaxy Retrofit can only do one thing really well and that is take enormous damage, but eventually it is killed under sustained fire without so much as scratch to the enemy.
I'm now tired of waiting for a Fleet Gal-X or a good upgrade to the Gal-R, the Federation in this game is stagnating and it's a lot more fun to fly another huge ship that can really get the job done, the Bortasqu, yes I've gone to the dark side and loving it. A Ferasan engineer in a Bort is awesome in space and ground and a lot more fun than a boring old human in a boring ship.
It's not the Galaxy's fault, it's Cryptic's, clearly they didn't want every second ship in the game to be a Galaxy so they crippled it from the outset and have no intention of ever making it even slightly more viable.
that the reason of this thread, THEY ARE INDEED ship with more of those.
like the star cruiser for example, more science bo slot, better turn rate, and you known what it is even not a cstore ship.
so can we have a galaxy retrofit and galaxy x cstore ship that are at the level of other cstore ship?.
not boost T4 ship.
that mean a ship that is sligtly better than a non cstore ship, not the contrary.
because as of today the galaxy retrofit is slightly inferior to a simple star cruiser.
that is in contradiction with the cstore ship strategy of cryptic.
So you all just really want a fleet assault cruiser with a Galaxy skin.
Got it.
Thanks.
Though I don't see Geko bringing that to existence, since, you know, the Fleet Assault Cruiser already exists.
there was no admirals or flag officers on the D, yet it was the flag ship. im pretty sure the producers dont actually get what a flag ship really is.
That was kind of my point on the use of the term "flagship" in TNG, they really had no idea what they were talking about and just thought it was cool. Remember, these were the guys that had to techno-babble their way through much of TNG.
new eng skills are not a solution, and arent even realistic. what is needed is ether more of the existing sci or tac skills for the ship to be competitive in 1 way or the other.
any improvement that could be made would still leave the ship as crappy as all the other fed cruisers. that have little function in this game other then absorbing fire wile other ships actually accomplish things. often no one bothers to shoot at them abyway becase theres no reason too, and they are hardest to kill. cruiser healing can be easily accomplished with sci ships, and their CC and sci captain debuffs make them incredibly dangerous components of teams. that leaves cruisers laying down usefully strong pressure wile healing, in an attempt to be as useful as a sci ship. but, all power creep in this game has basically been anti pressure additions, leaving the pretty strong pressure fed cruisers can cause more and more marginalized.
in regards to fed cruisers, the galaxy is TRIBBLE poor. it should have the most flexibility, not the most restrictive build. and if it cant heal and CC, it better be able to heal and pressure, something that has little or no effect now.
a bit better turn rates, ether a DPS buff to beam arrays and singles, or a change in beam array and single fireing cycle so they deal damage in a more front loaded way, is needed. all that in addition to an overhaul to the galaxy
Actually, working to make engineer skills as on par as tac and sci skills would help cruisers tremendously, especially the Galaxy. Having potent Commander and Lt. Commander eng' BoFF skills would go a long way for cruisers.
We actually just got more maneuverability for our ships. It shouldn't be that hard to get better than a 16 degree turn rate on a Galaxy now, especially with a Warp Core with extra power to engines. RCS's have been changed to improve the way they have worked on cruisers and the Galaxy-R can now do a Saucer Sep' and have escort like turning.
I am all for a rehash on how beam weapons work, the drain is honestly more of a problem in doing dps than anything else with cruisers.
So you all just really want a fleet assault cruiser with a Galaxy skin.
Got it.
Thanks.
Though I don't see Geko bringing that to existence, since, you know, the Fleet Assault Cruiser already exists.
i don't see where you see that the star cruiser is an assault cruiser?
i don't want the galaxy retrofit to be an assault cruiser but something slighty or even equal at tanking than an star cruiser.
i reserve a tactical oriented bo layout for the galaxy x, and this one is not a clone of the regent and other tactical cruiser either
So you all just really want a fleet assault cruiser with a Galaxy skin.
Got it.
Thanks.
Though I don't see Geko bringing that to existence, since, you know, the Fleet Assault Cruiser already exists.
how is anyone supposed to take you seriously when you want a fricking connie set up the exact same way that your now bashing? this could not be more ironic. us wanting the galaxy like that compared to what you want makes us look totally sane.
and no body in this thread said they wanted a regent clone, though with a setup like that the saucer separation would actually be beneficial, instead of irreverent to it
eh, id want ether a 3 pack like thing thats in that thread in my sig, or the galor setup without the universal station. thats a counterpart to the ambassador setup. or the d'deridex setup, with a LT eng instead of those 2 ENS stations
that is an opinion, not a fact.
that you found that this utopia is unrealistic or unplausible is irrelevent since you are not the author of that franchise.
human in the federation according to gen roddenberry " vision" are not dependant to money, profit, there is no poor anymore, everyone have food and acces to medecine.
everyone work for the better of all not for personal profit.
and that is not in place only in 3 first season of tng, it beguin with the TOS serie.
so i insist, the federation in star trek is about living in an utopia.
and, also... since the human race as of today never achieve an utopian society with theses criterias, on what experience do you conclude that this would lead to less awareness?
Roddenberry wan't able to truly articulate Star Treks human portion of the universe as a "Utopian Society", they could barely accommodate the bottom two parts of Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, which is the minimum required to attempt to start a Utopian Society. Also, if TOS's universe didn't have value in profit, why were there guys like Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones running around trading with other humans for profit, risking their safety and lives for accumulation of wealth? There was less scarcity for basic needs, but there was still scarcity, people still worked for something more than for self realization or social status.
As far as less awareness in a Utopia, there a period in any society, where the people believe that they are living in the pinnacle of human societal evolution and drop their guard because they believe there can not be any relevant external threat to their way of life. The Romans were a perfect example of this towards their end. The Harrapan (of Indus Valley, modern day India) society pre-conquest (circa 1500 BC) was an extremely well planned society that had all needs of food, shelter and medicine (at that times standards) and bountiful trade with other societies in Mesopotamia. They experienced a time of peace and tranquility that they enjoyed so much that barely even maintained a military to defend itself. It was then overrun by the Aryans
There also has been "Utopian" societies attempted in the U.S., they collapsed upon themselves because, after time members became too fixated on attaining self actualization and not upon ensuring the day to day survival of the "society", crippling it from the inside by lack of productivity or externally by failing to defend it by allowing in new members that weren't as committed as they were.
What was presented as Utopia was so far removed from what a society could or would be as to be immediately seen a fanciful farce instead of a real better future for everyone.
Gene's Federation was the epitome of a house of cards that only worked because the writers said so, their suppossed better lives through technology, knowledge and understanding were never really showcased. If anything the writers went out of their way to show how fake and sterile it all was, as if saying "this is supposed to be utopian, but its actually soulless! yuk, yuk!".
I agree, TOS showed a society that had greatly improved over the last three centuries, early TNG tried to assert a Utopian society, but couldn't articulate the basics of how it was maintained or even guided, it was the biggest accidental becoming and sustaining of a Utopia that I have ever read, seen or heard of since Zardoz (diaper wearing Sean Connery and all.)
i don't see where you see that the star cruiser is an assault cruiser?
i don't want the galaxy retrofit to be an assault cruiser but something slighty or even equal at tanking than an star cruiser.
i reserve a tactical oriented bo layout for the galaxy x, and this one is not a clone of the regent and other tactical cruiser either
If you want something that tanks like a Star Cruiser, use a Star Cruiser. Sounds to me like the only difference of what you want is a different skin.
Comments
The operable word in that state is "was".
Would you really want the Ambassadors boff layout? Its pretty much in the same boat as the Galaxy as far as firepower. The Regent makes more sense, but you almost have to give up your sci slot to have a high rate of impact, and then whats the point of having the Regent?
Like you said, in the show, the Enterprise D was outfitted for diplomatic and exploration missions. It was the exemplar of the Galaxy class and the basis for the concept of what ships of that class were expected to be built as (a diplomatic exploration ship).
As far as blaming Cryptic. Is it Cryptic's fault that Gene Roddenberrys concept of the Federation in TNG as a bunch of goodie-goodies that go about telling people how much more dignified and evolved they are compared to other societies? The first four seasons or so was the most pure sense of how forget the concept of a franchise.
Is it Cryptics fault that a teenager almost destroys the flagship of the Federation every fourth episode? Is it Cryptics fault that some of the greatest challenges by other species were from the likes of Talarians and the overly mysterious "Sheliak"? The fact is that TNG needed to create the Borg so the Federation wasn't seen as only facing than a galaxy of "third-world" antagonists states. The show didn't give credibility to Starfleets ship/military superiority, but how weak its enemies were. Anyone adult can feel "mighty" when mercilessly defeating four poodles (kids don't try that at home, no animals were harmed in the creation of this example). If you want to point fingers and lay blame, blame Rodenberrys mid 1980's vision of a post-Kirk future of Star Trek.
Why not work from the standpoint that all cruisers are gimped and work to get that fixed first, instead of complaining about the ship that you like the looks of the most? Saying that the way the Galaxy is "unfair" is to forget that in life, few things are fair. When I am in a position to affect change, I will be less inclined to give leeway to someone complaining about "fairness" because a persons concept of fairness is more like fair when it is to their advantage.
I completely agree. I feel that a large portion of us perceive a "fair" STO Galaxy-class to be like the one in the show. But it's not. It is what it is; an unfair, poor imitation of the Galaxy-class we have seen in the shows. But it's what we have, and it's not going to change.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Ships got refitted, even older ships (Excelsior -R, Ambassador-R) got a much better BOFF/Console Layout.
Because the Ambassador, is (was) a free to get ship. And it has a much better BOFF/Console Layout than the Galaxy-R.
So it wouldn't be such a problem to make something like a mirror version of the Galaxy with that BOFF/Console Layout.
Giving such a Ship the BOFF/Console Layout of the Regent would cause a lot of problems, because the Regent is a C-Store ship. Releasing such a ship in a Lockbox would be very stupid for Crypitc IMO.
No, as i have said countless times before, the Galaxy Class was extremely versatile and adaptable.
IF cryptic had done some research about that ship, they would have known.
What we saw was a Battleships/Explorer modified for diplomatic/scientific missions.
DS9 Dominion War Battlescenes showed Galaxy Classes much more suited for Combat.
No, that's just bad writing.
Yeah, we get it, you like the Federation just any other Future Mankind in other Sci fi universes.
But making it a Utopia was one of the few obvious things that seperated Star Trek from other Sci fi universes. A better future with better people in it.
Utopia? Of course there is nothing wrong with it, it is just that people in the last 10-15 years wanted to see a more darker and dirtyer Federation, so their own lives didn't look so miserable anymore.
Of course all cruisers should be better, but this thread is about the Galaxy Class and not cruisers in general.
You didn't get it. It is about the three series (TNG,DS9, Voy) "hero" ships.
DS9 and Voy "hero" ships are very good (Defiant) and ok (Intrepid) but the Galaxy Class is just useless.
Don't missunderstand me, i am not a super huge Fan of the Galaxy Class, but i just hate how Cryptic made that ship in their game.
No. That is where you would be wrong.
The Original Series showed the Star Trek universe was a dangerous, dirty place where you couldn't talk your way out of every problem. Violence and warfare happened, and was sometimes unavoidable.
The only installment where "The Great Bird" had full discretion that was worth a damn was The Cage. But even then, Roddenberry was forced to compromise with NBC to get Star Trek aired.
Since then, every time Roddenberry tried to mold Star Trek into his vision of a perfect future, it wasn't a rousing success. The Motion Picture lacked the high, swashbuckling adventure of the Original Series. It was panned by critics and fans alike. After Roddenberry lost creative control, we got films like The Wrath of Khan that are still fan favorites and cultural icons.
The Next Generation was another example. The first two seasons, which adhered to Gene's vision of a utopian, understanding future, didn't have the highest ratings and was despised by many fans. The series didn't really take off until season three, when you had more adventure and grave threats to the Federation. After that, it was the most successful syndicated series during it's run and fans warmed up to it.
I admire Roddenberry for giving us Star Trek. But his ideals of a utopia where communication solves all and Humanity as perfect, peace loving, beings with "evolved sensibilities" doesn't sell. And to be frank, is a damned moonbat pipe dream.
Deep Space Nine and Voyager were the most realistic of the later installments from their beginnings. Outside of the Federation, with it's "New World Economy" and lofty ideals, things are not so cut and dried. Idealism is something to strive for, not the defining characteristic of life. And it doesn't always cut it. Sisko and Janeway figured that out over time.
So, no. The Federation and Star Trek isn't about living in a utopia. It's about exploration in dangerous, unknown regions of space. It's about warfare, politics, and diplomacy. It's a commentary on the modern, Human condition. It's a "wagon train to the stars" where the Indians are not always friendly and a kind word doesn't always placate them.
I mean it wouldnt break the game if the Galaxy would get some attention in regard of firepower.
Sure it might not be meant to be a warship but considering other cruiser options the galaxy simply has very little to offer.
The good engineering abilities have shared cooldowns and there isnt much room for science abilities to make up for it.
And a ship with only one tactical Lt. is pretty much worthless unless it has at least a Lt. Cmdr science.
Even if we dont go into giving it more tac consoles or what else. I think a more flexible Boff seating through an Universal Ensign would help this ship alot.
Or maybe at least sensor analysis. It is an Exploration Cruiser after all but its very lacking in terms of science.
It wouldnt destroying its engineering focusm, keep old loadouts valid and give us the options to play with some nice abilities.
However id go even further by switcheng the Lt. Com Enginner and the tac Lt. and id have that Ensign be Universal. And maybe, just maybe add sensor analyses.
That would up the potential quite a bit. It would still be somewhat less powerfull in dps than the Assault Cruiser Refit and Excelsior beacause of the Boff Layout and it would not surpass the Support Cruiser in terms of Heals + decent firepower.
Or lets make a new Version alltogether at least for the Fleet version. Same layout as the
Fleet Excelsior but with an Universal Ensign and only 3 tac consoles but 4 engineering and 3 science consoles.
On top of the nacelles you add the phaser strips the Galaxy X has on its nacelles. There was a ship shown in DS9 that actually had those aditional phaser strips. And voila you got a wartime version of the Galaxy. I think in the Show it wass called Venture , same as the Galaxy variant you can buy in the Zen Store.
you are confusing the star trek universe and the federation.
in gen's vision the humanity of that time have become better in every point ( yes it an utopia but, hey! it is science fiction!)
the fact that the rest of the universe is not ( or mostly ) daesn't diminish this axiom.
so the federation is about living in an utopia indeed.
starfleet, however will be confronted to hostile races and other people that do not share the same values, and that cool otherwhise it would have been quite boring.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
Are you are aware that the USS Constellation (constructed in 1854) served as a flagship during WWII, it was certainly not the best and most powerful ship of its fleet. I was designated as a flagship because both Admiral Ernest J. King ( Commander-in-Chief, United States Fleet. On 18 March 1942, he was appointed Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) at the time he commanded her) and then Vice Admiral Royal E. Ingersoll
Pretty much, her captain even looked like Captain Stubing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_wFEB4Oxlo If you watch TNG, the Federation had thought it had pretty much insulated itself from the threats of the Klingons ( a member of the Federation in the first season) and Romulans (reared the heads during the 2nd or third season to say "we are back"), and Cardassians ( a not fully developed or credulous enemy until the last two seasons of TNG)
Thats what Romulans do, they play a game of chess and only make a move when they are at the advantage.
We have seen several examples on how a Galor was not on par with any large cruiser.
I just reitterated it :P
^^^^^^
This! Definitely this!
Living in Utopia would numb the senses. There is less awareness to the possibility that there really are dangerous threats because everything taken care of going so smootly. Its olnly when the truth sets through pain and loss that it is realized that the Utopian life people live are just illusions. The period of time where there were living in Utopia (circa TNG up until about season 4) , they decided to not be so dedicated to war or defense, but diplomacy and self realization. They were living a farce of a Candyland fantasy during the pajama uniformed first few seasons of TNG.
there was no admirals or flag officers on the D, yet it was the flag ship. im pretty sure the producers dont actually get what a flag ship really is.
Yes, the Galaxy refit is the Galaxy-X
Wouldn't a much better solution would be for Cryptic to work on more combat effective engineer BoFF skills, especially at higher levels?
Honestly, I'm not sold on the Regents Boff Layout being all that much better. I bought the Regent for her 180 torp for my Excel' and Nebulas. I won't even start on the lock box ships.
You might have had a better argument if you avoided saying it originated at a "battleship/explorer modified for diplomatic/scientific missions" and stuck with an explorer that also served as a diplomatic science mission ship and later modded for combat use. The Galaxy (or any other Federation design we see on TV/Screen) is not a battleship, nor was intended to be such.
As was much of the first three seasons of TNG, including the TNG era background story of the time.
Far from the truth. It was never about it being a Utopian society as a separation. The separation was how hard humanity had worked to improve upon itself and look past the societal pitfalls of the era when the show aired. It was the hope that humanity had a future in a time where people thought that they were on the brink of nuclear war. The ability to follow MLK Jr.s dream of judging by a persons content and not by their skin. It was never about Utopia, but the relentless pursuit of self improvement and the existence OF a future for mankind. The TNG attainment of "Utopia" in TNG pretty much ruined the ideal of the pursuit in that universe.
I've got news for you, the majority of the cruisers are useless. I wouldn't take anything less than an Excel' hull into PvP and even then I am hesitant unless I team up with a good team that I can throw heals on and buff up. Also, the hero ship for TNG got replaced in the movis to the Sovy'. Its still the same cast and crew on the ship, which is what the story was about.
any improvement that could be made would still leave the ship as crappy as all the other fed cruisers. that have little function in this game other then absorbing fire wile other ships actually accomplish things. often no one bothers to shoot at them abyway becase theres no reason too, and they are hardest to kill. cruiser healing can be easily accomplished with sci ships, and their CC and sci captain debuffs make them incredibly dangerous components of teams. that leaves cruisers laying down usefully strong pressure wile healing, in an attempt to be as useful as a sci ship. but, all power creep in this game has basically been anti pressure additions, leaving the pretty strong pressure fed cruisers can cause more and more marginalized.
in regards to fed cruisers, the galaxy is TRIBBLE poor. it should have the most flexibility, not the most restrictive build. and if it cant heal and CC, it better be able to heal and pressure, something that has little or no effect now.
a bit better turn rates, ether a DPS buff to beam arrays and singles, or a change in beam array and single fireing cycle so they deal damage in a more front loaded way, is needed. all that in addition to an overhaul to the galaxy
What was presented as Utopia was so far removed from what a society could or would be as to be immediately seen a fanciful farce instead of a real better future for everyone.
Gene's Federation was the epitome of a house of cards that only worked because the writers said so, their suppossed better lives through technology, knowledge and understanding were never really showcased. If anything the writers went out of their way to show how fake and sterile it all was, as if saying "this is supposed to be utopian, but its actually soulless! yuk, yuk!".
No they got it right.
Think about it. Today we have Flagship brands, stores, products, tv shows, foods, etc etc.
The Enterprise is the Federations Flagship ship. Lol.
She represents the ideals of the Federation. Her from her Captain to the last person on-board. It was a privilege to be assigned to the Enterprise in any capacity because of what she represented and continues to represent.
It didn't have anything to do with having the most firepower or toughest defenses or what flag officer was currently aboard.
It was about being a symbol to all that witnessed the ship.
As for the Galaxy.
To those against I would ask a few questions.
How would increasing the current turn rate of the Galaxy by as much as, but not more than, 2, create an imbalance in the game? And how?
Will altering the current bridge officer layout into something similar to the Ambassador or Fleet Excelsior cause a significant shift in PvE/PvP that will be detrimental to the game or its playerbase? And how?
Would introducing a single additional tactical console at the expense of an engineering console upset the current balance of the game? And how?
You want a cruiser with more of those, there's already a few to choose from. So ... round and round this whole silliness goes.
Want a tactical focused cruiser? Choose one of the ones that already does that.
So you want an 8 turn rate. More tactical consoles and a better tactical BOFF layout?
In other words, you want to fly the Assault Cruiser with a Galaxy Skin?
Either give the fleet version the 3rd tact console and make the ensign eng uni or give her a turn buff to 8 to allow us to tank a bit better and rotate weakened shields out of line of fire.
The Galaxy is the most crippled ship in this game by its design.
Low turn rate.
Too many low eng engineering powers
Weak firepower
Saucer separation that has a 5 min cd
But i got a better idea, the Galaxy was supposed to be the benchmark for the tank part of the mmo trilogy in this game. How about we lower every other cruiser to a turn rate of 6. A lt tactical station a lt sci station and focus every cruiser solely on engineering and hull healing i mean the tank in the mmo trilogy isn't supposed to be a damage dealer, he is supposed to simply be the guy who takes the beating whilst Sci de-buffs and Tact blows it up.
So Vor'cha, Negh'var, Excelsior, Ambassador,Regent, D'Kora, Galor, D'Deridex and other cruiser captains you are now toothless punchbags, designed to be just that a punch bag, you're ships now nothing special, you have no sci abilities for crowd control, no tact abilities above Lt to do any damage and contribute to a fire fight, you are now a boring brick that can barely turn, and just sit and be hit.
Hey why should the Galaxy get special treatment after all its working as intended, the other cruisers in this game are the ones that are broken, so lets gimp i mean fix them
that is an opinion, not a fact.
that you found that this utopia is unrealistic or unplausible is irrelevent since you are not the author of that franchise.
human in the federation according to gen roddenberry " vision" are not dependant to money, profit, there is no poor anymore, everyone have food and acces to medecine.
everyone work for the better of all not for personal profit.
and that is not in place only in 3 first season of tng, it beguin with the TOS serie.
so i insist, the federation in star trek is about living in an utopia.
and, also... since the human race as of today never achieve an utopian society with theses criterias, on what experience do you conclude that this would lead to less awareness?
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
that the reason of this thread, THEY ARE INDEED ship with more of those.
like the star cruiser for example, more science bo slot, better turn rate, and you known what it is even not a cstore ship.
so can we have a galaxy retrofit and galaxy x cstore ship that are at the level of other cstore ship?.
not boost T4 ship.
that mean a ship that is sligtly better than a non cstore ship, not the contrary.
because as of today the galaxy retrofit is slightly inferior to a simple star cruiser.
that is in contradiction with the cstore ship strategy of cryptic.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
So you all just really want a fleet assault cruiser with a Galaxy skin.
Got it.
Thanks.
Though I don't see Geko bringing that to existence, since, you know, the Fleet Assault Cruiser already exists.
That was kind of my point on the use of the term "flagship" in TNG, they really had no idea what they were talking about and just thought it was cool. Remember, these were the guys that had to techno-babble their way through much of TNG.
Actually, working to make engineer skills as on par as tac and sci skills would help cruisers tremendously, especially the Galaxy. Having potent Commander and Lt. Commander eng' BoFF skills would go a long way for cruisers.
We actually just got more maneuverability for our ships. It shouldn't be that hard to get better than a 16 degree turn rate on a Galaxy now, especially with a Warp Core with extra power to engines. RCS's have been changed to improve the way they have worked on cruisers and the Galaxy-R can now do a Saucer Sep' and have escort like turning.
I am all for a rehash on how beam weapons work, the drain is honestly more of a problem in doing dps than anything else with cruisers.
i don't see where you see that the star cruiser is an assault cruiser?
i don't want the galaxy retrofit to be an assault cruiser but something slighty or even equal at tanking than an star cruiser.
i reserve a tactical oriented bo layout for the galaxy x, and this one is not a clone of the regent and other tactical cruiser either
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
how is anyone supposed to take you seriously when you want a fricking connie set up the exact same way that your now bashing? this could not be more ironic. us wanting the galaxy like that compared to what you want makes us look totally sane.
and no body in this thread said they wanted a regent clone, though with a setup like that the saucer separation would actually be beneficial, instead of irreverent to it
eh, id want ether a 3 pack like thing thats in that thread in my sig, or the galor setup without the universal station. thats a counterpart to the ambassador setup. or the d'deridex setup, with a LT eng instead of those 2 ENS stations
Roddenberry wan't able to truly articulate Star Treks human portion of the universe as a "Utopian Society", they could barely accommodate the bottom two parts of Maslows Hierarchy of Needs, which is the minimum required to attempt to start a Utopian Society. Also, if TOS's universe didn't have value in profit, why were there guys like Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones running around trading with other humans for profit, risking their safety and lives for accumulation of wealth? There was less scarcity for basic needs, but there was still scarcity, people still worked for something more than for self realization or social status.
As far as less awareness in a Utopia, there a period in any society, where the people believe that they are living in the pinnacle of human societal evolution and drop their guard because they believe there can not be any relevant external threat to their way of life. The Romans were a perfect example of this towards their end. The Harrapan (of Indus Valley, modern day India) society pre-conquest (circa 1500 BC) was an extremely well planned society that had all needs of food, shelter and medicine (at that times standards) and bountiful trade with other societies in Mesopotamia. They experienced a time of peace and tranquility that they enjoyed so much that barely even maintained a military to defend itself. It was then overrun by the Aryans
There also has been "Utopian" societies attempted in the U.S., they collapsed upon themselves because, after time members became too fixated on attaining self actualization and not upon ensuring the day to day survival of the "society", crippling it from the inside by lack of productivity or externally by failing to defend it by allowing in new members that weren't as committed as they were.
I agree, TOS showed a society that had greatly improved over the last three centuries, early TNG tried to assert a Utopian society, but couldn't articulate the basics of how it was maintained or even guided, it was the biggest accidental becoming and sustaining of a Utopia that I have ever read, seen or heard of since Zardoz (diaper wearing Sean Connery and all.)
If you want something that tanks like a Star Cruiser, use a Star Cruiser. Sounds to me like the only difference of what you want is a different skin.