Question to the guys who are against the Galaxy being retrofitted and made more competitive in this game. You refer to the shows on how the Galaxy was not a combat vessel, Linked youtube vids of her fails, referred her fails in episodes and appear to discount the episodes that show her in a good light, tell us how weak it was and this evidence shows the ship is not what we fanboys think it is.
On this basis, what evidence do we have from the shows to prove the Excelsior is a better combat vessel than the Galaxy, the Ambassador being a better combat vessel than the Galaxy and a having better Science abilities, and the Cheyenne being a better combat ship.
What evidence is there to show that these ships are superior or should be superior combat wise or Science wise over the Galaxy.
Remember the Galaxy was the lead ship for a T.V series where the show was about the human condition and was more science fiction than the TOS cowboys and bar brawls in space. It was a more thoughtful Trek where the crew out smarted the opponent rather than punched them into submission.
Lets talk Excelsior TNG she was pretty much a ferry for transporting diplomats and Admirals around the Federation, DS9 She performed very poorly during the Dominion War. Was cannon fodder not a single kill shown on screen, the Galaxy out performed her in the fleet fights we saw.
Ambassador. We know 1 was present and destroyed at Wolf 359. One was part of the Picards task force in his attempt to block Romulan Support to the Duras sisters. And we know the Ent-C defended valiantly a Klingon Outpost against 3 warbirds before going down in flames. Mainly due to being able to out maneuver them.
The Cheyenne. Kitbash ship used for the BOBW graveyard scene
So please why are these 3 ships setup with better combat abilities boff and console setups, than the Galaxy and one has access to better Science abilities when from what we have seen with our own 2 eyes the Galaxy has the better feats.
Are we assuming the Excelsior, Ambassador Cheyenne are better, Because i haven't seen anything through any Star Trek episodes that shows them to be better than a Galaxy
I see a lot of people also go on about the Odysseys loss to the JemHadar and yes her weapons and shields didn't seem to be doing jack in that fight, but hey here comes a bad TRIBBLE new enemy, we need to make it look like they are bad TRIBBLE, we need to symbolize how bad TRIBBLE they are, what ship shall we have them destroy to show how bad TRIBBLE they are. A Miranda, a Excelsior, a Ambassador no no no, here we go our top of line and best ship the Galaxy, this will send chills down our views spine seeing a ship that looks like the Enterprise being carved up like a roast.
We started this and several other threads to address what we felt was a poor representation of the Galaxy class vessel. They weren't created to ask that it be the number one ship in the game. It has never been the objective.
So why all the ship vs ship comparisons?
Because as soon as we ask that the ship be revamped, we get attacked.
Polaronbeam is an excellent example. Those who are against like to come out and state their opinion as law. We try to present our case using canon and near canon sources that are supported by what is seen on screen. The amount of math, time and who knows what else that has been put into this argument by people such as Rogue Vulcan, Ilithi Dragon, Catamount, Ex Astris, dontdrunkimshoot and a few others is insane.
They have broken down every tv episode from TNG, DS9 and Voyager.
The math adds up, the phasers, shields, hull, engines everything follows a set pattern that has very very few deviations from each other.
Yet despite this.
And yes, they even take into account things like the D'D firing at the Ent-D and Generations, they and ourselves are labeled as frothing fanboys. Nevermind that for most of us the Galaxy isn't even our favorite ship!
The way that we have stated phasers work is backed by their on-screen showing. Every time. The numbers being said fluctuate but the behavior of the weapon does not.
The Galaxy has over 1,000 emitters when seen on-screen.
The tech manuals which some of you have started to pull from state that each emitter can discharge 5.1MW of energy. And that they pass this energy along from one emitter to the next until discharged. There is no mention of loss of energy. Also, most of us lack the basic understanding of physics to even argue for or against this. (Energy vs Power for example.)
While this number does not fit the amount of damage seen being inflicted on-screen. It is the base from which much has been done for the comparison work. And the behavior does fit mathematically with what is seen on-screen.
The Iowa would own the newest destroyer in ship to ship combat.
It has larger guns, more damage soak and can be equipped with anything that the destroyer can be, and have more of it. Size does matter.
We say that phasers are a mature technology due to the fact that they have been around for a few hundred years. Since before Kirk was Captain of the Enterprise. They are by no means a new technology.
Saying that we are ignoring tech advances and possible break through technology is simply not true.
If it is true, then point it out. Where is this new tech? When is it mentioned? It isn't. So we can't say it does.
Look at the Photon Torpedo. How long has that been around in Star Trek? And when did we see the first Quantum Torpedo?
We have even acknowledged that the Sovereign has a much greater density of emitters and torpedo tubes than what was seen in Generations on the Galaxy.
What you who are frothing back at us fail to recognize is the credit we do give to the Sovereign and other ships. That we have looked at what you are saying we haven't.
And what has been seen is not backing your claims.
The Sovereign has never been displayed as a super powerful ship.
It has one ship kill to its credit from ship to ship combat.
The Defiant has been shown getting it's trash kicked by other ships, yet that is ignored by most. The Intrepid class was shown getting wrecked all the time, it was only with exotic technology and tech from the future that Voyager survived at all. Built to spec she was a small ship with limited tactical abilities. As shown on-screen.
The Prometheus was shown as taking out a Nebula that was catching up to her.
No-one acknowledges that the Nebula was catching up to the fastest ship in the fleet. A feat that regardless of tech level will be destroying your engine. The background story of the Prometheus' destruction of a D'D Warbird is never addressed or acknowledged by fans of the Prometheus, yet they aren't labeled fan boys. Despite the blatant ignoring of the fact that you have 2 warships and a heavily slanted(according to fans) Akira class present. Or that the ship that was destroyed seemingly had no shields indicating some sort of prior conflict that had drained them.
The canon states specifically that the Galaxy is a battleship.
You cannot deny that. It happens 3 times.
The Sovereign is stated as being the most advanced. Advanced does not equal more powerful. My dad's laptop is more advanced than my desktop. But my desktop has more processing power, better graphic capability, more memory and a larger power supply.
Mine will out perform his more advanced laptop.
That doesn't change that his is more advanced.
Again, advanced does not mean more powerful.
Best part of this whole thing is that when asked a simple question, Why not bring the Galaxy inline with other T5 ships. You can't even answer.
Best part of this whole thing is that when asked a simple question, Why not bring the Galaxy inline with other T5 ships. You can't even answer.
That's more specifically polaronbeam. He consistently has a flawed opinion, tries to disprove theories by name-calling (the meaningless "Galaxy fanboy" term is most prominent) and criticizing their posts, instead of supplying counterevidence. However, when others do the same to him, he refuses to respond, or retreats back to name-calling. Quite immature, really.
Where do I stand? I'm just the one who sees the game as it is, and relaying that critical analysis back to this thread. Deep down inside I wish for a better Galaxy, but reality is whet keeps this suppressed. In regards to the ship ingame, it's highly unlikely anything will change.
Priorities. In Dev Land, you have to get the most bang for your buck with the resources at hand, and there's usually not enough resources to do everything at the same time. It gets frustrating when the feature you want keeps getting pushed back, but it's probably because the devs have to concentrate on different priorities set upon them by higher-ups. Sometimes devs will work on personal projects outside of the normal scope of their work, but usually it means that particular items will take longer to see the light of day, if it ever does. Remember, forum posts are not legally binding contracts, and that the schedule constantly changes. Just deal with it.
This is from the Star Trek Online lead designer. The fact that this ship hasn't changed yet, is proven by his words. Unfortunately, there's your answer.
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!
Where do I stand? I'm just the one who sees the game as it is, and relaying that critical analysis back to this thread. Deep down inside I wish for a better Galaxy, but reality is whet keeps this suppressed. In regards to the ship ingame, it's highly unlikely anything will change.
I can agree with that.
It is basically the same thing we are all thinking.
We have even acknowledged that the Sovereign has a much greater density of emitters and torpedo tubes than what was seen in Generations on the Galaxy.
What you who are frothing back at us fail to recognize is the credit we do give to the Sovereign and other ships. That we have looked at what you are saying we haven't.
And what has been seen is not backing your claims.
The Sovereign has never been displayed as a super powerful ship.
It has one ship kill to its credit from ship to ship combat.
The canon states specifically that the Galaxy is a battleship.
You cannot deny that. It happens 3 times.
The Sovereign is stated as being the most advanced. Advanced does not equal more powerful. My dad's laptop is more advanced than my desktop. But my desktop has more processing power, better graphic capability, more memory and a larger power supply.
Mine will out perform his more advanced laptop.
That doesn't change that his is more advanced.
Again, advanced does not mean more powerful.
Best part of this whole thing is that when asked a simple question, Why not bring the Galaxy inline with other T5 ships. You can't even answer.
Look if you guys feel that the Galaxy needs to be fixed then by golly it needs to be fixed. However what I take offense to is the minimalizing of the Sovereign. The E is described as the most advanced ship in the fleet. Now do you put that title on a ship that is faster than the other ships? Do you put that title on a ship that computes more than other ships. Or doesn't it seem logical that a ship called the most advanced ship in the fleet do everything better than previous ships?
When the D came out and was called the most advanced ship in the fleet doesnt that mean it's better than every other ship? Shouldnt the D be better than the A, B and C???
If the Navy decided to build a Battleship now wouldnt it be more powerful and advanced than the Iowa?
The galaxy should be the third best cruiser behind the sovereign and the oddy.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
That's more specifically polaronbeam. He consistently has a flawed opinion, tries to disprove theories by name-calling (the meaningless "Galaxy fanboy" term is most prominent) and criticizing their posts, instead of supplying counterevidence. However, when others do the same to him, he refuses to respond, or retreats back to name-calling. Quite immature, really.
Where do I stand? I'm just the one who sees the game as it is, and relaying that critical analysis back to this thread. Deep down inside I wish for a better Galaxy, but reality is whet keeps this suppressed. In regards to the ship ingame, it's highly unlikely anything will change.
This is from the Star Trek Online lead designer. The fact that this ship hasn't changed yet, is proven by his words. Unfortunately, there's your answer.
And yet, my "flawed opinion" regarding your "space hotel" seems to have withstood the test of time longer than your THREE YEARS of whining with absolutely NO RESULTS. And if you really believe that Geko is somehow "going rouge" without Cryptic/CBS's knowledge and approval, then you Galaxy fanboys are really more out of touch with your situation than I realized.
BTW, I'm NOT required to respond to you of ANY of you Galaxy fanboys in the manner that YOU want me to, so your "school yard taunts" are really irrelevant to me, as I prove by just answering what I want to answer. Once again, this is the tone that was set by you Galaxy fanboys early on in this thread, and now that it's being applied toward YOU, you're whining like little children with skinned knees. Typical.
No one is compelling you or any of you Galaxy fanboys to respond or acknowledge my posts, other than your own bruised egos and need to get "the last word". If you don't want to deal with my opinions, it's rather simple: Don't bother to acknowledge them.
It's clear that you guys have absolutely no plan or will to change your situation with the Galaxy other than whining for ANOTHER THREE YEARS. Either you are too lazy or too unorganized to try to contact Cryptic/CBS directly in order to try to change your situation. If there are so many "Galaxy lovers" in this game as you claim, shouldn't you be able to at least start an online petition requesting the changes that you want? Nope. Instead you trot out a 20+ year old "tech manual" of a television that has been of the air for almost 20 years, rage against episodes, writers, developers, and anyone with a differing opinion regarding your beloved "space hotel".
If you Galaxy fanboys lack the will and determination to really try to get changes done, why should anyone, INCLUDING Cryptic listen to you, when it's clear to everyone BUT you that Cryptic's revenue stream does NOT depend on you disgruntled Galaxy fanboys?
And yet, my "flawed opinion" regarding your "space hotel" seems to have withstood the test of time longer than your THREE YEARS of whining with absolutely NO RESULTS. And if you really believe that Geko is somehow "going rouge" without Cryptic/CBS's knowledge and approval, then you Galaxy fanboys are really more out of touch with your situation than I realized.
BTW, I'm NOT required to respond to you of ANY of you Galaxy fanboys in the manner that YOU want me to, so your "school yard taunts" are really irrelevant to me, as I prove by just answering what I want to answer. Once again, this is the tone that was set by you Galaxy fanboys early on in this thread, and now that it's being applied toward YOU, you're whining like little children with skinned knees. Typical.
No one is compelling you or any of you Galaxy fanboys to respond or acknowledge my posts, other than your own bruised egos and need to get "the last word". If you don't want to deal with my opinions, it's rather simple: Don't bother to acknowledge them.
It's clear that you guys have absolutely no plan or will to change your situation with the Galaxy other than whining for ANOTHER THREE YEARS. Either you are too lazy or too unorganized to try to contact Cryptic/CBS directly in order to try to change your situation. If there are so many "Galaxy lovers" in this game as you claim, shouldn't you be able to at least start an online petition requesting the changes that you want? Nope. Instead you trot out a 20+ year old "tech manual" of a television that has been of the air for almost 20 years, rage against episodes, writers, developers, and anyone with a differing opinion regarding your beloved "space hotel".
If you Galaxy fanboys lack the will and determination to really try to get changes done, why should anyone, INCLUDING Cryptic listen to you, when it's clear to everyone BUT you that Cryptic's revenue stream does NOT depend on you disgruntled Galaxy fanboys?
... you do realize that everything you just said about us "fanboys" also applys to you so where does this moral superior stance of yours justified?
Look if you guys feel that the Galaxy needs to be fixed then by golly it needs to be fixed. However what I take offense to is the minimalizing of the Sovereign. The E is described as the most advanced ship in the fleet. Now do you put that title on a ship that is faster than the other ships? Do you put that title on a ship that computes more than other ships. Or doesn't it seem logical that a ship called the most advanced ship in the fleet do everything better than previous ships?
When the D came out and was called the most advanced ship in the fleet doesnt that mean it's better than every other ship? Shouldnt the D be better than the A, B and C???
If the Navy decided to build a Battleship now wouldnt it be more powerful and advanced than the Iowa?
The galaxy should be the third best cruiser behind the sovereign and the oddy.
i agree the sov is more powerful tacticly in cannon its like comparing a iowa class battleship(sov) to a south dakota(galaxy) both are good one is just a little better then the other
however ingame its like comparing a iowa to a Clemson class distroyer
Look if you guys feel that the Galaxy needs to be fixed then by golly it needs to be fixed. However what I take offense to is the minimalizing of the Sovereign. The E is described as the most advanced ship in the fleet. Now do you put that title on a ship that is faster than the other ships? Do you put that title on a ship that computes more than other ships. Or doesn't it seem logical that a ship called the most advanced ship in the fleet do everything better than previous ships?
When the D came out and was called the most advanced ship in the fleet doesnt that mean it's better than every other ship? Shouldnt the D be better than the A, B and C???
If the Navy decided to build a Battleship now wouldnt it be more powerful and advanced than the Iowa?
The galaxy should be the third best cruiser behind the sovereign and the oddy.
Khan, we love the Sovereign.
She has one of the sleekest most sexy profiles and loadouts in all of Star Trek.
Most of us that argue that the Galaxy is a superior phaser platform fly Sovereigns in every game. They are just an all around cooler looking ship. (In many opinions.)
We aren't interested in marginalizing the Sovereign at all.
if the Gal can receive modern/current tech to surpass the Sovereign then why can't the Ambassador or Exel receive the same upgrades and maybe surpass the Gal?
if the old ships can be upgraded then so can the galaxy(which actually was supposed to have a 100 year hull life) and has a 80 year head start on tech and design also there is only so much a ship can be upgraded before it is too hard or expensive resource wise or the US navy would still use gato class submarines instead of 688's and Virginia's
Khan, we love the Sovereign.
She has one of the sleekest most sexy profiles and loadouts in all of Star Trek.
Most of us that argue that the Galaxy is a superior phaser platform fly Sovereigns in every game. They are just an all around cooler looking ship. (In many opinions.)
We aren't interested in marginalizing the Sovereign at all.
thats all i am concerned with...just like the ENT J is better than ENT A-I and ENT Z takes up the whole Epsilon Quadrant
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Look if you guys feel that the Galaxy needs to be fixed then by golly it needs to be fixed. However what I take offense to is the minimalizing of the Sovereign. The E is described as the most advanced ship in the fleet. Now do you put that title on a ship that is faster than the other ships? Do you put that title on a ship that computes more than other ships. Or doesn't it seem logical that a ship called the most advanced ship in the fleet do everything better than previous ships?
When the D came out and was called the most advanced ship in the fleet doesnt that mean it's better than every other ship? Shouldnt the D be better than the A, B and C???
If the Navy decided to build a Battleship now wouldnt it be more powerful and advanced than the Iowa?
The galaxy should be the third best cruiser behind the sovereign and the oddy.
"Advanced" does not translate into "every system is far superior". For example, I could say that the Apple iPod 5 is the most advanced iPod ever, because it has a bigger screen, better processor, better camera, etc. However, no doubt there are elements of the iPod that have not become more technologically progressive compared to the iPod before it (rough example, the headphone jack. The design of the headphone jack is probably still the same as the one on my second-generation iPod.)
And yet, my "flawed opinion" regarding your "space hotel" seems to have withstood the test of time longer than your THREE YEARS of whining with absolutely NO RESULTS. And if you really believe that Geko is somehow "going rouge" without Cryptic/CBS's knowledge and approval, then you Galaxy fanboys are really more out of touch with your situation than I realized.
BTW, I'm NOT required to respond to you of ANY of you Galaxy fanboys in the manner that YOU want me to, so your "school yard taunts" are really irrelevant to me, as I prove by just answering what I want to answer. Once again, this is the tone that was set by you Galaxy fanboys early on in this thread, and now that it's being applied toward YOU, you're whining like little children with skinned knees. Typical.
No one is compelling you or any of you Galaxy fanboys to respond or acknowledge my posts, other than your own bruised egos and need to get "the last word". If you don't want to deal with my opinions, it's rather simple: Don't bother to acknowledge them.
It's clear that you guys have absolutely no plan or will to change your situation with the Galaxy other than whining for ANOTHER THREE YEARS. Either you are too lazy or too unorganized to try to contact Cryptic/CBS directly in order to try to change your situation. If there are so many "Galaxy lovers" in this game as you claim, shouldn't you be able to at least start an online petition requesting the changes that you want? Nope. Instead you trot out a 20+ year old "tech manual" of a television that has been of the air for almost 20 years, rage against episodes, writers, developers, and anyone with a differing opinion regarding your beloved "space hotel".
If you Galaxy fanboys lack the will and determination to really try to get changes done, why should anyone, INCLUDING Cryptic listen to you, when it's clear to everyone BUT you that Cryptic's revenue stream does NOT depend on you disgruntled Galaxy fanboys?
"Withstanding the test of time" has no meaning. The contents of this entire forum has "withstood the test of time", because posts do not disappear. :P
As for Geko going rogue: No one but you discussed or even thought about that. I don't even know where you are pulling this out from.
Yes, you are not required to respond. But, like Wesley refusing to respond to Picard's questions in one of the TNG episodes, saying nothing is the equivalent of admitting to the fact that your position is incorrect. Unless of course, you feel it isn't, where you do choose to respond.
Which is fine with me, really. It means to everyone including myself, that you can't even answer those questions because you do not have an answer yourself. We all know it. There's no need to protest and say "Oh, well I don't need to respond if I don't have to". Saying you're wrong is perfectly okay, and no one will judge you for it.
Yeah, you're right. I have no will to change the Galaxy. Because it ain't happening. That's what the whole quote from Captain Geko was for. They don't have the time to invest in changing a product which, flawed as it may be, is making them money purely off of the ships' image. And again, I don't rage. When have I ever raged? Show me proof that I raged in this thread. (And this is what I mean. It is incredibly arrogant to assume you know anything about me at all.)
Petitions are banned, and you know it.
By the way, your consistently used-and-proven broken term has no effect anymore. Just to help you out: no one really cares anymore.
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!
I have always wanted a reasonable Galaxy. I say leavethe t4 Galaxy alone and fix the Retro. and the fix I have suggested has always been easy and does not make her an uber ship just better and closer to canon. The truth is the galaxy at this point in time should be the 3rd most powerful ship in the fed fleet after sov and Oddy. I feel sov and gal are about equal but have different leanings. Gal was exploration and Sov defense.
Let's take a look at the behavior of starfleet as a whole. We start with Ent era. new and innocent the pride of their fleet the NX Enterprise launches to see what's out their. Their findings show a more hostile enviroment and they reacted accordingly. The Colombia at launch was more powerful the the Enterprise at launch for the mentaility of the fleet changed and note the Enterprise was refitted to be more combat capable. But the TOS era starfleet ships in general maintian a balance of exploration and combat. Their best ships could explore space and when the need arises defend the federation and her interests. This continues through TMP era and even stated in Star Trek 6 when one admiral asked were they mothballing starfleet the responded that their exploration and science duites would not be affected by the peace treaty with the Klingons. By TNG era they were in an Alliance with the Klingons and no contact with the Romulans since Naranda 3 and had a peace treaty with them. and they have had skirmish wars since. The Galaxy as a result was heavily designed for exploration over combat. at the time she was tje strongest ship in the fleet and the designers thought she was adequely armed to defend herself from threats. Wolf 359 and Destruction of most of the original Galaxys and the increasing conflict in the Galaxy. cause them to rethink their stance. the answer was the FC era ships. all clearly more combat minded then the last group. While the Miranda's and Excels got creamed during the war the galaxy did well, a credit to the designers to adress the issues the ship had. After the war those galaxys would be finished and they fleet rebuild would be happening with newer designs replacing the aging Miranda. Starfleet likely reverted to the balance stance of eploration and combat then the exploration lean during TNG or the combat leaning during DW.
Now polerarm stop the name calling heck might as well stop posting here since all you currently shown is hate. All trek fans wether they like the galaxy class or not do at least want to see the ship properly presented in the game.I want her close to canon as possible while maintaining game balence. now some of us trek fans may disagree on how that's done and why we all agree on that fact and WE DON'T NAME CALL EACH OTHER. If you don't have anything contructive to say then simply......SHUT UP.
I have always wanted a reasonable Galaxy. I say leave the t4 Galaxy alone and fix the Retro.
I feel sov and gal are about equal but have different leanings. Gal was exploration and Sov defense.
Now polerarm stop the name calling heck might as well stop posting here since all you currently shown is hate. All trek fans wether they like the galaxy class or not do at least want to see the ship properly presented in the game.I want her close to canon as possible while maintaining game balence. now some of us trek fans may disagree on how that's done and why we all agree on that fact and WE DON'T NAME CALL EACH OTHER. If you don't have anything contructive to say then simply......SHUT UP.
Agree with that first sentence there and the whole of the last paragraph.
Disagree with the in game Sovvy and Gal-R being equal from a performance standpoint. I have played for nearly two years now and cruisers exclusive, I can make my freebie Sovvy fly circles around and outgun my Gal-R by a wide margin. The only advantage I will give the Galaxy is hull points, and let's face it, in STO battle situations, a few more points in hull doesn't make a big difference, both will die or survive pretty much the same.
And just to add my voice to everyone else who is trying to clarify: I am not asking the Galaxy to be the top-of-the-line uber ship of the game. I would hazard to say that 99% of the posters here do not have that in mind either. We just want the Galaxy Retrofit that is being sold as a T5 ship to actually perform to that standard. As she is, she falls quite a bit below that mark. (Is the freebie Sovereign T4? T4.5?)
Agree with that first sentence there and the whole of the last paragraph.
Disagree with the in game Sovvy and Gal-R being equal from a performance standpoint. I have played for nearly two years now and cruisers exclusive, I can make my freebie Sovvy fly circles around and outgun my Gal-R by a wide margin. The only advantage I will give the Galaxy is hull points, and let's face it, in STO battle situations, a few more points in hull doesn't make a big difference, both will die or survive pretty much the same.
And just to add my voice to everyone else who is trying to clarify: I am not asking the Galaxy to be the top-of-the-line uber ship of the game. I would hazard to say that 99% of the posters here do not have that in mind either. We just want the Galaxy Retrofit that is being sold as a T5 ship to actually perform to that standard. As she is, she falls quite a bit below that mark. (Is the freebie Sovereign T4? T4.5?)
Note I wasn't comapring the Sto versions of Gal and sov. I was comparing them to canon. the Sto yes. i still have my freebie sov and held my own against an Oddy AND a GalX teamed against me.
Tier 5, actually. C-Store ships are often referred as "T5.5" since they are also T5, but cost more and have the consoles and stuff.
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!
admiral: Gotcha! And impressive work fending off a Oddy and Gal-X, I still have my free Sovvy and patrol her now and again. She is really great for a free ship. Come to think of it, every free ship I've gotten is really good. MY freebie Oddy and Ambassador rock socks too. Thanks for those Cryptic!
stardestoyer: Thank you for clearing that up. Makes sense. (Now if Cryptic devs would just realize it! Yep, I went there! )
admiral: Gotcha! And impressive work fending off a Oddy and Gal-X, I still have my free Sovvy and patrol her now and again. She is really great for a free ship. Come to think of it, every free ship I've gotten is really good. MY freebie Oddy and Ambassador rock socks too. Thanks for those Cryptic!
stardestoyer: Thank you for clearing that up. Makes sense. (Now if Cryptic devs would just realize it! Yep, I went there! )
Personally, I just think that they have got to the point where they don't care anymore. A lot of the stuff that the Dev's come out with seems like bitter resentment because they are not getting an easy ride... Star Trek is a massive franchise and personally, Cryptic took on a project WAY too big for them.
gecko has said that the galaxy, and some other older ships, are proboly going to get looked at. the galaxy was specifically mentioned. there is the problem with the second gen saucer separation, and fitting it to the galaxy because of the different in height on the venture neck. thats proboly the reason theres not multiple costumes on the ody, it would be to hard to get the sep tech to work.
all potential changes to the galaxy are being held off till that sep tech work is done. so the non argument about them over the course of 3 years not caring or wanting to change the ship is an even more worthless attempt at making a point then it already was.
being as subjective as possible, and relying on the technical explanation of phaser arrays from the tech manual, the galaxy simply has the most powerful beam array by far. the additive effect of emitters makes it so the longer it is, the more damage it can deal. no ship has an array even half as long as the 2 saucer arrays on the galaxy. following this path of logic, based on canon information, indicates pretty clearly were the galaxy sits in relation to other slightly more advanced ships, with vastly shorter arrays. if one were to stat the galaxy for a game, this information should be reliant. speaking of games, no trek game in the past had any of us that did this sort of research, and even if they did, they would have had to implement stats on the galaxy that go against popular opinion. well, i dont give a damn about that, i care about facts. its not just the main array ether, theres analysis of the shield strength, hull armor, torpedo launching volume capacity of those 2 huge torpedo launchers, a size advantage being more then twice the volume of the sovereign, there is a whole lot of raw data and stats that if examined the same way the arrays were, show the galaxy quite favorably in all categories.
thats all i am concerned with...just like the ENT J is better than ENT A-I and ENT Z takes up the whole Epsilon Quadrant
altrought i am seduced with the fact that dontdrunkimshoot come with concerning the firepower potential of the galaxy, and that in my dream i like to see a refited galaxy for combat that would be more powerfull than a sovereign, it just daesn't seem right.
yes if we look at the propertie of the galaxy there is no reason to said that with upgrade he can not be as or more powerfull than the sovereign but this is a fictional show, so in my opinion what is more important is the intent of the creator of the show rather what what can be deduced by logical and fact.
i bielieve that their intend is that the sovereign is as or a little more powerfull than the galaxy who is much bigger ( wich to me seem like a big progress in technology ).
they are in the type of thinking that " newer is better" wich i do accept also EVEN if in the reality this statement can be disprove on many things.
but we are not talking about reality here,but a fictional show.
the only ship that could be given the capacitie to equal the sovereign firepower is the galaxy x wich is more than an upgrade but a restructuration of the ship to compete with newer and more tactical oriented ship of it time ( wich would fall in the sto era if i am not mistaken )
so yes, even if it puzzle me to see a smaller ship doing more damage ( at same level of technologie that is )
it would puzzle me much more to think that starfleet would give to one of the best crew a ship that is less good than the previous.
so no, i don't want it to be as powerfull as the sovereign.
and i also don't want the galaxy x to have the same bo layout as the regent, not because i don't want it to be as powerfull as the regent but because i don't want it to be as "weak" as the regent.
there is a possible bo layout that can allow her to be almost as powerfull without degrading her tanking capacities too much.
When it comes towards newer starships like the Vesta or Scimitar classes the Devs did their homework. It seems like they studied, reflected upon, and carefully read the Star Trek books on the Vesta.
When it comes towards the tech Manuel's of the Galaxy, sovereign, Intrepid and other older in game starships the devs didn't care to pick up any books at all. They just created them and released them to the wind.
Now real Star Trek fans are upset and disappointed. They need to go back read, study and reflect on ll the canon material they can find.
For example:
the Intrepid is can land on a planet. Now I know this might be hard to add, but I'm sure the ship has more secrets to unlock.
The galaxy has 3 torpedo launchers. The 3rd one is hidden within saucer separation. It also has a built in captains yacht too.
Now I'm sure that I missed out on a ton of other cool things. But this was just a starting point. Do more research devs on older class starships, all other ships from now on. This should be standard policy.
When it comes towards newer starships like the Vesta or Scimitar classes the Devs did their homework. It seems like they studied, reflected upon, and carefully read the Star Trek books on the Vesta.
When it comes towards the tech Manuel's of the Galaxy, sovereign, Intrepid and other older in game starships the devs didn't care to pick up any books at all. They just created them and released them to the wind.
Now real Star Trek fans are upset and disappointed. They need to go back read, study and reflect on ll the canon material they can find.
For example:
the Intrepid is can land on a planet. Now I know this might be hard to add, but I'm sure the ship has more secrets to unlock.
The galaxy has 3 torpedo launchers. The 3rd one is hidden within saucer separation. It also has a built in captains yacht too.
Now I'm sure that I missed out on a ton of other cool things. But this was just a starting point. Do more research devs on older class starships, all other ships from now on. This should be standard policy.
is there a tech manual for the Sovereign or Intrepid???
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
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!
And yet - the Sovereign Class 1701-E Enterprise is instrumental in blowing that self same cube away (you even see a shield flare as it flies in showing it successfully countering Borg attacks....
Yet some in the thread STILL feel that Galaxy Class should be and is still superior to the Sovereign Class.:eek:
(Oh and lastly, the Defiant wasn't able to be destroyed by that Borg Cube - as Picard said in the film -- "Adrift, but salvageable...")
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..."
And yet - the Sovereign Class 1701-E Enterprise is instrumental in blowing that self same cube away (you even see a shield flare as it flies in showing it successfully countering Borg attacks....
Yet some in the thread STILL feel that Galaxy Class should be and is still superior to the Sovereign Class.:eek:
(Oh and lastly, the Defiant wasn't able to be destroyed by that Borg Cube - as Picard said in the film -- "Adrift, but salvageable...")
Yes, but the Defiant was destroyed by a Breen Energy Dampening Weapon and besides, the Defiant was "adrift" right next to the Borg Cube when it exploded so that is pretty sloppy writing.
But I agree with you, the Sovereign SHOULD be more powerful then the Galaxy in a tactical sense but the Excelsior... Did you see any Excelsior class ships at the Battle of Sector 001... Oh wait... guess Starfleet LEARNT not to do that from Wolf 359.
... you do realize that everything you just said about us "fanboys" also applys to you so where does this moral superior stance of yours justified?
It makes me to STILL be happy with MY ship, so where does that leave YOU? Oh, I know, it leaves you in the EXACT same position that you were in THREE YEARS AGO: crying and whining without having enough conviction to stop playing a game that you spend a significant amount of your time whining about.
There is NO WAY I would spend three years whining about a game and still play it. Either move on, find an ACTUAL way to convince Cryptic to modify it, or accept it. But apparently, far too many of you Galaxy fanboys lack the conviction to take ANY stance other than WHINING. How is THAT working for you so far? (hint: zero)
So I guess that "moral superior stance" is justified since as I said, I wouldn't waste my time by simply whining and inexplicably refusing to alter my whining strategy while STILL playing the very same game that is causing me such distress.
It makes me to STILL be happy with MY ship, so where does that leave YOU? Oh, I know, it leaves you in the EXACT same position that you were in THREE YEARS AGO: crying and whining without having enough conviction to stop playing a game that you spend a significant amount of your time whining about.
There is NO WAY I would spend three years whining about a game and still play it. Either move on, find an ACTUAL way to convince Cryptic to modify it, or accept it. But apparently, far too many of you Galaxy fanboys lack the conviction to take ANY stance other than WHINING. How is THAT working for you so far? (hint: zero)
So I guess that "moral superior stance" is justified since as I said, I wouldn't waste my time by simply whining and inexplicably refusing to alter my whining strategy while STILL playing the very same game that is causing me such distress.
You seem to be missing the numerous posts from people who suggested a viable layout for the Galaxy-class. You post far too quickly for your own benefit.
As for wasting time, why are you here anyways? You don't support the Galaxy-class being changed, you don't provide solid evidence against the Galaxy-class being changed... so what really is your purpose here? (A lot of people here believe you are trolling. For your own sake, please give us a reason why you are not.)
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!
Comments
What a great post.
We started this and several other threads to address what we felt was a poor representation of the Galaxy class vessel. They weren't created to ask that it be the number one ship in the game. It has never been the objective.
So why all the ship vs ship comparisons?
Because as soon as we ask that the ship be revamped, we get attacked.
Polaronbeam is an excellent example. Those who are against like to come out and state their opinion as law. We try to present our case using canon and near canon sources that are supported by what is seen on screen. The amount of math, time and who knows what else that has been put into this argument by people such as Rogue Vulcan, Ilithi Dragon, Catamount, Ex Astris, dontdrunkimshoot and a few others is insane.
They have broken down every tv episode from TNG, DS9 and Voyager.
The math adds up, the phasers, shields, hull, engines everything follows a set pattern that has very very few deviations from each other.
Yet despite this.
And yes, they even take into account things like the D'D firing at the Ent-D and Generations, they and ourselves are labeled as frothing fanboys. Nevermind that for most of us the Galaxy isn't even our favorite ship!
The way that we have stated phasers work is backed by their on-screen showing. Every time. The numbers being said fluctuate but the behavior of the weapon does not.
The Galaxy has over 1,000 emitters when seen on-screen.
The tech manuals which some of you have started to pull from state that each emitter can discharge 5.1MW of energy. And that they pass this energy along from one emitter to the next until discharged. There is no mention of loss of energy. Also, most of us lack the basic understanding of physics to even argue for or against this. (Energy vs Power for example.)
While this number does not fit the amount of damage seen being inflicted on-screen. It is the base from which much has been done for the comparison work. And the behavior does fit mathematically with what is seen on-screen.
The Iowa would own the newest destroyer in ship to ship combat.
It has larger guns, more damage soak and can be equipped with anything that the destroyer can be, and have more of it. Size does matter.
We say that phasers are a mature technology due to the fact that they have been around for a few hundred years. Since before Kirk was Captain of the Enterprise. They are by no means a new technology.
Saying that we are ignoring tech advances and possible break through technology is simply not true.
If it is true, then point it out. Where is this new tech? When is it mentioned? It isn't. So we can't say it does.
Look at the Photon Torpedo. How long has that been around in Star Trek? And when did we see the first Quantum Torpedo?
We have even acknowledged that the Sovereign has a much greater density of emitters and torpedo tubes than what was seen in Generations on the Galaxy.
What you who are frothing back at us fail to recognize is the credit we do give to the Sovereign and other ships. That we have looked at what you are saying we haven't.
And what has been seen is not backing your claims.
The Sovereign has never been displayed as a super powerful ship.
It has one ship kill to its credit from ship to ship combat.
The Defiant has been shown getting it's trash kicked by other ships, yet that is ignored by most. The Intrepid class was shown getting wrecked all the time, it was only with exotic technology and tech from the future that Voyager survived at all. Built to spec she was a small ship with limited tactical abilities. As shown on-screen.
The Prometheus was shown as taking out a Nebula that was catching up to her.
No-one acknowledges that the Nebula was catching up to the fastest ship in the fleet. A feat that regardless of tech level will be destroying your engine. The background story of the Prometheus' destruction of a D'D Warbird is never addressed or acknowledged by fans of the Prometheus, yet they aren't labeled fan boys. Despite the blatant ignoring of the fact that you have 2 warships and a heavily slanted(according to fans) Akira class present. Or that the ship that was destroyed seemingly had no shields indicating some sort of prior conflict that had drained them.
The canon states specifically that the Galaxy is a battleship.
You cannot deny that. It happens 3 times.
The Sovereign is stated as being the most advanced. Advanced does not equal more powerful. My dad's laptop is more advanced than my desktop. But my desktop has more processing power, better graphic capability, more memory and a larger power supply.
Mine will out perform his more advanced laptop.
That doesn't change that his is more advanced.
Again, advanced does not mean more powerful.
Best part of this whole thing is that when asked a simple question, Why not bring the Galaxy inline with other T5 ships. You can't even answer.
That's more specifically polaronbeam. He consistently has a flawed opinion, tries to disprove theories by name-calling (the meaningless "Galaxy fanboy" term is most prominent) and criticizing their posts, instead of supplying counterevidence. However, when others do the same to him, he refuses to respond, or retreats back to name-calling. Quite immature, really.
Where do I stand? I'm just the one who sees the game as it is, and relaying that critical analysis back to this thread. Deep down inside I wish for a better Galaxy, but reality is whet keeps this suppressed. In regards to the ship ingame, it's highly unlikely anything will change.
This is from the Star Trek Online lead designer. The fact that this ship hasn't changed yet, is proven by his words. Unfortunately, there's your answer.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I can agree with that.
It is basically the same thing we are all thinking.
Look if you guys feel that the Galaxy needs to be fixed then by golly it needs to be fixed. However what I take offense to is the minimalizing of the Sovereign. The E is described as the most advanced ship in the fleet. Now do you put that title on a ship that is faster than the other ships? Do you put that title on a ship that computes more than other ships. Or doesn't it seem logical that a ship called the most advanced ship in the fleet do everything better than previous ships?
When the D came out and was called the most advanced ship in the fleet doesnt that mean it's better than every other ship? Shouldnt the D be better than the A, B and C???
If the Navy decided to build a Battleship now wouldnt it be more powerful and advanced than the Iowa?
The galaxy should be the third best cruiser behind the sovereign and the oddy.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
And yet, my "flawed opinion" regarding your "space hotel" seems to have withstood the test of time longer than your THREE YEARS of whining with absolutely NO RESULTS. And if you really believe that Geko is somehow "going rouge" without Cryptic/CBS's knowledge and approval, then you Galaxy fanboys are really more out of touch with your situation than I realized.
BTW, I'm NOT required to respond to you of ANY of you Galaxy fanboys in the manner that YOU want me to, so your "school yard taunts" are really irrelevant to me, as I prove by just answering what I want to answer. Once again, this is the tone that was set by you Galaxy fanboys early on in this thread, and now that it's being applied toward YOU, you're whining like little children with skinned knees. Typical.
No one is compelling you or any of you Galaxy fanboys to respond or acknowledge my posts, other than your own bruised egos and need to get "the last word". If you don't want to deal with my opinions, it's rather simple: Don't bother to acknowledge them.
It's clear that you guys have absolutely no plan or will to change your situation with the Galaxy other than whining for ANOTHER THREE YEARS. Either you are too lazy or too unorganized to try to contact Cryptic/CBS directly in order to try to change your situation. If there are so many "Galaxy lovers" in this game as you claim, shouldn't you be able to at least start an online petition requesting the changes that you want? Nope. Instead you trot out a 20+ year old "tech manual" of a television that has been of the air for almost 20 years, rage against episodes, writers, developers, and anyone with a differing opinion regarding your beloved "space hotel".
If you Galaxy fanboys lack the will and determination to really try to get changes done, why should anyone, INCLUDING Cryptic listen to you, when it's clear to everyone BUT you that Cryptic's revenue stream does NOT depend on you disgruntled Galaxy fanboys?
... you do realize that everything you just said about us "fanboys" also applys to you so where does this moral superior stance of yours justified?
It isn't and he knows it.
But the internet grants anonymity and many use that to abandon much and justify it.
/shrug
i agree the sov is more powerful tacticly in cannon its like comparing a iowa class battleship(sov) to a south dakota(galaxy) both are good one is just a little better then the other
however ingame its like comparing a iowa to a Clemson class distroyer
Khan, we love the Sovereign.
She has one of the sleekest most sexy profiles and loadouts in all of Star Trek.
Most of us that argue that the Galaxy is a superior phaser platform fly Sovereigns in every game. They are just an all around cooler looking ship. (In many opinions.)
We aren't interested in marginalizing the Sovereign at all.
if the old ships can be upgraded then so can the galaxy(which actually was supposed to have a 100 year hull life) and has a 80 year head start on tech and design also there is only so much a ship can be upgraded before it is too hard or expensive resource wise or the US navy would still use gato class submarines instead of 688's and Virginia's
thats all i am concerned with...just like the ENT J is better than ENT A-I and ENT Z takes up the whole Epsilon Quadrant
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
"Withstanding the test of time" has no meaning. The contents of this entire forum has "withstood the test of time", because posts do not disappear. :P
As for Geko going rogue: No one but you discussed or even thought about that. I don't even know where you are pulling this out from.
Yes, you are not required to respond. But, like Wesley refusing to respond to Picard's questions in one of the TNG episodes, saying nothing is the equivalent of admitting to the fact that your position is incorrect. Unless of course, you feel it isn't, where you do choose to respond.
Which is fine with me, really. It means to everyone including myself, that you can't even answer those questions because you do not have an answer yourself. We all know it. There's no need to protest and say "Oh, well I don't need to respond if I don't have to". Saying you're wrong is perfectly okay, and no one will judge you for it.
Yeah, you're right. I have no will to change the Galaxy. Because it ain't happening. That's what the whole quote from Captain Geko was for. They don't have the time to invest in changing a product which, flawed as it may be, is making them money purely off of the ships' image. And again, I don't rage. When have I ever raged? Show me proof that I raged in this thread. (And this is what I mean. It is incredibly arrogant to assume you know anything about me at all.)
Petitions are banned, and you know it.
By the way, your consistently used-and-proven broken term has no effect anymore. Just to help you out: no one really cares anymore.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Let's take a look at the behavior of starfleet as a whole. We start with Ent era. new and innocent the pride of their fleet the NX Enterprise launches to see what's out their. Their findings show a more hostile enviroment and they reacted accordingly. The Colombia at launch was more powerful the the Enterprise at launch for the mentaility of the fleet changed and note the Enterprise was refitted to be more combat capable. But the TOS era starfleet ships in general maintian a balance of exploration and combat. Their best ships could explore space and when the need arises defend the federation and her interests. This continues through TMP era and even stated in Star Trek 6 when one admiral asked were they mothballing starfleet the responded that their exploration and science duites would not be affected by the peace treaty with the Klingons. By TNG era they were in an Alliance with the Klingons and no contact with the Romulans since Naranda 3 and had a peace treaty with them. and they have had skirmish wars since. The Galaxy as a result was heavily designed for exploration over combat. at the time she was tje strongest ship in the fleet and the designers thought she was adequely armed to defend herself from threats. Wolf 359 and Destruction of most of the original Galaxys and the increasing conflict in the Galaxy. cause them to rethink their stance. the answer was the FC era ships. all clearly more combat minded then the last group. While the Miranda's and Excels got creamed during the war the galaxy did well, a credit to the designers to adress the issues the ship had. After the war those galaxys would be finished and they fleet rebuild would be happening with newer designs replacing the aging Miranda. Starfleet likely reverted to the balance stance of eploration and combat then the exploration lean during TNG or the combat leaning during DW.
Now polerarm stop the name calling heck might as well stop posting here since all you currently shown is hate. All trek fans wether they like the galaxy class or not do at least want to see the ship properly presented in the game.I want her close to canon as possible while maintaining game balence. now some of us trek fans may disagree on how that's done and why we all agree on that fact and WE DON'T NAME CALL EACH OTHER. If you don't have anything contructive to say then simply......SHUT UP.
Agree with that first sentence there and the whole of the last paragraph.
Disagree with the in game Sovvy and Gal-R being equal from a performance standpoint. I have played for nearly two years now and cruisers exclusive, I can make my freebie Sovvy fly circles around and outgun my Gal-R by a wide margin. The only advantage I will give the Galaxy is hull points, and let's face it, in STO battle situations, a few more points in hull doesn't make a big difference, both will die or survive pretty much the same.
And just to add my voice to everyone else who is trying to clarify: I am not asking the Galaxy to be the top-of-the-line uber ship of the game. I would hazard to say that 99% of the posters here do not have that in mind either. We just want the Galaxy Retrofit that is being sold as a T5 ship to actually perform to that standard. As she is, she falls quite a bit below that mark. (Is the freebie Sovereign T4? T4.5?)
Note I wasn't comapring the Sto versions of Gal and sov. I was comparing them to canon. the Sto yes. i still have my freebie sov and held my own against an Oddy AND a GalX teamed against me.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
stardestoyer: Thank you for clearing that up. Makes sense. (Now if Cryptic devs would just realize it! Yep, I went there!
Personally, I just think that they have got to the point where they don't care anymore. A lot of the stuff that the Dev's come out with seems like bitter resentment because they are not getting an easy ride... Star Trek is a massive franchise and personally, Cryptic took on a project WAY too big for them.
all potential changes to the galaxy are being held off till that sep tech work is done. so the non argument about them over the course of 3 years not caring or wanting to change the ship is an even more worthless attempt at making a point then it already was.
being as subjective as possible, and relying on the technical explanation of phaser arrays from the tech manual, the galaxy simply has the most powerful beam array by far. the additive effect of emitters makes it so the longer it is, the more damage it can deal. no ship has an array even half as long as the 2 saucer arrays on the galaxy. following this path of logic, based on canon information, indicates pretty clearly were the galaxy sits in relation to other slightly more advanced ships, with vastly shorter arrays. if one were to stat the galaxy for a game, this information should be reliant. speaking of games, no trek game in the past had any of us that did this sort of research, and even if they did, they would have had to implement stats on the galaxy that go against popular opinion. well, i dont give a damn about that, i care about facts. its not just the main array ether, theres analysis of the shield strength, hull armor, torpedo launching volume capacity of those 2 huge torpedo launchers, a size advantage being more then twice the volume of the sovereign, there is a whole lot of raw data and stats that if examined the same way the arrays were, show the galaxy quite favorably in all categories.
altrought i am seduced with the fact that dontdrunkimshoot come with concerning the firepower potential of the galaxy, and that in my dream i like to see a refited galaxy for combat that would be more powerfull than a sovereign, it just daesn't seem right.
yes if we look at the propertie of the galaxy there is no reason to said that with upgrade he can not be as or more powerfull than the sovereign but this is a fictional show, so in my opinion what is more important is the intent of the creator of the show rather what what can be deduced by logical and fact.
i bielieve that their intend is that the sovereign is as or a little more powerfull than the galaxy who is much bigger ( wich to me seem like a big progress in technology ).
they are in the type of thinking that " newer is better" wich i do accept also EVEN if in the reality this statement can be disprove on many things.
but we are not talking about reality here,but a fictional show.
the only ship that could be given the capacitie to equal the sovereign firepower is the galaxy x wich is more than an upgrade but a restructuration of the ship to compete with newer and more tactical oriented ship of it time ( wich would fall in the sto era if i am not mistaken )
so yes, even if it puzzle me to see a smaller ship doing more damage ( at same level of technologie that is )
it would puzzle me much more to think that starfleet would give to one of the best crew a ship that is less good than the previous.
so no, i don't want it to be as powerfull as the sovereign.
and i also don't want the galaxy x to have the same bo layout as the regent, not because i don't want it to be as powerfull as the regent but because i don't want it to be as "weak" as the regent.
there is a possible bo layout that can allow her to be almost as powerfull without degrading her tanking capacities too much.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
When it comes towards the tech Manuel's of the Galaxy, sovereign, Intrepid and other older in game starships the devs didn't care to pick up any books at all. They just created them and released them to the wind.
Now real Star Trek fans are upset and disappointed. They need to go back read, study and reflect on ll the canon material they can find.
For example:
the Intrepid is can land on a planet. Now I know this might be hard to add, but I'm sure the ship has more secrets to unlock.
The galaxy has 3 torpedo launchers. The 3rd one is hidden within saucer separation. It also has a built in captains yacht too.
Now I'm sure that I missed out on a ton of other cool things. But this was just a starting point. Do more research devs on older class starships, all other ships from now on. This should be standard policy.
is there a tech manual for the Sovereign or Intrepid???
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Not for the Sovereign, we only have Eaves' design notes. But the Intrepid, yes, there's a Tech Manual for that.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
"It was designed for one purpose only, to fight and defeat the Borg" - Sisko...
"Perhaps a day is a good day to die...!" One crippled Defiant in front of a Borg Cube. There's your Defiant Devs that you love so much... a failure...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7Lr8cdZwHQ
And yet - the Sovereign Class 1701-E Enterprise is instrumental in blowing that self same cube away (you even see a shield flare as it flies in showing it successfully countering Borg attacks....
Yet some in the thread STILL feel that Galaxy Class should be and is still superior to the Sovereign Class.:eek:
(Oh and lastly, the Defiant wasn't able to be destroyed by that Borg Cube - as Picard said in the film -- "Adrift, but salvageable...")
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..."
Yes, but the Defiant was destroyed by a Breen Energy Dampening Weapon and besides, the Defiant was "adrift" right next to the Borg Cube when it exploded so that is pretty sloppy writing.
But I agree with you, the Sovereign SHOULD be more powerful then the Galaxy in a tactical sense but the Excelsior... Did you see any Excelsior class ships at the Battle of Sector 001... Oh wait... guess Starfleet LEARNT not to do that from Wolf 359.
It makes me to STILL be happy with MY ship, so where does that leave YOU? Oh, I know, it leaves you in the EXACT same position that you were in THREE YEARS AGO: crying and whining without having enough conviction to stop playing a game that you spend a significant amount of your time whining about.
There is NO WAY I would spend three years whining about a game and still play it. Either move on, find an ACTUAL way to convince Cryptic to modify it, or accept it. But apparently, far too many of you Galaxy fanboys lack the conviction to take ANY stance other than WHINING. How is THAT working for you so far? (hint: zero)
So I guess that "moral superior stance" is justified since as I said, I wouldn't waste my time by simply whining and inexplicably refusing to alter my whining strategy while STILL playing the very same game that is causing me such distress.
You seem to be missing the numerous posts from people who suggested a viable layout for the Galaxy-class. You post far too quickly for your own benefit.
As for wasting time, why are you here anyways? You don't support the Galaxy-class being changed, you don't provide solid evidence against the Galaxy-class being changed... so what really is your purpose here? (A lot of people here believe you are trolling. For your own sake, please give us a reason why you are not.)
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!