I am saying that in our Real Life history we had proponents of certain types of war. IE Battleships. They felt they would be the end of all arguments and battles. Then a game changer of technology. In this case the Carrier and those big guns were obsolete. Technology did not climb in a straight line, it took a hard left.
To translate the concept to Star Trek. The Galaxy huge beam array was impressive, but some how less than feasible versus newer threats. Result, new ships are smaller, less carrying families, Instead of one or two big weapons they carry lots of smaller ones.
Take for example why they chose to send Voyager a science vessel to capture the makii. (I know I spelled that wrong) Because as Paris said there was no ship in Starfleet nimble enough for the environment of the badlands. Different circumstances get different ships, even back at the fleet planning stage.
It's not a change in technology that makes things obsolete in such a short amount of time. It's a change in thinking, an adaptation to current techniques, that causes things to become obsolete rather quickly.
The Galaxy-class large phaser array was still feasible against newer opponents. Look at Sacrifice of Angels. One Galaxy-class starship, with two quarter-power phaser shots, manages to stun/damage a DW-era Galor, and shortly afterward, a second Galaxy fires a similar shot to disable the same Galor. The full power shot, with a consistent beam, was never used! Another, in the Battle of Chin'toka, fires two torpedoes into an OWP, destroying it (even flying through the debris unscathed).
The Intrepid-class vessel was likely designed as a smaller-scale Galaxy-class, with the same intent of exploration, scientific research, diplomacy, and lesser combat, and required less crew for automation.
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!
perhaps we should at least try to get them to fix the model first. since day one the saucer impulse engines have run constantly on the saucer on both the galaxy and the gal-x they were never used unless the ship was separated
SERIOUSLY, HOW DID THEY **** THAT UP!?!?!?!?!?!?!
also has anyone noticed that there is no impulse engines on the nebula?
perhaps we should at least try to get them to fix the model first. since day one the saucer impulse engines have run constantly on the saucer on both the galaxy and the gal-x they were never used unless the ship was separated
SERIOUSLY, HOW DID THEY **** THAT UP!?!?!?!?!?!?!
also has anyone noticed that there is no impulse engines on the nebula?
Few things. See my other reply about I am using Real history to illuminate some of the whys and hows that technology can change or not change. I am not trying to say a space ship a bomber and a ww2 ship are the same thing. I am showing how technology does not follow a straight line as much as people would like it to.
Star Trek Technology (Especially weapons and defensive systems) haven't changed very much in over 150 years, and looking at possible future timelines, it won't change very much.
Star Trek isn't real life. In Star Trek things just work different than in other Sci fi universes, like BSG or Star Wars. For me it always was a welcome change from those stereotypes other Sci Fi universe have. Other people obviously can't wait for Star Trek to become the same old stuff like any other Sci Fi series, featuring Carriers, Space fighters and other stuff they find "cool".
Star Trek technology is exactly how the writers want it to be.
For me, a Star Trek universe where Starfleet consists of Escorts, Carriers and Space fighters isn't Star Trek anymore. Taking away it's uniqueness makes it just as exchangeable as some other Sci Fi series. Cryptic is on route to take away Star Treks uniqueness and making it more and more uninteresting (at least for me).
I wonder how wierd TNG or TOS would have been if the ship would have been a Carrier. I mean "... to explore strange new worlds..." in a Battlestar, yeah very believeable.
In my opinion, people wanting Escorts, Carriers or Starfighters haven't understood anything Star Trek is about. Just because people become more and more paranoid nowadays, doesn't mean that Star Trek has to be like them.
StarTrek was an ideal, which had little to do with reality or how Humanity will actually be in 200-400 years.
If most people rather want large scale space wars (like in DS9) or totally militarized Spaceships blowing everyting in pieces in their way, then Star Trek better should have died. At least it could have kept its ideals rather then being twisted into something completely different.
Starfleet having Escorts, Carriers and starfighters is a pervertion of what Star trek is about in my humble opinion.
"...'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
perhaps we should at least try to get them to fix the model first. since day one the saucer impulse engines have run constantly on the saucer on both the galaxy and the gal-x they were never used unless the ship was separated
SERIOUSLY, HOW DID THEY **** THAT UP!?!?!?!?!?!?!
also has anyone noticed that there is no impulse engines on the nebula?
This is something that I've been actively pushing for. The model of the Galaxy-class is horrendous. Neck shape, hull shape, saucer engines, deflector, etc etc etc.
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!
Star Trek Technology (Especially weapons and defensive systems) haven't changed very much in over 150 years, and looking at possible future timelines, it won't change very much.
Star Trek isn't real life. In Star Trek things just work different than in other Sci fi universes, like BSG or Star Wars. For me it always was a welcome change from those stereotypes other Sci Fi universe have. Other people obviously can't wait for Star Trek to become the same old stuff like any other Sci Fi series, featuring Carriers, Space fighters and other stuff they find "cool".
Star Trek technology is exactly how the writers want it to be.
For me, a Star Trek universe where Starfleet consists of Escorts, Carriers and Space fighters isn't Star Trek anymore. Taking away it's uniqueness makes it just as exchangeable as some other Sci Fi series. Cryptic is on route to take away Star Treks uniqueness and making it more and more uninteresting (at least for me).
I wonder how wierd TNG or TOS would have been if the ship would have been a Carrier. I mean "... to explore strange new worlds..." in a Battlestar, yeah very believeable.
In my opinion, people wanting Escorts, Carriers or Starfighters haven't understood anything Star Trek is about. Just because people become more and more paranoid nowadays, doesn't mean that Star Trek has to be like them.
StarTrek was an ideal, which had little to do with reality or how Humanity will actually be in 200-400 years.
If most people rather want large scale space wars (like in DS9) or totally militarized Spaceships blowing everyting in pieces in their way, then Star Trek better should have died. At least it could have kept its ideals rather then being twisted into something completely different.
Starfleet having Escorts, Carriers and starfighters is a pervertion of what Star trek is about in my humble opinion.
Hear hear, I'll sign that
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
This is something that I've been actively pushing for. The model of the Galaxy-class is horrendous. Neck shape, hull shape, saucer engines, deflector, etc etc etc.
I find the neck the most annoying. I mean even my sister saw that the angle is wrong, how can a "professional" designer not see that?
Is it just lack of interest, incompetence or did they actively make the ship look bad, because they hate it?
"...'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
Star Trek Technology (Especially weapons and defensive systems) haven't changed very much in over 150 years, and looking at possible future timelines, it won't change very much.
Star Trek isn't real life. In Star Trek things just work different than in other Sci fi universes, like BSG or Star Wars. For me it always was a welcome change from those stereotypes other Sci Fi universe have. Other people obviously can't wait for Star Trek to become the same old stuff like any other Sci Fi series, featuring Carriers, Space fighters and other stuff they find "cool".
Star Trek technology is exactly how the writers want it to be.
For me, a Star Trek universe where Starfleet consists of Escorts, Carriers and Space fighters isn't Star Trek anymore. Taking away it's uniqueness makes it just as exchangeable as some other Sci Fi series. Cryptic is on route to take away Star Treks uniqueness and making it more and more uninteresting (at least for me).
I wonder how wierd TNG or TOS would have been if the ship would have been a Carrier. I mean "... to explore strange new worlds..." in a Battlestar, yeah very believeable.
In my opinion, people wanting Escorts, Carriers or Starfighters haven't understood anything Star Trek is about. Just because people become more and more paranoid nowadays, doesn't mean that Star Trek has to be like them.
StarTrek was an ideal, which had little to do with reality or how Humanity will actually be in 200-400 years.
If most people rather want large scale space wars (like in DS9) or totally militarized Spaceships blowing everyting in pieces in their way, then Star Trek better should have died. At least it could have kept its ideals rather then being twisted into something completely different.
Starfleet having Escorts, Carriers and starfighters is a pervertion of what Star trek is about in my humble opinion.
perhaps we should at least try to get them to fix the model first. since day one the saucer impulse engines have run constantly on the saucer on both the galaxy and the gal-x they were never used unless the ship was separated
Actually during late TNG/DS9 (especially the Dominion War shots) Galaxy Class ships ran with all three impulse engines at full power even when connected.
You can see several Galaxy class ships in the fleet at around 3:30 into the clip, all with all three engines lit. So that doesn't bother me. Though I do agree with just about all of the rest of the thread.
sto is the only place voyager is a 'science vessel'.
in space, you have space ships, and the laws of physics.
you would need to change the laws of physics for your point to be valid.
Ahh the laws of physics that state that when a ship moving in space lose their engine power they slow to a stop?
Or the law of physics that says when a ship makes a hard turn everyone on board feels gravity slide to the new 'down' for the ship?
Please do not ask for pure physics in Star Trek. There is a reason it is science fiction.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Idk about running at full power but the saucer section engines were probably on hot standby incase the primary impulse engine on the back of the neck took damage. This way the ship wouldn't lose maneuverability at a critical moment in a battle.
The moment you mentioned that a question came to mind. How does any loss of power in the drive section mean you can't fire the phasers or have at least minimal shields with the independant power systems of the saucer section? These are basically two specialized ships docked together most of the time so loss of power in one should be made up for it from the other.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
The moment you mentioned that a question came to mind. How does any loss of power in the drive section mean you can't fire the phasers or have at least minimal shields with the independant power systems of the saucer section? These are basically two specialized ships docked together most of the time so loss of power in one should be made up for it from the other.
he said if the main was damaged power doesn't matter if the engine doesn't work, the saucer ones may have been on idle, his theory about the saucer engines available as backups is sound because i think they avoided using all 3 engines at the same time due to relativistic concerns(it is note worthy that all galaxy's shown using all 3 were in combat so it may have been a operational change after Ent-d was destroyed) it shoulnt be used as a base for the model because we have far more evidence showing them not in use then in use(also the saucer engines do not seam to be glowing as brightly as the main one which supports the backup idea)
The moment you mentioned that a question came to mind. How does any loss of power in the drive section mean you can't fire the phasers or have at least minimal shields with the independant power systems of the saucer section? These are basically two specialized ships docked together most of the time so loss of power in one should be made up for it from the other.
The Saucer Section
Saucer impulse engines P/S: run off of deuterium burn, can be used as a minimal power supply if needed. Runs independent of the warp reactor EPS system, since thrust is generated by force, not the EPS power grid.
Power supply: Saucer impulse engines, fusion reactors
Phasers: Hooked into the warp reactor power supply (same thing as the Enterprise-A). Will function off of fusion reactors if Saucer Separation is in effect.
Shields: Run off of the EPS grid. Unknown whether anything stronger than a basic shield bubble (protection against dust see VOY: "Year of Hell, Pt II") can be done off of Saucer Impulse Engine and.or fusion reactor power when separated.
The Stardrive Section
Engines: Warp engines fueled by EPS power grid. Main impulse engine uses the large deuterium tank in the Stardrive to operate, and can serve as emergency backup power supply.
Power supply: M/ARA warp reactor core, requires dilithium, deuterium injection and antimatter injection to operate. Main impulse engine can "burn" to create power if M/ARA is ejected or otherwise offline. Unknown if fusion reactors reside in the Stardrive.
Phasers: Run off of the warp reactor output power, via EPS power grid.
Shields: Also run off of EPS grid.
In short, when the Saucer is separated, it has to find its own power supply to power the phasers and shields. It can find this power from the engines and from the fusion reactors, although their power output is significantly smaller than a warp core power output level.
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!
The Saucer Section
Saucer impulse engines P/S: run off of deuterium burn, can be used as a minimal power supply if needed. Runs independent of the warp reactor EPS system, since thrust is generated by force, not the EPS power grid.
Power supply: Saucer impulse engines, fusion reactors
Phasers: Hooked into the warp reactor power supply (same thing as the Enterprise-A). Will function off of fusion reactors if Saucer Separation is in effect.
Shields: Run off of the EPS grid. Unknown whether anything stronger than a basic shield bubble (protection against dust see VOY: "Year of Hell, Pt II") can be done off of Saucer Impulse Engine and.or fusion reactor power when separated.
The Stardrive Section
Engines: Warp engines fueled by EPS power grid. Main impulse engine uses the large deuterium tank in the Stardrive to operate, and can serve as emergency backup power supply.
Power supply: M/ARA warp reactor core, requires dilithium, deuterium injection and antimatter injection to operate. Main impulse engine can "burn" to create power if M/ARA is ejected or otherwise offline. Unknown if fusion reactors reside in the Stardrive.
Phasers: Run off of the warp reactor output power, via EPS power grid.
Shields: Also run off of EPS grid.
If I am reading your reply correctly then they are not a pair of full starships as the saucer is only reserve power and STL flight. Independant shields and phasers would drain the saucer power to fast.
Thank you.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
My Opinion is while the Galaxy Class May infact be a heavily Engineer orientated ship, Cryptic had an Opportunity to make its counterpart, The Galaxy - X ala the Federation Dreadnought, a more tactical orientated ship. Which they failed to do.
If I am reading your reply correctly then they are not a pair of full starships as the saucer is only reserve power and STL flight. Independant shields and phasers would drain the saucer power to fast.
Thank you.
Exactly. To boil it down to the basics, the saucer is just a "large space town" with minimal defenses. The Stardrive is what contains the power.
(Of course, the saucer is armed with the large phaser arrays, however, the strength of a phaser beam when the saucer is separated is lower. To have high output, the large phaser arrays need to be connected to the stardrive warp power)
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!
How (bad) they made the Galaxy Class just shows that they don't really care how things in Star Trek work or what some things mean.
Bear in mind that the Galaxy class and its variants are "balanced" in line with the developer's assumptions for how "balance" should work.
The only way we'll see any change in the way ships are designed and balanced is if the community can persuade Cryptic that their underlying assumptions are wrong. This is something that'll be enormously difficult for several reasons:
1) Cryptic's developer culture isn't very open to such challenges
2) Even if they agreed that the existing system is desperately broken, they are loathe to take any actions that might negatively impact players' investment
3) And even if the first two points were overcame, there's still the fact that a sweeping rebalance effort would be an enormously costly project that cannot be justified as the F2P business and development model relies on a constant cycle of new content deprecating old.
1) dunno
2) sure, afaik they do have a manpower issue
3) no. completely wrong. that's not an f2p model. thats just bad design. what you are talking about is power creep happening because its easier to get quickly.
but its also game destroying.
1) I asserted that because past developer responses strongly indicate that they reject out of hand the notion that the current system is poor.
2) Nothing to do with manpower, everything to do with fear of player outrage. Every time there's even been rumours that something might get rebalanced or changed (beyond the fixing of outright bugs) there's sufficient forum outrage to force them to back down. Every time.
3) It is absolutely the F2P business and development model that Cryptic has adopted. Every project they do has to be justified by the potential sales return it'll create; a massive ship rebalancing project will be expensive and they cannot guarantee it'll generate more sales of current ships. As for MMO power creep -- it's a proven sales winner, it's not going away in F2P games.
the saucer impulse engines on a galaxy were never on in TNG because they weren't in a huge fleet battle proboly. in a combat situation, they would proboly be activated. they simply arent needed in any other situation wile unseperated
each impulse engine was direly connected to several fusion reactors, and those reactors also provided plasma to the EPS grid, even wile the impuse engines were at full power. they are the auxiliary power that gets called for often times. the impulse engines proboly didn't even need the fusion reactors they were connected to being active, the warp core generates more then enough plasma to drive the impulse engines wile not at warp.
in nemisis during the battle with the scimitar, the enterprise appeared to fight that whole battle on just the impulse fusion reactors, if the core was off line and not producing plasma. they were at full combat speed, had full power to shields and weapons, they basically looked unaffected by the loss of the core's plasma. the impuse fusion reactors are apparently very powerful, BUT they run on just deuterium, im guessing they are hilariously inefficient compared to the power per input you get out of a M/AM reaction. the E apparently burned through the entirety of its deuterium stores, causing the shooting battle to end
starcraft had this, it was hurting the game, they fixed the problem, took the hit & came back better for it.
if its the model cryptic has adopted, then i, from experience, will keep my money in my pocket, since i have seen games flat out die from following this action
rebalancing the ships is not that expensive. if they where competent there would be 2 or 3 people whos time was solely dedicated to balancing stats of ships & powers.
and the whining little exploit abusers could go & jump.
Welcome to the club skollulfr +)
I dropped STO ages ago because of the P2W and power creep model that was adopted shortly before the F2P model was revealed. And have only continued to stick around in the false hope that it might change. Sadly it only seems to be accelerating.
My Opinion is while the Galaxy Class May infact be a heavily Engineer orientated ship, Cryptic had an Opportunity to make its counterpart, The Galaxy - X ala the Federation Dreadnought, a more tactical orientated ship. Which they failed to do.
I agree. While I have no issue with the base Galaxy/variants being slanted toward engineers, I also feel the dreadnought cruiser should have been slanted toward tactical.
I agree. While I have no issue with the base Galaxy/variants being slanted toward engineers, I also feel the dreadnought cruiser should have been slanted toward tactical.
While I wholeheartedly agree, we must remember that at the time of the Galaxy and Galaxy-X design the game and more importantly the boff seating arrangements were very different. In the modern meta the game is played with a ship with a LT CMDR of a different class than its CMDR slot, and certainly without three ens slots of the same proffession. If anything that last one is the mayor stumbling block fed ships face, presumably KDF ships are in a similar situation.
Star Trek Technology (Especially weapons and defensive systems) haven't changed very much in over 150 years, and looking at possible future timelines, it won't change very much.
Star Trek isn't real life. In Star Trek things just work different than in other Sci fi universes, like BSG or Star Wars. For me it always was a welcome change from those stereotypes other Sci Fi universe have. Other people obviously can't wait for Star Trek to become the same old stuff like any other Sci Fi series, featuring Carriers, Space fighters and other stuff they find "cool".
Star Trek technology is exactly how the writers want it to be.
For me, a Star Trek universe where Starfleet consists of Escorts, Carriers and Space fighters isn't Star Trek anymore. Taking away it's uniqueness makes it just as exchangeable as some other Sci Fi series. Cryptic is on route to take away Star Treks uniqueness and making it more and more uninteresting (at least for me).
I wonder how wierd TNG or TOS would have been if the ship would have been a Carrier. I mean "... to explore strange new worlds..." in a Battlestar, yeah very believeable.
In my opinion, people wanting Escorts, Carriers or Starfighters haven't understood anything Star Trek is about. Just because people become more and more paranoid nowadays, doesn't mean that Star Trek has to be like them.
StarTrek was an ideal, which had little to do with reality or how Humanity will actually be in 200-400 years.
If most people rather want large scale space wars (like in DS9) or totally militarized Spaceships blowing everyting in pieces in their way, then Star Trek better should have died. At least it could have kept its ideals rather then being twisted into something completely different.
Starfleet having Escorts, Carriers and starfighters is a pervertion of what Star trek is about in my humble opinion.
I understand what you are suggesting the ideal of Star Trek is, which is the spirit of exploration both inside and out. While I agree that the exploration in Star Trek is performed by exploration ship and not full fledged warships, to suggest that carriers, battleships,fighters and escorts don't exist in Starfleet for its peacekeeping/wartime operations seems to be lacking. Sure the Connie and Galaxy explored (or were supposed to) beyond the borders of the Federation on their own, there must be a borderline/core-worlds defense capable of deterring invasion fleets from the likes of Klingons, Romulans, etc...
While it isn't the Holy Bible Canon, there has been reference to dreadnoughts, namely Federation classes in the first two Star Trek movies http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federation_class and in books. We have seen fighters and escorts in DS9, I would also go as far as to suggest that the lesser ships shown in the Sol system on Star Trek: Enterprise were some sort of destroyer/frigate designed for defense (albeit en masse). During times of peace, many are probably relegated to core world defense were they would be not as active so they may still be maintained and functional, but not used enough to increase wear and tear to keep costs down.
The exploration in Star Trek should be with ships like the Connie' or Galaxy, but there should be room for warships in combat use.
I understand what you are suggesting the ideal of Star Trek is, which is the spirit of exploration both inside and out. While I agree that the exploration in Star Trek is performed by exploration ship and not full fledged warships, to suggest that carriers, battleships,fighters and escorts don't exist in Starfleet for its peacekeeping/wartime operations seems to be lacking. Sure the Connie and Galaxy explored (or were supposed to) beyond the borders of the Federation on their own, there must be a borderline/core-worlds defense capable of deterring invasion fleets from the likes of Klingons, Romulans, etc...
While it isn't the Holy Bible Canon, there has been reference to dreadnoughts, namely Federation classes in the first two Star Trek movies http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federation_class and in books. We have seen fighters and escorts in DS9, I would also go as far as to suggest that the lesser ships shown in the Sol system on Star Trek: Enterprise were some sort of destroyer/frigate designed for defense (albeit en masse). During times of peace, many are probably relegated to core world defense were they would be not as active so they may still be maintained and functional, but not used enough to increase wear and tear to keep costs down.
The exploration in Star Trek should be with ships like the Connie' or Galaxy, but there should be room for warships in combat use.
Starfleet had no warships besides the Defiant. It was the first "warship" they ever build, everything before even during the Klingon wars were multi-mission ships. The famed Miranda was the "workhorse" of the fleet but could be refitted to be a destroyer kind of ship, the Constitution was a explorer but also well armed and with a biit of refitting could pose as a "battleship" if you will - but Starfleet never build "ships for war". Why can't people get over that in this fictional universe humanity does not need to build battleships when their design philosophy is as flexible as portrayed. Their ships could easily serve as peacekeeping forces without them being "ships of war". This is just the way Starfleet and the Federation were designed. They're still neither weak nor fools as they survived countless wars almost uncontested, there is still a "Starfleet Tactical" department concerned with defensive operations and they adapted quite well to the Dominion thread, although hopelessly overbudened with the situation at first.
Even the defense of their core worlds doesn't need "battleships" as some heavier cruisers and multi-mission ships on stand-by could be organized into a defensive force. Additionally we know that at least the Sol system is protected by a bunch of "sentry pods", essentially automated drone ships that were meant to engage enemy forces that reached the core systems (namely the Mars Defense Perimeter -> http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Mars_Defense_Perimeter which was even Earth's primary defense). Those sentries were designed to be a force on their own - too bad it was a Borg cube they faced on screen (remember, it was when Borg were still frightening ).
I don't mean to be offensive or anything, I just can't get why people insist that there can be no "peaceful" force that also is quite capable of defendng themselves. My guess is that people want to play our present time militarized society in every game or want to see them in every movie there is. Since that's usually how "terrans" are portrayed in sci-fi. Huge battleships and carriers on which some military guys with cigars shout orders. Star Trek isn't like that
EDIT: Your mention of ST:ENT might be right, though. ENT was set before the federation was founded. There is no Starfleet, it's Earth's ships you see and by that time they still fielded a military (MACOs aren't Starfleet, they're Earth military which was disbanded after the Federation and Starfleet were founded).
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Starfleet had no warships besides the Defiant. It was the first "warship" they ever build, everything before even during the Klingon wars were multi-mission ships. The famed Miranda was the "workhorse" of the fleet but could be refitted to be a destroyer kind of ship, the Constitution was a explorer but also well armed and with a biit of refitting could pose as a "battleship" if you will - but Starfleet never build "ships for war". Why can't people get over that in this fictional universe humanity does not need to build battleships when their design philosophy is as flexible as portrayed. Their ships could easily serve as peacekeeping forces without them being "ships of war". This is just the way Starfleet and the Federation were designed. They're still neither weak nor fools as they survived countless wars almost uncontested, there is still a "Starfleet Tactical" department concerned with defensive operations and they adapted quite well to the Dominion thread, although hopelessly overbudened with the situation at first.
Even the defense of their core worlds doesn't need "battleships" as some heavier cruisers and multi-mission ships on stand-by could be organized into a defensive force. Additionally we know that at least the Sol system is protected by a bunch of "sentry pods", essentially automated drone ships that were meant to engage enemy forces that reached the core systems (namely the Mars Defense Perimeter -> http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Mars_Defense_Perimeter which was even Earth's primary defense). Those sentries were designed to be a force on their own - too bad it was a Borg cube they faced on screen (remember, it was when Borg were still frightening ).
I don't mean to be offensive or anything, I just can't get why people insist that there can be no "peaceful" force that also is quite capable of defendng themselves. My guess is that people want to play our present time militarized society in every game or want to see them in every movie there is. Since that's usually how "terrans" are portrayed in sci-fi. Huge battleships and carriers on which some military guys with cigars shout orders. Star Trek isn't like that
EDIT: Your mention of ST:ENT might be right, though. ENT was set before the federation was founded. There is no Starfleet, it's Earth's ships you see and by that time they still fielded a military (MACOs aren't Starfleet, they're Earth military which was disbanded after the Federation and Starfleet were founded).
I I never suggested that Starfleet should be "huge battleships and carriers on which some military guys with cigars shout orders", just that it isn't out of the realm of possibility (and probability) that (especially in the TOS era) there were purpose built ships of war that weren't on the edges of the Federation exploring. Like I said , the Federation class DN was mentioned in two movies (one visually, one verbally). They wouldn't be the majority of the fleet by any stretch of the imagination. TOS was a different and more volatile period of time, I wont say the same for TNG, where it was likely that they didn't have such a rough period.
Comments
It's not a change in technology that makes things obsolete in such a short amount of time. It's a change in thinking, an adaptation to current techniques, that causes things to become obsolete rather quickly.
The Galaxy-class large phaser array was still feasible against newer opponents. Look at Sacrifice of Angels. One Galaxy-class starship, with two quarter-power phaser shots, manages to stun/damage a DW-era Galor, and shortly afterward, a second Galaxy fires a similar shot to disable the same Galor. The full power shot, with a consistent beam, was never used! Another, in the Battle of Chin'toka, fires two torpedoes into an OWP, destroying it (even flying through the debris unscathed).
The Intrepid-class vessel was likely designed as a smaller-scale Galaxy-class, with the same intent of exploration, scientific research, diplomacy, and lesser combat, and required less crew for automation.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
SERIOUSLY, HOW DID THEY **** THAT UP!?!?!?!?!?!?!
also has anyone noticed that there is no impulse engines on the nebula?
I thought Nebula had it on the saucer?
dont recall seeing them on the model in game
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/nebula/nebula-galaxy-top.jpg
found this pic the show modle doesnt have them ether although i did find a non cannon source that said it was in the neck
Star Trek isn't real life. In Star Trek things just work different than in other Sci fi universes, like BSG or Star Wars. For me it always was a welcome change from those stereotypes other Sci Fi universe have. Other people obviously can't wait for Star Trek to become the same old stuff like any other Sci Fi series, featuring Carriers, Space fighters and other stuff they find "cool".
Star Trek technology is exactly how the writers want it to be.
For me, a Star Trek universe where Starfleet consists of Escorts, Carriers and Space fighters isn't Star Trek anymore. Taking away it's uniqueness makes it just as exchangeable as some other Sci Fi series. Cryptic is on route to take away Star Treks uniqueness and making it more and more uninteresting (at least for me).
I wonder how wierd TNG or TOS would have been if the ship would have been a Carrier. I mean "... to explore strange new worlds..." in a Battlestar, yeah very believeable.
In my opinion, people wanting Escorts, Carriers or Starfighters haven't understood anything Star Trek is about. Just because people become more and more paranoid nowadays, doesn't mean that Star Trek has to be like them.
StarTrek was an ideal, which had little to do with reality or how Humanity will actually be in 200-400 years.
If most people rather want large scale space wars (like in DS9) or totally militarized Spaceships blowing everyting in pieces in their way, then Star Trek better should have died. At least it could have kept its ideals rather then being twisted into something completely different.
Starfleet having Escorts, Carriers and starfighters is a pervertion of what Star trek is about in my humble opinion.
This is something that I've been actively pushing for. The model of the Galaxy-class is horrendous. Neck shape, hull shape, saucer engines, deflector, etc etc etc.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Hear hear, I'll sign that
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Is it just lack of interest, incompetence or did they actively make the ship look bad, because they hate it?
Im with yuo bro 100%
Actually during late TNG/DS9 (especially the Dominion War shots) Galaxy Class ships ran with all three impulse engines at full power even when connected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d734afLFPds
You can see several Galaxy class ships in the fleet at around 3:30 into the clip, all with all three engines lit. So that doesn't bother me. Though I do agree with just about all of the rest of the thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvqme6qYtME
And here at 1:05 in the Voyager Endgame clip - the Galaxy in the gathered 'fleet' has all it's engines active as well.
Ahh the laws of physics that state that when a ship moving in space lose their engine power they slow to a stop?
Or the law of physics that says when a ship makes a hard turn everyone on board feels gravity slide to the new 'down' for the ship?
Please do not ask for pure physics in Star Trek. There is a reason it is science fiction.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
The moment you mentioned that a question came to mind. How does any loss of power in the drive section mean you can't fire the phasers or have at least minimal shields with the independant power systems of the saucer section? These are basically two specialized ships docked together most of the time so loss of power in one should be made up for it from the other.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
he said if the main was damaged power doesn't matter if the engine doesn't work, the saucer ones may have been on idle, his theory about the saucer engines available as backups is sound because i think they avoided using all 3 engines at the same time due to relativistic concerns(it is note worthy that all galaxy's shown using all 3 were in combat so it may have been a operational change after Ent-d was destroyed) it shoulnt be used as a base for the model because we have far more evidence showing them not in use then in use(also the saucer engines do not seam to be glowing as brightly as the main one which supports the backup idea)
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Unnamed_Galaxy_class_starships?file=Galaxy_class_firing_phasers.jpg
found this pic from ds9 not sure what episode so not all galaxys ran them
The Saucer Section
Saucer impulse engines P/S: run off of deuterium burn, can be used as a minimal power supply if needed. Runs independent of the warp reactor EPS system, since thrust is generated by force, not the EPS power grid.
Power supply: Saucer impulse engines, fusion reactors
Phasers: Hooked into the warp reactor power supply (same thing as the Enterprise-A). Will function off of fusion reactors if Saucer Separation is in effect.
Shields: Run off of the EPS grid. Unknown whether anything stronger than a basic shield bubble (protection against dust see VOY: "Year of Hell, Pt II") can be done off of Saucer Impulse Engine and.or fusion reactor power when separated.
The Stardrive Section
Engines: Warp engines fueled by EPS power grid. Main impulse engine uses the large deuterium tank in the Stardrive to operate, and can serve as emergency backup power supply.
Power supply: M/ARA warp reactor core, requires dilithium, deuterium injection and antimatter injection to operate. Main impulse engine can "burn" to create power if M/ARA is ejected or otherwise offline. Unknown if fusion reactors reside in the Stardrive.
Phasers: Run off of the warp reactor output power, via EPS power grid.
Shields: Also run off of EPS grid.
In short, when the Saucer is separated, it has to find its own power supply to power the phasers and shields. It can find this power from the engines and from the fusion reactors, although their power output is significantly smaller than a warp core power output level.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
If I am reading your reply correctly then they are not a pair of full starships as the saucer is only reserve power and STL flight. Independant shields and phasers would drain the saucer power to fast.
Thank you.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Exactly. To boil it down to the basics, the saucer is just a "large space town" with minimal defenses. The Stardrive is what contains the power.
(Of course, the saucer is armed with the large phaser arrays, however, the strength of a phaser beam when the saucer is separated is lower. To have high output, the large phaser arrays need to be connected to the stardrive warp power)
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
The only way we'll see any change in the way ships are designed and balanced is if the community can persuade Cryptic that their underlying assumptions are wrong. This is something that'll be enormously difficult for several reasons:
1) Cryptic's developer culture isn't very open to such challenges
2) Even if they agreed that the existing system is desperately broken, they are loathe to take any actions that might negatively impact players' investment
3) And even if the first two points were overcame, there's still the fact that a sweeping rebalance effort would be an enormously costly project that cannot be justified as the F2P business and development model relies on a constant cycle of new content deprecating old.
2) Nothing to do with manpower, everything to do with fear of player outrage. Every time there's even been rumours that something might get rebalanced or changed (beyond the fixing of outright bugs) there's sufficient forum outrage to force them to back down. Every time.
3) It is absolutely the F2P business and development model that Cryptic has adopted. Every project they do has to be justified by the potential sales return it'll create; a massive ship rebalancing project will be expensive and they cannot guarantee it'll generate more sales of current ships. As for MMO power creep -- it's a proven sales winner, it's not going away in F2P games.
each impulse engine was direly connected to several fusion reactors, and those reactors also provided plasma to the EPS grid, even wile the impuse engines were at full power. they are the auxiliary power that gets called for often times. the impulse engines proboly didn't even need the fusion reactors they were connected to being active, the warp core generates more then enough plasma to drive the impulse engines wile not at warp.
in nemisis during the battle with the scimitar, the enterprise appeared to fight that whole battle on just the impulse fusion reactors, if the core was off line and not producing plasma. they were at full combat speed, had full power to shields and weapons, they basically looked unaffected by the loss of the core's plasma. the impuse fusion reactors are apparently very powerful, BUT they run on just deuterium, im guessing they are hilariously inefficient compared to the power per input you get out of a M/AM reaction. the E apparently burned through the entirety of its deuterium stores, causing the shooting battle to end
Welcome to the club skollulfr +)
I dropped STO ages ago because of the P2W and power creep model that was adopted shortly before the F2P model was revealed. And have only continued to stick around in the false hope that it might change. Sadly it only seems to be accelerating.
I agree. While I have no issue with the base Galaxy/variants being slanted toward engineers, I also feel the dreadnought cruiser should have been slanted toward tactical.
While I wholeheartedly agree, we must remember that at the time of the Galaxy and Galaxy-X design the game and more importantly the boff seating arrangements were very different. In the modern meta the game is played with a ship with a LT CMDR of a different class than its CMDR slot, and certainly without three ens slots of the same proffession. If anything that last one is the mayor stumbling block fed ships face, presumably KDF ships are in a similar situation.
I understand what you are suggesting the ideal of Star Trek is, which is the spirit of exploration both inside and out. While I agree that the exploration in Star Trek is performed by exploration ship and not full fledged warships, to suggest that carriers, battleships,fighters and escorts don't exist in Starfleet for its peacekeeping/wartime operations seems to be lacking. Sure the Connie and Galaxy explored (or were supposed to) beyond the borders of the Federation on their own, there must be a borderline/core-worlds defense capable of deterring invasion fleets from the likes of Klingons, Romulans, etc...
While it isn't the Holy Bible Canon, there has been reference to dreadnoughts, namely Federation classes in the first two Star Trek movies http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Federation_class and in books. We have seen fighters and escorts in DS9, I would also go as far as to suggest that the lesser ships shown in the Sol system on Star Trek: Enterprise were some sort of destroyer/frigate designed for defense (albeit en masse). During times of peace, many are probably relegated to core world defense were they would be not as active so they may still be maintained and functional, but not used enough to increase wear and tear to keep costs down.
The exploration in Star Trek should be with ships like the Connie' or Galaxy, but there should be room for warships in combat use.
Starfleet had no warships besides the Defiant. It was the first "warship" they ever build, everything before even during the Klingon wars were multi-mission ships. The famed Miranda was the "workhorse" of the fleet but could be refitted to be a destroyer kind of ship, the Constitution was a explorer but also well armed and with a biit of refitting could pose as a "battleship" if you will - but Starfleet never build "ships for war". Why can't people get over that in this fictional universe humanity does not need to build battleships when their design philosophy is as flexible as portrayed. Their ships could easily serve as peacekeeping forces without them being "ships of war". This is just the way Starfleet and the Federation were designed. They're still neither weak nor fools as they survived countless wars almost uncontested, there is still a "Starfleet Tactical" department concerned with defensive operations and they adapted quite well to the Dominion thread, although hopelessly overbudened with the situation at first.
Even the defense of their core worlds doesn't need "battleships" as some heavier cruisers and multi-mission ships on stand-by could be organized into a defensive force. Additionally we know that at least the Sol system is protected by a bunch of "sentry pods", essentially automated drone ships that were meant to engage enemy forces that reached the core systems (namely the Mars Defense Perimeter -> http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Mars_Defense_Perimeter which was even Earth's primary defense). Those sentries were designed to be a force on their own - too bad it was a Borg cube they faced on screen (remember, it was when Borg were still frightening
I don't mean to be offensive or anything, I just can't get why people insist that there can be no "peaceful" force that also is quite capable of defendng themselves. My guess is that people want to play our present time militarized society in every game or want to see them in every movie there is. Since that's usually how "terrans" are portrayed in sci-fi. Huge battleships and carriers on which some military guys with cigars shout orders. Star Trek isn't like that
EDIT: Your mention of ST:ENT might be right, though. ENT was set before the federation was founded. There is no Starfleet, it's Earth's ships you see and by that time they still fielded a military (MACOs aren't Starfleet, they're Earth military which was disbanded after the Federation and Starfleet were founded).
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I I never suggested that Starfleet should be "huge battleships and carriers on which some military guys with cigars shout orders", just that it isn't out of the realm of possibility (and probability) that (especially in the TOS era) there were purpose built ships of war that weren't on the edges of the Federation exploring. Like I said , the Federation class DN was mentioned in two movies (one visually, one verbally). They wouldn't be the majority of the fleet by any stretch of the imagination. TOS was a different and more volatile period of time, I wont say the same for TNG, where it was likely that they didn't have such a rough period.