The devs changed the D'Ds BOFF layout after ppl where complaining about it for being poorly, i don't unterstand why this isn't possible with the G -R...
It is very strange, when you look at it from that perspective. There is definitely precedent for them tweaking a ship's layout.
I wonder what the dev thought process about the Galaxy is. If they're worried about making it overpowered, I don't think anybody in this thread (or its predecessor) is seriously suggesting that it be made a supership.
It'd just be nice if it weren't outclassed by every single other cruiser in the endgame.
On a side note I have a funny G-R related story. This morning me and a buddy were going to run undine assault, i hopped in my G-R and readied up. We get in and bam he is dc'ed and can't get back on, he is stuck on Teamspeak only.
One of our team quits at the sight of him dc'ing. I however plan to fight till he manages to get back in. So I take up position in my lane, and call for the other 2 guys to come over. I was very saddened to see that neither of the 2 pubbies could do better then 2-3k dps if that. It was so little dmg that I honestly couldn't tell they were shooting.
So here I'am stuck in a rough STF with the low DPS G-R, basicly by myself as the other 2 guys werent dealing dmg or healing me, sad for a mogai and a fleet intrepid. Most people would have just pulled the plug and left, but I didnt want a leaver penalty. So I went to work, my G-R is set up to just take dmg, and tank it like a boss. But even so fighting 10 or so undine ships at once is asking a lot.
With my FAW agro build I pushed up the line drawing all their fire, the command ship driving right behind me unhindered, the 2 other guys never getting shot at. Took me about 10mins per section aka 20mins per lane solo. But I got 2 lanes done, closed all the extra rifts, and was 1/4th up the 3rd lane after killing my 2nd dreadnaught when my friend finally got back in.
Once he joined back in his MVAM and my G-R took the lane in 10mins total, he litterly added 50% more firepower. At this point one of the 2 others quit, we got to the end and killed the planet killer.
Took almost 1h 1/2 but we did it, we were laughing cause he said "Had I not rejoined you would have completely solo'd it". He got a kick out of the planet killer shooting me 8 times in a row with the beam and 2 torpedo volleys that hit me and I just kept on going like nothing happened.
G-R she is a tough nut to crack when built up right. But sadly my FACR could have done all that and killed everything waaayyy faster. I still enjoy the G-R but its far from being on par with the other cruisers, not just in dmg. It would be a better tank ironicly if that 3rd ens was a sci. Btw 0 deaths in that stf. Might not be much to most people but when your getting hit back to back by 10 or so undine ships for 10-14k a pop sometimes it does hurt a tad, but the ol G-R can take it.
Hope they fix her up eventually so she will be truely on par. Out lasting a ton of hard hitting NPC is impressive sometimes, but its not truely all that fun being a punching bag for 1 1/2 hours, at the end im like "Dude I'm switching to my G-X sick of being kicked around for a while lol".
Oh in that case could have it as:
CMDR Engineering (4)
Lt.CMDR Universal (3)
Lt. Tactical (2)
Lt. Science (2)
Ens. Engineeering (1)
True it's meant to be a Cruiser and as a Cruiser according to the Holy Trinity of STO is meant to be very Engineering Heavy rather than being Tac/Science Balanced, I think that BOFF Layout would help make it more of a Balanced ship as befitting it's role as a Multi-purpose ship in it's time, although the 3 Vesta-type Multi-Mission ships probably now have more of a purpose as needing the "Multi-purpose role BOFF layout", but that's mainly due to the Vesta replacing the Galaxy in Exploration/Science terms while the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy in Cruiser terms...
we don't need another ody clone, only less flexible. virus had the right idea, in making one of the LTs eng, and it having no innate tac station, only a universal LTC and ENS
we don't need another ody clone, only less flexible. virus had the right idea, in making one of the LTs eng, and it having no innate tac station, only a universal LTC and ENS
Man, if only.
Although I will say I'm still in love with the idea of having the ship's bridge stations shift from science heavy to tac heavy depending on whether or not the ship is separated.
Im not really into the idea of swapping stations on separation, almost every fight the galaxy class were in they fought joined. The separation was only used to evac people, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that its combat abilities would jump dramatically from separation. If this was the case in the dominion wars it would just be fleets of stardrives. After all, when it separates it loses its main phaser arrays, which are far larger and more powerful then the arrays that are uncovered by separating.
I still maintain that, CMD eng, LTC tac, LTC sci, LT uni would work the best. With a 4/3/3 layout. Its different from the oddy, its not like the FACR, nothing else like it in the fed line up. It has both utility and flexibility, with uniqueness all its own for the feds. At the same time it doesnt replace all the other ships, the FACR and the Avenger would still be ahead in terms of, and it would be near the G-X on that front but the G-X would still have cloak and lance over it and would be slightly more tanky giving it more of a dreadnought feel it should have.
You want a G-R for dmg, you could set it up dual A2B with a LT eng, or go more tac heavy and have LT tac. Or if you want a good cc/heal support you could lean it even more Sci with a LT sci. If the Fleet star cruiser gets revamped after it, it could have a similar build but more Sci locked with 4 eng/ 4 sci consoles leaving both having their roles.
Wouldn't step on the ambassador or the excel in their respective roles either, as both their boff stations would be very different. Anyone who wants a multi-mission Galaxy, to me thats your layout right there. Without need to rely on consoles, or other gimicks that not everyone may want to use.
Im not really into the idea of swapping stations on separation, almost every fight the galaxy class were in they fought joined. The separation was only used to evac people, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that its combat abilities would jump dramatically from separation. If this was the case in the dominion wars it would just be fleets of stardrives. After all, when it separates it loses its main phaser arrays, which are far larger and more powerful then the arrays that are uncovered by separating.
I still maintain that, CMD eng, LTC tac, LTC sci, LT uni would work the best. With a 4/3/3 layout. Its different from the oddy, its not like the FACR, nothing else like it in the fed line up. It has both utility and flexibility, with uniqueness all its own for the feds. At the same time it doesnt replace all the other ships, the FACR and the Avenger would still be ahead in terms of, and it would be near the G-X on that front but the G-X would still have cloak and lance over it and would be slightly more tanky giving it more of a dreadnought feel it should have.
You want a G-R for dmg, you could set it up dual A2B with a LT eng, or go more tac heavy and have LT tac. Or if you want a good cc/heal support you could lean it even more Sci with a LT sci. If the Fleet star cruiser gets revamped after it, it could have a similar build but more Sci locked with 4 eng/ 4 sci consoles leaving both having their roles.
Wouldn't step on the ambassador or the excel in their respective roles either, as both their boff stations would be very different. Anyone who wants a multi-mission Galaxy, to me thats your layout right there. Without need to rely on consoles, or other gimicks that not everyone may want to use.
don't try to make sense of the galaxy separating and becoming tactically superior, it and a whole lot of other things like that are dead wrong, and this isnt even the worst offender. its simply a way to enhance gameplay, to make the ship better when you activate a transformation, its neat.
also wile that line is canon (about turning into a formidable combat vessel when separated). it was said by worf in the first season to another klingon wile he was giving a tour and boasting about the flagship of the federation
also wile that line is canon (about turning into a formidable combat vessel when separated). it was said by worf in the first season to another klingon wile he was giving a tour and boasting about the flagship of the federation
i figure he means that in a klingon sense. until the negvar, they only had relatively small, quick, heavily armed ships, a separated galaxy is more relateable to that. the vorcha is actually a bit smaller by volume then an akira
the stardrive alone is 40% larger then a vorcha, but tactically probably a match for one, with the massive burst torpedo launchers and 2 arrays that match the ambassador's largest. unseparated, its got substantially more powerful phasers at its disposal, but 3 times the heft it had, ends up fitting the description of a big gun battleship then.
It's also canon that the Enterprise D shot more powerful phaser bursts from the torpedo tube!
And WAY more powerful burst from the deflector dish!
Why?
BC it's about power transfer from the warp core NOT array lengths.
PS you can write off the torpedo tube phaser they set up in that TNG episode (It made no sense to disable your photons right before an impending battle)
But you can't write off BOBW deflector burst. "Only part of the ship that was designed to CHANNEL that much POWER at controlled frequencies" Where did the power come from? Warp Core.
There's also Geordi stating that a phaser would be more powerful if power levels to the single emitter are increased. An array's advantage is field of fire and precision. I like the idea DDIS voiced, though, that the wandering glow is some kind of power transfer that culminates in a high powered shot, yet there is neither TM nor on-screen evidence of that mechanic.
The defelctor burst though is something that should make it into the game. It has beens tated that a channeled beam from the deflector dish dwarves all weapon system the ship has at it's disposal. When we remember BOBW, a shot like that is far from being standart practice and in fact hurts the ship very much. When I look at the Venture-type refit in STO, however, I am thinking that structural and technological improvements to the deflector dish would allow for an ability like this.
The Venture could make use of such a high powered attack. Instead of burning out, the dish is shut down, maybe even closed off via an animated armour lid or something while engines, weapons and auxilliary systems of the ship firing are offline for a certain period of time afterwards, making it a very powerful ability which is exposing the ship. It would be a neat strategic ability.
^ 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
There's also Geordi stating that a phaser would be more powerful if power levels to the single emitter are increased. An array's advantage is field of fire and precision. I like the idea DDIS voiced, though, that the wandering glow is some kind of power transfer that culminates in a high powered shot, yet there is neither TM nor on-screen evidence of that mechanic.
The defelctor burst though is something that should make it into the game. It has beens tated that a channeled beam from the deflector dish dwarves all weapon system the ship has at it's disposal. When we remember BOBW, a shot like that is far from being standart practice and in fact hurts the ship very much. When I look at the Venture-type refit in STO, however, I am thinking that structural and technological improvements to the deflector dish would allow for an ability like this.
The Venture could make use of such a high powered attack. Instead of burning out, the dish is shut down, maybe even closed off via an animated armour lid or something while engines, weapons and auxilliary systems of the ship firing are offline for a certain period of time afterwards, making it a very powerful ability which is exposing the ship. It would be a neat strategic ability.
No, the MACO set has the "Heavy Graviton Beam" which is a VOY gizmo. The defelctor shot in BOBW looks and works completely different. Further, a "heavy graviton beam" was explicitly mentioned in the episode's dialogue as a possible weapon against the Borg, yet Riker dismissed the idea.
^ 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
Heavy Graviton Beam was dismissed bc it was not powerful enough to incapacitate the Borg in Geordi's opinion.
But other species? Possibly
Uh? Might be, but that doesn't change the fact that the HGB is not what we see in BOBW
^ 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
Wasn't it used in DS9 to bring down the minefield?
We see it in VOY. It is a green beam used to open fluidic rifts, however... yeah, Cryptic just created an ability and named it randomly after something mentioned on screen, but that's not entirely new
^ 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
Anyway, the GCS phasers are among the strongest ship mounted phaser weapons shown in canon Trek, ever.
Even if the Sovereigns where slightly stronger (which they surely are not) the GCS in STO should have more tac console slots and at least a Lt. Cmdr. tac BOFF station IMO.
"...'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
Anyway, the GCS phasers are among the strongest ship mounted phaser weapons shown in canon Trek, ever.
Even if the Sovereigns where slightly stronger (which they surely are not) the GCS in STO should have more tac console slots and at least a Lt. Cmdr. tac BOFF station IMO.
If it's based on the array length then it is BS. length means TRIBBLE other wise why don't more ships have them. nope. mark indicates strength.
If it's based on the array length then it is BS. length means TRIBBLE other wise why don't more ships have them. nope. mark indicates strength.
Sorry i don't want to start the same debate all over AGAIN, but the GCS surely was outfitted with the newest equipment (Power generation/defensive sys./weapons) availlable.
Isn't that what we do all the time in STO? (Outfitting our ships with new equipment)
A sub par GCS would indicate that the devs think the GCS was a bad ship from the start and not became relatively bad because its "old".
So the question is, why do cryptics devs think the GCS was a bad ship in the first place?
"...'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
Galaxy had the most powerful phasers when launched the Mk X phasers. Also came with over 100 science labs and a dolphin tank. Canon! So Volume =/= more power either.
Sovereign wasn't built yet. Came with MkXII phasers. So did the Promethious which was stated as a long range Tactical vessel. And it's phasers are broken up, not in 1 long array.
Not each newer ship is suppoed to top the one before. Many ships just have other purposes and mission profiles.
That doesn't mean that a Intrepid has more Firepower than a Galaxy, don't you think?
The GCS was highly modifiable. As Flagship it carried a lot of stuff not needed in a firefight.
I hope you don't seriously think that in wartime the Ent -D would still have kept the kindergarten, the kids and their families on board...
Why would Starfleet purposely build the next large cruiser class with less powerful weapons when it's Flagship, Galaxy Class, was completely ineffective against the borg and Earth nearly assimilated?
Well the Sov couldn't blast hole into a cube so it could almost fly through.
The point is we don't have any direct references between both ships. Heck we don't even have a statement comparing both ships. We can only take educated guesses.
And everything i have seen just cries that the GCS is still more than on par with the Sovereign.
Let's try to see it from that perspective:
Building a big ship takes years or even decades of planning and designing.
The sovereign just cannot be designed, build and tested in the years after the first contact with the borg, it must have been in planning stage before that, similar to the Prometheus. Those ships don't replace the one before, they complement each other.
No1 is stating that the Galaxy in Canon wasn't powerful but array length =/= more powerful phaser.
It's about which ship can effectively channel more energy through the EPS grid and phaser assembly.
Each Starfleet ship gets new tech as soon as it is availlable.
The GCS surely got new power couplings, EPS grid and phaser emitters as soon as they where availlable.
What's important is the availlable space. A wartime refit (or a non Diplomacy refit :P) Galaxy Class would surely have much more fusion generators and a tougher power grid. Even if the Sovereign had better phasers (which is nonsense IMO) it still would have much more power reserves all over the ship. So in the end, even if both ships where on par concerning firepower the GCS would still have more durability and even stronger shields* but it would be slightly less maneuverable.
(* shield systems can be upgraded, so it ultimately depend on how much power can a ship generate.)
Again, as i have stated roughly 1001+ times before, the GCS was highly modifiable.
At wartimes the ship would look and perform quiet different to what we saw in the early TNG seasons. Just look at "Yeasterdays Enterprise" Ent-D to get a impression of a wartime refit Galaxy Class Starship.
"...'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
I'll put it this way. When launched the Galaxy class had the best phasers even made, at the time mark 10. Soveriegn was mark 12. Now about sto timeline both ships are likely launched bran new with the latest mark of phasers. There design differences will favor one over the other in various fields. But the array lentgh equea;s power is bull TRIBBLE for why doesn't other ships use it. Example intrepid. that could easily have a single array on the upper saucer section but nope it has 2. so length does not equal power. the galaxy just has a very large fire arc with the main saucer arrays nothing more.
I'll put it this way. When launched the Galaxy class had the best phasers even made, at the time mark 10. Soveriegn was mark 12. Now about sto timeline both ships are likely launched bran new with the latest mark of phasers. There design differences will favor one over the other in various fields. But the array lentgh equea;s power is bull TRIBBLE for why doesn't other ships use it. Example intrepid. that could easily have a single array on the upper saucer section but nope it has 2. so length does not equal power. the galaxy just has a very large fire arc with the main saucer arrays nothing more.
This, albeit the Sovereign was launched with Mark XI arrays, I think, Mk XII are an STO thing. But STOs "marks" don't follow logic, it's just a level indicator since type-8 phaser would be completely different weapons, essentially, from say a type-9 or 10. Anyhow, while I personally think the Galaxies' power output IS indeed higher and pure firepower it tops the Sovereign (which is more manoeuvreale on the other hand, so they are even but on top in different situations), there is no indication that a longer array equals more firepower in primary or secondary canon sources (e.g. on-screen or the manuals). But I might miss something, DDIS went into great detail there and maybe I overlooked something, but essentially it's true: type-10 phasers have the same baseline power output, it doesn't matter how long an array is. The Galaxy has, however, more than 300 degrees covered with her primary weaponry, auxilliary arrays leave virtually no blind spots to exploit whereas a Sovereign or Intrepid or other newer ships do have those blind spots and need more arrays to cover them, but more arrays does also mean nothing in terms of output since you cannot fire all at once AND it just shows design flaws in terms of defensive capabilites
But I still think a deflector blast could be something Starfleet figured out with the Venture. Still an exceptional practice, but systems should be in a state where the shot doesn't rip the ship apart but only needs some time to regenerate.
EDIT: Oh, and nobody dare to say the dolphin tanks are redundant. They rock! And I think the dolphins are even superior navigators if I don't confuse that info with something else...
^ 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
Maybe after extensive upgrades the Galaxy is on par with the Sovereign.
Extensive?
Both ships differ just 10 years.
That's nothing compared to the Excelsior which is supposed to be on par with a new ship BUILD for combat (defiant). I think Starfleets capabilities to keep ships up to date is remarkeable.
The GCS is on par with the Sovereign in any case.
Just think about it.
Starfleet isnt stupid, they wouldn let their most complex ship become obsolete ten years after introduction, that would be absolute nonsense. As i said before, both ships aren't rivals they complement each other.
Just because Picard got the Sovereign after carelessly letting the big -D get destroyed, doesn't mean his next ship MUST be totally superior.
(Personally i think it's quite the contrary.)
Remember when the Intrepid was first on screen, they also said something about it being the most avanced ship. (or something similar)
Do you seriously think the Intrepid has stronger phasers, shields or a higher power output than a Galaxy?
But in the end they're on the same side so of course they are going to share technologies and have similar equipment.
And why wouldn't the Sovereign be modular and highly customizable??
It is, but the point is the GCS has more space to be customized. Rip out the leisure stuff, the kindergarten and all the other nonsense , you could basicly put a Sovereign into it, lol.
So lets say the ship needs more fusion reactors or shield emitters (or whatever the situation requires), the GCS has the advantage of having more space at hand to mount different, or the same equipment as a Sovereign. (just more or bigger in size)
But the baseline for the Sovereign is higher than the Galaxy
As i said before, there's only 10 years difference between both ships.
By now (STO) both ships are 30-40 years old and got more than one overhaul in the meantime.
The more time passes the more diminishing the technical differences become.
The GCS is just the bigger ship in the end, less maneuverable but more power to generate and more durability.
Ultimately the difference between both ships should be a matter of taste. Do you want a faster more maneuverable ship or a slower more sturdy one?
In STO the relation between both ships should be similar. Both should be strong ships, just suited for different playstyles. But one shouldn't be completely bad while the other one can compete on top level.
That's not right IMO.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
This, albeit the Sovereign was launched with Mark XI arrays, I think, Mk XII are an STO thing. But STOs "marks" don't follow logic, it's just a level indicator since type-8 phaser would be completely different weapons, essentially, from say a type-9 or 10. Anyhow, while I personally think the Galaxies' power output IS indeed higher and pure firepower it tops the Sovereign (which is more manoeuvreale on the other hand, so they are even but on top in different situations), there is no indication that a longer array equals more firepower in primary or secondary canon sources (e.g. on-screen or the manuals). But I might miss something, DDIS went into great detail there and maybe I overlooked something, but essentially it's true: type-10 phasers have the same baseline power output, it doesn't matter how long an array is. The Galaxy has, however, more than 300 degrees covered with her primary weaponry, auxilliary arrays leave virtually no blind spots to exploit whereas a Sovereign or Intrepid or other newer ships do have those blind spots and need more arrays to cover them, but more arrays does also mean nothing in terms of output since you cannot fire all at once AND it just shows design flaws in terms of defensive capabilites
But I still think a deflector blast could be something Starfleet figured out with the Venture. Still an exceptional practice, but systems should be in a state where the shot doesn't rip the ship apart but only needs some time to regenerate.
I think the Galaxy and Sovie have the same power output. And i have always considered opposites sides of the same coing. Galaxy is more peace oriented. That is not to say she can't punch hard but the Standard Galaxy is a multi mission explorer that can do several things at opnce and can defend her crew but note a good portion of the crew is civilain. they were ment to explore unknown regions for 10 years before a severe refit. Sov on the other hand is gear more for combat. while she has a similar role in peace time she is deswign more be more survivalbe then the Galaxy since within a decade most of the first production line had been destroyed. In the end Galaxy has the edge in exploration and science while the sov hasthe edge in combat.
I think the Galaxy and Sovie have the same power output. And i have always considered opposites sides of the same coing. Galaxy is more peace oriented. That is not to say she can't punch hard but the Standard Galaxy is a multi mission explorer that can do several things at opnce and can defend her crew but note a good portion of the crew is civilain. they were ment to explore unknown regions for 10 years before a severe refit. Sov on the other hand is gear more for combat. while she has a similar role in peace time she is deswign more be more survivalbe then the Galaxy since within a decade most of the first production line had been destroyed. In the end Galaxy has the edge in exploration and science while the sov hasthe edge in combat.
The sovy=more combat is not based on any evidence, however. The only indicator is that the sovy shoots a lot in the later TNG action flicks. The ship must have been designed during the same time the Galaxy served ("peace"), it was labeled "Mark II Explorer" and, like you said, has basically the same mission profile albeit on a smaller scale. Picards explorer line doesn't mean they are a battleship know, it means they got sidelined doing dominion related peacekeeping duties all the years the Ent-E launched.
^ 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
Comments
It is very strange, when you look at it from that perspective. There is definitely precedent for them tweaking a ship's layout.
I wonder what the dev thought process about the Galaxy is. If they're worried about making it overpowered, I don't think anybody in this thread (or its predecessor) is seriously suggesting that it be made a supership.
It'd just be nice if it weren't outclassed by every single other cruiser in the endgame.
One of our team quits at the sight of him dc'ing. I however plan to fight till he manages to get back in. So I take up position in my lane, and call for the other 2 guys to come over. I was very saddened to see that neither of the 2 pubbies could do better then 2-3k dps if that. It was so little dmg that I honestly couldn't tell they were shooting.
So here I'am stuck in a rough STF with the low DPS G-R, basicly by myself as the other 2 guys werent dealing dmg or healing me, sad for a mogai and a fleet intrepid. Most people would have just pulled the plug and left, but I didnt want a leaver penalty. So I went to work, my G-R is set up to just take dmg, and tank it like a boss. But even so fighting 10 or so undine ships at once is asking a lot.
With my FAW agro build I pushed up the line drawing all their fire, the command ship driving right behind me unhindered, the 2 other guys never getting shot at. Took me about 10mins per section aka 20mins per lane solo. But I got 2 lanes done, closed all the extra rifts, and was 1/4th up the 3rd lane after killing my 2nd dreadnaught when my friend finally got back in.
Once he joined back in his MVAM and my G-R took the lane in 10mins total, he litterly added 50% more firepower. At this point one of the 2 others quit, we got to the end and killed the planet killer.
Took almost 1h 1/2 but we did it, we were laughing cause he said "Had I not rejoined you would have completely solo'd it". He got a kick out of the planet killer shooting me 8 times in a row with the beam and 2 torpedo volleys that hit me and I just kept on going like nothing happened.
G-R she is a tough nut to crack when built up right. But sadly my FACR could have done all that and killed everything waaayyy faster. I still enjoy the G-R but its far from being on par with the other cruisers, not just in dmg. It would be a better tank ironicly if that 3rd ens was a sci. Btw 0 deaths in that stf. Might not be much to most people but when your getting hit back to back by 10 or so undine ships for 10-14k a pop sometimes it does hurt a tad, but the ol G-R can take it.
Hope they fix her up eventually so she will be truely on par. Out lasting a ton of hard hitting NPC is impressive sometimes, but its not truely all that fun being a punching bag for 1 1/2 hours, at the end im like "Dude I'm switching to my G-X sick of being kicked around for a while lol".
Oh in that case could have it as:
CMDR Engineering (4)
Lt.CMDR Universal (3)
Lt. Tactical (2)
Lt. Science (2)
Ens. Engineeering (1)
True it's meant to be a Cruiser and as a Cruiser according to the Holy Trinity of STO is meant to be very Engineering Heavy rather than being Tac/Science Balanced, I think that BOFF Layout would help make it more of a Balanced ship as befitting it's role as a Multi-purpose ship in it's time, although the 3 Vesta-type Multi-Mission ships probably now have more of a purpose as needing the "Multi-purpose role BOFF layout", but that's mainly due to the Vesta replacing the Galaxy in Exploration/Science terms while the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy in Cruiser terms...
Man, if only.
Although I will say I'm still in love with the idea of having the ship's bridge stations shift from science heavy to tac heavy depending on whether or not the ship is separated.
I'd take it either way.
I still maintain that, CMD eng, LTC tac, LTC sci, LT uni would work the best. With a 4/3/3 layout. Its different from the oddy, its not like the FACR, nothing else like it in the fed line up. It has both utility and flexibility, with uniqueness all its own for the feds. At the same time it doesnt replace all the other ships, the FACR and the Avenger would still be ahead in terms of, and it would be near the G-X on that front but the G-X would still have cloak and lance over it and would be slightly more tanky giving it more of a dreadnought feel it should have.
You want a G-R for dmg, you could set it up dual A2B with a LT eng, or go more tac heavy and have LT tac. Or if you want a good cc/heal support you could lean it even more Sci with a LT sci. If the Fleet star cruiser gets revamped after it, it could have a similar build but more Sci locked with 4 eng/ 4 sci consoles leaving both having their roles.
Wouldn't step on the ambassador or the excel in their respective roles either, as both their boff stations would be very different. Anyone who wants a multi-mission Galaxy, to me thats your layout right there. Without need to rely on consoles, or other gimicks that not everyone may want to use.
don't try to make sense of the galaxy separating and becoming tactically superior, it and a whole lot of other things like that are dead wrong, and this isnt even the worst offender. its simply a way to enhance gameplay, to make the ship better when you activate a transformation, its neat.
i figure he means that in a klingon sense. until the negvar, they only had relatively small, quick, heavily armed ships, a separated galaxy is more relateable to that. the vorcha is actually a bit smaller by volume then an akira
the stardrive alone is 40% larger then a vorcha, but tactically probably a match for one, with the massive burst torpedo launchers and 2 arrays that match the ambassador's largest. unseparated, its got substantially more powerful phasers at its disposal, but 3 times the heft it had, ends up fitting the description of a big gun battleship then.
There's also Geordi stating that a phaser would be more powerful if power levels to the single emitter are increased. An array's advantage is field of fire and precision. I like the idea DDIS voiced, though, that the wandering glow is some kind of power transfer that culminates in a high powered shot, yet there is neither TM nor on-screen evidence of that mechanic.
The defelctor burst though is something that should make it into the game. It has beens tated that a channeled beam from the deflector dish dwarves all weapon system the ship has at it's disposal. When we remember BOBW, a shot like that is far from being standart practice and in fact hurts the ship very much. When I look at the Venture-type refit in STO, however, I am thinking that structural and technological improvements to the deflector dish would allow for an ability like this.
The Venture could make use of such a high powered attack. Instead of burning out, the dish is shut down, maybe even closed off via an animated armour lid or something while engines, weapons and auxilliary systems of the ship firing are offline for a certain period of time afterwards, making it a very powerful ability which is exposing the ship. It would be a neat strategic ability.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Kinda makes you want some brand-new LtCmdr- and Commander-level Eng powers based on them, eh?
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
I think the maco set has that shot.
No, the MACO set has the "Heavy Graviton Beam" which is a VOY gizmo. The defelctor shot in BOBW looks and works completely different. Further, a "heavy graviton beam" was explicitly mentioned in the episode's dialogue as a possible weapon against the Borg, yet Riker dismissed the idea.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Uh? Might be, but that doesn't change the fact that the HGB is not what we see in BOBW
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
We see it in VOY. It is a green beam used to open fluidic rifts, however... yeah, Cryptic just created an ability and named it randomly after something mentioned on screen, but that's not entirely new
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Why BS?
Anyway, the GCS phasers are among the strongest ship mounted phaser weapons shown in canon Trek, ever.
Even if the Sovereigns where slightly stronger (which they surely are not) the GCS in STO should have more tac console slots and at least a Lt. Cmdr. tac BOFF station IMO.
If it's based on the array length then it is BS. length means TRIBBLE other wise why don't more ships have them. nope. mark indicates strength.
Isn't that what we do all the time in STO? (Outfitting our ships with new equipment)
A sub par GCS would indicate that the devs think the GCS was a bad ship from the start and not became relatively bad because its "old".
So the question is, why do cryptics devs think the GCS was a bad ship in the first place?
That doesn't mean that a Intrepid has more Firepower than a Galaxy, don't you think?
The GCS was highly modifiable. As Flagship it carried a lot of stuff not needed in a firefight.
I hope you don't seriously think that in wartime the Ent -D would still have kept the kindergarten, the kids and their families on board...
Well the Sov couldn't blast hole into a cube so it could almost fly through.
The point is we don't have any direct references between both ships. Heck we don't even have a statement comparing both ships. We can only take educated guesses.
And everything i have seen just cries that the GCS is still more than on par with the Sovereign.
Let's try to see it from that perspective:
Building a big ship takes years or even decades of planning and designing.
The sovereign just cannot be designed, build and tested in the years after the first contact with the borg, it must have been in planning stage before that, similar to the Prometheus. Those ships don't replace the one before, they complement each other.
Each Starfleet ship gets new tech as soon as it is availlable.
The GCS surely got new power couplings, EPS grid and phaser emitters as soon as they where availlable.
What's important is the availlable space. A wartime refit (or a non Diplomacy refit :P) Galaxy Class would surely have much more fusion generators and a tougher power grid. Even if the Sovereign had better phasers (which is nonsense IMO) it still would have much more power reserves all over the ship. So in the end, even if both ships where on par concerning firepower the GCS would still have more durability and even stronger shields* but it would be slightly less maneuverable.
(* shield systems can be upgraded, so it ultimately depend on how much power can a ship generate.)
Again, as i have stated roughly 1001+ times before, the GCS was highly modifiable.
At wartimes the ship would look and perform quiet different to what we saw in the early TNG seasons. Just look at "Yeasterdays Enterprise" Ent-D to get a impression of a wartime refit Galaxy Class Starship.
This, albeit the Sovereign was launched with Mark XI arrays, I think, Mk XII are an STO thing. But STOs "marks" don't follow logic, it's just a level indicator since type-8 phaser would be completely different weapons, essentially, from say a type-9 or 10. Anyhow, while I personally think the Galaxies' power output IS indeed higher and pure firepower it tops the Sovereign (which is more manoeuvreale on the other hand, so they are even but on top in different situations), there is no indication that a longer array equals more firepower in primary or secondary canon sources (e.g. on-screen or the manuals). But I might miss something, DDIS went into great detail there and maybe I overlooked something, but essentially it's true: type-10 phasers have the same baseline power output, it doesn't matter how long an array is. The Galaxy has, however, more than 300 degrees covered with her primary weaponry, auxilliary arrays leave virtually no blind spots to exploit whereas a Sovereign or Intrepid or other newer ships do have those blind spots and need more arrays to cover them, but more arrays does also mean nothing in terms of output since you cannot fire all at once AND it just shows design flaws in terms of defensive capabilites
But I still think a deflector blast could be something Starfleet figured out with the Venture. Still an exceptional practice, but systems should be in a state where the shot doesn't rip the ship apart but only needs some time to regenerate.
EDIT: Oh, and nobody dare to say the dolphin tanks are redundant. They rock! And I think the dolphins are even superior navigators if I don't confuse that info with something else...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Both ships differ just 10 years.
That's nothing compared to the Excelsior which is supposed to be on par with a new ship BUILD for combat (defiant). I think Starfleets capabilities to keep ships up to date is remarkeable.
The GCS is on par with the Sovereign in any case.
Just think about it.
Starfleet isnt stupid, they wouldn let their most complex ship become obsolete ten years after introduction, that would be absolute nonsense. As i said before, both ships aren't rivals they complement each other.
Just because Picard got the Sovereign after carelessly letting the big -D get destroyed, doesn't mean his next ship MUST be totally superior.
(Personally i think it's quite the contrary.)
Remember when the Intrepid was first on screen, they also said something about it being the most avanced ship. (or something similar)
Do you seriously think the Intrepid has stronger phasers, shields or a higher power output than a Galaxy?
Why?
Do you seriously think the Galaxy Cannot be modified to equip the same phaser emitters?
It is, but the point is the GCS has more space to be customized. Rip out the leisure stuff, the kindergarten and all the other nonsense
So lets say the ship needs more fusion reactors or shield emitters (or whatever the situation requires), the GCS has the advantage of having more space at hand to mount different, or the same equipment as a Sovereign. (just more or bigger in size)
As i said before, there's only 10 years difference between both ships.
By now (STO) both ships are 30-40 years old and got more than one overhaul in the meantime.
The more time passes the more diminishing the technical differences become.
The GCS is just the bigger ship in the end, less maneuverable but more power to generate and more durability.
Ultimately the difference between both ships should be a matter of taste. Do you want a faster more maneuverable ship or a slower more sturdy one?
In STO the relation between both ships should be similar. Both should be strong ships, just suited for different playstyles. But one shouldn't be completely bad while the other one can compete on top level.
That's not right IMO.
I think the Galaxy and Sovie have the same power output. And i have always considered opposites sides of the same coing. Galaxy is more peace oriented. That is not to say she can't punch hard but the Standard Galaxy is a multi mission explorer that can do several things at opnce and can defend her crew but note a good portion of the crew is civilain. they were ment to explore unknown regions for 10 years before a severe refit. Sov on the other hand is gear more for combat. while she has a similar role in peace time she is deswign more be more survivalbe then the Galaxy since within a decade most of the first production line had been destroyed. In the end Galaxy has the edge in exploration and science while the sov hasthe edge in combat.
The sovy=more combat is not based on any evidence, however. The only indicator is that the sovy shoots a lot in the later TNG action flicks. The ship must have been designed during the same time the Galaxy served ("peace"), it was labeled "Mark II Explorer" and, like you said, has basically the same mission profile albeit on a smaller scale. Picards explorer line doesn't mean they are a battleship know, it means they got sidelined doing dominion related peacekeeping duties all the years the Ent-E launched.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!