but that DEFINES the X type ships. They need it because of the lance
Tac Bort's got a lance, Guramba's got a lance. Neither one of them needs a third nacelle.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
but that DEFINES the X type ships. They need it because of the lance
I feel we are wandering off topic again, but why would the lance need a third nacelle?
The nacelles don't generate power, the warpcore does. The lance is nothing but a large phaser emitter probably connected to the core or some other high energy source (which is why separation doesn't make sense in STO), but a warp nacelle is just a gas/plasma filled chamber with an ignition coil wrapped around it (basically an "empty" chamber). It doesn't generate power, all it would theoretically do is create a third warp bubble around the ship to "stabilize" warp flight.
The infamous "Federation Class" design of the USS Entente makes more sense than the Galaxy refit as the third warp nacelle was fused on the saucer (despite the connie being not shown capable of separation). This would mean the saucer would be warp-capable if separated and this would make more sense for a "dreadnaught" ship, making the saucer a fully able combat worthy craft.
^ 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
I feel we are wandering off topic again, but why would the lance need a third nacelle?
The nacelles don't generate power, the warpcore does. The lance is nothing but a large phaser emitter probably connected to the core or some other high energy source (which is why separation doesn't make sense in STO), but a warp nacelle is just a gas/plasma filled chamber with an ignition coil wrapped around it (basically an "empty" chamber). It doesn't generate power, all it would theoretically do is create a third warp bubble around the ship to "stabilize" warp flight.
The infamous "Federation Class" design of the USS Entente makes more sense than the Galaxy refit as the third warp nacelle was fused on the saucer (despite the connie being not shown capable of separation). This would mean the saucer would be warp-capable if separated and this would make more sense for a "dreadnaught" ship, making the saucer a fully able combat worthy craft.
Perhaps because the boosted warp core needs a new run off. It's basically similar to Defiant's issues. she is too powerful for her size thus she can never use her fll power in speed. She would rip herself apart. Perhaps the third nacelle stops that problem. But obviously their is a reason to have more than 2 nacelles. Federation and Niagra both have 3 nacelles. Constellation and Cheyeene have 4 as well.
Perhaps because the boosted warp core needs a new run off. It's basically similar to Defiant's issues. she is too powerful for her size thus she can never use her fll power in speed. She would rip herself apart. Perhaps the third nacelle stops that problem. But obviously their is a reason to have more than 2 nacelles. Federation and Niagra both have 3 nacelles. Constellation and Cheyeene have 4 as well.
Honestly, i don't belive that slapping a third nacelle on a ship is the only sollution for a problem like that. (IF that's the probelm in the first place)
As angrytarg said, nacelles don't generate power. Warp core and Fusion Generators do, neither are located inside a nacelle.
I always look at it from this perspective, a nacelle is like the wheel on a car. Wheels don't generate power, the Engine does.
Maybe the third nacelle allows the ship to dive deeper into subspace and allowes higher speeds or it creates a more stable Warp bubble.
Aside from that, i don't see a reason to attach more than two nacelles on a complete ship.
Just to be sure, the posted ships eiher have substantial more massive nacelles or more nacelles than the standard Galaxy.
Anyway.
The posted ships easily could be a advancement of the G-X and unite both ships (the -R and the -X) again to a more powerful and more versatile ship.
It could be seen as part of the Galaxy Class evolution. (which makes the whole issue on-topic again )
Speaking of evolution, am i the only one thinking that the Galaxy is the closest thing to a "living ship"? (at least what Starfleet ships concerns)
I'm not speaking about Bio-neural gel packs or things like that, i'm speaking about it having something like a soul or just being more than the sum of its parts. (it just a intuitive thing, i know it sounds crazy)
"...'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
When creating the game they surely thought that giving the ship almost exclusively engineering powers would make it the king of tanking.
But we all know by now, that this isn't the case.
What else could be the reason to give the Galaxy such a extreme BOFF layout?
If you've been flying the Gal-R for YEARS (as you've been implying), then you must know of some changes that were made over the years to certain BOff abilities.
E.G.: Aux2SIF originally was a HoT + Resistance, and HE was a simple debuff-remover.
At one point, out of the blue, they changed Aux2SIF to be a one-off heal with a much decreased resistance buff (if i remember correctly, on equal terms of today resistances they pretty much halved the buff), and turned the HE into a hazard remover AND a uber HoT + a slight resistance buff.
How i remember that? i remember that because at the time i was lvling my lvl20 KDF with a K'Tanco (which was newly introduced and i wanted to try it out), and had to change all my Eng BOff skilling because of that change.
Now you see why the Gal-R was considered quite a master tank...
If you've been flying the Gal-R for YEARS (as you've been implying), then you must know of some changes that were made over the years to certain BOff abilities.
E.G.: Aux2SIF originally was a HoT + Resistance, and HE was a simple debuff-remover.
At one point, out of the blue, they changed Aux2SIF to be a one-off heal with a much decreased resistance buff (if i remember correctly, on equal terms of today resistances they pretty much halved the buff), and turned the HE into a hazard remover AND a uber HoT + a slight resistance buff.
How i remember that? i remember that because at the time i was lvling my lvl20 KDF with a K'Tanco (which was newly introduced and i wanted to try it out), and had to change all my Eng BOff skilling because of that change.
Now you see why the Gal-R was considered quite a master tank...
if you have been flying it for years too, you would know those changes to the skills were made before there was a single c store ship, even the 3 tier 4 retrofits, the galaxy X, the excelsior, and nebula. sorry, for the galaxy R's entire existence, its never been a master tank. :rolleyes:
If you've been flying the Gal-R for YEARS (as you've been implying), then you must know of some changes that were made over the years to certain BOff abilities.
E.G.: Aux2SIF originally was a HoT + Resistance, and HE was a simple debuff-remover.
At one point, out of the blue, they changed Aux2SIF to be a one-off heal with a much decreased resistance buff (if i remember correctly, on equal terms of today resistances they pretty much halved the buff), and turned the HE into a hazard remover AND a uber HoT + a slight resistance buff.
How i remember that? i remember that because at the time i was lvling my lvl20 KDF with a K'Tanco (which was newly introduced and i wanted to try it out), and had to change all my Eng BOff skilling because of that change.
Now you see why the Gal-R was considered quite a master tank...
What's your point?
.. they enhanced some healing powers over the years, great (which affect ALL ships, not just the GCS).
The point is that the GCS shouldn't be so extreme engineering focussed at all.
It should be much more versatile, and not just the most engineering focussed ship in the game.
(i don't know how often i have written this in the last years.)
The G-R is basicly a flying brick, the most passive ship in STO. Even if other ships where even more passive, the point is that it is a totally wrong interpretation of the Galaxy Class.
Personally i don't care if it fits into that un-holy trinity (stone/paper/scissor) mold or not.
And i don't care if the G -R is supposed to be the most tanky ship in the game. (which it isn't)
I expect a good representaion of the Galaxy Class, THAT would raise the games quality IMO.
In fact, i would like to see that for all canon ships, while non canon ships would carry that spirit even further. (again, THAT would raise the games quality)
But cryptic did a much more extreme, almost comical approach when creating ships.
They made ships way too extreme in what they did best (in their opinion) in the shows.
To be honest i don't see the Defiant as a glass canon or the intrepid as a extreme science ship when i watch the according series. Nor is the Prometheus a cannon spitting glass cannon or the Akira a jetfighter like carrier.
Cryptics devs should not only rework the Galaxy Class to be more canon, they should also rework all other canon ships. (they can do what they want with their own creations 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
But cryptic did a much more extreme, almost comical approach when creating ships.
They made ships way too extreme in what they did best (in their opinion) in the shows.
To be honest i don't see the Defiant as a glass canon or the intrepid as a extreme science ship when i watch the according series. Nor is the Prometheus a cannon spitting glass cannon or the Akira a jetfighter like carrier.
Cryptics devs should not only rework the Galaxy Class to be more canon, they should also rework all other canon ships. (they can do what they want with their own creations IMO)
At this point they should remake from scratch the entire ship and space combat systems.
The entire game was originally meant and developed the "unholy trinity" of MMOs, and there's so much you can do when the guy who originally created the ship system may have aswell been fired years ago due to their "crew renewal". (Sometimes i look at cryptic's job page and i wonder how in the world they keep going with that many open positions)
this 3 nacelle stuff, its not a good sign if a ship has more then 2. you only see 3 or more when there are high performance goals, but inadequate technology. its a baindaid, with numerous drawbacks in excess mass, equipment, initial and ongoing cost, and power draw.
the galaxy X having 3 nacelles is in place of a proper warp coil upgrade, or if they couldn't fit ultra modern coils in the nacelle housing, an entirely redesigned nacelle. if the galaxy needed a 3rd nacelle added to stay competitive, its got 1 foot in the grave as a class at that point, which is absurd. something like the galaxy X shouldn't need to exist till turn of the 26th century.
this 3 nacelle stuff, its not a good sign if a ship has more then 2. you only see 3 or more when there are high performance goals, but inadequate technology. its a baindaid, with numerous drawbacks in excess mass, equipment, initial and ongoing cost, and power draw.
the galaxy X having 3 nacelles is in place of a proper warp coil upgrade, or if they couldn't fit ultra modern coils in the nacelle housing, an entirely redesigned nacelle. if the galaxy needed a 3rd nacelle added to stay competitive, its got 1 foot in the grave as a class at that point, which is absurd. something like the galaxy X shouldn't need to exist till turn of the 26th century.
At this point they should remake from scratch the entire ship and space combat systems.
The entire game was originally meant and developed the "unholy trinity" of MMOs, and there's so much you can do when the guy who originally created the ship system may have aswell been fired years ago due to their "crew renewal". (Sometimes i look at cryptic's job page and i wonder how in the world they keep going with that many open positions)
If you take a close look at STOs mechanics you cannot miss one simple fact: The game never went well with the Star Trek theme. The whole gameplay, rising in ranks, get a ton of ships you swap on the fly, the handling, the missions - it all feels like it was a starfighter game like wing commander. I am almost 100% sure that this game was developed to be something completely different like freelancer, and somehow they got the license because Perpetual screwed up and then they hastily put it all together. You control every ship in STO like it's meant to be a nimble starfighter and the cannon-heavy gameplay supports this. The basic idea that you rise in ranks and buy new ships is completely inaccurate to represent Star Trek, it's a freelancer-mercenary approach with your personal hangar of fighters. If we talk about an accurate representation, STO cannot be fixed. A new game is needed, really. They can bandaid STO and could improve a whole lot in terms of canon representation, but it's obvious that this is not in their interest.
Out-of-universe I don't think much thought went into it. The Cheyenne was a background kitbash and the designers went a little rogue with those. We have single and tripple or quadro-nacelle ships for their looks and the Galaxy Refit was a nod to the abandoned Federation Class. So, "real" reason for more nacelles is probably because it looked good on that particular model.
In-universe reason is that the Cheyenne, Constellation and Prometheus use single warp coils, while the Galaxy nacelles house dual warp coils which means the Galaxy actually has four warp coils in her nacelles (the refit got six). Obviously, there is an in-universe advantage to have more warp coils but it seems to also be a law of Trekverse that you need an even number of them. This rule was (out-of-universe) established to make those designs fit, specifically to explain why the G-R could have a third nacelle or why they were single-nacelled designs (with Galaxy-style nacelles though).
We can assume that the Constellation was an experiment in that regard, going from Constitution (2 warp coils) to an upgraded system with four coils each in it's own nacelle. Obviously, the design didn't stick, albeit at some point the Cheyenne took over and most likely was a predecessor to the Galaxy which spawned the dual coil nacelle 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
If you take a close look at STOs mechanics you cannot miss one simple fact: The game never went well with the Star Trek theme. The whole gameplay, rising in ranks, get a ton of ships you swap on the fly, the handling, the missions - it all feels like it was a starfighter game like wing commander. I am almost 100% sure that this game was developed to be something completely different like freelancer, and somehow they got the license because Perpetual screwed up and then they hastily put it all together. You control every ship in STO like it's meant to be a nimble starfighter and the cannon-heavy gameplay supports this. The basic idea that you rise in ranks and buy new ships is completely inaccurate to represent Star Trek, it's a freelancer-mercenary approach with your personal hangar of fighters. If we talk about an accurate representation, STO cannot be fixed. A new game is needed, really. They can bandaid STO and could improve a whole lot in terms of canon representation, but it's obvious that this is not in their interest.
Out-of-universe I don't think much thought went into it. The Cheyenne was a background kitbash and the designers went a little rogue with those. We have single and tripple or quadro-nacelle ships for their looks and the Galaxy Refit was a nod to the abandoned Federation Class. So, "real" reason for more nacelles is probably because it looked good on that particular model.
In-universe reason is that the Cheyenne, Constellation and Prometheus use single warp coils, while the Galaxy nacelles house dual warp coils which means the Galaxy actually has four warp coils in her nacelles (the refit got six). Obviously, there is an in-universe advantage to have more warp coils but it seems to also be a law of Trekverse that you need an even number of them. This rule was (out-of-universe) established to make those designs fit, specifically to explain why the G-R could have a third nacelle or why they were single-nacelled designs (with Galaxy-style nacelles though).
We can assume that the Constellation was an experiment in that regard, going from Constitution (2 warp coils) to an upgraded system with four coils each in it's own nacelle. Obviously, the design didn't stick, albeit at some point the Cheyenne took over and most likely was a predecessor to the Galaxy which spawned the dual coil nacelle idea.
Cheyenne was made the same time as the Galaxy. and i didn't include the Prommie because of MVAM
there's 0 evidence this class was a great success, that started a successful trend. its just the token every ~50 years attempt to make a 4 nacelle ship that at least equals the performance to weight ratio of a 2 nacelle ship.
i cant tell whats a bigger shame, that those BoBW thrown together ship didn't get more fleshed out, or that they bothered making them at all.
there's 0 evidence this class was a great success, that started a successful trend. its just the token every ~50 years attempt to make a 4 nacelle ship that at least equals the performance to weight ratio of a 2 nacelle ship.
i cant tell whats a bigger shame, that those BoBW thrown together ship didn't get more fleshed out, or that they bothered making them at all.
the same could be said for Soyuz. Like it or not that IS a Miranda Variant. It just gets a fancy name
Cheyenne was made the same time as the Galaxy. and i didn't include the Prommie because of MVAM
Might be, I personally just headcanon it in another way. We have literally no in-universe information about any of those ships.
My personal theory is that the Cheyenne was a kind of advanced Constellation and a design study following the Ambassador and predescending the Galaxy. It uses a literal Galaxy saucer, albeit much smaller and it tries the four warp coil thing which we also find in the Galaxies nacelles. But we simply don't know, it's pure speculation, like talking about Caitians
^ 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 3 nacelle stuff, its not a good sign if a ship has more then 2. you only see 3 or more when there are high performance goals, but inadequate technology. its a baindaid, with numerous drawbacks in excess mass, equipment, initial and ongoing cost, and power draw.
the galaxy X having 3 nacelles is in place of a proper warp coil upgrade, or if they couldn't fit ultra modern coils in the nacelle housing, an entirely redesigned nacelle. if the galaxy needed a 3rd nacelle added to stay competitive, its got 1 foot in the grave as a class at that point, which is absurd. something like the galaxy X shouldn't need to exist till turn of the 26th century.
That's why i support a alternative Galaxy -X model in STO. (and all trek)
A upgraded Galaxy Class wuld need to look much different than the Galaxy -X IMO.
Such a ship would need enhanced armor, more space for a even bigger Warp core and stronger offensive and defensive equipment.
Instead of longer nacelles like the Sovereign i would create wider and bigger nacelles that do not require the shield bubble to expand that much like at the Sovereign.
Regarding to its appearance i would make it look like the rejected "heavy" Galaxy Class variant from STOs early times. (looks much better than most ships cryptic made, afaik) LINK
"...'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
Might be, I personally just headcanon it in another way. We have literally no in-universe information about any of those ships.
My personal theory is that the Cheyenne was a kind of advanced Constellation and a design study following the Ambassador and predescending the Galaxy. It uses a literal Galaxy saucer, albeit much smaller and it tries the four warp coil thing which we also find in the Galaxies nacelles. But we simply don't know, it's pure speculation, like talking about Caitians
i figure the constellation is a kitbash of decommissioned constitution refits, at the turn of the 24rd century, cobbled together into something useful. i doubt any were total new constructions.
the cheyene, new orleans, and most of the rest of those kitbash ships, for them to make much sense should be using the under slung decks of a galaxy class saucer, deck 11 and lower, stacked back to back. also, scaled appropriately with that, the cheyenne makes no sense, being that small. thats what proper, fleshed out, BoBW ships should look like
Cheyenne was made the same time as the Galaxy. and i didn't include the Prommie because of MVAM
I agree that the Cheyenne was still being churned out of the shipyards at the same time as the Galaxy class. But we do not know when the class first entered service, in-universe.
Let's face it, ship most modelers don't give ships they create much of a thought.
Especially made for TV, they are supposed to look good nothing else.
One can think somehow or other about multi nacelle ships and kitbashes, but what they have done with the Galaxy Class -> Galaxy -X looks just cheap.
It looks like made by a five year old, completely destroying the grace and elegance of the Galaxy Class.
the chyenne was made by taking a enterpise-D model kit's saucer and gluing 4 sharpies to 2 necks
it was background filler the tech manuals never even gave the ships any stats
In fact, they created a smaller looking saucer, only similar to the Galaxy saucer. Other than the ship we have in STO, its nacelles where much shorter (better looking IMO).
My point is, that they deliberately created a unique ship, just to never use it again?
Very strange IMO.
Not only that, with the Cheyenne we could see that more ships where build having wide saucers.
Personally i liked the wide design much more, it was uniqe, new and fresh. Perfect for giving Starfleet a new face and feel after Kirks era and TOS movies.
Streched designs that followed (Intrepid, then Sovereign) look too generic, boring and uncreative in my opinion, trivializing the new approach and give trek design a more generic sci-fi show direction.
(Sorry that was the graphic designer speaking here.)
"...'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
Let's face it, ship most modelers don't give ships they create much of a thought.
Especially made for TV, they are supposed to look good nothing else.
One can think somehow or other about multi nacelle ships and kitbashes, but what they have done with the Galaxy Class -> Galaxy -X looks just cheap.
It looks like made by a five year old, completely destroying the grace and elegance of the Galaxy Class.
In fact, they created a smaller looking saucer, only similar to the Galaxy saucer. Other than the ship we have in STO, its nacelles where much shorter (better looking IMO).
My point is, that they deliberately created a unique ship, just to never use it again?
Very strange IMO.
Not only that, with the Cheyenne we could see that more ships where build having wide saucers.
Personally i liked the wide design much more, it was uniqe, new and fresh. Perfect for giving Starfleet a new face and feel after Kirks era and TOS movies.
Streched designs that followed (Intrepid, then Sovereign) look too generic, boring and uncreative in my opinion, trivializing the new approach and give trek design a more generic sci-fi show direction.
(Sorry that was the graphic designer speaking here.)
Another example. Ambassador. They worked hard on that ship and we only see it a few times. Heck we don't even see it in DW, the best time to show that girl off.
Let's face it, ship most modelers don't give ships they create much of a thought.
Especially made for TV, they are supposed to look good nothing else.
One can think somehow or other about multi nacelle ships and kitbashes, but what they have done with the Galaxy Class -> Galaxy -X looks just cheap.
It looks like made by a five year old, completely destroying the grace and elegance of the Galaxy Class. (...)
Fun fact: This is the Gal-R's designer's point of view as well I can't remember where but the quote is on Memory Alpha, I just read it yesterday. They were toying with how to make the Galaxy look "futuristic" and the winning designer said that he simply slapped a nacelle from clay and spare parts on it. He said himself something almost literally like "it looked like something a child would do" - but that design won
Another example. Ambassador. They worked hard on that ship and we only see it a few times. Heck we don't even see it in DW, the best time to show that girl off.
True, although the poor Ambassador had a cruel real-life fate. A stagehand dropped the model which then broke and was never fixed. That's literally what happened.
^ 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
Fun fact: This is the Gal-R's designer's point of view as well I can't remember where but the quote is on Memory Alpha, I just read it yesterday. They were toying with how to make the Galaxy look "futuristic" and the winning designer said that he simply slapped a nacelle from clay and spare parts on it. He said himself something almost literally like "it looked like something a child would do" - but that design won
True, although the poor Ambassador had a cruel real-life fate. A stagehand dropped the model which then broke and was never fixed. That's literally what happened.
Facepalm. But still by DW they were CGI alot, would it hurt to put an Ambassador in there?
Comments
Tac Bort's got a lance, Guramba's got a lance. Neither one of them needs a third nacelle.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Two words. CRAPTIC DESIGNS.
I feel we are wandering off topic again, but why would the lance need a third nacelle?
The nacelles don't generate power, the warpcore does. The lance is nothing but a large phaser emitter probably connected to the core or some other high energy source (which is why separation doesn't make sense in STO), but a warp nacelle is just a gas/plasma filled chamber with an ignition coil wrapped around it (basically an "empty" chamber). It doesn't generate power, all it would theoretically do is create a third warp bubble around the ship to "stabilize" warp flight.
The infamous "Federation Class" design of the USS Entente makes more sense than the Galaxy refit as the third warp nacelle was fused on the saucer (despite the connie being not shown capable of separation). This would mean the saucer would be warp-capable if separated and this would make more sense for a "dreadnaught" ship, making the saucer a fully able combat worthy craft.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Perhaps because the boosted warp core needs a new run off. It's basically similar to Defiant's issues. she is too powerful for her size thus she can never use her fll power in speed. She would rip herself apart. Perhaps the third nacelle stops that problem. But obviously their is a reason to have more than 2 nacelles. Federation and Niagra both have 3 nacelles. Constellation and Cheyeene have 4 as well.
As angrytarg said, nacelles don't generate power. Warp core and Fusion Generators do, neither are located inside a nacelle.
I always look at it from this perspective, a nacelle is like the wheel on a car. Wheels don't generate power, the Engine does.
Maybe the third nacelle allows the ship to dive deeper into subspace and allowes higher speeds or it creates a more stable Warp bubble.
Aside from that, i don't see a reason to attach more than two nacelles on a complete ship.
Just to be sure, the posted ships eiher have substantial more massive nacelles or more nacelles than the standard Galaxy.
Anyway.
The posted ships easily could be a advancement of the G-X and unite both ships (the -R and the -X) again to a more powerful and more versatile ship.
It could be seen as part of the Galaxy Class evolution. (which makes the whole issue on-topic again
Speaking of evolution, am i the only one thinking that the Galaxy is the closest thing to a "living ship"? (at least what Starfleet ships concerns)
I'm not speaking about Bio-neural gel packs or things like that, i'm speaking about it having something like a soul or just being more than the sum of its parts. (it just a intuitive thing, i know it sounds crazy)
If you've been flying the Gal-R for YEARS (as you've been implying), then you must know of some changes that were made over the years to certain BOff abilities.
E.G.: Aux2SIF originally was a HoT + Resistance, and HE was a simple debuff-remover.
At one point, out of the blue, they changed Aux2SIF to be a one-off heal with a much decreased resistance buff (if i remember correctly, on equal terms of today resistances they pretty much halved the buff), and turned the HE into a hazard remover AND a uber HoT + a slight resistance buff.
How i remember that? i remember that because at the time i was lvling my lvl20 KDF with a K'Tanco (which was newly introduced and i wanted to try it out), and had to change all my Eng BOff skilling because of that change.
Now you see why the Gal-R was considered quite a master tank...
Fix aft beam hardpoints in the style of the Ambassador...I'm tired of shooting through my nacelles.
if you have been flying it for years too, you would know those changes to the skills were made before there was a single c store ship, even the 3 tier 4 retrofits, the galaxy X, the excelsior, and nebula. sorry, for the galaxy R's entire existence, its never been a master tank. :rolleyes:
What's your point?
.. they enhanced some healing powers over the years, great (which affect ALL ships, not just the GCS).
The point is that the GCS shouldn't be so extreme engineering focussed at all.
It should be much more versatile, and not just the most engineering focussed ship in the game.
(i don't know how often i have written this in the last years.)
The G-R is basicly a flying brick, the most passive ship in STO. Even if other ships where even more passive, the point is that it is a totally wrong interpretation of the Galaxy Class.
Personally i don't care if it fits into that un-holy trinity (stone/paper/scissor) mold or not.
And i don't care if the G -R is supposed to be the most tanky ship in the game. (which it isn't)
I expect a good representaion of the Galaxy Class, THAT would raise the games quality IMO.
In fact, i would like to see that for all canon ships, while non canon ships would carry that spirit even further. (again, THAT would raise the games quality)
But cryptic did a much more extreme, almost comical approach when creating ships.
They made ships way too extreme in what they did best (in their opinion) in the shows.
To be honest i don't see the Defiant as a glass canon or the intrepid as a extreme science ship when i watch the according series. Nor is the Prometheus a cannon spitting glass cannon or the Akira a jetfighter like carrier.
Cryptics devs should not only rework the Galaxy Class to be more canon, they should also rework all other canon ships. (they can do what they want with their own creations IMO)
At this point they should remake from scratch the entire ship and space combat systems.
The entire game was originally meant and developed the "unholy trinity" of MMOs, and there's so much you can do when the guy who originally created the ship system may have aswell been fired years ago due to their "crew renewal". (Sometimes i look at cryptic's job page and i wonder how in the world they keep going with that many open positions)
still?
wait for us to reach 702 pages like the old thread to said that:)
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=528931&page=271
NAH! Let's break THAT record!:P
the galaxy X having 3 nacelles is in place of a proper warp coil upgrade, or if they couldn't fit ultra modern coils in the nacelle housing, an entirely redesigned nacelle. if the galaxy needed a 3rd nacelle added to stay competitive, its got 1 foot in the grave as a class at that point, which is absurd. something like the galaxy X shouldn't need to exist till turn of the 26th century.
Explain Chyenne.
If you take a close look at STOs mechanics you cannot miss one simple fact: The game never went well with the Star Trek theme. The whole gameplay, rising in ranks, get a ton of ships you swap on the fly, the handling, the missions - it all feels like it was a starfighter game like wing commander. I am almost 100% sure that this game was developed to be something completely different like freelancer, and somehow they got the license because Perpetual screwed up and then they hastily put it all together. You control every ship in STO like it's meant to be a nimble starfighter and the cannon-heavy gameplay supports this. The basic idea that you rise in ranks and buy new ships is completely inaccurate to represent Star Trek, it's a freelancer-mercenary approach with your personal hangar of fighters. If we talk about an accurate representation, STO cannot be fixed. A new game is needed, really. They can bandaid STO and could improve a whole lot in terms of canon representation, but it's obvious that this is not in their interest.
Out-of-universe I don't think much thought went into it. The Cheyenne was a background kitbash and the designers went a little rogue with those. We have single and tripple or quadro-nacelle ships for their looks and the Galaxy Refit was a nod to the abandoned Federation Class. So, "real" reason for more nacelles is probably because it looked good on that particular model.
In-universe reason is that the Cheyenne, Constellation and Prometheus use single warp coils, while the Galaxy nacelles house dual warp coils which means the Galaxy actually has four warp coils in her nacelles (the refit got six). Obviously, there is an in-universe advantage to have more warp coils but it seems to also be a law of Trekverse that you need an even number of them. This rule was (out-of-universe) established to make those designs fit, specifically to explain why the G-R could have a third nacelle or why they were single-nacelled designs (with Galaxy-style nacelles though).
We can assume that the Constellation was an experiment in that regard, going from Constitution (2 warp coils) to an upgraded system with four coils each in it's own nacelle. Obviously, the design didn't stick, albeit at some point the Cheyenne took over and most likely was a predecessor to the Galaxy which spawned the dual coil nacelle idea.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Cheyenne was made the same time as the Galaxy. and i didn't include the Prommie because of MVAM
there's 0 evidence this class was a great success, that started a successful trend. its just the token every ~50 years attempt to make a 4 nacelle ship that at least equals the performance to weight ratio of a 2 nacelle ship.
i cant tell whats a bigger shame, that those BoBW thrown together ship didn't get more fleshed out, or that they bothered making them at all.
the same could be said for Soyuz. Like it or not that IS a Miranda Variant. It just gets a fancy name
Might be, I personally just headcanon it in another way. We have literally no in-universe information about any of those ships.
My personal theory is that the Cheyenne was a kind of advanced Constellation and a design study following the Ambassador and predescending the Galaxy. It uses a literal Galaxy saucer, albeit much smaller and it tries the four warp coil thing which we also find in the Galaxies nacelles. But we simply don't know, it's pure speculation, like talking about Caitians
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
That's why i support a alternative Galaxy -X model in STO. (and all trek)
A upgraded Galaxy Class wuld need to look much different than the Galaxy -X IMO.
Such a ship would need enhanced armor, more space for a even bigger Warp core and stronger offensive and defensive equipment.
Instead of longer nacelles like the Sovereign i would create wider and bigger nacelles that do not require the shield bubble to expand that much like at the Sovereign.
Regarding to its appearance i would make it look like the rejected "heavy" Galaxy Class variant from STOs early times. (looks much better than most ships cryptic made, afaik)
LINK
i figure the constellation is a kitbash of decommissioned constitution refits, at the turn of the 24rd century, cobbled together into something useful. i doubt any were total new constructions.
the cheyene, new orleans, and most of the rest of those kitbash ships, for them to make much sense should be using the under slung decks of a galaxy class saucer, deck 11 and lower, stacked back to back. also, scaled appropriately with that, the cheyenne makes no sense, being that small. thats what proper, fleshed out, BoBW ships should look like
the chyenne was made by taking a enterpise-D model kit's saucer and gluing 4 sharpies to 2 necks
it was background filler the tech manuals never even gave the ships any stats
I agree that the Cheyenne was still being churned out of the shipyards at the same time as the Galaxy class. But we do not know when the class first entered service, in-universe.
Especially made for TV, they are supposed to look good nothing else.
One can think somehow or other about multi nacelle ships and kitbashes, but what they have done with the Galaxy Class -> Galaxy -X looks just cheap.
It looks like made by a five year old, completely destroying the grace and elegance of the Galaxy Class.
In fact, they created a smaller looking saucer, only similar to the Galaxy saucer. Other than the ship we have in STO, its nacelles where much shorter (better looking IMO).
My point is, that they deliberately created a unique ship, just to never use it again?
Very strange IMO.
Not only that, with the Cheyenne we could see that more ships where build having wide saucers.
Personally i liked the wide design much more, it was uniqe, new and fresh. Perfect for giving Starfleet a new face and feel after Kirks era and TOS movies.
Streched designs that followed (Intrepid, then Sovereign) look too generic, boring and uncreative in my opinion, trivializing the new approach and give trek design a more generic sci-fi show direction.
(Sorry that was the graphic designer speaking here.)
Another example. Ambassador. They worked hard on that ship and we only see it a few times. Heck we don't even see it in DW, the best time to show that girl off.
Fun fact: This is the Gal-R's designer's point of view as well
True, although the poor Ambassador had a cruel real-life fate. A stagehand dropped the model which then broke and was never fixed. That's literally what happened.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Facepalm. But still by DW they were CGI alot, would it hurt to put an Ambassador in there?