test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Galaxy class
darthmeow504
Member Posts: 2,302 Arc User
In another thread, someone complained about the Galaxy class in game being a "gimped Titanic" and wanted a better one. That sentiment is one I've seen a lot, with people who grew up on TNG having an attachment to that ship and wanting it to be made as a viable endgame ship if not THE main flagship as it was lo those decades ago when TNG was still on the air. My reply to him was as follows:
Now I won't deny I hate the Galaxy and have from the first moment I laid eyes on it in 1987. I feel it's hideously ugly and the design principles both inside and out were misguided at best. I grew up on TOS, but I immediately recognized the Constitution refit as vastly superior to the original and the Excelsior as better still. I fell in love with the Sovereign at first sight as it corrected virtually every design mistake made with Galaxy and restored grace and beauty to the Enterprise line.
But even if the Galaxy was an amazing ship, she's still vastly outdated just like my beloved Refit Enterprise from TMP and TWOK. Time moves on and beloved ships get outdated and replaced by modern designs. That's how it works. It happens to cars too. Why can't some people accept that and move on from the Galaxy, especially when the Guardian exists to represent the Ambassador / Galaxy design lineage in the modern setting?
A "gimped Titanic" is EXACTLY what the Galaxy class should be. It was a fragile, bloated, overly luxurious space cruise liner built in a time of unprecedented peace and woefully unprepared for any form of challenging duty. The Enterprise-D was destroyed by a freaking B'Rel, for crites sake, and virtually every other one ever seen on screen was also blown to bits. It was rightly replaced by the Sovereign class which was a superior ship in every way, andeven that is no longer a front-line vessel in the current STO timeline though I wouldn't mind seeing a decent refit for endgame that could be like the old Excelsior refit that stuck along past it's prime because it was such a good base design.
The Guardian class is the 2410 successor to the Ambassador / Galaxy design lineage. Perhaps it should have a different shaped deflector dish and pylon options to bring out a little more of the Galaxy aesthetic for those who want that, but no to an endgame Galaxy. It's out of date just like the Constutution and Galaxy whining should go on the FCT list just like the endgame Connie.
Now I won't deny I hate the Galaxy and have from the first moment I laid eyes on it in 1987. I feel it's hideously ugly and the design principles both inside and out were misguided at best. I grew up on TOS, but I immediately recognized the Constitution refit as vastly superior to the original and the Excelsior as better still. I fell in love with the Sovereign at first sight as it corrected virtually every design mistake made with Galaxy and restored grace and beauty to the Enterprise line.
But even if the Galaxy was an amazing ship, she's still vastly outdated just like my beloved Refit Enterprise from TMP and TWOK. Time moves on and beloved ships get outdated and replaced by modern designs. That's how it works. It happens to cars too. Why can't some people accept that and move on from the Galaxy, especially when the Guardian exists to represent the Ambassador / Galaxy design lineage in the modern setting?
:origin()/pre15/2383/th/pre/i/2013/224/7/e/star_trek_idic_facebook_cover_by_athdaraseleya-d6hri4e.jpg)
The D in IDIC doesn't stand for discrimination, and neither does this poster.
Post edited by darthmeow504 on
0
Comments
By this reasoning the Intrepid-class is now also out of date, yet we have a tier 6 version in the Pathfinder that can be made to look exactly like said 40 year old ship.
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
Why is there a T5 Excelsior? That hunk of junk's twice as old as the GCS and was getting blown out of the sky left and right during the Dominion War, whereas Starfleet never lost a single GCS on-screen after the Odyssey. And the Kumari and Narcine date back to the 2150s.
If Cryptic had ever actually used any logic in their ship selections for this game you'd have a leg to stand on.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Sophisticated does not mean powerful. It was more a Jack-of-all-Trades, not a warship, not a science vessel, not an exploratory scout, but the best compromise of just about every conceivable use the creators could ret-con it to be.
Well, the Galaxy R is still competitive even for elite STFs. The only thing preventing Galaxy R success to the masses is lack of knowledge, build and piloting skill. A Galaxy R should hit 50k-75k which is sufficient for all elite content.
The only reason you wouldnt pick a Galaxy R because of its performance is if you are aiming for DPS Prime, which is so far only reserved for 2 ships.
That's because it's a hero ship and the writers needed plot variety. They used the Defiant on science missions too, no matter that Sisko stated point-blank it was specifically intended as a combat vessel in "The Search".
"Sacrifice of Angels" and "Tears of the Prophets" show that the GCS makes a perfectly good line battleship, given some minor doctrinal changes (e.g. using it under escort by smaller destroyer-class ships).
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
It is equal in battlepower (offense+defense+maneuveribilty) to a D'Deridex.
Given that, it should be more powerful than it is currently, considering it is outclassed by Ambassador- und Excelsior-Class Starships, both ships older than the Galaxy.
I wouldnt see the Sovereign as a updated Galaxy-Class, because it has different tasks to perform and is more battle-trimmed with less "luxus" the galaxy-class had to offer.
But well, that the Galaxy needs an Upgrade is a dead horse, especially since the devs failed heavily with its T5U-Refit.
I already responded in the original thread where this was conceived, but let me also respond to this part I'm quoting here.
- Because we're fans and fans come here to command their favourite ship from the shows.
- Because by the time of 2410, the first batch of Galaxies it's roughly at half of their intended lifespan.
- Because the Galaxy's predecessor the Ambassador is a better end-game ship in every conceivable way, and it's predecessor - the Excelsior is even better end-game ship than both.
- Because why should I accept and move on from the Galaxy, when in this game 250 year old designs like the Narcine, the Xindi whatchamacallit Escort or the T'Varo which I preoredered before LoR because I'm an ENT fan are top of the line end-game ships in their respecive roles - all better than the 200+ years newer Galaxy Class.
As starswordc said:
But they don't. That's why I've supported the people who ask for an end-game Constitution all these years, regardless of who's stopping that from happening. That's why I consider your stance to be hypocritical considering what goes on in the game.
Going by your logic I should say - Hey, I personally disliked the Sovereign (which is true)- and it's only 10 years newer than the Galaxy, so why isn't it pure TRIBBLE as well. Didn't the Avenger replace it? The fact is, we're fans here and as fans we want to be able to use and be competitive in our favourite ships, especially if they're one of the hero ships from a certain Star Trek show. And especially because Cryptic has no logic when it comes to ships and their preformance.
If Cryptic showed a backbone and desiced that they're going in a new era with new ships and stick to it, I wouldn't only accept, but even support your stance. I'm not unreasonable. But in a game where "anything goes", I refuse to accept the current state of this hero ship just because a certain developer doesn't like it.
And then, there's also this:
Starfleet builds warships, whether they like to use more threatening sounding names or not.
Starfleet is the military of the Federation, whether Starfleet officers like Picard didn't like to say it or not.
Starfleet is the one that defends and fights for the Federation, not anyone else. Skirmishes, small scale brush fire conflicts, to all out war... Starfleet fights for the Federation. These crises can come at any time so Starfleet makes its ships capable for war at any point in time.
The Federation has a long history of war and smaller scaled conflicts. It is absolutely foolish to believe that war is something their ships in general aren't capable of. Because war often comes and finds you when you don't want it.
I didn't say it wasn't a capable Warship, I'm saying that such was not its main purpose. It was the Flagship 'Oooh lookie at that ship! Don't it look so Purdy and symbolise all that the Federation stand for'! Its job was to make the Federation look good and (incidentally) benign. Having it be 'This ship could blow away your entire fleet before breakfast. On autopilot. Would be self-defeating.
Intreprid is overly science heavy
Defiant is overly tac heavy
Galaxy is overly eng heavy
As time went on they released more and more ships that blurred those lines, ships were released in what crytpic thought was the highest-lowest demand.
All ship types had the same progression
Patrol escort was more durable than defiant with more eng, this made it superior. Nobody is crying over that
Advanced escorts were superior with its science boost.. again, no defiant threads
MVAE comes out with lt cmd sci
After this the HEC came out? lt cmd eng. This matches the MVAE's lt cmd seating
Then maybe the blockade runner? Eng heavy, making escorts tanky again
Soon after we got Andorian ships in flavours to blur all lines
The introduction of destroyers really made things a mess, slightly slower, massively increased durability for little to no firepower loss.
On the cruiser side? Same thing happened. Substitute destroyers for battle cruisers
So there is a logical progression, just because some butthurt TNG/Galaxy fans can't take it, isn't anyone's fault but their own. Intreprid sucks, Defiant sucks, Galaxy sucks, live with it, all are capable of doing anything the game has.
The progression people want that needs to "make sense" is some odd notion that ships should have power levels assigned by the age, and when things are retrofitted (and considering this is a GAME) that makes less sense.
Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
Nothing to do anymore.
http://dtfleet.com/
Visit our Youtube channel
TL;DR: I'm not capable of making an intelligent point, so I'll fall back to spewing blanket insults instead.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Actually, we have never seen a Galaxy being destroyed in the Dominion War. Just a damaged USS Galaxy during the Battle of Chin'toka.
Though we have seen a number of Akiras and Mirandas biting the bullet.
Every time I see posts that defend why ships like the NX and Connie should be T5/T6 facts like I pointed out they seem to ignore...
The reason why the Enterprise-D and the Odyssey were destroyed were simply plot reasons.
Yes but we don't care about this. We are Star Trek fans trying to have fun and getting an end game Galaxy is exactly what we want to have fun and RP at the same time.
I would say the needless destruction of the Odyssey was a declaration of war...
Your bias in this matter has blinded you to why the Galaxy class is in this game to begin with. People who grew up watching Star Trek, want to be able to play this game using the ships they grew up with. If you don't like it, then don't play STO. Yes that argument can be used both ways bub. :cool:
Put simply, the Galaxy class is here to stay. Get over it!
[/SIGPIC]
Now we know why they won't give us a connie, the older the ship is the better it is. Shpoks is a genius for figuring it out.
It was an armed ship operating in another species space. It was exactly the same as if a Bird-Of-Prey had been found lurking on the wrong side of the Neutral Zone.
^^^This! This is far and away much better of an explanation of WHY the Galaxy class needs a buff in firepower!
[/SIGPIC]
^^^Yep! Re-read this! TWICE! Then re-read it again! This is why your argument does not hold as much water as you might think. :P
[/SIGPIC]
Except STO is a thempark of pretty much everything Star Trek.
You have ENT era ships at endgame, and how many appearances did they have in the entirety of the Star Trek franchise?
You have TNG, DS9, VOY era ships, hero ships at endgame.
You have the few canon Romulan and KDF vessels at endgame.
You have Species 8472 Bioships playable at endgame, and how many appearances did they have in the IP?
You have 2 of the 3 onscreen canon Dominion warships at endgame.
You have a Ferengi D'Kora playable at endgame, and how many appearances did that have in the entirety of Star Trek?
You have Hirogen vessels, playable at endgame.
But the notion of playable Constitution-class at endgame? Hold your horses now! THAT'S IMMERSION BREAKING! We can't have that... AT ALL! We simply cannot have the ship class that carried this franchise as the "Hero Ship" for 20 years be at endgame status. No sirree.
Main purpose of the ship is not the same as what the ship is capable of doing. The purpose of the ship is dictated by what's going on and what the fleet's headquarters says it's going to do.
A warship made during war does not necessarily make it a better warship than one that was made before a war.
Especially since it was the Federation that SENT the Odyssey into the Gamma Quadrant looking for a fight.
And the Dominion obliged.
Shpoks, those are my thoughts exactly! Too bad people like this seem to be what the dev's listen to more often than not. :rolleyes:
[/SIGPIC]