test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Galaxy class

1262729313262

Comments

  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    skollulfr wrote: »
    thats a really good point i hadnt thought of.


    its not even a simple case of cross section scale.
    if you actually see the displacement volume and estimated mass values its simply beyond internal conceptualisation how massive it is in comparison to contemporary structures.

    volume is the only true way to measure these ships. length and height don't tell you anything useful, they aren't geometric shapes. the sovereign is longer than the galaxy, and people with a strait face have told me the sovereign is a bigger ship. the galaxy is almost 2.5 times larger by volume, they aren't even remotely in the same weight class.

    http://www.treksinscifi.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2328.0;attach=22260;image

    here's another picture relating its size to the real world
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Here's a couple more:

    http://i.imgur.com/MJCOpws.jpg
    Love that one. Just dwarfs the Titanic. And neither ship is anywhere near as wide as the Stardrive section.
    I didn't realize the space shuttle was so big in comparison.
    Of course, those just lend an idea of scale to the ENT-J
    http://www.coldnorth.com/owen/game/startrek/finalfrontier/enterprise-j.gif
    God I hate the J. :(

    But she's a big girl, two Kilometers long right?
    well ya of course, ether empty or fully stocked with troops and a more robust combat infrastructure, ether would be better then the enterprise spec. the events of chain of command with jelico proved how not ready the enterprise was for a serious fight, after he had his way with things going to red alert also meant taking a lot of unnecessary systems offline. also, in yesterday's enterprise you got to see exactly what a battleship spec galaxy would be outfitted like. in that timeline, there had been a war with the Klingons the galaxy's entire development, yet not one exterior detail was different. more proof that the ship wasn't designed to be some huge wet blanket that couldn't fight in its own weight class.

    and ya the saucer would be an amazing ground fortress, the enormous hanger bay is the perfect staging area for just about anything, its got at least as much capacity as an air craft carrier
    https://i.imgur.com/ZZ8uPf0.jpg
    http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130108220958/startrek/images/0/02/Shuttlebay,_main_%28deck_4%29,_Galaxy-class.jpg
    That's you know is that legit?

    I never got a chance to see the Galaxy blueprints first hand. Does the Main Shuttlebay really go all the way around the core like that?
    volume is the only true way to measure these ships. length and height don't tell you anything useful, they aren't geometric shapes. the sovereign is longer than the galaxy, and people with a strait face have told me the sovereign is a bigger ship. the galaxy is almost 2.5 times larger by volume, they aren't even remotely in the same weight class.
    And a mass of 4.96 million metric tons. In the arena of the mass of the Great Pyramid. Much of that is in the warp coils.

    I remember somewhere someone had calculated the floor space in the galaxy, the area of all the decks...I'll see if I can find that.

    Well that's just dumb, I'm a HUGE Sovereign fan and there's just no way that's true. A simple look at the two ships from above at scale tells the tale. Absurd.

    She was supposed to be smaller and sleeker.

    Ha, the Pentagon, that's great.
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • disposeableh3r0disposeableh3r0 Member Posts: 1,927 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    snip

    http://www.treksinscifi.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2328.0;attach=22260;image

    here's another picture relating its size to the real world

    Idk, I think maybe putting the pentagon in the saucer section would probably make the galaxy weaker.
    As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?

    Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln

    Occidere populo et effercio confractus
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »
    That's you know is that legit?

    I never got a chance to see the Galaxy blueprints first hand. Does the Main Shuttlebay really go all the way around the core like that?

    well, just looking at the MSD proves it goes that deep. i wouldn't be surprised if the interior follows the contures of the saucer. that blueprint set was made by the same folks that created the canon, to me thats as canon as something seen in the show.

    captaind3 wrote: »
    And a mass of 4.96 million metric tons. In the arena of the mass of the Great Pyramid. Much of that is in the warp coils.

    I remember somewhere someone had calculated the floor space in the galaxy, the area of all the decks...I'll see if I can find that.

    http://st-v-sw.net/STSWvolumetrics.html

    this is a volume reading of a computer model of the galaxy class, and many other ships, measuring how much volume they displace at their correct scale. galaxy comes in at 5,820,983m³
    captaind3 wrote: »
    Well that's just dumb, I'm a HUGE Sovereign fan and there's just no way that's true. A simple look at the two ships from above at scale tells the tale. Absurd.

    She was supposed to be smaller and sleeker.

    http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg

    seriously. just look at them from all the angles, the sov is shrimpy. that 'tiny' galaxy class secondary hull is at least 3 times the size of the sovereign's, not even counting the neck. just the saucer section alone so much bigger then an entire sovereign.


    oh and if anyone can still stand loging in, there was a new tribble patch to check for improved models and what not
  • disposeableh3r0disposeableh3r0 Member Posts: 1,927 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    well, just looking at the MSD proves it goes that deep. i wouldn't be surprised if the interior follows the contures of the saucer. that blueprint set was made by the same folks that created the canon, to me thats as canon as something seen in the show.




    http://st-v-sw.net/STSWvolumetrics.html

    this is a volume reading of a computer model of the galaxy class, and many other ships, measuring how much volume they displace at their correct scale. galaxy comes in at 5,820,983m³



    http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg

    seriously. just look at them from all the angles, the sov is shrimpy. that 'tiny' galaxy class secondary hull is at least 3 times the size of the sovereign's, not even counting the neck. just the saucer section alone so much bigger then an entire sovereign.


    oh and if anyone can still stand loging in, there was a new tribble patch to check for improved models and what not

    I think the main shuttle bay was supposed to be the entire area on the blister on the saucer, it was also at least 2 decks tall.
    As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?

    Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln

    Occidere populo et effercio confractus
  • themetalstickmanthemetalstickman Member Posts: 1,010 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »
    God I hate the J. :(

    But she's a big girl, two Kilometers long right?

    Uhh...considerably larger than that. If the Galaxy is ~640 meters long...
    Og12TbC.jpg

    Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.

    I dare you to do better.
  • lan451lan451 Member Posts: 3,386 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Looks like Thomas finished working on his latest ship project.

    https://twitter.com/thomasthecat/status/579159131883376641

    I wonder what it could be...

    :P
    JWZrsUV.jpg
    Mine Trap Supporter
  • supergirl1611supergirl1611 Member Posts: 809 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I do hope when we see a tier 6 Galaxy they have taken our feedback on board and don't give the ship another passive boff layout. We have been voicing our disapproval and giving ideas on what we believe the Galaxy should be setup like for years.

    Make us proud Cryptic and make the ship proud,
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    ^Tease.
    well, just looking at the MSD proves it goes that deep. i wouldn't be surprised if the interior follows the contures of the saucer. that blueprint set was made by the same folks that created the canon, to me thats as canon as something seen in the show.
    You're completely right, I'm ashamed I never noticed that.

    http://st-v-sw.net/STSWvolumetrics.html

    this is a volume reading of a computer model of the galaxy class, and many other ships, measuring how much volume they displace at their correct scale. galaxy comes in at 5,820,983m³
    That's a lot of space. I gotta look up things that come close.

    I see their density readings, but I'm wondering if their calculations account for the fact that the densest heaviest single component on a starship is the warp coils? Accounting for 25% of the mass of the Galaxy class. That would drastically shift what the rest of the ship's density would come out to don't you think?
    http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg

    seriously. just look at them from all the angles, the sov is shrimpy. that 'tiny' galaxy class secondary hull is at least 3 times the size of the sovereign's, not even counting the neck. just the saucer section alone so much bigger then an entire sovereign.
    Worf voice, "Shrimpy?"

    It's the dreadnaught and the battlecruiser.

    Funny enough as a pure capability thing, I wonder how the volume of the Sovereign compares to the actual used volume of the Galaxy. She left spacedock with how much of her internal space unused. Considering that and that technology shrinks over time. Starfleet may have been able to get the same work out of a Sovereign that they did out of the first year of the Galaxy at the smaller size. While upgraded Galaxies got on with their true intended purpose. Deep space, long term, high level in depth exploration.
    oh and if anyone can still stand loging in, there was a new tribble patch to check for improved models and what not
    I'm on that today.
    I think the main shuttle bay was supposed to be the entire area on the blister on the saucer, it was also at least 2 decks tall.
    He's right though, if you look at the MSD it's not just the blister, it goes INTO the saucer too.

    http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/4/40/Galaxy_class_MSD.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110624094633&path-prefix=en

    Looking at it, the open space where it isn't a lot of decks does go forward of the core of the saucer. That's awesome.

    I know it's frowned upon around here, but that pretty much justifies all Galaxies having hangar pets by virtue of the sheer available space.
    Uhh...considerably larger than that. If the Galaxy is ~640 meters long...
    Excuse me, meant to say two miles long.
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »
    God I hate the J. :(

    You're not the only one.
    I consider it the fugliest piece of garbage in the history of science fiction. To this day, I still wonder what was going through their heads when they designed and approved it. As if they were drunk, stoned or whatever....
    lan451 wrote: »
    Looks like Thomas finished working on his latest ship project.

    https://twitter.com/thomasthecat/status/579159131883376641

    I wonder what it could be...

    :P

    Well, If Thomas is making/has made it - I think we have a valid reason to be hopefull of a good design for the new ship.
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    shpoks wrote: »
    You're not the only one.
    I consider it the fugliest piece of garbage in the history of science fiction. To this day, I still wonder what was going through their heads when they designed and approved it. As if they were drunk, stoned or whatever....
    The very idea that those spindly nacelles would look more advanced just pisses me off. They don't look advanced they look...cheesy. They look like ship engines from Captain Proton. I think the Stardrive looks ridiculous and it kind of broke my heart in the design the Enterprise-F contest when they made one of the criteria that it was moving in a direction towards the J.
    Well, If Thomas is making/has made it - I think we have a valid reason to be hopefull of a good design for the new ship.

    I'm not familiar with the Devs individual work, what's he been responsible for before?
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • lan451lan451 Member Posts: 3,386 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Thomas made the Pathfinder and I think one of the Fed command ships. I think we'll be alright if he's the one making the new Galaxy.
    JWZrsUV.jpg
    Mine Trap Supporter
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »
    I'm not familiar with the Devs individual work, what's he been responsible for before?

    Well, seems that he recently started completely designing ships from head to toe by himself - the first project that had 100% his signature on was the Pathfinder as far as I know, but he worked on other projects (combined with other devs I assume) well before that. I happen to like the Pathfinder, so I chose to be hopefull of the new one as well. :)
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    from the silhouette, im sure not to care much for it, every single costume variation of the galaxy looks orders worse then the original. this one in particular is way to angled and sharp all over the place, the basic design will always look best rounded off without arbitrary angles and panels stuck all over it. and just watch, like the other costumes it will have more down graded features like smaller impulse engines, inferior hangers, shorter arrays, or smaller saucers. literal downgrades on what should be an upgrade. i just hope the galaxy model got an intrepid tier overhaul to go with this new skin.
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    reyan01 wrote: »
    As for the T6 exploration cruiser - Thomas will undoubtedly produce an attractive ship, but I still can't bring myself to say "I can't wait" - I just can't get past my concern that nothing has been learnt from the endless discussions and feedback on the matter and she'll, again, be an overly-engineering heavy lemon.

    To be honest, I'm just hoping it is >this design< as it seems it will be - I've loved that weird looking thing ever since I first saw it as a concept years ago. :)
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • induperatorinduperator Member Posts: 806 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    from the silhouette, im sure not to care much for it, every single costume variation of the galaxy looks orders worse then the original. this one in particular is way to angled and sharp all over the place, the basic design will always look best rounded off without arbitrary angles and panels stuck all over it. and just watch, like the other costumes it will have more down graded features like smaller impulse engines, inferior hangers, shorter arrays, or smaller saucers. literal downgrades on what should be an upgrade. i just hope the galaxy model got an intrepid tier overhaul to go with this new skin.

    Indeed.

    most variations of canon ships are unappealing compared to the original, with all their redundancies and spiky parts and light up hulls, just like the Scimitar variants.
    The added hull patterns and Tron lines really take away from the authenticity especially with the Intel vessels,
    I often find the most simple designs are the best.
  • papesh1papesh1 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    from the silhouette, im sure not to care much for it, every single costume variation of the galaxy looks orders worse then the original. this one in particular is way to angled and sharp all over the place, the basic design will always look best rounded off without arbitrary angles and panels stuck all over it. and just watch, like the other costumes it will have more down graded features like smaller impulse engines, inferior hangers, shorter arrays, or smaller saucers. literal downgrades on what should be an upgrade. i just hope the galaxy model got an intrepid tier overhaul to go with this new skin.


    I hope that silhouette is not the finished product. It looks like a variant of the Guardian.

    A true refinement of the galaxy class that honors the original would be best.
    I think the Pathfinder didn't go too far from the original Intrepid. It looks like an update/upgrade.
    If the Galaxy got something similar while keeping or even increasing its mass it would be appealing. Of course, the performance of the ship would need to be on par.

    This pic http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/8792/3axissizecompare.jpg definitely shows you the sheer size/volume of her.

    The only Fed crusier that would match or exceed the Galaxy in volume is the Ody.
    http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6043/7006085291_af74a4d2f5_o.jpg
    http://www.suricatafx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/enterprise_comparison.png

    I only could find a side pic. But you can see it with just that.
  • darlexadarlexa Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I have enjoyed the galaxy x since I have gotten her, but my problems are;

    loss of the various components. the base galaxy can use all of the different class pieces for their ship, the gal x only gets the two. this is a running complaint with a lot of the new ships in the game, little variation. you get all sorts of customization for the original ships, but that disappears with the new ones. and its doubly a shame with the gal x because you do actually have all those pieces already. all you have to do is create a new third pylon/neck design.

    the third nacelle is linked to the pylon. this is unacceptable as it forces you to limit your customization so the three nacelles match.


    the lance. its SUPPOSED to be a super phaser. but even using phaser weapons and all phaser boost consoles. the thing isn't particularly powerful. granted, the cooldown is a bit better now, its not that impressive a weapon any more. the separated versions of the weapon are more useful really.

    the hanger is a lot of fun, but it really depends on what you put in there. thoroughly enjoy my purple grade swarmer's. the saucer seems to respond sorta to the commands too. through proper use of the hanger commands, you can use the hanger pets as part of the ships offensive weapons, making it vicious in a fight.

    lastly. the bridge officer layout is poor. the gal x is supposed to be a dreadnought. the universal should be increased from ensign if not made a higher ranked tactical slot outright. and its a zen ship too, so the universal ensign AND another bridge position entirely wouldn't be out of line either. the ship misses out on having decent tactical bridge officers because of it.

    as it is, despite the room for improvement, the galaxy x remains a respectable ship in the game in my opinion, if properly outfitted and through good use of the hanger.

    one thing that might be considered would be to make the lance a user defined device. make it only accept a single canon and the game simply uses that as the core or base multiplier for the axial weapon. it would let the player change the energy type of the axial slot, as well as level up the axial weapon with whatever is put there. it would still only work in the super lance mode when together, or the shotgun/mini lance mode when separated.

    this would however allow players to set the ship up in ap or other energy types and still be able to boost the axial weapon. you currently cant do that unless you use phaser. it would also allow the player to level the axial up. just make its current level correspond with the standard lvl10 gear or whateve rteh ship "spawns" with to alow us to level the thing up.
  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    The galaxy is a fine ship...wish I could the same about her captains.
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    The galaxy is a fine ship...wish I could the same about her captains.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTSA_sWGM44 :rolleyes:
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    lan451 wrote: »
    Thomas made the Pathfinder and I think one of the Fed command ships. I think we'll be alright if he's the one making the new Galaxy.
    shpoks wrote: »
    Well, seems that he recently started completely designing ships from head to toe by himself - the first project that had 100% his signature on was the Pathfinder as far as I know, but he worked on other projects (combined with other devs I assume) well before that. I happen to like the Pathfinder, so I chose to be hopefull of the new one as well. :)

    Is that so? Well with that in mind I am highly optimistic. That Pathfinder was high quality.
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Part of the issue was that there wasn't much time for anything to go through their heads - I recall Doug Drexler saying that the 'J' would have been something quite different if they'd had a few weeks to work on it. As it was, the were given only a few HOURS to produce something, and the best that they could do in that very limited time was the display graphic we saw in 'Azati Prime'.
    Well if that's the case then I can forgive them. It could also be different due to the fact that that timeline has apparently been erased. Considering the vast differences in the post-Nero timeline NCC-1701, perhaps the J will be similarly altered. The Sphere builders were at least that big of a disruption.

    from the silhouette, im sure not to care much for it, every single costume variation of the galaxy looks orders worse then the original. this one in particular is way to angled and sharp all over the place, the basic design will always look best rounded off without arbitrary angles and panels stuck all over it. and just watch, like the other costumes it will have more down graded features like smaller impulse engines, inferior hangers, shorter arrays, or smaller saucers. literal downgrades on what should be an upgrade. i just hope the galaxy model got an intrepid tier overhaul to go with this new skin.

    Doug Drexler, when he was hired on the show remembered seeing the study model, '"Bob had just gotten done showing me Greg Jein’s little five inch maquette of the Enterprise D. It was the first time I laid eyes on the new configuration. I remember all the little windows being penciled, and I remember Bob’s obvious pride in the design. “Not a straight line on it,” he enthused, referring to the ships curvy appearance. Curves meant that the show had a substantially better budget than in 1966."


    That said, I'm quite pleased with the Venture, except the detail under and around the Deflector Dish. But the smaller more integrated impulse engines do give the visual effect of making the engines look weaker, even when by technology they're probably better.

    papesh1 wrote: »
    I hope that silhouette is not the finished product. It looks like a variant of the Guardian.

    A true refinement of the galaxy class that honors the original would be best.
    I think the Pathfinder didn't go too far from the original Intrepid. It looks like an update/upgrade.
    If the Galaxy got something similar while keeping or even increasing its mass it would be appealing. Of course, the performance of the ship would need to be on par.
    I wonder what Probert would draw???
    darlexa wrote: »
    I have enjoyed the galaxy x since I have gotten her, but my problems are;

    loss of the various components. the base galaxy can use all of the different class pieces for their ship, the gal x only gets the two. this is a running complaint with a lot of the new ships in the game, little variation. you get all sorts of customization for the original ships, but that disappears with the new ones. and its doubly a shame with the gal x because you do actually have all those pieces already. all you have to do is create a new third pylon/neck design.

    the third nacelle is linked to the pylon. this is unacceptable as it forces you to limit your customization so the three nacelles match.


    the lance. its SUPPOSED to be a super phaser. but even using phaser weapons and all phaser boost consoles. the thing isn't particularly powerful. granted, the cooldown is a bit better now, its not that impressive a weapon any more. the separated versions of the weapon are more useful really.

    the hanger is a lot of fun, but it really depends on what you put in there. thoroughly enjoy my purple grade swarmer's. the saucer seems to respond sorta to the commands too. through proper use of the hanger commands, you can use the hanger pets as part of the ships offensive weapons, making it vicious in a fight.

    lastly. the bridge officer layout is poor. the gal x is supposed to be a dreadnought. the universal should be increased from ensign if not made a higher ranked tactical slot outright. and its a zen ship too, so the universal ensign AND another bridge position entirely wouldn't be out of line either. the ship misses out on having decent tactical bridge officers because of it.

    as it is, despite the room for improvement, the galaxy x remains a respectable ship in the game in my opinion, if properly outfitted and through good use of the hanger.

    one thing that might be considered would be to make the lance a user defined device. make it only accept a single canon and the game simply uses that as the core or base multiplier for the axial weapon. it would let the player change the energy type of the axial slot, as well as level up the axial weapon with whatever is put there. it would still only work in the super lance mode when together, or the shotgun/mini lance mode when separated.

    this would however allow players to set the ship up in ap or other energy types and still be able to boost the axial weapon. you currently cant do that unless you use phaser. it would also allow the player to level the axial up. just make its current level correspond with the standard lvl10 gear or whateve rteh ship "spawns" with to alow us to level the thing up.

    This is the Galaxy Class support group. Welcome friend. :)
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    shpoks wrote: »

    I have no idea what you are talking about.
  • captaind3captaind3 Member Posts: 2,449 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    By the way I scoped out the Galaxy model on Tribble. It's currently the same old same old. :(


    I want your opinions on this. It seems to me taking a close look at the galaxy in game, that she is a closer fit to the proportions of the 4 foot model of the Enterprise rather than the original Probert sleeker 6 foot model.

    For comparison.

    http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/e/eb/Galaxy_class_differences_between_the_4-foot_and_6-foot_models.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110607103711&path-prefix=en

    http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/images/1/1c/USS_Enterprise-D_differences_between_6_and_4_foot_studio_models.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140711113615&path-prefix=en
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo9_r1_400.gif
    "Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many — they are few"
  • sharpie65sharpie65 Member Posts: 679 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I have to agree with you, as much as I like the Galaxy it looks far too..blocky? to be liked easily and instantly. It's something that you have to get used to, and it looks like the Cryptic engine used that same design, unfortunately. I definitely prefer the 6ft Probert model.
    MXeSfqV.jpg
  • shpoksshpoks Member Posts: 6,967 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Ask Chekov. :P
    HQroeLu.jpg
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    im a 4 foot man myself. the saucer rim on the 6 foot is too thin for the 2 decks that are supposed to be there, the nacelle pylons having less of a slop up looks more realistic, the stockier secondary hull just looks better, and thers a lot more surface detail on the 4 foot, 6 foot looks die cast
  • darlexadarlexa Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    The galaxy is a fine ship...wish I could the same about her captains.

    hey, I resemble that remark.

    but I agree. properly handled, most of the ships in the game can be very effective. its just that the ship has to fit with you play style and you have to outfit them properly.

    the gal x is unique in that I think the ship will actually let you mess up its layout. I only have a single set of canon on her, in one piece, I don't think canon is a realistic way to set her up, but separated, I think canon work. the star drive is maneuverable enough that I could see doing it without major issues.
  • darlexadarlexa Member Posts: 222 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    captaind3 wrote: »


    This is the Galaxy Class support group. Welcome friend. :)

    thank you. looks like a fun place to check back everyone in a while. any realistic chance some of these might get looked at? or is it just group therapy for galaxy x lovers?.
  • potasssiumpotasssium Member Posts: 1,226 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I Love the Galaxy-X, and Nebula, and would KILL to get the New Orleans in game.

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/New_Orleans_class

    All of which have Galaxy parts, just not a fan of the plain Galaxy herself, aestheticly, or performance wise, my Fed Cruiser of choice is my T5U Fleet Ambassador.

    I like her much more without that ungodly wide saucer, C-Store Battle Bridge Please.

    Still, the Galaxy is better looking to me than the Guardian, Eclipse, Star Cruiser, Avenger, Excelsior, and Connie to me.

    But not as good looking as the Ambassador, Heavy Cruiser, Constitution Refit, Exeter, Excelsior Retrofit, or Geneva.
    Thanks for the Advanced Light Cruiser, Allied Escort Bundles, Jem-Hadar Light Battlecruiser, and Mek'leth
    New Content Wishlist
    T6 updates for the Kamarag & Vor'Cha
    Heavy Cruiser & a Movie Era Style AoY Utility Cruiser
    Dahar Master Jacket

  • rosetyler51rosetyler51 Member Posts: 1,631 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    darlexa wrote: »
    hey, I resemble that remark.

    but I agree. properly handled, most of the ships in the game can be very effective. its just that the ship has to fit with you play style and you have to outfit them properly.

    the gal x is unique in that I think the ship will actually let you mess up its layout. I only have a single set of canon on her, in one piece, I don't think canon is a realistic way to set her up, but separated, I think canon work. the star drive is maneuverable enough that I could see doing it without major issues.

    Bingo. I have seen what Galaxy can do in the hands of someone that knows and loves it. It is scary.
    “Love. You can learn all the math in the ‘Verse, but you take a boat in the air that you don’t love, she’ll shake you off just as sure as a turn of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down; tells you she’s hurtin’ before she keels. Makes her a home.”

    Maybe if people stopped changing ships more than they change underwear they could learn how to fly them right.
Sign In or Register to comment.