The bug ship got a T6 version, so the T6 treatment technically isn't limited to the hero ships.
Right, I forgot about that. Though lockbox ships always stuck out?
Also there are other ships as well. The Guardian, for example, is an ambassador - but not in name and it can't use the skin, but they could have called it "Guardian Support Cruiser" since it is more or less the exact same ship.
^ 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
Borticus (I think) said that the Galaxy would make an excellent command ship (*wink wink*) and we got those "rumors" flying around. You know.
Ah, thanks.
I'm not quite up to date, thanks for the info mate!
As much as i know Cryptics politics concerning the GCS, i'd say they definitely wont give it a Command Battlecruiser BOFF layout, no way.
The best we can hope for is a Guardian styled layout but as a command hybrid. But i could very well live with that, too.
"...'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
There are so many issues with this post, I'm not sure where to begin.
The Galaxy was never the most advanced starship (that honour belonged to the Sovereign). It was the largest ship, the most powerful ship, but not advanced.
The Galaxy, while designed for the purposes of space exploration, was no mere tank. It was a battleship but classified as an explorer. This fits with Starfleet's image of being an organization dedicated to space exploration and diplomatic relations, but also being the primary defense force for the Federation. Part of being a Starfleet ship includes switching roles from being a flag-bearing, science oriented ship, to a ship that can and did protect the Federation in times of crisis. It was capable to "kill and shoot", as you so eloquently phrased it, and both on-screen evidence and the TNGTM support this. It's a peacemaking vessel that can vaporize Klingon cruisers in a few shots, while holding its own.
When the Galaxy was launched she WAS the most advanced starship in the fleet. That mantle stood until the launch of the Intrepid and Sovereign - who's only honest tech advantage was bio neural gel packs and warp drive that doesn't harm subspace.
No Starfleet vessel has an offensive classification. The Defiant was an 'escort' when everyone and their mother knew she was a destroyer. The Sovereign was a 'Heavy Deterrence Explorer'. The Prometheus was a 'Long Range Tactical Escort'.
And what people don't seem to understand - the Sovereign doesn't replace the Galaxy in the fleet. It serves an entirely different purpose. If it replaces anything it would be the older Excelsior class ships which is completely surpassed by everything in the quadrant now. For the same amount of metal, for the same resources as a Galaxy - you could potentially build 3 Sovereigns. She's longer - but a much smaller ship.
There are things each ship can that the other can't. The Galaxy is a superior troop transport, a superior planetary emergency vessel, properly outfitted - with room for more power supplies and shield generators - she could take three times the beating a Sovereign could.
Yes, the Sovie is newer. Her phasers are newer. Her gel packs are better. But how much better is she really after the first ten year refit when the Galaxy Class comes out of spacedock with bio-neural gel packs, mk xii phasers, a newer warp core then the Sovereigns, Quantum torpedoes standard?
But would a Sovereign have more firepower? The Captain's yacht could be stripped out for a burst fire torpedo launcher like the Sovereigns. The neck torpedo launcher could be scrapped for two in the engineering hull where the hull meets the neck.
If both were outfitted as best as possible for combat - if they were both refit with the best phasers, the best torpedoes, the best shields, the best armor... I think the Galaxy would edge out the Sovereign in firepower and survivability. But you could build two Sovereigns for the resources of a Galaxy.
Now where we are in STO - the Galaxy and Sov are both well into their operational life. A Galaxy and Sovereign built int the same year would have the same tech, the same refit schedule.
Though the thing I wanted to see the most in TNG never happened. Them completely overloading an entire phaser strip - and firing the entire strip in a low yield, super wide angle burst. That would be amazing in clearing mine fields, torpedo onslaughts, fighter waves...
No Starfleet vessel has an offensive classification. The Defiant was an 'escort' when everyone and their mother knew she was a destroyer. The Sovereign was a 'Heavy Deterrence Explorer'. The Prometheus was a 'Long Range Tactical Escort'. (...)
Huh? While I agree with the rest of your posting, none of these classifications was used either in canon or in technical manuals/writer's material, except the Defiant's of course. The Sovereign was never classified, only an official piece of promotional work (the MSD I think?) classified it as "Explorer Type 2" - which, knowing starfleet, is not misleading. Since it replaces the Excelsior and Akira ships Sovereigns would adapt virtually all functions imaginable and it's weight class qualified it bearing the term Explorer. And when it comes to conflict, Explorers are Starfleet's prime vessels. They don't need to be named battle-war-shooties. The Prometheus was just called "tactical vessel" without any classification - probably because it was just a one-of-a-kind prototype in canon. According to it's configuration I personally would call it "frigate" (as the New Orleans) or simply "cruiser".
The Defiant is a odd animal. "Escort", "Destroyer" - none of these terms really does it justice. Not even frigate - if you read up on the background information including the extensive TM the ship in it's final appearance was a mobile defense platform, like a short range interceptor. They wanted tos tation a number of those ships on immobile stations to up their defense potential over runabouts and shuttles.
^ 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
Huh? While I agree with the rest of your posting, none of these classifications was used either in canon or in technical manuals/writer's material, except the Defiant's of course. The Sovereign was never classified, only an official piece of promotional work (the MSD I think?) classified it as "Explorer Type 2" - which, knowing starfleet, is not misleading. Since it replaces the Excelsior and Akira ships Sovereigns would adapt virtually all functions imaginable and it's weight class qualified it bearing the term Explorer. And when it comes to conflict, Explorers are Starfleet's prime vessels. They don't need to be named battle-war-shooties. The Prometheus was just called "tactical vessel" without any classification - probably because it was just a one-of-a-kind prototype in canon. According to it's configuration I personally would call it "frigate" (as the New Orleans) or simply "cruiser".
.
I might be thinking of what another game called them. Maybe Birth of the Federation?
Ive been seeing alot about the whole shield/weapon frequency. I dont see, unless there is a high speed modulation going on, how someone wouldnt figure out what frequency its at. Its an emission of energy, emitted enegry always has a frequency, use a sensor to measure it, violla! You the frequency. Thats what kinda bugged me, it toom how many years of shield technology to figure it out? Whe. The D went down, it shows that mpst of the time that freq' is static. Just seemed like a facepm there.
I might be thinking of what another game called them. Maybe Birth of the Federation?
BOTF didn't have very canonical ship classes. Starfleet was made up of all out military classes, the Sovereign is a "Dreadnaught" I think, next to Destroyers, Strike Cruisers and the like
Maybe ST: Legacy?
^ 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
the chance is high that the new t6 ships will follow the pathfinders path unfortunately. so they will be revamps but they will keep thweir original focus.
but for their actual ingame value and sell value a different approach would be better.
i suggest the t6 galaxy and neghvar to have following seating and console layout:
lt tac/pilot
lt uni
commander eng/command
ltcom sci/intel
3tac, 5eng, 3-4sci (depending on if its a fleet level like the command ships)
for the galaxy
___
and
lt eng/pilot
lt uni
ltcom tac/intel
com eng/command
with 4tac, 5eng and 2sci (or three if fleetlevel ship)
for the neghvar
and i think this is very likely to happen.
the other sheme is, that they do the pathfinder way and give it ****load of engineering, and only a lt tac/pilot(galaxy) and the lt eng/pilot (for neghvar) with the missing lt uni so the galaxy wont harm anything ever, and the neghvar will likely play like the older one with no difference at all, while both wont sell good anytime.
i still hope its my upper version and not the pathfinder way, but i highly doubt it.
another possible outcome would be, that the com eng gets the pilot doubling and the sci ltcom gets command, but having a high "pilot" thing on a galaxy is quite ... just not right ^^
lets just hope its not a too defense heavy design, cause (currently) its just not fun in game to be "tanky" at all, it just drags fight's lenghs.
still hope they somehow add some value to eng by giving it some ways to use it more offensively and not only "dps over time" like having more energy or directed energy modulation (still think this one should have a chance of 10,15,20% to deal 100% bleedthrough) for 30sec its basically no value to short fights at all.
why when discussing a seating for any tier 6 Galaxy do i get the sickening feeling it'll end up being the lt sci becoming the uni . making the uni redundant straight from the off and the command/hybrid being the lt tact station with the engineering seats not being touched.
why when discussing a seating for any tier 6 Galaxy do i get the sickening feeling it'll end up being the lt sci becoming the uni . making the uni redundant straight from the off and the command/hybrid being the lt tact station with the engineering seats not being touched.
lt tact/hybrid
ens eng
ltc eng
cmd eng
lt uni.
Seems like the type of logic Cryptic might use.
It'll get the pathfinder layout almost certainly. Cmdr Eng, Letc Eng, Lt Tac/Comm, Lt Sci, Lt Uni. The Sci cannot be the hybrid since then the Defiant had to get a tac hybrid lt - which it doesn't have.
It may be hard to believe, but the Intrepid/Defiant/Galaxy trinity follows a logic pattern - which is why the T6 layout will most certainly be the one I just posted, with 4/3/3 consoles (eng/sci/tac). Everything else *might* be possible but I would be very surprised.
^ 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
Highly doubt we will see more than one specialization hybrid-seat on a ship for awhile yet atleast till after the T-6 defiant is done/released, myself i would rather see the patrol escort done prefer that design over the defiant, or until we have atleast another two or three speciializations out for use.
I also think that the Uni seat should be changed that you can slot an use specialization hybrid-officers (Pilot, command, intel), but only can use up to a certain seating of thier powers such as one seat below what you are slotted. An example would be if you slotted a eng/pilot into a Ltc. uni seat you could only use up to Lt. level pilot ability in that seat, and so that would make deticated hybrid seat still more valuable than a uni seat yet would allow for the use of specialization abilities on more ships an more veriety in layouts for ships.
The Sovereign doesn't have a forward blind spot as either of its main arrays can fire forward as seen in First Contact. The separation of the main arrays actually gives a clear firing arc for the torpedoes. On the Galaxy it's possible to fire the main array and intersect the optimal torpedo flight path. Obviously this was always considered and accounted for but the Sovereign doesn't have that problem as phaser fire would be off center.
I think this particular point is irrelevant. We've seen phaser arrays adjusting their firing direction and firing in vectors other than perpendicular to the emitter surface. In both cases, the Sovereign and Galaxy (or any ship for that matter) could theoretically shoot down its own torpedoes if the beam intersected the flight path of the torpedo - which both the Galaxy and Sovereign have the firing arcs to do that. The only distinguishing trait is that the Galaxy could shoot down its own torpedoes from directly behind the active torpedo, but since Starfleet fire control/computing is so advanced, it doesn't make a difference.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
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?
Wow. . . nice to see someone else who grew up on Original Trek, and thinks the Galaxy-class is just aesthetically hideous.
That's true but with no phaser fire coming from the direct bow of the saucer there's less chance of accidents happening.
And I'm not talking about shooting down a torp from behind but a torpedo intersecting a phaser blast under the bow of the saucer.
I'm sure Murphy's law still applies in the 24th and 25th century.
Again, it makes negligible difference to present the Sovereign's ventral phaser array as a "better" design when computer fire control makes up for human limitations. Besides, think of how fast those torpedoes fly out of the launcher. They clear a saucer in a second or less. Even if the computer glitched (IF), the chance of the torpedo crossing the phaser beam is low. Besides, the phaser beam can be shut off for a fraction of a second to avoid detonating the torpedo, or be set to very low power to prevent damage.
We've seen episode upon episode upon movie of starships firing directed energy weapons as well as torpedoes at the same time, and we have never seen a ship shoot down its own torpedo unintentionally on-screen. This should indicate the occurrence of shooting down its own torpedo as statistically very low or insignificant. Certainly not enough to justify splitting the Sovereign's ventral phaser strip into two sections, dramatically reducing its potential power output while offering negligible benefits for a once-in-a-blue-moon event.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
That's because there is no loss of potential for splitting the arrays. If it were true then they would never be split up. What matters is the energy flow to the emitters from the warp core or fusion reactors via the EPS grid.
Why else are the arrays on the Ambassador, Sovereign, Intrepid, Prometheus, Nova all separated? ?
Depite being smaller in volume than the Galaxy the Sovereign has just as large power generating capabilities as its warp core and fusion reactors are just as large as the Galaxy's.
The longer array simply gives a wider firing arc.
There is a loss of potential power output if the arrays are separated. That's the reason why the Galaxy has such a large array. True, energy flow does matter, I can't dispute that. What also matters is the sequential number of independent phaser emitters that contribute to a shot.
Say for example that each Sovereign ventral array (one of the large ones) has 100 emitters. If one strip's individual emitters stack up to fire one phaser beam, that would be 100 emitters' worth of energy output. So the Sovereign fires 100. Meanwhile, the Galaxy has, say, 250 emitters, due to the continuous, unbroken phaser strip along its underside. That would mean the Galaxy's phaser beam fires 250.
This is a very rough example, since I don't have the number of emitters, energy output, or any specs on the Sovereign and Galaxy emitters. The point is to illustrate that, assuming the energy flow to the phaser arrays is the same for both ships, the Galaxy fires more powerful shots simply because it has more emitters to contribute to the one beam. The Sovereign is reduced to firing medium damage shots with its ventral arrays because the array physically cannot fire more powerful shots due to the limited number of emitters.
As I said a few pages back, the only reason I can see the phaser strips being separated is not to increase firing arcs, but for damage control. If the Galaxy's main array was damaged near the middle of the strip, I'm not sure how effective it would be. The Sovereign, on the other hand, could still use other independent arrays.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
The Galaxy's main arrays are so long bc the saucer is wider than longer. If you were to break up the Galaxy's main arrays you WOULD have a big blind spot directly in front. The longer array covers this huge area.
It's really funny how so many believe longer array theory. When I jump on TeamSpeak many of us get such a huge laugh over it.
I've gone in detail over the canon examples of how phasers work and nowhere in the tech manuals does it state that bc the arrays are linked and can transfer power does that make it more powerful. Galaxy fanboys include that all on their own.
And I'm not a Galaxy hater I just don't buy into the crappy argument that bigger or longer is always better.
your counter argument, and your debunking can be summed up in 1 not even word
nu-uh
get some better material if you want to participate in the argument. its all there in the tech manual, and its all there in the actual show. the debate has been settled on how arrays work.
I was wondering what people think if they made the new T-6 galaxy/exploration cruiser into a command variant. Would you want the command platform console set from the command battleships to be able to be used on it? I am not sure on this myself as it would mean we might not want to use the two set console (saucer seperate, and antimatter spread) and instead use the four piece command-set instead.
You know, it could just be that Starfleet decided that breaking up the arrays on the Sovereign and the Prometheus and the Intrepid were an acceptable tradeoff. Say it reduces things like wear and tear with an acceptable break up of power.
It's not like the Sovereigns werent upgraded within the first 10 years.
On that point, the Enterprise-E received a substantial retrofit after 8 years of service, getting what was it in Nemesis? Two more phaser arrays and four or five more torpedo launchers.
And that may be the key to the argument.
While we're arguing about the phaser arrays, it's worth noting that the Sovereign is pretty much a torpedo boat. The Galaxy has three torpedo launchers and only two available in the joined configuration. The Sovereign started with five and got at least four more later on.
The ship seemed to be built around her Quantum Torpedo launcher in the same vein as the Galaxy Dreadnaught Variant is built around her Phaser Lance (too bad Cryptic doesn't treat her like that, but I've digressed), if we consider that Quantum Torpedoes have a far higher yield than photon torpedoes and are designed to have superior shield envelope penetration, then it makes sense that they can ease off on the phasers.
Phaser array length has been speculated on here forever but the numerous canon examples of increasing firepower by isolating emitters and increased power transfer via warp power is clear.
How's this for a hypothetical? The newer phaser arrays accomplished the same thing as the longer arrays by being able to pass the beam energy back and forth along the strip until it reached the same power. That would be advantageous when applying the system to a smaller vessel. We've already established that power isn't a concern nor is firing arc as a phaser array can fire in any direction it has line of sight with. You'd get the same effect without the need for the longer array.
Prometheus ships were never classified as "escorts" but long range tactical "vessels". Whether cruiser, destroyer, escort it's all ambiguous as it was never stated.
I believe the Prometheus' only official designation was "Experimental"
Ive been seeing alot about the whole shield/weapon frequency. I dont see, unless there is a high speed modulation going on, how someone wouldnt figure out what frequency its at. Its an emission of energy, emitted enegry always has a frequency, use a sensor to measure it, violla! You the frequency. Thats what kinda bugged me, it toom how many years of shield technology to figure it out? Whe. The D went down, it shows that mpst of the time that freq' is static. Just seemed like a facepm there.
Well at the knife fight ranges that space combat in Star Trek takes place at, the time for the sensors to get back to your ship, get processed, and change the shield harmonic is very tight. When I mentioned Voyager earlier, they were basically like the Borg, the analysis of the frequency occurred on impact. The shield read the frequency of the incoming weapon and adapted.
The fact that scanning hasn't been done implies that it's very difficult if not impossible, likely for the same reason that you can't just scan an opponent's shields and grab their frequency, and likely the same reason you can't see their shields. The effect is occurring in subspace.
In order to actually know what the frequency of the incoming subspace frequency is, you'd basically have to specifically scan ALL of the subspace domains and ping the right one.
Think back to Schisms, the TNG episode that gave us the Solanae. They had to put a beacon on someone and allow them to be taken in order to actually find out where in subspace they were...what frequency the universe they were in was. And that was with a subspace rift in the ship.
Even in game it takes a physical object to acquire shield information.
As for the frequency being static, I suppose that makes sense, since getting the frequency is normally impossible. The Borg adapt to weapons hitting them but when it comes to target shields, they just drain them and brute force them with a Tractor beam.
"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"
Ahhhh yes here's the Galaxy fanboy who makes it up.
i don't need to make anything up, conjecture, extrapolate, or draw a logical conclusion, when the visuals of the show and the tech manual details paint such a clear picture. only a fanboy would object to actual evidence, and only defiant or sovereign fanboys would be so blatantly unobjective.
You know, it could just be that Starfleet decided that breaking up the arrays on the Sovereign and the Prometheus and the Intrepid were an acceptable tradeoff. Say it reduces things like wear and tear with an acceptable break up of power.
the closest thing i can come up with on reasoning for so called splitting unnecessarily of arrays, is that the EPS system on these smaller ships can only handle the power draw of arrays the size that they are, wile maintaining acceptable rate of fire, and not dimming the lights or compromising the power of other systems wile trying to recharge a whole array. on all these ships with split arrays though, their size and array length proportion is still about the same as the galaxy's ratio.
On that point, the Enterprise-E received a substantial retrofit after 8 years of service, getting what was it in Nemesis? Two more phaser arrays and four or five more torpedo launchers.
And that may be the key to the argument.
While we're arguing about the phaser arrays, it's worth noting that the Sovereign is pretty much a torpedo boat. The Galaxy has three torpedo launchers and only two available in the joined configuration. The Sovereign started with five and got at least four more later on.
The ship seemed to be built around her Quantum Torpedo launcher in the same vein as the Galaxy Dreadnaught Variant is built around her Phaser Lance (too bad Cryptic doesn't treat her like that, but I've digressed), if we consider that Quantum Torpedoes have a far higher yield than photon torpedoes and are designed to have superior shield envelope penetration, then it makes sense that they can ease off on the phasers.
yes but the tubes on the galaxy are huge, the launch tube is actually 50 meters long, end to end they could load 24 torpedoes into it, more if the tube has a circumference larger enough to stack several on top of each other. that long tube seems to have a rail gun effect too, several times in tng torps have flown out hyper accelerated.
the sovereign has a lot of tubes, but they area ll pretty small, and there's not much of a barrel on any of them, just the loader and the launch port. i count 6 burst 3 photon tubes in 3 sets of 2, the burst 3 quantum tube, and 3 or 4 single shot tubes. all these can throw a lot of torps around too, and is very decentralized compared to the galaxy. i tend to think the ships are tied in torpedo output, with the akira actually having a slight edge over both.
How's this for a hypothetical? The newer phaser arrays accomplished the same thing as the longer arrays by being able to pass the beam energy back and forth along the strip until it reached the same power. That would be advantageous when applying the system to a smaller vessel. We've already established that power isn't a concern nor is firing arc as a phaser array can fire in any direction it has line of sight with. You'd get the same effect without the need for the longer array.
the glow effect bouncing back and forth, that would look odd. they might as well just fire a second shot, doubling dipping as all the emitters trying to recharge might lead to dissipating the phased energy more then adding to it. they are called 'rapid' nadions after all.
If the goal with splitting the phasers on the Sovereign was so it wouldn't intersect with torpedoes. The split array doesn't solve that. Phaser stripe can fire in any direction that the strip has line of sight of. That, on the sovereign, would still include torpedoes.
The reason for splitting them on the Intrepid class is the larger than average secondary deflector on the top. The bottom could be because the pointier noses on ships prevented the array from being carried all the way around. That could apply to the Sovereign bottom as well (also covers the Prometheus). The top on the Sovereign goes around a more rounded area.
The Ambassador was an intermediary between banks and arrays. Splitting provides no benefit. Maybe the arrays at the time couldn't be as long. There's 19 years between the C and the D for technological improvements in that area.
But ultimately I imagine it was largely done because it looks better.
Comments
The bug ship got a T6 version, so the T6 treatment technically isn't limited to the hero ships.
Mine Trap Supporter
Borticus (I think) said that the Galaxy would make an excellent command ship (*wink wink*) and we got those "rumors" flying around. You know.
Right, I forgot about that. Though lockbox ships always stuck out?
Also there are other ships as well. The Guardian, for example, is an ambassador - but not in name and it can't use the skin, but they could have called it "Guardian Support Cruiser" since it is more or less the exact same ship.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I'm not quite up to date, thanks for the info mate!
As much as i know Cryptics politics concerning the GCS, i'd say they definitely wont give it a Command Battlecruiser BOFF layout, no way.
The best we can hope for is a Guardian styled layout but as a command hybrid. But i could very well live with that, too.
When the Galaxy was launched she WAS the most advanced starship in the fleet. That mantle stood until the launch of the Intrepid and Sovereign - who's only honest tech advantage was bio neural gel packs and warp drive that doesn't harm subspace.
No Starfleet vessel has an offensive classification. The Defiant was an 'escort' when everyone and their mother knew she was a destroyer. The Sovereign was a 'Heavy Deterrence Explorer'. The Prometheus was a 'Long Range Tactical Escort'.
And what people don't seem to understand - the Sovereign doesn't replace the Galaxy in the fleet. It serves an entirely different purpose. If it replaces anything it would be the older Excelsior class ships which is completely surpassed by everything in the quadrant now. For the same amount of metal, for the same resources as a Galaxy - you could potentially build 3 Sovereigns. She's longer - but a much smaller ship.
There are things each ship can that the other can't. The Galaxy is a superior troop transport, a superior planetary emergency vessel, properly outfitted - with room for more power supplies and shield generators - she could take three times the beating a Sovereign could.
Yes, the Sovie is newer. Her phasers are newer. Her gel packs are better. But how much better is she really after the first ten year refit when the Galaxy Class comes out of spacedock with bio-neural gel packs, mk xii phasers, a newer warp core then the Sovereigns, Quantum torpedoes standard?
If both were outfitted as best as possible for combat - if they were both refit with the best phasers, the best torpedoes, the best shields, the best armor... I think the Galaxy would edge out the Sovereign in firepower and survivability. But you could build two Sovereigns for the resources of a Galaxy.
Now where we are in STO - the Galaxy and Sov are both well into their operational life. A Galaxy and Sovereign built int the same year would have the same tech, the same refit schedule.
Though the thing I wanted to see the most in TNG never happened. Them completely overloading an entire phaser strip - and firing the entire strip in a low yield, super wide angle burst. That would be amazing in clearing mine fields, torpedo onslaughts, fighter waves...
Huh? While I agree with the rest of your posting, none of these classifications was used either in canon or in technical manuals/writer's material, except the Defiant's of course. The Sovereign was never classified, only an official piece of promotional work (the MSD I think?) classified it as "Explorer Type 2" - which, knowing starfleet, is not misleading. Since it replaces the Excelsior and Akira ships Sovereigns would adapt virtually all functions imaginable and it's weight class qualified it bearing the term Explorer. And when it comes to conflict, Explorers are Starfleet's prime vessels. They don't need to be named battle-war-shooties. The Prometheus was just called "tactical vessel" without any classification - probably because it was just a one-of-a-kind prototype in canon. According to it's configuration I personally would call it "frigate" (as the New Orleans) or simply "cruiser".
The Defiant is a odd animal. "Escort", "Destroyer" - none of these terms really does it justice. Not even frigate - if you read up on the background information including the extensive TM the ship in it's final appearance was a mobile defense platform, like a short range interceptor. They wanted tos tation a number of those ships on immobile stations to up their defense potential over runabouts and shuttles.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I might be thinking of what another game called them. Maybe Birth of the Federation?
BOTF didn't have very canonical ship classes. Starfleet was made up of all out military classes, the Sovereign is a "Dreadnaught" I think, next to Destroyers, Strike Cruisers and the like
Maybe ST: Legacy?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
but for their actual ingame value and sell value a different approach would be better.
i suggest the t6 galaxy and neghvar to have following seating and console layout:
lt tac/pilot
lt uni
commander eng/command
ltcom sci/intel
3tac, 5eng, 3-4sci (depending on if its a fleet level like the command ships)
for the galaxy
___
and
lt eng/pilot
lt uni
ltcom tac/intel
com eng/command
with 4tac, 5eng and 2sci (or three if fleetlevel ship)
for the neghvar
and i think this is very likely to happen.
the other sheme is, that they do the pathfinder way and give it ****load of engineering, and only a lt tac/pilot(galaxy) and the lt eng/pilot (for neghvar) with the missing lt uni so the galaxy wont harm anything ever, and the neghvar will likely play like the older one with no difference at all, while both wont sell good anytime.
i still hope its my upper version and not the pathfinder way, but i highly doubt it.
another possible outcome would be, that the com eng gets the pilot doubling and the sci ltcom gets command, but having a high "pilot" thing on a galaxy is quite ... just not right ^^
lets just hope its not a too defense heavy design, cause (currently) its just not fun in game to be "tanky" at all, it just drags fight's lenghs.
still hope they somehow add some value to eng by giving it some ways to use it more offensively and not only "dps over time" like having more energy or directed energy modulation (still think this one should have a chance of 10,15,20% to deal 100% bleedthrough) for 30sec its basically no value to short fights at all.
lt tact/hybrid
ens eng
ltc eng
cmd eng
lt uni.
Seems like the type of logic Cryptic might use.
It'll get the pathfinder layout almost certainly. Cmdr Eng, Letc Eng, Lt Tac/Comm, Lt Sci, Lt Uni. The Sci cannot be the hybrid since then the Defiant had to get a tac hybrid lt - which it doesn't have.
It may be hard to believe, but the Intrepid/Defiant/Galaxy trinity follows a logic pattern - which is why the T6 layout will most certainly be the one I just posted, with 4/3/3 consoles (eng/sci/tac). Everything else *might* be possible but I would be very surprised.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I also think that the Uni seat should be changed that you can slot an use specialization hybrid-officers (Pilot, command, intel), but only can use up to a certain seating of thier powers such as one seat below what you are slotted. An example would be if you slotted a eng/pilot into a Ltc. uni seat you could only use up to Lt. level pilot ability in that seat, and so that would make deticated hybrid seat still more valuable than a uni seat yet would allow for the use of specialization abilities on more ships an more veriety in layouts for ships.
I think this particular point is irrelevant. We've seen phaser arrays adjusting their firing direction and firing in vectors other than perpendicular to the emitter surface. In both cases, the Sovereign and Galaxy (or any ship for that matter) could theoretically shoot down its own torpedoes if the beam intersected the flight path of the torpedo - which both the Galaxy and Sovereign have the firing arcs to do that. The only distinguishing trait is that the Galaxy could shoot down its own torpedoes from directly behind the active torpedo, but since Starfleet fire control/computing is so advanced, it doesn't make a difference.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Wow. . . nice to see someone else who grew up on Original Trek, and thinks the Galaxy-class is just aesthetically hideous.
Oh yeah?
This old lady would like to have a word with you, young man.
Again, it makes negligible difference to present the Sovereign's ventral phaser array as a "better" design when computer fire control makes up for human limitations. Besides, think of how fast those torpedoes fly out of the launcher. They clear a saucer in a second or less. Even if the computer glitched (IF), the chance of the torpedo crossing the phaser beam is low. Besides, the phaser beam can be shut off for a fraction of a second to avoid detonating the torpedo, or be set to very low power to prevent damage.
We've seen episode upon episode upon movie of starships firing directed energy weapons as well as torpedoes at the same time, and we have never seen a ship shoot down its own torpedo unintentionally on-screen. This should indicate the occurrence of shooting down its own torpedo as statistically very low or insignificant. Certainly not enough to justify splitting the Sovereign's ventral phaser strip into two sections, dramatically reducing its potential power output while offering negligible benefits for a once-in-a-blue-moon event.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
There is a loss of potential power output if the arrays are separated. That's the reason why the Galaxy has such a large array. True, energy flow does matter, I can't dispute that. What also matters is the sequential number of independent phaser emitters that contribute to a shot.
Say for example that each Sovereign ventral array (one of the large ones) has 100 emitters. If one strip's individual emitters stack up to fire one phaser beam, that would be 100 emitters' worth of energy output. So the Sovereign fires 100. Meanwhile, the Galaxy has, say, 250 emitters, due to the continuous, unbroken phaser strip along its underside. That would mean the Galaxy's phaser beam fires 250.
This is a very rough example, since I don't have the number of emitters, energy output, or any specs on the Sovereign and Galaxy emitters. The point is to illustrate that, assuming the energy flow to the phaser arrays is the same for both ships, the Galaxy fires more powerful shots simply because it has more emitters to contribute to the one beam. The Sovereign is reduced to firing medium damage shots with its ventral arrays because the array physically cannot fire more powerful shots due to the limited number of emitters.
As I said a few pages back, the only reason I can see the phaser strips being separated is not to increase firing arcs, but for damage control. If the Galaxy's main array was damaged near the middle of the strip, I'm not sure how effective it would be. The Sovereign, on the other hand, could still use other independent arrays.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
your counter argument, and your debunking can be summed up in 1 not even word
nu-uh
get some better material if you want to participate in the argument. its all there in the tech manual, and its all there in the actual show. the debate has been settled on how arrays work.
On that point, the Enterprise-E received a substantial retrofit after 8 years of service, getting what was it in Nemesis? Two more phaser arrays and four or five more torpedo launchers.
And that may be the key to the argument.
While we're arguing about the phaser arrays, it's worth noting that the Sovereign is pretty much a torpedo boat. The Galaxy has three torpedo launchers and only two available in the joined configuration. The Sovereign started with five and got at least four more later on.
The ship seemed to be built around her Quantum Torpedo launcher in the same vein as the Galaxy Dreadnaught Variant is built around her Phaser Lance (too bad Cryptic doesn't treat her like that, but I've digressed), if we consider that Quantum Torpedoes have a far higher yield than photon torpedoes and are designed to have superior shield envelope penetration, then it makes sense that they can ease off on the phasers.
How's this for a hypothetical? The newer phaser arrays accomplished the same thing as the longer arrays by being able to pass the beam energy back and forth along the strip until it reached the same power. That would be advantageous when applying the system to a smaller vessel. We've already established that power isn't a concern nor is firing arc as a phaser array can fire in any direction it has line of sight with. You'd get the same effect without the need for the longer array. I believe the Prometheus' only official designation was "Experimental"
The little badass of the family.
Well at the knife fight ranges that space combat in Star Trek takes place at, the time for the sensors to get back to your ship, get processed, and change the shield harmonic is very tight. When I mentioned Voyager earlier, they were basically like the Borg, the analysis of the frequency occurred on impact. The shield read the frequency of the incoming weapon and adapted.
The fact that scanning hasn't been done implies that it's very difficult if not impossible, likely for the same reason that you can't just scan an opponent's shields and grab their frequency, and likely the same reason you can't see their shields. The effect is occurring in subspace.
In order to actually know what the frequency of the incoming subspace frequency is, you'd basically have to specifically scan ALL of the subspace domains and ping the right one.
Think back to Schisms, the TNG episode that gave us the Solanae. They had to put a beacon on someone and allow them to be taken in order to actually find out where in subspace they were...what frequency the universe they were in was. And that was with a subspace rift in the ship.
Even in game it takes a physical object to acquire shield information.
As for the frequency being static, I suppose that makes sense, since getting the frequency is normally impossible. The Borg adapt to weapons hitting them but when it comes to target shields, they just drain them and brute force them with a Tractor beam.
i don't need to make anything up, conjecture, extrapolate, or draw a logical conclusion, when the visuals of the show and the tech manual details paint such a clear picture. only a fanboy would object to actual evidence, and only defiant or sovereign fanboys would be so blatantly unobjective.
the closest thing i can come up with on reasoning for so called splitting unnecessarily of arrays, is that the EPS system on these smaller ships can only handle the power draw of arrays the size that they are, wile maintaining acceptable rate of fire, and not dimming the lights or compromising the power of other systems wile trying to recharge a whole array. on all these ships with split arrays though, their size and array length proportion is still about the same as the galaxy's ratio.
yes but the tubes on the galaxy are huge, the launch tube is actually 50 meters long, end to end they could load 24 torpedoes into it, more if the tube has a circumference larger enough to stack several on top of each other. that long tube seems to have a rail gun effect too, several times in tng torps have flown out hyper accelerated.
the sovereign has a lot of tubes, but they area ll pretty small, and there's not much of a barrel on any of them, just the loader and the launch port. i count 6 burst 3 photon tubes in 3 sets of 2, the burst 3 quantum tube, and 3 or 4 single shot tubes. all these can throw a lot of torps around too, and is very decentralized compared to the galaxy. i tend to think the ships are tied in torpedo output, with the akira actually having a slight edge over both.
the glow effect bouncing back and forth, that would look odd. they might as well just fire a second shot, doubling dipping as all the emitters trying to recharge might lead to dissipating the phased energy more then adding to it. they are called 'rapid' nadions after all.
The reason for splitting them on the Intrepid class is the larger than average secondary deflector on the top. The bottom could be because the pointier noses on ships prevented the array from being carried all the way around. That could apply to the Sovereign bottom as well (also covers the Prometheus). The top on the Sovereign goes around a more rounded area.
The Ambassador was an intermediary between banks and arrays. Splitting provides no benefit. Maybe the arrays at the time couldn't be as long. There's 19 years between the C and the D for technological improvements in that area.
But ultimately I imagine it was largely done because it looks better.