Heavy weapons, like torpedoes, did more damage as a matter of fact, but also suffered from a weakness to ECM and needed a skilled player to perform well.
The whole division between hull damage and shield damage in sto is bogus anyway.
I loved the SFC games, especially the deeper SFC1 and 2. Cruisers ruled Star Trek and they did so in SFC games also. It took artform levels of skill to take on a heavier ship like a Constitution-class with a lighter ship like a Bird of Prey.
Everything from power management, limited damage control uses, inability to repair hull in combat (only on visiting shipyards/starbases). So many possibilities. Power management alone was a major Give & Take series of commands because sensors, weapons, ECM, shields, engines, etc. consumed power. It was up to the player to prioritize what was getting power, what was going to be weakened to strengthen something else. All the systems had great purpose, because just going heavy weapons and shield power was going to leave you glaringly weak in something else.
Damage control was nice. Because certain aspects of a ship could be focused on to disable. A player only had so many Damage Control Teams to use and you were not getting them back in the middle of a battle. The big thing with Cruisers was that they had the capacity to equip the larger, more powerful pieces of gear as well as having more Damage Control Teams possible.
A skilled player on a small vessel was awesome because he didn't have that amount of luxury.
Anyways, old school Starfleet Command was awesome back then.
Anyways, in SFC, energy weapons like Phasers, Disruptors and torpedoes like Photons all affected hull and shields the same. The major change was that torpedoes did far more damage and consumed much higher power and had longer reloads.
And the end statement is the way I see it as well, its a dramatic special effect. Otherwise, starships would have emitter arrays wrapping around the hull like a complex domino line. And the Galaxy X phaser lance would have also never happened.
if it was just a random visual effect, it wouldn't have so much consistency across several shows, and the tech behind it fully explained by the tech manual.
wrapping the hull totally with arrays is preposterous. the limitation of array length is clearly tied to how many emiters any given size of ship can support with its EPS system, and not even klingon ships are that literally covered with weapons, or any ships in any other space scifi universe. the galaxy X is a daydream of Q at best, its not worthy of having any conclusions drawn based on any of it's features.
if it was just a random visual effect, it wouldn't have so much consistency across several shows, and the tech behind it fully explained by the tech manual.
wrapping the hull totally with arrays is preposterous. the limitation of array length is clearly tied to how many emiters any given size of ship can support with its EPS system, and not even klingon ships are that literally covered with weapons, or any ships in any other space scifi universe. the galaxy X is a daydream of Q at best, its not worthy of having any conclusions drawn based on any of it's features.
So then. If the issue is so settled, Please address the logic behind the miniscule beam array on top of the stardrive for use in combat.
So then. If the issue is so settled, Please address the logic behind the miniscule beam array on top of the stardrive for use in combat.
the actual shape of the neck is what it is, just like the shape of every other ship is what it is. regardless of it mistakenly being referred to as the battle section, the neck shape is optimized to be ideal for connecting to the saucer, above all other factors. the star drive would still be about as combat capable as an ambassador class though, probably more so with those torp launchers.
another reason for it not to have huge guns is the lack of a saucer section that would have a gigantic amount of plasma sitting in conduits at any given time, being fed by the core and at least 6 fusion reactors, acting like an energy reservoir that can keep up with the potential power consumption of those main arrays.
whats the difference between the galaxy and every other smaller ship, that just so happens to have smaller arrays? less total plasma active in EPS conduits at any given time, because they have dramatically less actual pluming, because they are dramatically smaller ships.
The problem with the longer array being more powerful weapon argument is that there's no in screen evidence to support it. Unless someone can find some.
In retrospect i think they should have given the Stardrive similar weapons like the Defiants Phaser cannons right from the beginning at the start of TNG.
Cryptics devs could have given the seperated Stardrive section some additional abilities, like mounting DHCs and a more tac heavy BOFF layout (similar like the Dyson destroyers have).
But of course it's just the Galaxy, don't put too much tought in it devs.
But on the other hand i think the whole idea of seperating the ship isn't very thought out.
Its better to have one strong efficient structure than two glued together (sounds disgusting, lol.)
If they only didn't put that goofy Stuff on the G-X it, would make more sense. Hey devs if you can read this, please make the G-X third nacelle optional.
(yeah, i know it will never happen )
"...'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
The problem with the longer array being more powerful weapon argument is that there's no in screen evidence to support it. Unless someone can find some.
you really cant point to a single time any other hero ship causing that much damage, or blew a ship the size of a kvort away with a single shot after shields were breached, not even the defiant.
thats really a problem in star trek itself, they almost never let conventional weapons solve any kind of problem. even in the dominion war, it was always about some trick being the key to a resolution, often a nonviolent resolution. the galaxy a few other times put up an amazing show of force, but it was against an invincible or god like opponent, so it was ineffective. only when conventional weapons have no chance of doing anything, do they let a ship cut lose, thats how it was in nemesis too even.
you really cant point to a single time any other hero ship causing that much damage, or blew a ship the size of a kvort away with a single shot after shields were breached, not even the defiant.
thats really a problem in star trek itself, they almost never let conventional weapons solve any kind of problem. even in the dominion war, it was always about some trick being the key to a resolution, often a nonviolent resolution. the galaxy a few other times put up an amazing show of force, but it was against an invincible or god like opponent, so it was ineffective. only when conventional weapons have no chance of doing anything, do they let a ship cut lose, thats how it was in nemesis too even.
Yes but they also never did that again and none of the other arrays fired before Borg immunity to show that they were that much stronger.
All that shows is the galaxy has strong phasers, not that the long array is stronger than shorter ones.
Are we really back to the "Longer = Better vs. Nuh-uh" argument?
"After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true. Except for a T5 Connie. That would be f*%#ing awesome." - Mr. Spock
Are we really back to the "Longer = Better vs. Nuh-uh" argument?
Hey, I was just pointing out that there's no on screen evidence to support the view that it does. Personally I don't really care either way, the Galaxy still has powerful weapons even without that existing.
Are we really back to the "Longer = Better vs. Nuh-uh" argument?
It's never going to end. Heck, we finally have a Galaxy class that's better than a Fleet Assault Cruiser (I'll take overwhelm emitters 3 over a fourth tac console any day of the week), and people are still arguing about how powerful the ship should really be.
If we're going to be brutally honest and always go by 'canon', any version of the Galaxy should still be toast when facing a Jem'Hadar dreadnought or Borg cube or Scimitar. Yet we can regularly beat them in game.
If we're going to be brutally honest and always go by 'canon', any version of the Galaxy should still be toast when facing a Jem'Hadar dreadnought or Borg cube or Scimitar. Yet we can regularly beat them in game.
Any Starfleet/ROM/KDF ship would be a pile of ashes when facing a Borg cube alone in "real" trek.
Longer = Better vs. Nuh-uh" argument?
Personally i don't care what's "real", the point is that we like that ship (and others) and like to discuss about it. Thats all.
"...'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 is one thing i don't understand:
Why doesn't the Andromeda Class have a hangar bay?
Don't get me wrong i'm not talking about the 24th century TNG Galaxy Class, i'm talking about the 25th century STO Andromeda Class which is supposedly a successor of the TNG GCS.
Since ships like the G-X and the three Command Battlecruisers have a hangar bay why the Andromeda not?
I mean it's (visible) hangars are big enough so why not?
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
I'm glad it doesn't. Of course every ship has shuttles, a Galaxy+ even a significant number of them. But slapping a hangar on them just further enforces this star wars fighter battle system that's really out of place. I'm surprised you, yreodred, are even asking this question
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I'm glad it doesn't. Of course every ship has shuttles, a Galaxy+ even a significant number of them. But slapping a hangar on them just further enforces this star wars fighter battle system that's really out of place. I'm surprised you, yreodred, are even asking this question
I was just curious, because i know Cryptics devs and their habit of making ships "better" by turning them into battelstars. (like the G-X, for ex.)
Surprisingly the Andromeda didn't get that "treatment".
"...'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 is one thing i don't understand:
Why doesn't the Andromeda Class have a hangar bay?
Don't get me wrong i'm not talking about the 24th century TNG Galaxy Class, i'm talking about the 25th century STO Andromeda Class which is supposedly a successor of the TNG GCS.
Since ships like the G-X and the three Command Battlecruisers have a hangar bay why the Andromeda not?
I mean it's (visible) hangars are big enough so why not?
Actually even the 24th century Galaxy main shuttlebay is big enough to use the ship as a carrier, not to mention shuttlebays 2, 3 (which are, unfortunately, insufficient for carrier purposes, but still bigger than many other ship's shuttlebays).
I was actually mildly disappointed that the Galaxy wasn't a 'flight deck cruiser' it's big enough and has the room for the support craft.
**** the Hangar bay. I like using Concentrate Firepower 3 on my T6 Galaxy. Hangar units clutter up my chances of getting the CF3 proc.
There are hangars available that would let you continue to use CFIII (Type 8's, SRU's, etc...), though the usefulness of said hangars is another problem... lol
I'm not going to start up a petition to get a hangar on the Galaxy or anything like that, I'm quite happy with the fixes implemented on the Andromeda, a hangar would be nice but isn't necessary to enjoy the ship.
Actually even the 24th century Galaxy main shuttlebay is big enough to use the ship as a carrier, not to mention shuttlebays 2, 3 (which are, unfortunately, insufficient for carrier purposes, but still bigger than many other ship's shuttlebays).
I was actually mildly disappointed that the Galaxy wasn't a 'flight deck cruiser' it's big enough and has the room for the support craft.
There are hangars available that would let you continue to use CFIII (Type 8's, SRU's, etc...), though the usefulness of said hangars is another problem... lol
I'm not going to start up a petition to get a hangar on the Galaxy or anything like that, I'm quite happy with the fixes implemented on the Andromeda, a hangar would be nice but isn't necessary to enjoy the ship.
I am also of the train of thought that 1 hangar bay is pointless (except for the Scimitar's Drones). Hangar units perform in numbers. 1 bay does nothing, IMO, and that's coming from a longtime carrier user for PVE and PVP
And I do not want the Galaxy to become a FDC. That means giving up Weapon System Efficiency Cruiser Command. A big hell no from me on that.
I am also of the train of thought that 1 hangar bay is pointless (except for the Scimitar's Drones). Hangar units perform in numbers. 1 bay does nothing, IMO, and that's coming from a longtime carrier user for PVE and PVP
And I do not want the Galaxy to become a FDC. That means giving up Weapon System Efficiency Cruiser Command. A big hell no from me on that.
I agree that a single hangar is of 'limited' usefulness, 6 fighters won't compare to a properly buffed Beam array, DPS wise that is. Fighters are also painfully squishy in combat, yes, and unless you use Yellowstones you will be counting Fighter lifespan in seconds.
Dispite these shortcomings they are still useful, though for a veteran player not nearly as much as we'd expect or want... (I'm also a carrier captain, and have flown carriers for years)
As for not wanting the Galaxy to be a Flight Deck Cruiser... I'd respectuflly disagree, I can't help be mildy upset seeing that giant shuttlebay going completely unused in STO, but it seems as if you've got your wish I doubt that Cryptic will add a hangar to a ship that is already well liked among players (Andromeda).
the galaxey was also the ship that producers and FX workers say brought in the fighters you see in DS9 they even had a variant made for the CGI footage with a double decker main shuttle bay for ingoing and outgoing traffic
the main shuttle bay is also 4 decks tall and takes up the space of the saucer up to the main phaser array. that is more volume then most ships. and this is not even taking into account shuttle bays 2 (3 decks tall fills up the neck to the turbo lift) and 3 (2 decks tall half as deep and hald as wide on one shuttle can fit through the door )
Since you all seem to be the experts on the Galaxy, in game and out, the saucer separation console states the saucer gets Engineering Team and EPtS but I've never seen it cast any of those ever. Has anyone else noticed the same? Is there a bug?
A saucer casting ET like the odyssey casting worker bees would be awesome
Comments
Yeah, it might be. May also be Starfleet Battles. Still without a frameof reference, its just numbers and data points.
I loved the SFC games, especially the deeper SFC1 and 2. Cruisers ruled Star Trek and they did so in SFC games also. It took artform levels of skill to take on a heavier ship like a Constitution-class with a lighter ship like a Bird of Prey.
Everything from power management, limited damage control uses, inability to repair hull in combat (only on visiting shipyards/starbases). So many possibilities. Power management alone was a major Give & Take series of commands because sensors, weapons, ECM, shields, engines, etc. consumed power. It was up to the player to prioritize what was getting power, what was going to be weakened to strengthen something else. All the systems had great purpose, because just going heavy weapons and shield power was going to leave you glaringly weak in something else.
Damage control was nice. Because certain aspects of a ship could be focused on to disable. A player only had so many Damage Control Teams to use and you were not getting them back in the middle of a battle. The big thing with Cruisers was that they had the capacity to equip the larger, more powerful pieces of gear as well as having more Damage Control Teams possible.
A skilled player on a small vessel was awesome because he didn't have that amount of luxury.
Anyways, old school Starfleet Command was awesome back then.
Anyways, in SFC, energy weapons like Phasers, Disruptors and torpedoes like Photons all affected hull and shields the same. The major change was that torpedoes did far more damage and consumed much higher power and had longer reloads.
if it was just a random visual effect, it wouldn't have so much consistency across several shows, and the tech behind it fully explained by the tech manual.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=23029901&postcount=1147
that topic has been settled.
wrapping the hull totally with arrays is preposterous. the limitation of array length is clearly tied to how many emiters any given size of ship can support with its EPS system, and not even klingon ships are that literally covered with weapons, or any ships in any other space scifi universe. the galaxy X is a daydream of Q at best, its not worthy of having any conclusions drawn based on any of it's features.
So then. If the issue is so settled, Please address the logic behind the miniscule beam array on top of the stardrive for use in combat.
the actual shape of the neck is what it is, just like the shape of every other ship is what it is. regardless of it mistakenly being referred to as the battle section, the neck shape is optimized to be ideal for connecting to the saucer, above all other factors. the star drive would still be about as combat capable as an ambassador class though, probably more so with those torp launchers.
another reason for it not to have huge guns is the lack of a saucer section that would have a gigantic amount of plasma sitting in conduits at any given time, being fed by the core and at least 6 fusion reactors, acting like an energy reservoir that can keep up with the potential power consumption of those main arrays.
whats the difference between the galaxy and every other smaller ship, that just so happens to have smaller arrays? less total plasma active in EPS conduits at any given time, because they have dramatically less actual pluming, because they are dramatically smaller ships.
Cryptics devs could have given the seperated Stardrive section some additional abilities, like mounting DHCs and a more tac heavy BOFF layout (similar like the Dyson destroyers have).
But of course it's just the Galaxy, don't put too much tought in it devs.
But on the other hand i think the whole idea of seperating the ship isn't very thought out.
Its better to have one strong efficient structure than two glued together (sounds disgusting, lol.)
If they only didn't put that goofy Stuff on the G-X it, would make more sense.
Hey devs if you can read this, please make the G-X third nacelle optional.
(yeah, i know it will never happen
these come to mind
0m10s
with no borg immunity hax in play, the main arrays can vaporize portions of a cube about equal with a GCS's own volume, each shot.
1m7s
you really cant point to a single time any other hero ship causing that much damage, or blew a ship the size of a kvort away with a single shot after shields were breached, not even the defiant.
thats really a problem in star trek itself, they almost never let conventional weapons solve any kind of problem. even in the dominion war, it was always about some trick being the key to a resolution, often a nonviolent resolution. the galaxy a few other times put up an amazing show of force, but it was against an invincible or god like opponent, so it was ineffective. only when conventional weapons have no chance of doing anything, do they let a ship cut lose, thats how it was in nemesis too even.
All that shows is the galaxy has strong phasers, not that the long array is stronger than shorter ones.
It's never going to end. Heck, we finally have a Galaxy class that's better than a Fleet Assault Cruiser (I'll take overwhelm emitters 3 over a fourth tac console any day of the week), and people are still arguing about how powerful the ship should really be.
If we're going to be brutally honest and always go by 'canon', any version of the Galaxy should still be toast when facing a Jem'Hadar dreadnought or Borg cube or Scimitar. Yet we can regularly beat them in game.
Longer = Better vs. Nuh-uh" argument?
Personally i don't care what's "real", the point is that we like that ship (and others) and like to discuss about it. Thats all.
Why doesn't the Andromeda Class have a hangar bay?
Don't get me wrong i'm not talking about the 24th century TNG Galaxy Class, i'm talking about the 25th century STO Andromeda Class which is supposedly a successor of the TNG GCS.
Since ships like the G-X and the three Command Battlecruisers have a hangar bay why the Andromeda not?
I mean it's (visible) hangars are big enough so why not?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Surprisingly the Andromeda didn't get that "treatment".
I still want a TNG interior tho so I can yell at the ready room fish.
Actually even the 24th century Galaxy main shuttlebay is big enough to use the ship as a carrier, not to mention shuttlebays 2, 3 (which are, unfortunately, insufficient for carrier purposes, but still bigger than many other ship's shuttlebays).
I was actually mildly disappointed that the Galaxy wasn't a 'flight deck cruiser' it's big enough and has the room for the support craft.
There are hangars available that would let you continue to use CFIII (Type 8's, SRU's, etc...), though the usefulness of said hangars is another problem... lol
I'm not going to start up a petition to get a hangar on the Galaxy or anything like that, I'm quite happy with the fixes implemented on the Andromeda, a hangar would be nice but isn't necessary to enjoy the ship.
I am also of the train of thought that 1 hangar bay is pointless (except for the Scimitar's Drones). Hangar units perform in numbers. 1 bay does nothing, IMO, and that's coming from a longtime carrier user for PVE and PVP
And I do not want the Galaxy to become a FDC. That means giving up Weapon System Efficiency Cruiser Command. A big hell no from me on that.
I agree that a single hangar is of 'limited' usefulness, 6 fighters won't compare to a properly buffed Beam array, DPS wise that is. Fighters are also painfully squishy in combat, yes, and unless you use Yellowstones you will be counting Fighter lifespan in seconds.
Dispite these shortcomings they are still useful, though for a veteran player not nearly as much as we'd expect or want... (I'm also a carrier captain, and have flown carriers for years)
As for not wanting the Galaxy to be a Flight Deck Cruiser... I'd respectuflly disagree, I can't help be mildy upset seeing that giant shuttlebay going completely unused in STO, but it seems as if you've got your wish I doubt that Cryptic will add a hangar to a ship that is already well liked among players (Andromeda).
the main shuttle bay is also 4 decks tall and takes up the space of the saucer up to the main phaser array. that is more volume then most ships. and this is not even taking into account shuttle bays 2 (3 decks tall fills up the neck to the turbo lift) and 3 (2 decks tall half as deep and hald as wide on one shuttle can fit through the door )
3 was the only one ever shown on screen
http://www.neutralzone.de/database/Federation/Starfleet/Galaxy_USS_Enterprise_MSD2_01.jpg
if the defiant could fit through the door it could actually pack int he main shuttle bay
A saucer casting ET like the odyssey casting worker bees would be awesome
"Make it so" - Captain Picard
Build I am working for my Federation, Klingon, and Romulans.