Dreadnoughts are supposedly huge, heavily armed ships meant to be hard to destroy, this ship seems to be far too small and nimble for a dreadnought.
And really... that old discussion again? The Galaxy-X is what it is, they won't just change the entire ship to something completely different, and best we can hope for is a decent Fleet variant.
Also, seriously, why are people so enamoured with that thing? It's just the Enterprise with some spare model parts glued on, hell, they even say in the one Episode it shows up that Starfleet has far more modern vessels and this ship is only still upgraded and in use thanks to Rikers sentimentality.
The Galaxy class isn't a warship, it's a floating little village with weapons to defend itself if need be and it makes sense that the galaxy-X fits that mold as well.
-
Join Starfleet,
Boldly go where no man has gone before,
Meet interesting new species, and Kill them!
a compact, smaller then average cruiser has no business having the strongest shields and the hugest hull hitpoints and damage soak. that would be a quality of ships that have much larger volumes, and more available power. smaller should mean more maneuverable, less durable, not more durable as well.
the defiant has cannons because with its size range they could not get a useful amount of firepower out of beam arrays with the room a ship that small would have had to mount them. so they instead designed it to use narraow arc cannons, because those would be easier to package in a small ship, and with its maneuverability the fire arc limitation would be much less an issue.
strictly in a canon sense, a cruiser at least the Prometheus's size simply wouldn't opt for cannons over beams, because it would have room to mount arrays long enough to be more powerful and have no fire arc drawbacks. of course in game its cannons>beams, and using cannons on battle cruisers is awesome fun on my kdf. now the KDF dont even have fun battlecruiser over the fed faction anymore, infact a kdf battlecruiser was delayed again to work on this thing
I flat disagree with basically all of this. For starters, can we please stop spreading the nonsense that mass=durability=power? That correlation is simply not true - in fact, it is typically the opposite of the truth in modern engineering - yes, you can put a larger engine/reactor/whatever on a larger chassis, but it's not necessarily efficient to do so, especially if you are talking about different vessels with wildly different design goals, etc. In addition, the durability of a ship depends not merely on its size or mass, but also on the internal configuration of space, bulkheads, etc. Similarly, armor effectiveness is not merely a function of mass or thickness, but also of materials, shape, and again the internal configuration of the thing being protected. In Star Trek, the problem is even worse, as there are so many 'unknowns' in the engineering given the technobabble and unobtainium used in the show that making suppositions about what's "really" true is futile at best.
Okuda's tech manual is a prime example of this, because the bit about the phaser arrays makes absolutely no sense at all. Transferring the energy from one emitter to the next would only ever serve to bleed off some of the energy and make the final beam weaker than if that same amount of energy were simply dumped through the single firing emitter without the silly transfers. Even if the transfers were 100% efficient, that would at best mean the power stayed the same (but we know they're not 100% efficient, because the travelling 'glow' represents at least a minor energy bleed). The only way what we see in the shows would make the phasers stronger is if the emitters were, themselves, generating the power and handing it off down the line, but that's not how they are described, and that still doesn't preclude getting more power from a shorter array by simply giving the array more power directly from the ship's core.
I know it's hard to get PWE to invest money into designing new Klingon ships, but wouldn't it be possible to convert some of the existing Orion, Fek'iri and nausican NPC ships into player ships, instead?
The funny thing is last week I was planning on making and investing in a KDF toon purely because they have battlecruisers.
But this is just much more convenient.
The Klingon side story is still interesting to play through. A good alternative view. And it's always good to have alternative faction toons for goodies.
Dreadnoughts are supposedly huge, heavily armed ships meant to be hard to destroy, this ship seems to be far too small and nimble for a dreadnought.
And really... that old discussion again? The Galaxy-X is what it is, they won't just change the entire ship to something completely different, and best we can hope for is a decent Fleet variant.
Also, seriously, why are people so enamoured with that thing? It's just the Enterprise with some spare model parts glued on, hell, they even say in the one Episode it shows up that Starfleet has far more modern vessels and this ship is only still upgraded and in use thanks to Rikers sentimentality.
The Galaxy class isn't a warship, it's a floating little village with weapons to defend itself if need be and it makes sense that the galaxy-X fits that mold as well.
That was a rather sad and a little absurd of a statement. Fortunately that timeline and many things associated with it aren't even canon in universe.
The Galaxy was designed to have a hundred year life cycle. This isn't unheard of as both the Miranda and Excelsior classes have time in service on that time table. Even the Constitution lasted fifty years. The fact that they were going to decommission the Enterprise only half way through that seems odd. The Galaxy class due to the sheer size of the thing should be able to handle any refit. There is literally no component Starfleet would field that wouldn't be able to fit in it, especially since every observed canon starship after it is smaller than it. Regenerative shields should fit, more advanced weapons arrays should fit, new sensors? Not a problem, it's made for them. Literally the only thing you wouldn't be able to change is things like Quantum slipstream as the hull doesn't have appropriate subspace field geometry.
With five major starship upgrades over the hundred year life cycle, the Galaxy should just be reaching it's third major refit/retrofit and still ready to go.
As far as their combat capability I don't recall seeing any Galaxy's destroyed after the Odyssey was lost, and they were handling business during the Dominion war.
Turning the Federation's largest science ship into the largest warship isn't exactly a stretch. Like Mon Cal Cruisers in Star Wars.
And I like the Galaxy-X because it looks damn cool. I like the third nacelle. The Phaser lance as a matter of canon (badum bump) could frankly use some beefing up in game, but play balance and all.
"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"
I think I'm blind, I'm not seeing any pictures of the Avenger's bridge in either dev blog, in the wallpaper section of the website, or the screenshot part of the website.
(Looks far better than that huge 'future' bridge or whatever it's called that's the current default...)
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." -- Q, TNG: "Q-Who?"
^Words that every player should keep in mind, especially whenever there's a problem with the game...
ok now we Klingons can officially complain with good reason that we are being depreciated greatly--look at this ship and tell me that the Klingons have an equivalent, I dare you. And although we get new cruiser abilities, we get NO sort of new ship, which has been the case since the Peghqu' came out, or arguably the Bortasqu'
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] "The Borg - party-poopers of the galaxy"~ The Doctor
Agreed. I like the stats, but to me the ship is hideous.
Same here.
I'd love to buy a ship with those stats, but alone the tough of having to look at this ugly thing all the time is just terrible.
I already hate the view at the Starbase shipyard...
Cryptics designers should really keep their fingers away from starfleet ships. It's clearly not one of their (few) strengths. they rather should have given the GCS or at least the G -X those stats instead of this ugly bucket.
As i already said i would love to buy it if it where a reworked Galaxy Class, Star Cruiser or at least a good looking new design but this abomination is unacceptable for me.
But i am afraid Cryptics bosses just think that we players only look for a ships stats, no matter what ship it is. And since it is "just"* a Cruiser they (Crpyitcs devs) don't care about its design anyways.
*refering to Cryptics love to Escorts.
"...'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
It was made for the updated Federation tutorial. The current plan is that this bridge will become the new default bridge for Fed ships (that don't have custom ones).
On the subject of the Season 8 bridge I gotta say I agree. It doesn't look like the bridge of a Miranda/Centaur, Shihrkar but rather the bridge of the Khitomer.
That said, will there be new bridges being sold in the new style architecture?
And if I recall correctly this is part of a full ship interior revamp right?
And please, get the conn and ops consoles some chairs. I always felt kind of bad for Worf. I mean I know he's a Klingon and he doesn't mind standing, and ergonomically correct for the task, but come on get a man a stool or something. (Which he eventually did, before Deanna crashed the ship.)
with the fleet shield reduction from 1.21 to 1.1... there is 0 reason for me to get out of my fleet excelsior for this. ah well :P
Well it is a Fleet ship. You would be coming down a tier anyway.
"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"
Man I'm gonna have to get this ship I love the look its new its original and I liel the ship it gives a feeling of don't mess with me like it shows up at a battle and says "I'm here to kick a** and chew bubblegum and I'm all out of gum". And it has great stats.
Interia and turn rate comparison between the Daciot and the Avenger both have a turn rate of nine, but the Daciot only has an interia of 40 to the Avengers 50. Of course the Daciot isn't a battle cruiser, she's an FDC but she's pretty manueverable for a non battle cruiser cruiser. 40 interia is still better then any other battle cruiser.
My Fleet Corsair is less competitive in turn rate by 1 and interia by 20! I also have less base hull of 39,000 and less offense vs. Cannons and tac officers. On the bright side my impulse mod is .17 to his .15 .
But I'm still tanker then he is and I have more science abilities and a hangar bay, if I can use my tractor beam and interceptors to help keep his dual cannons off me, I can take him and if he ambushes me I can use feedback pulse and my trio of Romulan Particle Generators to make him taste it. And I have purchased the point defence consoles which when I use it right is wicked and can wipe out his V.A.T.A.
Hey, pwebranflakes will there be additional ship parts for the Avenger Class availlable?
Maybe some parts that make the ship look better or at least a switch to make it look like a (by cryptic) ignored ship like the original Star Cruisers or the Heavy Cruiser for example?
I hope you can understand that the "specific" style of the Avenger cannot be everyones taste, to say it mildly...
Since it will be the new top of the line ship, maybe we could get a more typical Starfleet design for it. Like a design that does not say "militaristic morons in command".
So just give us the option to just put a alternative ship appearance on it that is already in the game, like the Star Cruiser or Heavy Cruiser (as i already said).
"...'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
Its not supposed to be aesthetically pleasing its supposed to be functional but as far as I can tell the general consensus is that people like the design. And they're not going to add something to where you basically can just turn off what the ship looks like so don't ask.
Hey, pwebranflakes will there be additional ship parts for the Avenger Class availlable?
Maybe some parts that make the ship look better or at least a switch to make it look like a (by cryptic) ignored ship like the original Star Cruisers or the Heavy Cruiser for example?
I hope you can understand that the "specific" style of the Avenger cannot be everyones taste, to say it mildly...
Since it will be the new top of the line ship, maybe we could get a more typical Starfleet design for it. Like a design that does not say "militaristic morons in command".
So just give us the option to just put a alternative ship appearance on it that is already in the game, like the Star Cruiser or Heavy Cruiser (as i already said).
They don't do it for the other ships, sooo why would you think this will be the exception.
Comments
And really... that old discussion again? The Galaxy-X is what it is, they won't just change the entire ship to something completely different, and best we can hope for is a decent Fleet variant.
Also, seriously, why are people so enamoured with that thing? It's just the Enterprise with some spare model parts glued on, hell, they even say in the one Episode it shows up that Starfleet has far more modern vessels and this ship is only still upgraded and in use thanks to Rikers sentimentality.
The Galaxy class isn't a warship, it's a floating little village with weapons to defend itself if need be and it makes sense that the galaxy-X fits that mold as well.
Join Starfleet,
Boldly go where no man has gone before,
Meet interesting new species, and Kill them!
I flat disagree with basically all of this. For starters, can we please stop spreading the nonsense that mass=durability=power? That correlation is simply not true - in fact, it is typically the opposite of the truth in modern engineering - yes, you can put a larger engine/reactor/whatever on a larger chassis, but it's not necessarily efficient to do so, especially if you are talking about different vessels with wildly different design goals, etc. In addition, the durability of a ship depends not merely on its size or mass, but also on the internal configuration of space, bulkheads, etc. Similarly, armor effectiveness is not merely a function of mass or thickness, but also of materials, shape, and again the internal configuration of the thing being protected. In Star Trek, the problem is even worse, as there are so many 'unknowns' in the engineering given the technobabble and unobtainium used in the show that making suppositions about what's "really" true is futile at best.
Okuda's tech manual is a prime example of this, because the bit about the phaser arrays makes absolutely no sense at all. Transferring the energy from one emitter to the next would only ever serve to bleed off some of the energy and make the final beam weaker than if that same amount of energy were simply dumped through the single firing emitter without the silly transfers. Even if the transfers were 100% efficient, that would at best mean the power stayed the same (but we know they're not 100% efficient, because the travelling 'glow' represents at least a minor energy bleed). The only way what we see in the shows would make the phasers stronger is if the emitters were, themselves, generating the power and handing it off down the line, but that's not how they are described, and that still doesn't preclude getting more power from a shorter array by simply giving the array more power directly from the ship's core.
Yes (but can be used on the Fleet version).
Cheers,
Brandon =/\=
Awesome
I know it's hard to get PWE to invest money into designing new Klingon ships, but wouldn't it be possible to convert some of the existing Orion, Fek'iri and nausican NPC ships into player ships, instead?
The Ravager and Warbage Dreadnoughts or the K'norr Escort coming to mind.
Join Starfleet,
Boldly go where no man has gone before,
Meet interesting new species, and Kill them!
The Galaxy was designed to have a hundred year life cycle. This isn't unheard of as both the Miranda and Excelsior classes have time in service on that time table. Even the Constitution lasted fifty years. The fact that they were going to decommission the Enterprise only half way through that seems odd. The Galaxy class due to the sheer size of the thing should be able to handle any refit. There is literally no component Starfleet would field that wouldn't be able to fit in it, especially since every observed canon starship after it is smaller than it. Regenerative shields should fit, more advanced weapons arrays should fit, new sensors? Not a problem, it's made for them. Literally the only thing you wouldn't be able to change is things like Quantum slipstream as the hull doesn't have appropriate subspace field geometry.
With five major starship upgrades over the hundred year life cycle, the Galaxy should just be reaching it's third major refit/retrofit and still ready to go.
As far as their combat capability I don't recall seeing any Galaxy's destroyed after the Odyssey was lost, and they were handling business during the Dominion war.
Turning the Federation's largest science ship into the largest warship isn't exactly a stretch. Like Mon Cal Cruisers in Star Wars.
And I like the Galaxy-X because it looks damn cool. I like the third nacelle. The Phaser lance as a matter of canon (badum bump) could frankly use some beefing up in game, but play balance and all.
I thank you sir
Lucky you...I got neither.
The split neck still makes it look too ugly, though the pylon alternative appears a bit better.
The drop in shields is very much needed, but I think the Hull is still too high for that escort-cruiser hybrid.
The Avenger does not have a custom bridge.
This is the bridge that's used in the revamped Fed tutorial. Note this post from earlier: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=12803791#post12803791
That bridge will not be available tomorrow.
Cheers,
Brandon =/\=
Aw... why not?
(Looks far better than that huge 'future' bridge or whatever it's called that's the current default...)
^Words that every player should keep in mind, especially whenever there's a problem with the game...
I believe Branflakes already said, it is being added as part of Season 8.
Refine faster, dilithium! REFINE FASTER! :P
Mine Trap Supporter
Chillax. No Ego. No Drama.
Like my alien? Watch THE VIDEO
Need custom graphics for you or your fleet? Click HERE
"The Borg - party-poopers of the galaxy" ~ The Doctor
Agreed. I like the stats, but to me the ship is hideous.
I jump between an Armitage, Tactical Escort Retrofit, and Fleet Patrol Escort.
I'd love to buy a ship with those stats, but alone the tough of having to look at this ugly thing all the time is just terrible.
I already hate the view at the Starbase shipyard...
Cryptics designers should really keep their fingers away from starfleet ships. It's clearly not one of their (few) strengths. they rather should have given the GCS or at least the G -X those stats instead of this ugly bucket.
As i already said i would love to buy it if it where a reworked Galaxy Class, Star Cruiser or at least a good looking new design but this abomination is unacceptable for me.
But i am afraid Cryptics bosses just think that we players only look for a ships stats, no matter what ship it is. And since it is "just"* a Cruiser they (Crpyitcs devs) don't care about its design anyways.
*refering to Cryptics love to Escorts.
So far, this is the plan.
Mine Trap Supporter
That said, will there be new bridges being sold in the new style architecture?
And if I recall correctly this is part of a full ship interior revamp right?
And please, get the conn and ops consoles some chairs. I always felt kind of bad for Worf. I mean I know he's a Klingon and he doesn't mind standing, and ergonomically correct for the task, but come on get a man a stool or something. (Which he eventually did, before Deanna crashed the ship.)
Well it is a Fleet ship. You would be coming down a tier anyway.
My Fleet Corsair is less competitive in turn rate by 1 and interia by 20! I also have less base hull of 39,000 and less offense vs. Cannons and tac officers. On the bright side my impulse mod is .17 to his .15 .
But I'm still tanker then he is and I have more science abilities and a hangar bay, if I can use my tractor beam and interceptors to help keep his dual cannons off me, I can take him and if he ambushes me I can use feedback pulse and my trio of Romulan Particle Generators to make him taste it. And I have purchased the point defence consoles which when I use it right is wicked and can wipe out his V.A.T.A.
Maybe some parts that make the ship look better or at least a switch to make it look like a (by cryptic) ignored ship like the original Star Cruisers or the Heavy Cruiser for example?
I hope you can understand that the "specific" style of the Avenger cannot be everyones taste, to say it mildly...
Since it will be the new top of the line ship, maybe we could get a more typical Starfleet design for it. Like a design that does not say "militaristic morons in command".
So just give us the option to just put a alternative ship appearance on it that is already in the game, like the Star Cruiser or Heavy Cruiser (as i already said).
They don't do it for the other ships, sooo why would you think this will be the exception.
My PvE/PvP hybrid skill tree