test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
My take on the Galaxy Class issues in STO
mli777
Member Posts: 90 Arc User
Firstly, of all of the Star Trek TV series, TNG was my favourite followed shortly by DS9. Those were the series that got me interested in the Franchise.
Now, we have heard plenty of problems with the Galaxy class, but you know, I can live with those.
It's got a slow turn rate and hideous inertia, a relatively mediocre weapons and a very Engineering focused BOFF, layout, plus an unspectacular console layout.
I think its fine for what it is.
The Galaxy Class was originally a multirole exploration ship that had teeth but was really meant to "Explore Strange New Worlds," not engage in extended conflicts. My impression is that the ship was designed to defeat small groups of raiders attempting to interfere in exploration missions, not really designed to toe with major warships without plenty of support.
It was supposed to carry both Starfleet personnel and civilians in relative luxury and splendour. It had a bridge that while functional, was clearly designed for aesthetics. It had multiple recreational facilities, a small school for the children on board, etc. etc. This was designed in a time where the Federation was mostly at peace with the local powers, with little expectation of a full blown conflict soon.
This ship was not meant to perform extreme manoeuvres, and in the show, the ship was clearly not zipping about like dedicated military vessels such as the Defiant. When they did fight in large formations, like during the Dominion war, they turned rather slowly, and were used like old school ships of the line.
In short, this is not expected to be a PVP ship, nor one expected to deal massive DPS. Its weapons were meant to neutralize small number of enemy vessels, with the designers assuming that Starfleet would not use such vessels to spearhead military offensives. Thus, it was designed to be powerful, but in a defensive manner.
I found the Exploration cruiser is decent in some PVE environments provided support is available. They are best suited for single player missions, such as the exploration clusters.
As a final note, remember that the Galaxy Class design was started in the 2350s. The design is nearly 60 year old. In nautical terms, a new Galaxy Class by 2409ish is like building a brand new Kitty Hawk class aircraft carrier.
Now, we have heard plenty of problems with the Galaxy class, but you know, I can live with those.
It's got a slow turn rate and hideous inertia, a relatively mediocre weapons and a very Engineering focused BOFF, layout, plus an unspectacular console layout.
I think its fine for what it is.
The Galaxy Class was originally a multirole exploration ship that had teeth but was really meant to "Explore Strange New Worlds," not engage in extended conflicts. My impression is that the ship was designed to defeat small groups of raiders attempting to interfere in exploration missions, not really designed to toe with major warships without plenty of support.
It was supposed to carry both Starfleet personnel and civilians in relative luxury and splendour. It had a bridge that while functional, was clearly designed for aesthetics. It had multiple recreational facilities, a small school for the children on board, etc. etc. This was designed in a time where the Federation was mostly at peace with the local powers, with little expectation of a full blown conflict soon.
This ship was not meant to perform extreme manoeuvres, and in the show, the ship was clearly not zipping about like dedicated military vessels such as the Defiant. When they did fight in large formations, like during the Dominion war, they turned rather slowly, and were used like old school ships of the line.
In short, this is not expected to be a PVP ship, nor one expected to deal massive DPS. Its weapons were meant to neutralize small number of enemy vessels, with the designers assuming that Starfleet would not use such vessels to spearhead military offensives. Thus, it was designed to be powerful, but in a defensive manner.
I found the Exploration cruiser is decent in some PVE environments provided support is available. They are best suited for single player missions, such as the exploration clusters.
As a final note, remember that the Galaxy Class design was started in the 2350s. The design is nearly 60 year old. In nautical terms, a new Galaxy Class by 2409ish is like building a brand new Kitty Hawk class aircraft carrier.
USS Canada
N.C.C. 171867
Sovereign Class
Saint John Fleet Yard
"A Mari Usque Ad Mare"
N.C.C. 171867
Sovereign Class
Saint John Fleet Yard
"A Mari Usque Ad Mare"
Post edited by mli777 on
0
Comments
if any ship is apparently designed for multiple small craft engagement,it is the ambassador and her 6 small phaser strips. (hence support cruiser, makes sense)
and on casual observation, it apparently still has the biggest phaser strips with the best coverage arcs in star fleet in 2409. with a good 41 more years left in her expected hull life (100 years), she's going to be around for awhile.
personally, i think her lack of tooth would be well cured cured with a new bridge layout that included a commander tac slot. heaven knows it wold make the ship more cannon. (both because of Riker and because it appears to use BO3 in the shows)
but i don't believe this community is ready for such a radical concept.
I do have to admit I'd love the galaxy with either Universal Boff seating or having a server that allowed all ships to be universal.
Personally a nice second choice would be a wartime Galaxy like in yesterdays enterprise with a unique Federation layout of Com tac, lt com engineer, Lt science, lt enginee,r and universal ensign. 4 eng,1 sci,4 tac console layout and plus 10 weapoins plus 10 shields. Would be fun for sure.
Mainly I think all the Cruisers in game really need a turn rate boost though honestly its the federation ships that suffer over all the worst with the Bortas and the D'deridex leading the way for the Klinks and Rommies.
n your point about not being a PvP ship, then that same argument means that the Ambassador and the Excelsior have no business in PVP either.
Your talk about the design being out of date is also shortsighted. I point to a few examples below:
The B-52, commonly called the "BIG UGLY FAT FELLOW(sic)" or BUFF. Arguably, the B-1 and B-2 are its replacements. However, use in Afghanistan has shown that it is actually more economical than the B-1 ad B-2. In fact, those two aircraft fly too fast! The B-52 can bring more force to bear and has become known as the bomb dump truck.
Several US WW2 battleship remained in service until the mid 1980s despite their designs being over 50 years old. Heck, the USS Missiouri wasn't finally decommissioned until 1998! Over 50 years after the war ended!
Technology may advance, but basic design rarely changes. Even modern military naval vessels can be jury rigged with sails should the need arise. I think you need to revisit your argument that a design only lasts 20-30 years.
Not a bad boff layout, but id change the universal ensign to a sci ensign.
I don't. But I am curious why you thought a new thread was needed for you to express your reasoning for opposing any changes to the Galaxy class.
What's this focus on giving the Galaxy more firepower anyway? Shouldn't we focus more on its engineering capabilities? Raise hull strength, strengthen eng consoles (I heard they have diminishing returns - remove that and we're off to a great start), or give it an additional new console. Oh, and let's put some content in that demand exploration and tanking rather than just mindless PEW PEW PEWing.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Its one HELL of a tank though, jesus.
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
Now I don't really expect cryptic to do anything too it at all. Frankly I would be surprised if after all this time any one does. And I don't really need to have universal bridge officer slots, I just hate having more then one engineering bridge officer on a cruiser. A single commander is all the engineering power I need, any more usualy makes me choose lower levels of EP2X abilities then I would like.
p.s.: I think the Galaxy-class would be designed to handle everything it could conceivably encounter in deep space exploration on its own.
because the primary complaint is the ships lack of firepower. everything else is ok, really, and there are more than enough other ships with commander engineer slots. a commander tac slot fixes everything at once with the least work, and allow for a relatively unique Boff layout. and again, it is still starfleets biggest powerplant wired to starfleets biggest ship mounted phaser array, so yeah more "pew pew".
engineering abilities shouldnt be focused on because she does not need more or better engineering abilities. she has too many of them and it unbalances the ship, leading to the many many,,... many complaints. (i read that entire giant thread once, all of it...)
why not fix it?
A Galor Class warship annoyed Captain Picard firing on the Enterprise. The Enterprise fired a few volleys and knocked out the Galor's shields and weapons, and Picard asked if the Cardassians would like to talk or keep shooting - and they backed down. A Nebula class very easily destroyed a Cardassian Galor with it's shields disabled. The Galaxy and Nebula were built towards the end of the Cardassian War - so they were definitely built with war in mind.
If they changed the Engineering powers so they didn't all work on a cooldown or even added a few lower level ones so there were options to use - and not 5 cooldown wasting powers -, the current Galaxy could be fine - though the Support Cruiser retrofit flies exactly how I wish the Galaxy did. Heavy engineering, heavy sci, and you can shoehorn extra tac into it if you really want it.
26th Fleet
Task Force Avalon - CO USS Intrepid
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
This is a zombie thread (no posts in more than 30 days) and therefore will be closed by the mods. We're not suposed to post in threads like this, as per the forum rules.
However, you're wellcome to start a new thread on the issue or share your suggestions and ideas in the big old Galaxy thread >here< .