Well, IIRC if you knew the shield frequency, you could calibrate the transporter to bypass it. Needless to say this works best on your own shield. why didn't it happen more in the show? Well, I suppose it'd probably fail catastrophically if you tried it while taking fire....
It depends where you look. Voyager, like f2pdrakon posted, was a show that didn't give a damn about anything for convenience and as such it is, unfortunately canon.
Hwever, throughout TNG not overwatched by Brannon Braga it wasn't possible. Shield frequency was on a "rotation". Miles O'Brian figured out a way to beam through those "windows" the frequency changed, though. More advanced technology could penetrate shields, however.
Regarding the shuttles, wether they can penetrate shields or not is pure speculation. We only saw on screen that they couldn't, later on the topic never was mentioned again. So we can specualte that they can, but we don't know.
EDIT: Guys, please get over the classrooms, will you? There were a couple of rooms on such a large starship reserved for what, a dozen children. All that "The Galaxy was populated by thousand civilians" is nonsense. The Saratoga had families on board as well, btw. But that's no reason to stop beating the Galaxy, is it?
^ 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
Nothing justifies anything here. That's not how the real world works.
We're talking about a sci-fi franchise set in the imaginary future, the only rules that apply are those of the creator and IP holders of said franchise. If those people wanted, they could have said that the Galaxy's big shuttle bay is so big becuase they breed monkeys there. If Gene wanted Starfleet to fight the Klingons with mutated butterflies, we'd be fighting with mutated butterflies here.
The people that called the shots in Trek and TNG clearly never envisioned the Galaxy Class as a ship that carries and utilizes combat craft in her missions. No matter what you or me may want, no matter all the 'logical' extrapolations we may make doesn't change that fact that it is sci-fi, it's imaginary and the only rules that apply are the ones set by the creator and IP holders of Trek.
the IP holders and creators of star trek, created and/or approved those blueprints, and that internal configuration. a galaxy class capable of rapid launch and recovery of small craft of any kind is evidently part of gene Roddenberry approved vision and his approved ship designs. the only reason we didn't see it is because new sets are expensive, and so are shots of multiple craft (at least before CGI). so by your own logic, the Galaxy class is a Carrier, because gene and paramount said so when the blueprints with the 3 deck hangar bay were approved by them, and are part of the "Imaginary rules" of this universe. by your own logic, you are being illogical. again.
and even if she got a hangar tomorrow, nobody is forcing you to use it. you can be just like picard and keep your shuttle-roster full of nice and cannon type 8s and never launch them, just like picard did.
as for your logic of if we didn't see it in the shows it doesn't exist no matter how obvious, and your love of reductio ad absurdum, try this on for size.
we never saw them use toilets on the show, so starships do not have toilets, according to gene roddenberrys vision as seen on the shows. maybe they just beam the TRIBBLE out of you? nope, that didn't happen on the show either, so in gene Roddenberry's star trek, nobody poops, and there are no toilets.
the IP holders and creators of star trek, created and/or approved those blueprints, and that internal configuration. a galaxy class capable of rapid launch and recovery of small craft of any kind is evidently part of gene Roddenberry approved vision and his approved ship designs. the only reason we didn't see it is because new sets are expensive, and so are shots of multiple craft (at least before CGI). so by your own logic, the Galaxy class is a Carrier, because gene and paramount said so when the blueprints with the 3 deck hangar bay were approved by them, and are part of the "Imaginary rules" of this universe. by your own logic, you are being illogical. again.
Ah yes, the good ol' "sets are expensive" shtick all carrier fanboys use when they run out of arguments.
Do those blueprints happen to portray how fighters are launched and utilized? How they'll preform? Nope, I didn't think so, cause they're blueprints. The ship doesn't even carry fighter craft, but shuttles.
The IP holders were pretty clear that only things seen on screen with the ST logo can be considered canon and that in case that interferes with some source material, on screen trumps everything else regarding canon. So try again.
and even if she got a hangar tomorrow, nobody is forcing you to use it. you can be just like picard and keep your shuttle-roster full of nice and cannon type 8s and never launch them, just like picard did.
Awww how cute.....another already seen before and already lost argument from the carrier brigade.
How about you take your carrier fantasies away or onto another ship and leave this TNG icon as it's suposed to be?
as for your logic of if we didn't see it in the shows it doesn't exist no matter how obvious, and your love of reductio ad absurdum, try this on for size.
we never saw them use toilets on the show, so starships do not have toilets, according to gene roddenberrys vision as seen on the shows. maybe they just beam the TRIBBLE out of you? nope, that didn't happen on the show either, so in gene Roddenberry's star trek, nobody poops, and there are no toilets.
Oh and look, finally a strawman appeared!
I'll just tell you that I recall seing toilets/bathrooms in ENT and if angrytarg cares to oblige, he can post you the link of a Starfleet ship toilet seat he once posted.
But the sheer fact that you started to compare seing people taking a **** on screen with seing carrier and fighter craft launching sequences only shows how badly out of arguments you are on the topic. Nice strawman though, a little weak and old by now, but whatever.
Also, don't forget even the Odyssey has worker bees. So it's not like they've been phased out of use.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I have ZERO problems with them putting a hangar bay on the Galaxy R if they're doing it to the Gaaxy X. I mean, it's almost the same ship. So have at it. I just like talking Trek. And didn't want to pass up a chance of putting the idea of Keiko taking all the kids on a field trip to look at space jellyfish right before Lore pops up to try and destroy everyone again. Or worker bees. Cause, worker bees!
Awww how cute.....another already seen before and already lost argument from the carrier brigade.
How about you take your carrier fantasies away or onto another ship and leave this TNG icon as it's suposed to be?
according to the giant launch bay on the blueprints, my "carrier fantasy's" are how the ship is supposed to be. it can easily launch 4-6 shuttles at once and carries dozens of the craft.
to ignore these design elements because they were never emphasized in the show is to ignore the craft itself. and these designs elements are self evident, even if all you have is a model of the ship to look at. (then again, i am an engineer IRL so maybe its just obvious to me).
the only difference between fighters and shuttles is armament, so lets abandon the semantics please.
and now that we have exchanged strawmen, (one that i rather politely set up for you) are you willing to discuss with facts the potential capabilities of the galaxy class design based on sound engineering principles and apparent design elements? or should we turn this discussion to our (and possibly gene's) personal feelings about the ship and its portrayal instead. it can be one way or the other, not both. but i leave the choice to you, and look forward to future discussion. (but please, no more hyperbole)
i understand your perspective, you use the show as a limiter of what the ships potential is and on the show it clearly is not seen as a carrier, i agree. and clearly non deviation from the show is important to you, and used to be for me as well. however, please consider my own perspective; I use the show not as a limiter, but as a guideline of what the ship can do. i believe your perspective is just as valid as my own.
for the record, i do not fly and do not intend to fly any carrier on any character. nor am i a carrier fan, so stop calling me one. if you want to call me names i admit to being a transwarp loving speed freak in an Excelsior as my primary character.
according to the giant launch bay on the blueprints, my "carrier fantasy's" are how the ship is supposed to be. it can easily launch 4-6 shuttles at once and carries dozens of the craft.
to ignore these design elements because they were never emphasized in the show is to ignore the craft itself. and these designs elements are self evident, even if all you have is a model of the ship to look at. (then again, i am an engineer IRL so maybe its just obvious to me).
the only difference between fighters and shuttles is armament, so lets abandon the semantics please.
Like I said, my basic guideline is what the IP holder declared to be canon and what I've seen in the show. They were pretty clear that on-screen footage trumps everything else such as technical manuals, blueprints and other source materials if there ever is a contradiction between the two.
I never said that the ship lacks potential to do certain things, the Galaxy is an extremely modular design and a huge ship that was built with the intent to be adjusted in multiple ways.
The thing is, we never really saw much of any other configurations that the Enterprise-D, which was at the time the flagship, so that is basically our guideline for the ship in game. Because if we start digging deep into all that the Galaxy class can be configured to do, we'll need to have God knows how many different Galaxy layouts in STO.
And the reason I mentioned the shuttles compared to fighters was not semantics, but to point out the difference in roles and that the craft carried on board a Galaxy were not intended as added firepower support in combat.
and now that we have exchanged strawmen, (one that i rather politely set up for you) are you willing to discuss with facts the potential capabilities of the galaxy class design based on sound engineering principles and apparent design elements? or should we turn this discussion to our (and possibly gene's) personal feelings about the ship and its portrayal instead. it can be one way or the other, not both. but i leave the choice to you, and look forward to future discussion. (but please, no more hyperbole)
i understand your perspective, you use the show as a limiter of what the ships potential is and on the show it clearly is not seen as a carrier, i agree. and clearly non deviation from the show is important to you, and used to be for me as well. however, please consider my own perspective; I use the show not as a limiter, but as a guideline of what the ship can do. i believe your perspective is just as valid as my own.
for the record, i do not fly and do not intend to fly any carrier on any character. nor am i a carrier fan, so stop calling me one. if you want to call me names i admit to being a transwarp loving speed freak in an Excelsior as my primary character.
I can see how based on the techincal manual and blueprints you come to the assumption that the Galaxy could serve as a FDC being an engineer, but the thing that bugs me is that this is essentialy changing the role of the ship compared to what was seen in TNG. The Enterprise-D never used support craft in such manner and when I play around STO in my favourite ship I want the preformance to resemble what I've seen and come to love in the show.
The IP holders declared that what's seen on screen is primary canon and what we saw on screen was not a Galaxy class that uses fighters or any other support craft as a supplement in cobat situations. That's my stance on this issue and that's why I disregard the potential the ship has to be turned into something else.
I'm not going to argue that based on knowledge and engineering principles the ship couldn't be adjusted to preform in different ways. But once we open that can of worms, the carrier fans will want 2 hangars, the science fans will want a different set up with subsystem targeting, sensor analysis and more sci. consoles and Boff abilities, and so on..... and neither will be right or wrong, because if we go by the book and say that 70% of the Galaxy is modular, that means we can change it into pretty much anything. Why should a fan of one type of gameplay have the upper hand over another?
Honestly I used to care much more about what is being thrown in the game, but after many things and changes STO went through I don't overally concern myslef much with that or the deviation from the shows the game has any longer. However I care for the presentation of the 5 iconic ships from the ST shows and I think that their in-game variants (and there are only 3 of them) should truthfully represent the ships we came to love in those shows. I think that for those 3 we should be limited to what they were in the show without deviations, because they were all well documented and as fans came to love as such.
There are million of other canon designs that were not in the spotlight and can endure experimenting with them. There are even more non-canon designs in STO that we can experiment with. These 3 iconic ships should resemble the ones from the show in their role. I feel that at least some things need to be sacred.
Like I said, my basic guideline is what the IP holder declared to be canon and what I've seen in the show. They were pretty clear that on-screen footage trumps everything else such as technical manuals, blueprints and other source materials if there ever is a contradiction between the two.
I never said that the ship lacks potential to do certain things, the Galaxy is an extremely modular design and a huge ship that was built with the intent to be adjusted in multiple ways.
The thing is, we never really saw much of any other configurations that the Enterprise-D, which was at the time the flagship, so that is basically our guideline for the ship in game. Because if we start digging deep into all that the Galaxy class can be configured to do, we'll need to have God knows how many different Galaxy layouts in STO.
And the reason I mentioned the shuttles compared to fighters was not semantics, but to point out the difference in roles and that the craft carried on board a Galaxy were not intended as added firepower support in combat.
I can see how based on the techincal manual and blueprints you come to the assumption that the Galaxy could serve as a FDC being an engineer, but the thing that bugs me is that this is essentialy changing the role of the ship compared to what was seen in TNG. The Enterprise-D never used support craft in such manner and when I play around STO in my favourite ship I want the preformance to resemble what I've seen and come to love in the show.
The IP holders declared that what's seen on screen is primary canon and what we saw on screen was not a Galaxy class that uses fighters or any other support craft as a supplement in cobat situations. That's my stance on this issue and that's why I disregard the potential the ship has to be turned into something else.
I'm not going to argue that based on knowledge and engineering principles the ship couldn't be adjusted to preform in different ways. But once we open that can of worms, the carrier fans will want 2 hangars, the science fans will want a different set up with subsystem targeting, sensor analysis and more sci. consoles and Boff abilities, and so on..... and neither will be right or wrong, because if we go by the book and say that 70% of the Galaxy is modular, that means we can change it into pretty much anything. Why should a fan of one type of gameplay have the upper hand over another?
Honestly I used to care much more about what is being thrown in the game, but after many things and changes STO went through I don't overally concern myslef much with that or the deviation from the shows the game has any longer. However I care for the presentation of the 5 iconic ships from the ST shows and I think that their in-game variants (and there are only 3 of them) should truthfully represent the ships we came to love in those shows. I think that for those 3 we should be limited to what they were in the show without deviations, because they were all well documented and as fans came to love as such.
There are million of other canon designs that were not in the spotlight and can endure experimenting with them. There are even more non-canon designs in STO that we can experiment with. These 3 iconic ships should resemble the ones from the show in their role. I feel that at least some things need to be sacred.
I totally agree with everything you just said. Edit: perhaps sensor analysis would be a better solution for giving the galaxy the fix it needs in firepower? What do you think?
Thanks, I'm sorry if I came off a bit strong before, I tend to get a bit emotional about the Galaxy and quite frankly this 'revamp' has me worried that they may just slap a hangar on the R as an easy solution to all the complaints.
That would suck really badly for me, one can say "don't use the hangar if you don't want to" but to me it changes the whole perspective on the ship I'm using, not to mention the loss of certain cruiser comm arrays.
Edit: perhaps sensor analysis would be a better solution for giving the galaxy the fix it needs in firepower? What do you think?
Well, I don't really know what to think on that one - on one hand we have the science Odyssey and the command Bortasqu' that have that ability, however they're the bundled flagships. It wouldn't be a first but it might set a precedent that would make people complain about other ships getting the treatment although not necessarily.
It would sure be a beneficial boost to firepower that is really lacking on the R. And it certainly sounds much better to me that adding a hangar bay, since we had the Galaxy do tricks with the deflector before.
Honestly, I get that Cryptic is in a tough position in order to fix the ship and don't make fans of other ships complain about special treatment. What I think they should have and easily could have done is on the top of the new saucer sep. and 2-piece set they either made the engi.ens a universal one (or maybe not even that) and add a special weapon that comes with the ship just like the wide angle quantum torpedo that comes with the Regent that would be something like "Galaxy Heavy Beam Array", which would have good damage output and maybe be omni-directional in order to help the ship's DPS even if only by a small amount. That shouldn't be too hard and time consuming to make.
Saying the enormous shuttle bays of the Galaxy variants cannot possibly house fighters because we never saw it onscreen, is like saying Data's quarters cannot possibly house a dog, because we never saw that onscreen, but only a cat.
As seen many times in Trek, the shield field can be penetrated either by knowing the frequency (or some other such fun treknodrivel) or by opening small holes as needed. We are supposed to assume some such thing happens when our fighters launch, and it's perfectly logical. This isn't a sim. It's not a game about the details.
If your problem is that because TNG had no fighter episodes, you somehow feel the mere existence of fighter-tactics in STO (even if you don't use them) ruins the atmosphere of your experience, you're a strange bird. If the idea of the Galaxy-X getting a little more dps bothers you, well, fighters are easy to pop in PvP.
If you're problem is that the Galaxy-Retrofit doesn't get a hangar, I agree. But it's simply a gameplay decision, and not indicative of some in-universe inherent lack of space in the Galaxy-R's enormous landing bay.
BTW I hate Riker in this episode. The ship might be at the forefront of a major war staring down the Cardassian fleet alone until Starfleet arrives and Riker's there not following orders and worried about people's feelings on the changes. I do put part of the blame on Jellico for not instilling this need more with Riker but sometimes in the military you just need to shut up and do your job. (but that's for another thread debate)
"Starfleet is not a military organization." -- Jean-Luc Picard
...as much as early 21st century regimented mores might compel you to want it to be. In Roddeneberry's Star Trek, his fictional culture of the future is based purely on individual value. It's beyond extreme libertarianism. Even Picard's comment about there being no money only referred to an official, centralized currency printed by the Federation government. Rather, the Federation doesn't tax, and local currencies proliferate naturally. It's an extremely weak form of Federalism, weaker even than the Articles of Confederation in the first U.S. The 24th century solution for monopoly is freedom -- ever-more competition and ever-more advanced technologies. It follows that their morals reflect this extreme lack of centralized economic and political control that is wholly foreign to us.
Typical late 24th century Federation society simply does not find Jellico's treatment of the crew ethical. It's like complaining that it is stupid for a samurai to commit suicide for a reason that is unimportant to you. There is a fundamental cultural difference that has nothing to do with any reason you might, from your perspective, imagine to be universally logically or ethically vaild. This is why Picard made the above statement. Starfleet is similar to our conception of a military because it is a defensive force, but it is not quite synonymous. Federation values, particularly Earth values of Roddenberry's 24th century, do not find absolutely following orders in any situation, even very dangerous ones, to be praiseworthy. Starfleet is a purely consent-based organization, with no coercion, unlike what we call a 'military'. Other cultures do value total loyalty and do coerce, like the Klingons et al.
It depends where you look. Voyager, like f2pdrakon posted, was a show that didn't give a damn about anything for convenience and as such it is, unfortunately canon.
Hwever, throughout TNG not overwatched by Brannon Braga it wasn't possible. Shield frequency was on a "rotation". Miles O'Brian figured out a way to beam through those "windows" the frequency changed, though. More advanced technology could penetrate shields, however.
Regarding the shuttles, wether they can penetrate shields or not is pure speculation. We only saw on screen that they couldn't, later on the topic never was mentioned again. So we can specualte that they can, but we don't know.
EDIT: Guys, please get over the classrooms, will you? There were a couple of rooms on such a large starship reserved for what, a dozen children. All that "The Galaxy was populated by thousand civilians" is nonsense. The Saratoga had families on board as well, btw. But that's no reason to stop beating the Galaxy, is it?
I seem to remember a reference at some point to being able to open a "window" in the shield to allow a shuttle to pass through.
Anyways, I think the rotating shield frequency wasn't standard practice. Remember how the Duras sisters took out the Ent-D? :P Thus it's not "Voyager's fault".
Also... at one point in TNG, Geordi and Data rigged the D to be able to use a subspace transporter. Where'd that technology go? :P
Things can be changed very quickly and even in deep space.
Remember the episode where Picard gets captured by the Carrdasians and Jellico takes command of the Enterprise? Jellico had Geordi rearranging power systems which improved propulsion, shields and weapons but essentially shut down many scientific research laboratories. Geordi was complaining about needing more time but Data states that it can be done.
No major refit nor time at a starbase just on the fly hard work.
BTW I hate Riker in this episode. The ship might be at the forefront of a major war staring down the Cardassian fleet alone until Starfleet arrives and Riker's there not following orders and worried about people's feelings on the changes. I do put part of the blame on Jellico for not instilling this need more with Riker but sometimes in the military you just need to shut up and do your job. (but that's for another thread debate)
Yes, and that episode also justifies why the Galaxy class should have some universal consoles or stations. They converted some of the side stations to tactical stations
Well, I don't really know what to think on that one - on one hand we have the science Odyssey and the command Bortasqu' that have that ability, however they're the bundled flagships. It wouldn't be a first but it might set a precedent that would make people complain about other ships getting the treatment although not necessarily.
It would sure be a beneficial boost to firepower that is really lacking on the R. And it certainly sounds much better to me that adding a hangar bay, since we had the Galaxy do tricks with the deflector before.
Honestly, I get that Cryptic is in a tough position in order to fix the ship and don't make fans of other ships complain about special treatment. What I think they should have and easily could have done is on the top of the new saucer sep. and 2-piece set they either made the engi.ens a universal one (or maybe not even that) and add a special weapon that comes with the ship just like the wide angle quantum torpedo that comes with the Regent that would be something like "Galaxy Heavy Beam Array", which would have good damage output and maybe be omni-directional in order to help the ship's DPS even if only by a small amount. That shouldn't be too hard and time consuming to make.
Just because it has a different look doesn't mean its not military in nature.
Even JJ Abrams puts forth that it is not all about being a military, during the first movie Captain Pike goes into the speech with Kirk after the bar fight.
...as much as early 21st century regimented mores might compel you to want it to be. In Roddeneberry's Star Trek, his fictional culture of the future is based purely on individual value. It's beyond extreme libertarianism. Even Picard's comment about there being no money only referred to an official, centralized currency printed by the Federation government. Rather, the Federation doesn't tax, and local currencies proliferate naturally. It's an extremely weak form of Federalism, weaker even than the Articles of Confederation in the first U.S. The 24th century solution for monopoly is freedom -- ever-more competition and ever-more advanced technologies. It follows that their morals reflect this extreme lack of centralized economic and political control that is wholly foreign to us.
Typical late 24th century Federation society simply does not find Jellico's treatment of the crew ethical. It's like complaining that it is stupid for a samurai to commit suicide for a reason that is unimportant to you. There is a fundamental cultural difference that has nothing to do with any reason you might, from your perspective, imagine to be universally logically or ethically vaild. This is why Picard made the above statement. Starfleet is similar to our conception of a military because it is a defensive force, but it is not quite synonymous. Federation values, particularly Earth values of Roddenberry's 24th century, do not find absolutely following orders in any situation, even very dangerous ones, to be praiseworthy. Starfleet is a purely consent-based organization, with no coercion, unlike what we call a 'military'. Other cultures do value total loyalty and do coerce, like the Klingons et al.
yeah, sorry, Starfleet is a military, and only a blind idiot would see/say otherwise. Military ranks, procedures, defense, border defense, ships with enough power to be equal to other factions warships, I can keep going on. Starfleet is a military that just so happens to have a job other than just defense.
the fleet X actually got 4 tac consoles, im shocked. only ship with just a LT tac and 4 tac consoles too. they are this stubborn to make it a real tac cruiser with a LTC tac
the fleet X actually got 4 tac consoles, im shocked. only ship with just a LT tac and 4 tac consoles too. they are this stubborn to make it a real tac cruiser with a LTC tac
Got as in past tense? How do you know what the fleet X has?
yeah, sorry, Starfleet is a military, and only a blind idiot would see/say otherwise. Military ranks, procedures, defense, border defense, ships with enough power to be equal to other factions warships, I can keep going on. Starfleet is a military that just so happens to have a job other than just defense.
We can have a civilized discussion without assigning derogatory designations.
Starfleet is not toothless, everyone recognizes that. However, while technically speaking Starfleet is indeed a military, its job is peacekeeping and space exploration, as well as defense. So in a very loose term it is a military, but with the qualities of a funded civilian peacekeeping organization.
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!
Well in that case I'm not buying any of the ships. LTC tac boff and 4 tac consoles was a requirement.
indeed. also i noticed an undocumented feature, in the tool tip, of saucer separation was an additional 30 inerta, giving it 55 and thus just higher then the avenger. so, using DHCs on it will be even harder then it is on the avenger, thanks tribble good to know.
battle cruisers need a healthy amount of slide to sort of power slide around targets wile keeping their nose pointed at the center of what they are orbiting as they move sideways. without this slideing, useing DHCs in pvp requires around a 55+ turn rate, 70 or so ideal.
regardless, i would have bought the galaxy X finally if they had done something to help the galaxy R, to show my gratitude and support that decision with cash. this reboot excluding the R, ive never been so angry about some trivial video game trifle before. its the principle of the thing, the stepping over it like its $hit on the ground, to buff that eye sore.
Just because it has a different look doesn't mean its not military in nature. Picard would say such a thing because Starfleet is MORE than just the military. But does he not have to follow the ethical orders of his superiors? Does he not expect his subordinates to follow his orders or face court martial? Do they not wage war when attacked? Protect Federation borders? Are not ranks that of which is based off of the current Navy? Ship names?
The list goes on. Yes Roddenberry wanted it to stand for more and it does. But its the basis for the shows.
A Rose that isn't a flower... If you appreciated what I wrote accurately, you'd note that I said Starfleet fulfills some modern military functions. Not all words eternally designate absolute ideas. The word 'military' does not exclusively describe what Starfleet is, and I explained how Federation cultural values are much different from our own, and listed some of the many things that Starfleet personnel do that would not be found in any military organization today.
In early modern Japan, it was common practice for samurai to comply with orders to commit suicide. Would you follow that order? The word 'samurai' meant 'to serve', contextually referring to the nobility. Analogously, in the context of Japanese culture, Picard could have said, "Starfleet is not a feudal service organization". You are simply preserving your own definition of 'military' as any organization that uses force in the way you find acceptable. I am simply showing you how Roddenberry the futurist developed a new idea in the show to be contrasted with a modern military, a future where even that word is left behind as a descriptor of something Starfleet isn't in his fictional Federation culture of the mid-to-late-24th century, much as we don't use the word 'samurai' to describe our 'military'. And as evidence, I pointed to Picard's explicit statement, and Riker totally disassociating himself from Jellico's command of the Enterprise, for which he suffered no legal consequences.
yeah, sorry, Starfleet is a military, and only a blind idiot would see/say otherwise. Military ranks, procedures, defense, border defense, ships with enough power to be equal to other factions warships, I can keep going on. Starfleet is a military that just so happens to have a job other than just defense.
You shouldn't assume that all words connect to reality by designating eternal forms, such that if I show you how your definition is inadequate to describe a fictional organization as above, you judge it appropriate to call me a blind idiot, which, given your predilection for thinking your own vocabulary perfectly and exclusively represents eternal reality, makes the insult doubly insulting.
Stop derailing this thread, please. This is a place for nerd-ragers to be anonymously unappreciative and complain about the Galaxy-class, not to describe to us how you'd write a dictionary.
is SO off center. i mean that extra TRIBBLE is ugly and ruins the ship and all, but they actually managed to make it another step worse thanks to that.
Comments
It depends where you look. Voyager, like f2pdrakon posted, was a show that didn't give a damn about anything for convenience and as such it is, unfortunately canon.
Hwever, throughout TNG not overwatched by Brannon Braga it wasn't possible. Shield frequency was on a "rotation". Miles O'Brian figured out a way to beam through those "windows" the frequency changed, though. More advanced technology could penetrate shields, however.
Regarding the shuttles, wether they can penetrate shields or not is pure speculation. We only saw on screen that they couldn't, later on the topic never was mentioned again. So we can specualte that they can, but we don't know.
EDIT: Guys, please get over the classrooms, will you? There were a couple of rooms on such a large starship reserved for what, a dozen children. All that "The Galaxy was populated by thousand civilians" is nonsense. The Saratoga had families on board as well, btw. But that's no reason to stop beating the Galaxy, is it?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
the IP holders and creators of star trek, created and/or approved those blueprints, and that internal configuration. a galaxy class capable of rapid launch and recovery of small craft of any kind is evidently part of gene Roddenberry approved vision and his approved ship designs. the only reason we didn't see it is because new sets are expensive, and so are shots of multiple craft (at least before CGI). so by your own logic, the Galaxy class is a Carrier, because gene and paramount said so when the blueprints with the 3 deck hangar bay were approved by them, and are part of the "Imaginary rules" of this universe. by your own logic, you are being illogical. again.
and even if she got a hangar tomorrow, nobody is forcing you to use it. you can be just like picard and keep your shuttle-roster full of nice and cannon type 8s and never launch them, just like picard did.
as for your logic of if we didn't see it in the shows it doesn't exist no matter how obvious, and your love of reductio ad absurdum, try this on for size.
we never saw them use toilets on the show, so starships do not have toilets, according to gene roddenberrys vision as seen on the shows. maybe they just beam the TRIBBLE out of you? nope, that didn't happen on the show either, so in gene Roddenberry's star trek, nobody poops, and there are no toilets.
Ah yes, the good ol' "sets are expensive" shtick all carrier fanboys use when they run out of arguments.
Do those blueprints happen to portray how fighters are launched and utilized? How they'll preform? Nope, I didn't think so, cause they're blueprints. The ship doesn't even carry fighter craft, but shuttles.
The IP holders were pretty clear that only things seen on screen with the ST logo can be considered canon and that in case that interferes with some source material, on screen trumps everything else regarding canon. So try again.
Awww how cute.....another already seen before and already lost argument from the carrier brigade.
How about you take your carrier fantasies away or onto another ship and leave this TNG icon as it's suposed to be?
Oh and look, finally a strawman appeared!
I'll just tell you that I recall seing toilets/bathrooms in ENT and if angrytarg cares to oblige, he can post you the link of a Starfleet ship toilet seat he once posted.
But the sheer fact that you started to compare seing people taking a **** on screen with seing carrier and fighter craft launching sequences only shows how badly out of arguments you are on the topic. Nice strawman though, a little weak and old by now, but whatever.
What modern galaxies?
Also, don't forget even the Odyssey has worker bees. So it's not like they've been phased out of use.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I have ZERO problems with them putting a hangar bay on the Galaxy R if they're doing it to the Gaaxy X. I mean, it's almost the same ship. So have at it. I just like talking Trek. And didn't want to pass up a chance of putting the idea of Keiko taking all the kids on a field trip to look at space jellyfish right before Lore pops up to try and destroy everyone again. Or worker bees. Cause, worker bees!
according to the giant launch bay on the blueprints, my "carrier fantasy's" are how the ship is supposed to be. it can easily launch 4-6 shuttles at once and carries dozens of the craft.
to ignore these design elements because they were never emphasized in the show is to ignore the craft itself. and these designs elements are self evident, even if all you have is a model of the ship to look at. (then again, i am an engineer IRL so maybe its just obvious to me).
the only difference between fighters and shuttles is armament, so lets abandon the semantics please.
and now that we have exchanged strawmen, (one that i rather politely set up for you) are you willing to discuss with facts the potential capabilities of the galaxy class design based on sound engineering principles and apparent design elements? or should we turn this discussion to our (and possibly gene's) personal feelings about the ship and its portrayal instead. it can be one way or the other, not both. but i leave the choice to you, and look forward to future discussion. (but please, no more hyperbole)
i understand your perspective, you use the show as a limiter of what the ships potential is and on the show it clearly is not seen as a carrier, i agree. and clearly non deviation from the show is important to you, and used to be for me as well. however, please consider my own perspective; I use the show not as a limiter, but as a guideline of what the ship can do. i believe your perspective is just as valid as my own.
for the record, i do not fly and do not intend to fly any carrier on any character. nor am i a carrier fan, so stop calling me one. if you want to call me names i admit to being a transwarp loving speed freak in an Excelsior as my primary character.
Like I said, my basic guideline is what the IP holder declared to be canon and what I've seen in the show. They were pretty clear that on-screen footage trumps everything else such as technical manuals, blueprints and other source materials if there ever is a contradiction between the two.
I never said that the ship lacks potential to do certain things, the Galaxy is an extremely modular design and a huge ship that was built with the intent to be adjusted in multiple ways.
The thing is, we never really saw much of any other configurations that the Enterprise-D, which was at the time the flagship, so that is basically our guideline for the ship in game. Because if we start digging deep into all that the Galaxy class can be configured to do, we'll need to have God knows how many different Galaxy layouts in STO.
And the reason I mentioned the shuttles compared to fighters was not semantics, but to point out the difference in roles and that the craft carried on board a Galaxy were not intended as added firepower support in combat.
I can see how based on the techincal manual and blueprints you come to the assumption that the Galaxy could serve as a FDC being an engineer, but the thing that bugs me is that this is essentialy changing the role of the ship compared to what was seen in TNG. The Enterprise-D never used support craft in such manner and when I play around STO in my favourite ship I want the preformance to resemble what I've seen and come to love in the show.
The IP holders declared that what's seen on screen is primary canon and what we saw on screen was not a Galaxy class that uses fighters or any other support craft as a supplement in cobat situations. That's my stance on this issue and that's why I disregard the potential the ship has to be turned into something else.
I'm not going to argue that based on knowledge and engineering principles the ship couldn't be adjusted to preform in different ways. But once we open that can of worms, the carrier fans will want 2 hangars, the science fans will want a different set up with subsystem targeting, sensor analysis and more sci. consoles and Boff abilities, and so on..... and neither will be right or wrong, because if we go by the book and say that 70% of the Galaxy is modular, that means we can change it into pretty much anything. Why should a fan of one type of gameplay have the upper hand over another?
Honestly I used to care much more about what is being thrown in the game, but after many things and changes STO went through I don't overally concern myslef much with that or the deviation from the shows the game has any longer. However I care for the presentation of the 5 iconic ships from the ST shows and I think that their in-game variants (and there are only 3 of them) should truthfully represent the ships we came to love in those shows. I think that for those 3 we should be limited to what they were in the show without deviations, because they were all well documented and as fans came to love as such.
There are million of other canon designs that were not in the spotlight and can endure experimenting with them. There are even more non-canon designs in STO that we can experiment with. These 3 iconic ships should resemble the ones from the show in their role. I feel that at least some things need to be sacred.
I totally agree with everything you just said. Edit: perhaps sensor analysis would be a better solution for giving the galaxy the fix it needs in firepower? What do you think?
Thanks, I'm sorry if I came off a bit strong before, I tend to get a bit emotional about the Galaxy and quite frankly this 'revamp' has me worried that they may just slap a hangar on the R as an easy solution to all the complaints.
That would suck really badly for me, one can say "don't use the hangar if you don't want to" but to me it changes the whole perspective on the ship I'm using, not to mention the loss of certain cruiser comm arrays.
Well, I don't really know what to think on that one - on one hand we have the science Odyssey and the command Bortasqu' that have that ability, however they're the bundled flagships. It wouldn't be a first but it might set a precedent that would make people complain about other ships getting the treatment although not necessarily.
It would sure be a beneficial boost to firepower that is really lacking on the R. And it certainly sounds much better to me that adding a hangar bay, since we had the Galaxy do tricks with the deflector before.
Honestly, I get that Cryptic is in a tough position in order to fix the ship and don't make fans of other ships complain about special treatment. What I think they should have and easily could have done is on the top of the new saucer sep. and 2-piece set they either made the engi.ens a universal one (or maybe not even that) and add a special weapon that comes with the ship just like the wide angle quantum torpedo that comes with the Regent that would be something like "Galaxy Heavy Beam Array", which would have good damage output and maybe be omni-directional in order to help the ship's DPS even if only by a small amount. That shouldn't be too hard and time consuming to make.
As seen many times in Trek, the shield field can be penetrated either by knowing the frequency (or some other such fun treknodrivel) or by opening small holes as needed. We are supposed to assume some such thing happens when our fighters launch, and it's perfectly logical. This isn't a sim. It's not a game about the details.
If your problem is that because TNG had no fighter episodes, you somehow feel the mere existence of fighter-tactics in STO (even if you don't use them) ruins the atmosphere of your experience, you're a strange bird. If the idea of the Galaxy-X getting a little more dps bothers you, well, fighters are easy to pop in PvP.
If you're problem is that the Galaxy-Retrofit doesn't get a hangar, I agree. But it's simply a gameplay decision, and not indicative of some in-universe inherent lack of space in the Galaxy-R's enormous landing bay.
"Starfleet is not a military organization." -- Jean-Luc Picard
...as much as early 21st century regimented mores might compel you to want it to be. In Roddeneberry's Star Trek, his fictional culture of the future is based purely on individual value. It's beyond extreme libertarianism. Even Picard's comment about there being no money only referred to an official, centralized currency printed by the Federation government. Rather, the Federation doesn't tax, and local currencies proliferate naturally. It's an extremely weak form of Federalism, weaker even than the Articles of Confederation in the first U.S. The 24th century solution for monopoly is freedom -- ever-more competition and ever-more advanced technologies. It follows that their morals reflect this extreme lack of centralized economic and political control that is wholly foreign to us.
Typical late 24th century Federation society simply does not find Jellico's treatment of the crew ethical. It's like complaining that it is stupid for a samurai to commit suicide for a reason that is unimportant to you. There is a fundamental cultural difference that has nothing to do with any reason you might, from your perspective, imagine to be universally logically or ethically vaild. This is why Picard made the above statement. Starfleet is similar to our conception of a military because it is a defensive force, but it is not quite synonymous. Federation values, particularly Earth values of Roddenberry's 24th century, do not find absolutely following orders in any situation, even very dangerous ones, to be praiseworthy. Starfleet is a purely consent-based organization, with no coercion, unlike what we call a 'military'. Other cultures do value total loyalty and do coerce, like the Klingons et al.
Anyways, I think the rotating shield frequency wasn't standard practice. Remember how the Duras sisters took out the Ent-D? :P Thus it's not "Voyager's fault".
Also... at one point in TNG, Geordi and Data rigged the D to be able to use a subspace transporter. Where'd that technology go? :P
My character Tsin'xing
Yes, and that episode also justifies why the Galaxy class should have some universal consoles or stations. They converted some of the side stations to tactical stations
I like it. I really do. Make it special.
Even JJ Abrams puts forth that it is not all about being a military, during the first movie Captain Pike goes into the speech with Kirk after the bar fight.
yeah, sorry, Starfleet is a military, and only a blind idiot would see/say otherwise. Military ranks, procedures, defense, border defense, ships with enough power to be equal to other factions warships, I can keep going on. Starfleet is a military that just so happens to have a job other than just defense.
It's Abrams. But that's just my point, even Abrams grasped that concept, in his own Abrams way.
Got as in past tense? How do you know what the fleet X has?
We can have a civilized discussion without assigning derogatory designations.
Starfleet is not toothless, everyone recognizes that. However, while technically speaking Starfleet is indeed a military, its job is peacekeeping and space exploration, as well as defense. So in a very loose term it is a military, but with the qualities of a funded civilian peacekeeping organization.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
its on tribble. galaxy R untouched, save for the smooth gen 2 sep tech
Well in that case I'm not buying any of the ships. LTC tac boff and 4 tac consoles was a requirement.
indeed. also i noticed an undocumented feature, in the tool tip, of saucer separation was an additional 30 inerta, giving it 55 and thus just higher then the avenger. so, using DHCs on it will be even harder then it is on the avenger, thanks tribble good to know.
battle cruisers need a healthy amount of slide to sort of power slide around targets wile keeping their nose pointed at the center of what they are orbiting as they move sideways. without this slideing, useing DHCs in pvp requires around a 55+ turn rate, 70 or so ideal.
regardless, i would have bought the galaxy X finally if they had done something to help the galaxy R, to show my gratitude and support that decision with cash. this reboot excluding the R, ive never been so angry about some trivial video game trifle before. its the principle of the thing, the stepping over it like its $hit on the ground, to buff that eye sore.
A Rose that isn't a flower... If you appreciated what I wrote accurately, you'd note that I said Starfleet fulfills some modern military functions. Not all words eternally designate absolute ideas. The word 'military' does not exclusively describe what Starfleet is, and I explained how Federation cultural values are much different from our own, and listed some of the many things that Starfleet personnel do that would not be found in any military organization today.
In early modern Japan, it was common practice for samurai to comply with orders to commit suicide. Would you follow that order? The word 'samurai' meant 'to serve', contextually referring to the nobility. Analogously, in the context of Japanese culture, Picard could have said, "Starfleet is not a feudal service organization". You are simply preserving your own definition of 'military' as any organization that uses force in the way you find acceptable. I am simply showing you how Roddenberry the futurist developed a new idea in the show to be contrasted with a modern military, a future where even that word is left behind as a descriptor of something Starfleet isn't in his fictional Federation culture of the mid-to-late-24th century, much as we don't use the word 'samurai' to describe our 'military'. And as evidence, I pointed to Picard's explicit statement, and Riker totally disassociating himself from Jellico's command of the Enterprise, for which he suffered no legal consequences.
You shouldn't assume that all words connect to reality by designating eternal forms, such that if I show you how your definition is inadequate to describe a fictional organization as above, you judge it appropriate to call me a blind idiot, which, given your predilection for thinking your own vocabulary perfectly and exclusively represents eternal reality, makes the insult doubly insulting.
Stop derailing this thread, please. This is a place for nerd-ragers to be anonymously unappreciative and complain about the Galaxy-class, not to describe to us how you'd write a dictionary.
I'll be in my X. She rocks.
Wish the R got love. She didn't. X got enough love for me. Over it.
Tested it on Tribble. Worth the wait.
I'll be leaving this thread again. The pessimism here hurts my spirit.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
i have a sandwich, how can you be hungry?
im happy the gal X people are happy though, sincerely
though i dont know how you can stand looking at it when this
http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/595903887472712243/ED01DBCABAE80824D25135242620C58DE3B6C3F5/
and this
http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/595903887472713572/C970E0E7F99DD6B8A82CE48B3DD2B9A4AA3DE859/
is SO off center. i mean that extra TRIBBLE is ugly and ruins the ship and all, but they actually managed to make it another step worse thanks to that.