I hold the Cheyenne-class (my second favorite of the Heavy Cruisers, with the anticipated Constellation-class being my preference) under the same light as the Nebula-class: scaled-down, optimized, specialized versions of the Galaxy-class.
In my opinion, the Galaxy class wasn't just a class of ships but the beginning of a new generation of design parts. Kinda how the Refit Constitution, Miranda, Soyuz, and Constellation-class are part of a generation of design parts.
Under that opinion, I fly the Cheyenne Heavy Cruiser like a scaled-down Galaxy. For the Nebula, I fly it like a Galaxy with a declared "science" mission/purpose.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
I hold the Cheyenne-class (my second favorite of the Heavy Cruisers, with the anticipated Constellation-class being my preference) under the same light as the Nebula-class: scaled-down, optimized, specialized versions of the Galaxy-class.
In my opinion, the Galaxy class wasn't just a class of ships but the beginning of a new generation of design parts. Kinda how the Refit Constitution, Miranda, Soyuz, and Constellation-class are part of a generation of design parts.
That was my impression too.
But then some*fill in some insult here* had the bright idea to create the Sovereign and flush the whole new Starfleet look down the toilet and kill the big D in the most disgraceful way possible.
That was a real kick in the nuts IMO.
"...'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
That was my impression too.
But then some*fill in some insult here* had the bright idea to create the Sovereign and flush the whole new Starfleet look down the toilet and kill the big D in the most disgraceful way possible.
That was a real kick in the nuts IMO.
I think what happen was a fundamental change in design agreement across the board for the Federation. Instead of conforming to one generation of designs like the Refit Constitution and Galaxy styles (which probably took a lot of documentation, paperwork, and time), they reacted to the Borg threat by lifting the restriction. This let more designs be considered in order to find a quicker counter to the Borg. (To point, I believe that the Excelsior generational design provided faulty due to the ship being originally built for the Transwarp drive. It was an excellent cruiser in Lore but variants of the design like the Centaur only came out in times of desperate need like the Dominion war. The Ambassador class was a testing/prototype/transition stage to the Galaxy generational design).
This is also when Federation design went from explorers that can defend themselves to warships that have peacetime duties. New ships weren't designed to carry the mission of the Federation, the new ships were given the purpose of making sure the Federation survives an all-out war.
So, in my reasoning, the designs for the Saber/Defiant/Norway/Steamrunner/Akira/Sovereign were all proposed at the same time to satisfy this drastic new need in a short period of time (Worf 359 was in 2367 and Battle of Sector 001 is in 2373, so six years). Due to the size of the ships and difficulty of non-conforming parts and plans, the small and medium sized ships were completed in recognizable quantities in time for the Dominion war but the Sovereign was not (I think there were 4 Sovereigns total?).
But yeah, back on topic: I enjoy the Heavy Cruiser because it's a rather straight-forward, nothing flashy, effective version of a more elaborate and luxurious ship.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
I think what happen was a fundamental change in design agreement across the board for the Federation. Instead of conforming to one generation of designs like the Refit Constitution and Galaxy styles (which probably took a lot of documentation, paperwork, and time), they reacted to the Borg threat by lifting the restriction. This let more designs be considered in order to find a quicker counter to the Borg. (To point, I believe that the Excelsior generational design provided faulty due to the ship being originally built for the Transwarp drive. It was an excellent cruiser in Lore but variants of the design like the Centaur only came out in times of desperate need like the Dominion war. The Ambassador class was a testing/prototype/transition stage to the Galaxy generational design).
This is also when Federation design went from explorers that can defend themselves to warships that have peacetime duties. New ships weren't designed to carry the mission of the Federation, the new ships were given the purpose of making sure the Federation survives an all-out war.
So, in my reasoning, the designs for the Saber/Defiant/Norway/Steamrunner/Akira/Sovereign were all proposed at the same time to satisfy this drastic new need in a short period of time (Worf 359 was in 2367 and Battle of Sector 001 is in 2373, so six years). Due to the size of the ships and difficulty of non-conforming parts and plans, the small and medium sized ships were completed in recognizable quantities in time for the Dominion war but the Sovereign was not (I think there were 4 Sovereigns total?).
But yeah, back on topic: I enjoy the Heavy Cruiser because it's a rather straight-forward, nothing flashy, effective version of a more elaborate and luxurious ship.
I think there's an missunderstanding here.
In universe, Ships aren't designed, tested and build in months.
It took literally decades from the first design tests to the finished ship. I highly doubt that they simply designed some warships because they needed more.
In my understanding, the Sovereign, Akira, Saber, Steamrunner and Prometheus where planned for a long time. Sure some of them maybe lying on the shelf for a longer time or where older design studies which where picked up again, but still i think it doesn't make sense that the Sovereign (or the other ships) where replacing the other designs, like STOs devs may think.
The Galaxy design was by far too young to be replaced. Just look at the Excelsior Class design which was continued by the Sovereign (and then by the Odyssey in STO). So i think both design lines exist side by side and will be continued into the future.
As you may know all Starfleet ships where more or less adaptable so they could be refited for war/exploration/whatever. Also Starfleet ships (especially the big ones) got constantly updated and surely got the latest equipment availlable. It wouldn't make much sense to have the biggest ships ever build by starfleet being outdated by ships ten years older.
I don't think that the "newer" ships where soley build for war, but they where easier to construct and less complex to maintain. In a time of war this would be some advantage, but in peace time more versatile ships would be needed.
So i don't think that the Galaxy or Nebula or Cheyenne where less combat capable, the other ships where simply more easy to handle in war time. But it doesn't say anything about their general combat strenght. In fact, i think that the GCS family was more powerful then the newer ships, but as i said they where also much more complex.
I think these two design "families" should coexist side by side, everything else doesn't make much sense to me. So i think the Galaxy design Family (which includes the Nebula AND the Cheyenne) should be just as combat capable in STO as other designs. Even more, Cryptics designers should finally create some ships that continue the Ambassador -> Galaxy design, instead of only focussing on the Excelsior -> Sovereign path.
Hopefully this makes sense to you, my english isn't the best today.
"...'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
In universe, Ships aren't designed, tested and build in months.
It took literally decades from the first design tests to the finished ship. I highly doubt that they simply designed some warships because they needed more.
In my understanding, the Sovereign, Akira, Saber, Steamrunner and Prometheus where planned for a long time. Sure some of them maybe lying on the shelf for a longer time or where older design studies which where picked up again, but still i think it doesn't make sense that the Sovereign (or the other ships) where replacing the other designs, like STOs devs may think.
The Galaxy design was by far too young to be replaced. Just look at the Excelsior Class design which was continued by the Sovereign (and then by the Odyssey in STO). So i think both design lines exist side by side and will be continued into the future.
As you may know all Starfleet ships where more or less adaptable so they could be refited for war/exploration/whatever. Also Starfleet ships (especially the big ones) got constantly updated and surely got the latest equipment availlable. It wouldn't make much sense to have the biggest ships ever build by starfleet being outdated by ships ten years older.
I don't think that the "newer" ships where soley build for war, but they where easier to construct and less complex to maintain. In a time of war this would be some advantage, but in peace time more versatile ships would be needed.
So i don't think that the Galaxy or Nebula or Cheyenne where less combat capable, the other ships where simply more easy to handle in war time. But it doesn't say anything about their general combat strenght. In fact, i think that the GCS family was more powerful then the newer ships, but as i said they where also much more complex.
I think these two design "families" should coexist side by side, everything else doesn't make much sense to me. So i think the Galaxy design Family (which includes the Nebula AND the Cheyenne) should be just as combat capable in STO as other designs. Even more, Cryptics designers should finally create some ships that continue the Ambassador -> Galaxy design, instead of only focussing on the Excelsior -> Sovereign path.
Hopefully this makes sense to you, my english isn't the best today.
No need to apologize. Quite frankly, your english is better than same native speakers I know.
As for the the ship families, I think I should clarify and elaborate my earlier post. You are probably right, the Sovereign/Akira/Saber/Steamrunner/Norway were planned for a long time. Under normal circumstances, one of those designs would be picked after much testing, revising, and trial-and-error before it became the next generational class of ship design.
However, with the urgency of the Borg situation, I believe Starfleet approved the most viable of the designs they had on their desk (I can see how, just like design processes in our world, there would be a bunch of proposals that were simply... "no"). Viable for them at that time changed ships that can fulfill a scientific mission but can defend themselves to warships that has peacetime duties. So the focus was flipped while still managing to do both.
Which was why those ships were approved. What scientific purpose would the Mufti-Separation mode on the Prometheus provide? As demonstrated, it was mostly a combat-oriented ship with the usual Federation research equipment installed.
Would one of these new ship classes replace the Galaxy family? No, I don't think that was the intent. Not for the short term at least. The Galaxy, Excelsior cruisers, and the Refit Constitution design families have been working together harmoniously for many years. As seen in the Dominion war, they make up the vast bulk of the Federation fleets.
The old design families can definitely defend themselves but the newer designs were approved simply because they met a need the Federation required at that time. Which was for combat. Sure, they can do what Jellico did in "Chain of Command" where he redistributed power on the Ent-D to enhance the phaser arrays. But that's a stop-gap measure. Starfleet probably wanted purpose-built ships that fulfill that need as soon as it left space dock.
As for STO and future ship creations, its unlikely we can get more out of the Ambassador -> Galaxy range of ship designs. Other than a "Worf 359 Graveyard" bundle. Don't get me wrong, I'll spend my Zen on it but the opportunities and incentives are minimal.
At this point the analogy of "the Sovereign to the Galaxy" is "the Excelsior to the Constitution" is pretty spot on. So that appears to be the path we are headed.
Edit: Call me idealistic but I treat all ships in STO as equally combat capable. I just need to adapt differently for every one of them.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
The old design families can definitely defend themselves but the newer designs were approved simply because they met a need the Federation required at that time. Which was for combat. Sure, they can do what Jellico did in "Chain of Command" where he redistributed power on the Ent-D to enhance the phaser arrays. But that's a stop-gap measure. Starfleet probably wanted purpose-built ships that fulfill that need as soon as it left space dock.
You're right, what jellico did was just a interim solution to make the GCS more combat capable.
But if they had enough time (maybe a month) in Spacedock, the ship would have been transformed to a much more battle ready ship.
You must know that all starfleet ships from the GCS family where highly adaptable first and foremost the Galaxy Class. That's why they are so complex maintain. But that doesn not say anything about their capabilities in combat. (we're talking about "real" trek, not STO )
As for STO and future ship creations, its unlikely we can get more out of the Ambassador -> Galaxy range of ship designs. Other than a "Worf 359 Graveyard" bundle. Don't get me wrong, I'll spend my Zen on it but the opportunities and incentives are minimal.
At this point the analogy of "the Sovereign to the Galaxy" is "the Excelsior to the Constitution" is pretty spot on. So that appears to be the path we are headed.
Edit: Call me idealistic but I treat all ships in STO as equally combat capable. I just need to adapt differently for every one of them.
Please don't get me wrong but that comparison doesn't work.
The constitution was really old for it's estimated "life" quite the contrary to the Galaxy Class, which was build to be in service for the minimum of a hundred years.
The Excelsior -> Sovereign family isn't superior in any way.
Remember the Sovereign was launched only ten years after the Galaxy. I think Starfleets plan is to have both ship designs live side by side. One being the multi mission type (which can be adapted to almost everything, but need much more maintenance work) and the other one similar, but not having such a flexible mission profile. Both types are comparable strong in combat (it woldn't make much sense if not).
So Starfleet had much better "tools" for various scenarios. If a war would be around the corner, the GCS family ships, would be recalled to Starbases for war refit. (which costs precious time under certain circumstances).
The Excelsior family would be able to fight the enemy, until the refits where completed.
THEN all starfleet captial ships are optimized for combat and ready to fight an enemy force.
In times of peace, GCS family ships can be refitted for peacetime exploration and other duties again.
So in my opinion, Excelsior - Sov. family is more like the backbone of the fleet, the GCS family more adaptable to the current situation. BOTH are important without question, but none is superior over the other.
Sorry for the wall of text, but i love to philosophize about those things.
"...'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
That was my impression too.
But then some*fill in some insult here* had the bright idea to create the Sovereign and flush the whole new Starfleet look down the toilet and kill the big D in the most disgraceful way possible.
That was a real kick in the nuts IMO.
I seriously doubt that the Sovereign was intended to completely supplant the Galaxy.
The Galaxy is just too good of a design to kick to the curve. It would make sense that it would continue line service for the foreseeable future (in the Star Trek universe).
To me, being a dependable workhorse means more than being the "cutting edge". The Sovereign might be the new hotness as of the early 2370s, but it's the Galaxy and other older classes that will carry the real load for Starfleet.
You're right, what jellico did was just a interim solution to make the GCS more combat capable.
But if they had enough time (maybe a month) in Spacedock, the ship would have been transformed to a much more battle ready ship.
You must know that all starfleet ships from the GCS family where highly adaptable first and foremost the Galaxy Class. That's why they are so complex maintain. But that doesn not say anything about their capabilities in combat. (we're talking about "real" trek, not STO )
Please don't get me wrong but that comparison doesn't work.
The constitution was really old for it's estimated "life" quite the contrary to the Galaxy Class, which was build to be in service for the minimum of a hundred years.
The Excelsior -> Sovereign family isn't superior in any way.
Remember the Sovereign was launched only ten years after the Galaxy. I think Starfleets plan is to have both ship designs live side by side. One being the multi mission type (which can be adapted to almost everything, but need much more maintenance work) and the other one similar, but not having such a flexible mission profile. Both types are comparable strong in combat (it woldn't make much sense if not).
So Starfleet had much better "tools" for various scenarios. If a war would be around the corner, the GCS family ships, would be recalled to Starbases for war refit. (which costs precious time under certain circumstances).
The Excelsior family would be able to fight the enemy, until the refits where completed.
THEN all starfleet captial ships are optimized for combat and ready to fight an enemy force.
In times of peace, GCS family ships can be refitted for peacetime exploration and other duties again.
So in my opinion, Excelsior - Sov. family is more like the backbone of the fleet, the GCS family more adaptable to the current situation. BOTH are important without question, but none is superior over the other.
Sorry for the wall of text, but i love to philosophize about those things.
Oh, I agree. Given enough time, you can definitely drydock the Galaxy and make it more combat-oriented (in my estimate, it would be more like 2-3 months for each ship but that's personal speculation). However, at that point it comes to a basic form of logistics and strategy. Is it worth the risk of taking all of your big capital ships off the front lines and putting them in dry dock? Is it even doable with where all the ships are? How many drydocks are available and suitable enough to refit a Galaxy? Can your merry band of Mirandas, Excelsiors, Ambassadors, and Nebulas hold the line until the Galaxies come back? Given how each of those classes pretty much got one-shotted at Worf 359 and then swatted around during the Dominion War (I still cringe at the image of the Excelsior-class USS Valley Forge as it gets swiss cheesed by an orbital defense platform), I can imagine the loses in territory would be significant before those modifications are complete.
Then what if the modifications still aren't good enough? I suspect that Starfleet covered all of their bases by maintaining the Galaxy generational family with the older Excelsior cruisers and Refit Constitution design families (Miranda, Constellation, etc) as the backbone while having the newer specialized for combat starships (Sovereign, Saber, Defiant, Prometheus, etc) bolster the ranks.
The "Sovereign to Galaxy" as the "Excelsior to Refit Constitution" comparison was used, namely because its a new line of design following a design that has spawn many classes and variants. The Refit Constitution (which had the Refit C, Miranda, and Constellation) is being succeeded by the Excelsior style. The Galaxy (which had the Galaxy, Cheyenne, Nebula, Freedom, etc) is being succeeded by the Sovereign style. Its not about age. Clearly they got a lot of mileage out of the Refit Constitution design but they also did with the Galaxy design.
I also agree that the Sovereign and the Galaxy class were intended to serve side-by-side. However, the priorities of the Federation (through the various seasons of TNG, DS9, and the movies before JJ Trek) became more defense oriented than scientific research. The Federation still wants and values it original missions but thanks to Star Trek script writers, the Federation had to focus more on countering military threats.
Yes, the GCS can do all of the things the Federation needs and does it well. But the Sovereign, I believe, does combat better. Which is what the Federation wanted more of. I don't want to use analogies but I would describe the GCS as a Leatherman Multitool (with knives, files, pryers, etc) and the Sovereign as a hunting knife or bayonet. Sure, you can stab an opponent with both but the hunting knife/bayonet is better suited for combat. Besides, why design a combat ship to be only "as good as" a ship that was made for exploration could do in combat?
Arguably, yes, you can adapt the Galaxy all the way up to be a complete combat warship. But how long would that take? What are you sacrificing? How are you going to fill in those mission roles that the Galaxy isn't doing by being a combat warship? When the war is over, how long would it take to convert back to an Explorer? What happens if another war or crisis erupts right after you converted back to an Explorer again? Wouldn't it be just nice to have a section of your fleet always ready to fight at maximum combat strength right way? All of these questions are probably considered by Starfleet and quite frankly, with the amount of situations that require immediate military action in the Alpha Quadrant, Starfleet can't wait for the turnaround time of the Galaxy to a warship.
Either way, chronologically the Sovereign is the next step in Starfleet design. As much as we philosophize about it here, Starfleet has chosen the Sovereign design direction.
....But back to our Heavy Cruisers! Man, I love my four-nacelle ships.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
I like these ships, the Cheyenne in particular. A shame they never brought her back from the Wolf 359 graveyard. Would have loved to see one during the Dominion war.
The heavy cruisers themselves I have to admit im a bit undecided on whether or not they are good or not.
The standard retrofit is rather weak compared to the rest. Other than for looks, I wouldn't really fly it.
The fleet version seems alright, but I wish the BOFF layout would have some universal seating. All fleet ships should have it to some degree IMO.
The mirror one is surprisingly decent. The LT. Com sci BOFF makes it fun for both engis and scis alike. Definitely a good mirror ship. Heck, I might even prefer it over its regular counterparts fleet variant :eek:
Apart from the seating, my only hope is that the Constellation is gonna join the Cheyenne as an alternate canon model. I will say that the non-canon models are really good though.
I also agree that the Sovereign and the Galaxy class were intended to serve side-by-side. However, the priorities of the Federation (through the various seasons of TNG, DS9, and the movies before JJ Trek) became more defense oriented than scientific research. The Federation still wants and values it original missions but thanks to Star Trek script writers, the Federation had to focus more on countering military threats.
I blame John Q Taxpayer because movies can't sell without conflict. !.5 to 2 hours of a movie "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before" would be dull. So bring on the pew pew!
I like these ships, the Cheyenne in particular. A shame they never brought her back from the Wolf 359 graveyard. Would have loved to see one during the Dominion war.
The heavy cruisers themselves I have to admit im a bit undecided on whether or not they are good or not.
The standard retrofit is rather weak compared to the rest. Other than for looks, I wouldn't really fly it.
The fleet version seems alright, but I wish the BOFF layout would have some universal seating. All fleet ships should have it to some degree IMO.
The mirror one is surprisingly decent. The LT. Com sci BOFF makes it fun for both engis and scis alike. Definitely a good mirror ship. Heck, I might even prefer it over its regular counterparts fleet variant :eek:
Apart from the seating, my only hope is that the Constellation is gonna join the Cheyenne as an alternate canon model. I will say that the non-canon models are really good though.
I agree. It's a shame they didn't bring the Cheyenne back from the Worf 359 scene. However, I suspect the lack of a detailed model prop was the result of this. If there was a better detailed studio model, then it probably would have filled in for all those scenes that an Excelsior-class was in.
From the leak earlier this year, it definitely looks like the Constellation would at least be an alternate skin for the Cheyenne (Heavy Cruiser). If you're lucky, you can spot some people still flying their Heavy Cruisers around with the Constellation saucer. I have it on one of my Captains as a keepsake.
Member since November 2009... I think. (UFP) Ragnar
I am one of the lucky few to have the Constellation saucer section from the little Oopsie-daisy that Cryptic passed to us when the Mirror Heavy was released.
It's one of my two favourite ships at the moment (the other being the Mirror Nova). It's no doubt a cruiser, but the Lieutenant Commander science station gives me access to Gravity Well, while the twin Tactical officers still let me have a trio of explodey abilities. I call that great balance. I don't think I've EVER blown up in that ship, while even my C-Store purchases can't make that claim (except for the Atrox, unbelievably).
I'm loving the mirror heavy cruiser. It's a nice changeup over the usual escorts I fly, and it has a near-perfect blend of tactical, sci, and engineering capabilities. I still haven't found a way to make it quite as visually appealing as I'd like, but it's fun nonetheless.
Comments
In my opinion, the Galaxy class wasn't just a class of ships but the beginning of a new generation of design parts. Kinda how the Refit Constitution, Miranda, Soyuz, and Constellation-class are part of a generation of design parts.
Under that opinion, I fly the Cheyenne Heavy Cruiser like a scaled-down Galaxy. For the Nebula, I fly it like a Galaxy with a declared "science" mission/purpose.
(UFP) Ragnar
But then some*fill in some insult here* had the bright idea to create the Sovereign and flush the whole new Starfleet look down the toilet and kill the big D in the most disgraceful way possible.
That was a real kick in the nuts IMO.
I think what happen was a fundamental change in design agreement across the board for the Federation. Instead of conforming to one generation of designs like the Refit Constitution and Galaxy styles (which probably took a lot of documentation, paperwork, and time), they reacted to the Borg threat by lifting the restriction. This let more designs be considered in order to find a quicker counter to the Borg. (To point, I believe that the Excelsior generational design provided faulty due to the ship being originally built for the Transwarp drive. It was an excellent cruiser in Lore but variants of the design like the Centaur only came out in times of desperate need like the Dominion war. The Ambassador class was a testing/prototype/transition stage to the Galaxy generational design).
This is also when Federation design went from explorers that can defend themselves to warships that have peacetime duties. New ships weren't designed to carry the mission of the Federation, the new ships were given the purpose of making sure the Federation survives an all-out war.
So, in my reasoning, the designs for the Saber/Defiant/Norway/Steamrunner/Akira/Sovereign were all proposed at the same time to satisfy this drastic new need in a short period of time (Worf 359 was in 2367 and Battle of Sector 001 is in 2373, so six years). Due to the size of the ships and difficulty of non-conforming parts and plans, the small and medium sized ships were completed in recognizable quantities in time for the Dominion war but the Sovereign was not (I think there were 4 Sovereigns total?).
But yeah, back on topic: I enjoy the Heavy Cruiser because it's a rather straight-forward, nothing flashy, effective version of a more elaborate and luxurious ship.
(UFP) Ragnar
In universe, Ships aren't designed, tested and build in months.
It took literally decades from the first design tests to the finished ship. I highly doubt that they simply designed some warships because they needed more.
In my understanding, the Sovereign, Akira, Saber, Steamrunner and Prometheus where planned for a long time. Sure some of them maybe lying on the shelf for a longer time or where older design studies which where picked up again, but still i think it doesn't make sense that the Sovereign (or the other ships) where replacing the other designs, like STOs devs may think.
The Galaxy design was by far too young to be replaced. Just look at the Excelsior Class design which was continued by the Sovereign (and then by the Odyssey in STO). So i think both design lines exist side by side and will be continued into the future.
As you may know all Starfleet ships where more or less adaptable so they could be refited for war/exploration/whatever. Also Starfleet ships (especially the big ones) got constantly updated and surely got the latest equipment availlable. It wouldn't make much sense to have the biggest ships ever build by starfleet being outdated by ships ten years older.
I don't think that the "newer" ships where soley build for war, but they where easier to construct and less complex to maintain. In a time of war this would be some advantage, but in peace time more versatile ships would be needed.
So i don't think that the Galaxy or Nebula or Cheyenne where less combat capable, the other ships where simply more easy to handle in war time. But it doesn't say anything about their general combat strenght. In fact, i think that the GCS family was more powerful then the newer ships, but as i said they where also much more complex.
I think these two design "families" should coexist side by side, everything else doesn't make much sense to me. So i think the Galaxy design Family (which includes the Nebula AND the Cheyenne) should be just as combat capable in STO as other designs. Even more, Cryptics designers should finally create some ships that continue the Ambassador -> Galaxy design, instead of only focussing on the Excelsior -> Sovereign path.
Hopefully this makes sense to you, my english isn't the best today.
No need to apologize. Quite frankly, your english is better than same native speakers I know.
As for the the ship families, I think I should clarify and elaborate my earlier post. You are probably right, the Sovereign/Akira/Saber/Steamrunner/Norway were planned for a long time. Under normal circumstances, one of those designs would be picked after much testing, revising, and trial-and-error before it became the next generational class of ship design.
However, with the urgency of the Borg situation, I believe Starfleet approved the most viable of the designs they had on their desk (I can see how, just like design processes in our world, there would be a bunch of proposals that were simply... "no"). Viable for them at that time changed ships that can fulfill a scientific mission but can defend themselves to warships that has peacetime duties. So the focus was flipped while still managing to do both.
Which was why those ships were approved. What scientific purpose would the Mufti-Separation mode on the Prometheus provide? As demonstrated, it was mostly a combat-oriented ship with the usual Federation research equipment installed.
Would one of these new ship classes replace the Galaxy family? No, I don't think that was the intent. Not for the short term at least. The Galaxy, Excelsior cruisers, and the Refit Constitution design families have been working together harmoniously for many years. As seen in the Dominion war, they make up the vast bulk of the Federation fleets.
The old design families can definitely defend themselves but the newer designs were approved simply because they met a need the Federation required at that time. Which was for combat. Sure, they can do what Jellico did in "Chain of Command" where he redistributed power on the Ent-D to enhance the phaser arrays. But that's a stop-gap measure. Starfleet probably wanted purpose-built ships that fulfill that need as soon as it left space dock.
As for STO and future ship creations, its unlikely we can get more out of the Ambassador -> Galaxy range of ship designs. Other than a "Worf 359 Graveyard" bundle. Don't get me wrong, I'll spend my Zen on it but the opportunities and incentives are minimal.
At this point the analogy of "the Sovereign to the Galaxy" is "the Excelsior to the Constitution" is pretty spot on. So that appears to be the path we are headed.
Edit: Call me idealistic but I treat all ships in STO as equally combat capable. I just need to adapt differently for every one of them.
(UFP) Ragnar
You're right, what jellico did was just a interim solution to make the GCS more combat capable.
But if they had enough time (maybe a month) in Spacedock, the ship would have been transformed to a much more battle ready ship.
You must know that all starfleet ships from the GCS family where highly adaptable first and foremost the Galaxy Class. That's why they are so complex maintain. But that doesn not say anything about their capabilities in combat. (we're talking about "real" trek, not STO
Please don't get me wrong but that comparison doesn't work.
The constitution was really old for it's estimated "life" quite the contrary to the Galaxy Class, which was build to be in service for the minimum of a hundred years.
The Excelsior -> Sovereign family isn't superior in any way.
Remember the Sovereign was launched only ten years after the Galaxy. I think Starfleets plan is to have both ship designs live side by side. One being the multi mission type (which can be adapted to almost everything, but need much more maintenance work) and the other one similar, but not having such a flexible mission profile. Both types are comparable strong in combat (it woldn't make much sense if not).
So Starfleet had much better "tools" for various scenarios. If a war would be around the corner, the GCS family ships, would be recalled to Starbases for war refit. (which costs precious time under certain circumstances).
The Excelsior family would be able to fight the enemy, until the refits where completed.
THEN all starfleet captial ships are optimized for combat and ready to fight an enemy force.
In times of peace, GCS family ships can be refitted for peacetime exploration and other duties again.
So in my opinion, Excelsior - Sov. family is more like the backbone of the fleet, the GCS family more adaptable to the current situation. BOTH are important without question, but none is superior over the other.
Sorry for the wall of text, but i love to philosophize about those things.
I seriously doubt that the Sovereign was intended to completely supplant the Galaxy.
The Galaxy is just too good of a design to kick to the curve. It would make sense that it would continue line service for the foreseeable future (in the Star Trek universe).
To me, being a dependable workhorse means more than being the "cutting edge". The Sovereign might be the new hotness as of the early 2370s, but it's the Galaxy and other older classes that will carry the real load for Starfleet.
Oh, I agree. Given enough time, you can definitely drydock the Galaxy and make it more combat-oriented (in my estimate, it would be more like 2-3 months for each ship but that's personal speculation). However, at that point it comes to a basic form of logistics and strategy. Is it worth the risk of taking all of your big capital ships off the front lines and putting them in dry dock? Is it even doable with where all the ships are? How many drydocks are available and suitable enough to refit a Galaxy? Can your merry band of Mirandas, Excelsiors, Ambassadors, and Nebulas hold the line until the Galaxies come back? Given how each of those classes pretty much got one-shotted at Worf 359 and then swatted around during the Dominion War (I still cringe at the image of the Excelsior-class USS Valley Forge as it gets swiss cheesed by an orbital defense platform), I can imagine the loses in territory would be significant before those modifications are complete.
Then what if the modifications still aren't good enough? I suspect that Starfleet covered all of their bases by maintaining the Galaxy generational family with the older Excelsior cruisers and Refit Constitution design families (Miranda, Constellation, etc) as the backbone while having the newer specialized for combat starships (Sovereign, Saber, Defiant, Prometheus, etc) bolster the ranks.
The "Sovereign to Galaxy" as the "Excelsior to Refit Constitution" comparison was used, namely because its a new line of design following a design that has spawn many classes and variants. The Refit Constitution (which had the Refit C, Miranda, and Constellation) is being succeeded by the Excelsior style. The Galaxy (which had the Galaxy, Cheyenne, Nebula, Freedom, etc) is being succeeded by the Sovereign style. Its not about age. Clearly they got a lot of mileage out of the Refit Constitution design but they also did with the Galaxy design.
I also agree that the Sovereign and the Galaxy class were intended to serve side-by-side. However, the priorities of the Federation (through the various seasons of TNG, DS9, and the movies before JJ Trek) became more defense oriented than scientific research. The Federation still wants and values it original missions but thanks to Star Trek script writers, the Federation had to focus more on countering military threats.
Yes, the GCS can do all of the things the Federation needs and does it well. But the Sovereign, I believe, does combat better. Which is what the Federation wanted more of. I don't want to use analogies but I would describe the GCS as a Leatherman Multitool (with knives, files, pryers, etc) and the Sovereign as a hunting knife or bayonet. Sure, you can stab an opponent with both but the hunting knife/bayonet is better suited for combat. Besides, why design a combat ship to be only "as good as" a ship that was made for exploration could do in combat?
Arguably, yes, you can adapt the Galaxy all the way up to be a complete combat warship. But how long would that take? What are you sacrificing? How are you going to fill in those mission roles that the Galaxy isn't doing by being a combat warship? When the war is over, how long would it take to convert back to an Explorer? What happens if another war or crisis erupts right after you converted back to an Explorer again? Wouldn't it be just nice to have a section of your fleet always ready to fight at maximum combat strength right way? All of these questions are probably considered by Starfleet and quite frankly, with the amount of situations that require immediate military action in the Alpha Quadrant, Starfleet can't wait for the turnaround time of the Galaxy to a warship.
Either way, chronologically the Sovereign is the next step in Starfleet design. As much as we philosophize about it here, Starfleet has chosen the Sovereign design direction.
....But back to our Heavy Cruisers! Man, I love my four-nacelle ships.
(UFP) Ragnar
The heavy cruisers themselves I have to admit im a bit undecided on whether or not they are good or not.
The standard retrofit is rather weak compared to the rest. Other than for looks, I wouldn't really fly it.
The fleet version seems alright, but I wish the BOFF layout would have some universal seating. All fleet ships should have it to some degree IMO.
The mirror one is surprisingly decent. The LT. Com sci BOFF makes it fun for both engis and scis alike. Definitely a good mirror ship. Heck, I might even prefer it over its regular counterparts fleet variant :eek:
Apart from the seating, my only hope is that the Constellation is gonna join the Cheyenne as an alternate canon model. I will say that the non-canon models are really good though.
"Let them eat static!"
I blame John Q Taxpayer because movies can't sell without conflict. !.5 to 2 hours of a movie "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before" would be dull. So bring on the pew pew!
I agree. It's a shame they didn't bring the Cheyenne back from the Worf 359 scene. However, I suspect the lack of a detailed model prop was the result of this. If there was a better detailed studio model, then it probably would have filled in for all those scenes that an Excelsior-class was in.
From the leak earlier this year, it definitely looks like the Constellation would at least be an alternate skin for the Cheyenne (Heavy Cruiser). If you're lucky, you can spot some people still flying their Heavy Cruisers around with the Constellation saucer. I have it on one of my Captains as a keepsake.
(UFP) Ragnar
It's one of my two favourite ships at the moment (the other being the Mirror Nova). It's no doubt a cruiser, but the Lieutenant Commander science station gives me access to Gravity Well, while the twin Tactical officers still let me have a trio of explodey abilities. I call that great balance. I don't think I've EVER blown up in that ship, while even my C-Store purchases can't make that claim (except for the Atrox, unbelievably).
Captaincy, Excelsior-Class U.S.S. Bianca Beauchamp NCC-99947-F
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]