Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 123
# 471
03-07-2014, 08:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by reynoldsxd View Post
Defiant pet? Not gonna happen.

The ship should not have a hangar. It should have better tac seating and a revamped lance.
Your right it won't happen. Their logic was that the other dreads had bays. If they are forcing the bay on us it should at least get a unique pet.

Lance needs work.
--------------------------------
I want to propose to my JH Dread.....but I can't afford the 500million EC cover charge at the jewelry store.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,103
# 472
03-07-2014, 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by abystander0 View Post
That's fine. I am ok with people not agreeing with me.
That's the point of debate and discussion. I feel that everyone agrees with you all the time either you're stating something obvious (the sky on a clear day on Earth is blue) or completely meaningless.

Quote:

It could work a couple of ways. Each shot would discharge a fifth(assuming five shots in a cycle) of your weapon power until it's depeleted. The power of each shot is determined by how much available weapon power you had at the top of the firing cycle. Firing the spinal phaser would disable other weapons to make all that power available for use by the spinal phaser. Another way is to keep the high power drain, but use eps consoles, and other power management tricks to mitigate the drain, (engineers would see the highest benefit here). Here again, you could get 5 shots per firing cycle, or the cycle ends prematurely when you run out of weapon power. The first method would make all the shots in the cycle the same, but the over all damage output would be variable depending on what the weapon power was at the start of the firing sequence, the second method would give all shots the same base damage, but you might face having fewer shots due to not having enough power.
Even with EPS consoles recovering the drain between shots isn't gonna help much since power from beams doesn't really replenish until the weapon stops firing. If you fire the lance at 125 in that model it would be 125, 115, 105, 95, 85. I suppose that's workable especially if the first shot crushes the shields.


Quote:
Creating prototypes and testbeds, is not the same as full scale production. The defiant is the exception here since there was no way for Star Fleet to dodge the bullet with it. It was a warship pure and simple, calling it an escort was semantics. The bulk of Starfleet ships are exploration vessels that have enough armament to be useful in a combat role.
But the Prometheus is in full production now. And according to the ENT episode Azati Prime it was still operational in the 25th century.

Quote:
The Defiant was not a deep space exploration vessel. Sure you could do survey work within range of a base, but outside of that, it did not have the supply capacity for that.
My point wasn't that it was optimal, but that all Starfleet vessels can serve as science vessels as that's what it means to be a Starfleet vessel.

Quote:
That would be a waste of resources, when you could simply tear down the ship for raw materials, and build a new ship, since now that you have peace, you don't need as many hulls.
I disagree, sure you can build four five small fast ships like the Defiant with the resources that it takes to build a single Galaxy class, but I don't think that it is more resource, energy, or time efficient to dismantle a Galaxy class and repurpose the materials into a new ship versus modding a Galaxy with a third nacelle and a large heavy weapon. And probably new shields (a 1.1 shield modifier that's it?).

Quote:
A dreadnaught is a mailed fist. It has one purpose, and that is to deliver that huge weapon to a flashpoint undetected. It makes for an ideal terror weapon. That is antithetical to Starfleet's purpose. I doubt that Federation politicians would be happy with that kind of power.
I consulted the wik on this one, for a historic perspective.

The dreadnought was the predominant type of battleship in the early 20th century. The first of the kind, the Royal Navy's Dreadnought, made such a strong impression on people's minds when it was launched in 1906 that similar battleships built subsequently were referred to generically as "dreadnoughts", and earlier battleships became known as pre-dreadnoughts. The Dreadnought's design had two revolutionary features: an "all-big-gun" armament scheme, with an unprecedented number of heavy-calibre guns, and steam turbine propulsion.[a] As dreadnoughts became a crucial symbol of national power, the arrival of these new warships renewed the naval arms race between the United Kingdom and Germany. Dreadnought races sprang up around the world, including in South America, lasting up to the beginning of World War I.

Now while the Federation isn't the type of power to start an arms race with her competitors the Federation is also not the type of power that's going to simply sit back and be outgunned. We don't send Starfleet officers to die after all. Starfleet's purpose is exploration, but due to the fact that they are the ones out there on the frontier at the borders, coming into contact with hostiles first, their other primary purpose is to defend the Federation. I'm like Teddy, "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

You see it automatically as a terror weapon. I see it as a stand off weapon. Strategic deterrence. We are the Federation and we're not gonna launch biogenic weapons (barring Sisko but he was trying to prove a damn point), we don't touch thalaron weaponry at all, nor will we use trilithium torpedoes on your sun, or isolytic subspace weaponry. But don't get us wrong, we can build big ships, with big guns, that you will lose to.

I'm not sure where I stand on a Dreadnaught with a cloak though. That said for canon's sake the cloak should be integrated. Just saying. I'm for damn sure not a Pressman Starfleet officer though.


Quote:
It's a couple separate discussions there.

The first is the assertion that it's a tactical ship and should have an Lt commander tactical slot. (canonicity)

The second is the assertion that it belongs in this universe and fits in the timeline.

I guess it might be confusing if you look at it in a narrow context, and not the multiple discussions happening concurrently.
That's fair enough, it's not clear cut enough that intelligent people can't come down on different sides of it. That's why I hate temporal mechanics.


Quote:
Agreed, calling it a dreadnaught was .....uninspired maybe? (I prefer dumb though)

I don't recall having any issue with the assault cruiser...maybe others did. It's still a cruiser, just with more tactical flexibility.
Well seeing as how it has the largest gun in Federation history I can see why they'd come to that conclusion.

It was some of the same issues. Normal Rear Admiral Assault Cruisers have the same LT-Ens Tac setup, but the ship is restricted to beams and you can't use the strongest beam skills with that set up. And it had reached a point where the ship that was supposed to be the tank couldn't draw enough aggro to actually tank. The argument for the refit was that it should be more tactically capable. Which ultimately mercifully happened and I love it.

Quote:
I don't think that Starfleet has that many ships. According to the fluff in the path to 2409 Starfleet had problems with not having enough starships to deal with the Romulan/Klingon Border issue, dealing with Nausciaan raiders on the Klingon/Gorn borders, and having enough shps to conduct exploration/survey. I think that the number is actually around a thousand or so ships. Also, remember in DS9: Sacrifice of Angels, that they had to stop the Dominion from breaking through the wormhole with that huge fleet of over two thousand ships. As I recall the Federation fleet was outnumbered something like two to one against the defending Cardassian/Dominion fleet. I would assume that Starfleet planners are smart enough to throw as many starships as practical at a desperate fight like that, and not go in undergunned.

I don't have any hard numbers though, just extrapolating rough numbers from what was shown. Is there a table of organization that shows numbers for Starfleet? It might be useful in later discussions.
8000 light years in diameter and only the Okudas and God knows how much volume. It isn't logical for the Federation to have left all their other borders unguarded to fight the Dominion. Even at Warp 9.99 it takes a year to cross the Federation. At the Enterprise-D's top speed Warp 9.6 that's something like 5 years.

The 2800 Dominion ships would've been enough to finish the war against the allies. I think that wasn't because Starfleet only has 5000 ships or so, but because they only had 2000 that they could get to the front. The Dominion War had a pretty healthy build up. Starfleet had a few years to recall ships from the frontier and reorganize their fleet deployment to get people to the areas around the Cardassian border. That was accelerated with the war with the Klingons. But that doesn't mean they redeployed the entire fleet. The Dominion was going to win with those ships because of concentration of force.

Starfleet and the Klingons had also ground their edges against each other as well, so they went into the Dominion War with less ships then they had to begin with.


There was a short thread on this subject elsewhere.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=232237

I will say that in The Motion Picture, the 1701 was the only ship that could intercept V'ger, but that was on short notice for something coming straight at Earth at high speed. The idea seems to be that in peacetime most Starfleet vessels are out exploring the unknown and patrolling the borders and that only in times of war do they come together. On the same note the NCC-2000 was still 15 years away, so I think Starfleet back then was much smaller as was the Federation. And the 1701 was 25 years old as it was. Starfleet shipbuilding was either far less capable (easy as replicators hadn't been invented yet) and/or they focused on fewer high quality ships. Something that ramped up in the next century.

Star Trek is based on the Horatio Hornblower age of discovery ideal that one ship will be out at the edge of the unknown and be the sole representative of their nation there. But for a war that depiction must shift so you get to see how big this thing really is. Patrolling Federation space must be a truly titanic task.

If we're gonna look at one thing we should look at this, I think this is the greatest indicator.

The Excelsior class is still in service. The Excelsior is NCC-2000. Assuming that most ships in that era have relatively long service lives, if you want to say that most starships after her stayed in service to the Dominion war era, then we have the Prometheus whose plaque and MSD says NX-74913. That's what? 72913 Starfleet vessels built in a century.



This is also from show runner Ronald B. Moore in 1997.
Size Edit

Regarding the quantity of starships Starfleet had in use in the late 2370s, Moore commented, "I wouldn't be surprised if Starfleet had 30,000 ships or so." (AOL chat, 1997) This was based on reasoning that the USS Hood has a registry of NCC-42296 while the USS Voyager is NCC-74656.

During Operation Return, Starfleet attempted to prevent the Dominion from bringing down the minefield, which would have allowed 2800 ships to come through the wormhole, which would allow for a Dominion total victory. Meaning that since, at that time of the war, the forces of both sides were about equal, the true size of the Dominion forces was much larger than Starfleet.

Doctor Zimmerman claimed that there were 675 EMH Mark I instances active in Starfleet before they were taken off duty during the Dominion War. (VOY: "Life Line")


Here's the link to Mem-Alpha's archive.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Memo...ore/ron065.txt

Quote:
I don't hate the dreadnaught at all. I think its a cool ship. My issues with it is it can't do what it did in the show, and people are trying to make it something that it isn't. That goes for Cryptic too
I suppose I understand that. I'm certainly not one of the people doing the tier 5 Connie thing (seems weird to me).

But you have to admit, as it is now, it can't even do what it did in the show.

Quote:
I know. Shooty stuff is easier to sell to [spacebar] heroes though.

I agree with your idea here. The reputation, and the commendation ranks should count for something useful.
Man that would be such a dream. Especially to fly into a battle against a bunch of Orion ships, they see the registry and turn around and haul tail. No shots fired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reynoldsxd View Post

On a side note:

No, the antennas on the Galaxy saucer are not cannons. No sane engineer would place weapons at that location, where the own ship bars half a hemisphere of field of view...
I have no desire to argue against that, but they did do the same thing with the Phaser Lance y'know. Which could be why they would be there, to cover the arc.

But at the edge of the saucer would still be better. That said they're cannons, they only point in one direction anyway the way Star Trek starships use them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowcookies1 View Post
I know nobody really reads, these comments, but i wanted to say that i think it would be cool if the player could choose to fly the saucer section or the stardrive section when they engage saucer or chevron separation, similar to the multi-vector assault mode options.
I said that a while ago and I agree completely, nice to see someone else thinking along the same lines. We can do it with the Prometheus. Honestly I'd like to equip the two sections too. The galaxy Saucer has an aft Photon torpedo launcher(page 128 and 130 in TNG Tech manual) , I'd like to slap a Romulan Hyper Plasma in there instead.
Yes I support This

"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"

Last edited by captaind3; 03-07-2014 at 09:05 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,507
# 473
03-07-2014, 09:20 AM
After thinking about it for a while and reading some of the back and forth, I'm hoping that the reason they didn't do too much is because of larger game changes coming later on.

I'm hoping that by keeping the Galaxies as more tanky ships, that it means that they're either going to rebalance gameplay to need other roles than just DPS or maybe introduce new content that needs more than just DPS. I kind of feel that if they had just stuck a Lt. Com tac on the X that it would have basically been Cryptic giving up on any sort of movement away from the DPS fest we have now. On the other hand, the X is supposed to be more of a tac dread than anything...so idk, mixed on that one.

I'm really hoping that this is more of a "big picture" change than just being stubborn and snubbing Galaxy/X users. Of course I could just be overly optimistic about it. I hope I'm not though.

-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,234
# 474
03-07-2014, 09:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamif3 View Post
Your right it won't happen. Their logic was that the other dreads had bays. If they are forcing the bay on us it should at least get a unique pet.

Lance needs work.
Agreed - quite surprised that they didn't produce Very Rare/Elite type 8 shuttles for it, to be honest.

STAR TREK BATTLES - HIGH DPS PLAYERS NEED NOT APPY
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 345
# 475
03-07-2014, 09:36 AM
The lance is a bulky gun strapped onto the ship, you are not gonna make better use of it when its put to the absolute front. Its till not gonna swivel up or down.


Cannons, and i would actually make an argument against having those on the ship in the first place (same as i would argue that saucer sep has no place on the GX), would have to be placed into the front of the saucer to maximize the frontal assault.

That aside, it would look even more goofy than these big bolts firing from the antennas.



Heck, i wish the venture saucer would feature a roll bar where the cannons and torpedoes are emplaced.... Miranda style, but more rounded....

you know..... like this baby here:
http://admiral-horton.deviantart.com...lass-422347163

The Yamato From Klingon Academy, a Federation Battleship that was everything the GX is not.
It tanks like a boss, has ridiculous frontal firepower {this sucka carrys 2(!) starbase-grade-phasers(!!) in a weapon pod between the 2(!!!!) secondary hulls and is fed power by 2(!!!!!!!!!!!!) warpcore's. In addition it carrys the standard loadout of way to many phaser beam emitters (no arrays yet...) and a serious amount of photons in the rollbar bottom and top.}

Well, design aesthetics aside i am back to saying:

Cryptic had the opportunity not only to give us a decent dreadnought, but also add a new skin and model and update the whole package with the newer tech. Mode switching, integrated weapons etc.
They could have easily resold that as a package, and integrated a fleet galaxy X and Fleet Gal R update with the usual console and stat upgrades for the already existing ships.

But they did not.
They slapped a freaking hangar on it. They reused the bloody doomsday weapon gun. They did not refurbish the lance, they failed to at least make the boff seating better.
And they have the nerve to try and sell their LAZY HACK JOB as a fckn achievement!

There was no effort or thought spend on this reboot. Wait i must rectify that: They spend much thought on making this as insulting as possible.
Career Officer
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 56
# 476
03-07-2014, 09:54 AM
Well at least this revamp is something.. still would like to see the lance fixed as it usually either misses or does virtually no damage to a ship unless it doesn't have any shields. The fact that the saucer separation and reconnection "Should" no be using whatever saucer you're using is nice.

Now how about giving the same workover to the Prometheus Class.. Its never reconnected using your selected parts.
Vice Admiral Kheldryn B'ourne-United Federation of Planets-Engineer
"On my planet, we live underground. We're at home in space, Its dark. Let the darkness show us the way."
"I found a bug in Beta, Cryptic squished it. STO Founder and Proud LTS member."
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 161
# 477
03-07-2014, 10:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan451 View Post
After thinking about it for a while and reading some of the back and forth, I'm hoping that the reason they didn't do too much is because of larger game changes coming later on.

I'm hoping that by keeping the Galaxies as more tanky ships, that it means that they're either going to rebalance gameplay to need other roles than just DPS or maybe introduce new content that needs more than just DPS. I kind of feel that if they had just stuck a Lt. Com tac on the X that it would have basically been Cryptic giving up on any sort of movement away from the DPS fest we have now. On the other hand, the X is supposed to be more of a tac dread than anything...so idk, mixed on that one.

I'm really hoping that this is more of a "big picture" change than just being stubborn and snubbing Galaxy/X users. Of course I could just be overly optimistic about it. I hope I'm not though.
Well even if they change the game content, there is a problem.
Right now, everybody says the the Galaxy-R is a good tank. And that's basically true, mind you. But, it's only true if you build it as a solo tank.
Imho a really effective tank needs Tactical Team, Beam: Fire At Will and Attack Pattern: Delta. That's a tank's bread&butter from my point of view.
Right now the tactical options of the Gal-R are so limited, it can't pull that off. Without Fire At Will, all it can do is pull single aggro. Without AP: D (or AP: O..), other cruisers actually do a better job.
So it's just not enough being hard to kill. You have to have the abilities and options to actually do your job.

Of course you could rely on some other ship's AP: Delta, but the game is lightyears away from that kind of teamwork, it would simply not work for most players (which is a shame, but that's the way it is, extremely casualized), and it would be a crutch anyway. You're better off using a cruiser that's one Ensign engineering short but gets the job done. Like the Odyssey or the Fleet Ambassador.

That's the problem with the Gal-R. I don't want it to have more tactical skills to deal more damage. I would like it to be able to do what it was designed for.
Without a crutch like other people's AP: D or a point defense console to pull group aggro..
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,234
# 478
03-07-2014, 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kheldryn View Post
Well at least this revamp is something.. still would like to see the lance fixed as it usually either misses or does virtually no damage to a ship unless it doesn't have any shields. The fact that the saucer separation and reconnection "Should" no be using whatever saucer you're using is nice.

Now how about giving the same workover to the Prometheus Class.. Its never reconnected using your selected parts.
Doesn't always miss; just finished a fleet alert where:
[Combat (Self)] Your Phaser Spinal Lance deals 29789 Phaser Damage(Critical) to Ureon.

Not bad considering it was a completely unbuffed shot.

But it's accuracy is generally poor.

STAR TREK BATTLES - HIGH DPS PLAYERS NEED NOT APPY
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 345
# 479
03-07-2014, 11:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by reyan01 View Post
Doesn't always miss; just finished a fleet alert where:
[Combat (Self)] Your Phaser Spinal Lance deals 29789 Phaser Damage(Critical) to Ureon.

Not bad considering it was a completely unbuffed shot.

But it's accuracy is generally poor.

not bad? huh. Bo 2 already hits for around at least 12k on an unoptimized build regularly on a dual beam bank.
BO 3 is even better.

Boff power that do this every 30 seconds, no wait, 15 seconds thx 2 aux2bat....


the lance is a failure.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,103
# 480
03-07-2014, 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan451 View Post
After thinking about it for a while and reading some of the back and forth, I'm hoping that the reason they didn't do too much is because of larger game changes coming later on.

I'm hoping that by keeping the Galaxies as more tanky ships, that it means that they're either going to rebalance gameplay to need other roles than just DPS or maybe introduce new content that needs more than just DPS. I kind of feel that if they had just stuck a Lt. Com tac on the X that it would have basically been Cryptic giving up on any sort of movement away from the DPS fest we have now. On the other hand, the X is supposed to be more of a tac dread than anything...so idk, mixed on that one.

I'm really hoping that this is more of a "big picture" change than just being stubborn and snubbing Galaxy/X users. Of course I could just be overly optimistic about it. I hope I'm not though.
If that was the case then I can appreciate the reasoning to an extent, and also the secrecy. But I can't get past the dreadnaught designation, the tactical focus, but without the tactical seating.

I can understand the standard Assault Cruiser getting the Lt-ens tac seating. It fits perfectly with original design. It's branching. The Assault Cruiser is a cruiser with engineer focused seating. It's tactical because it has two Tac boffs on deck, but not incredibly powerful ones. The Star Cruiser has two science boff seats but not incredibly powerful ones. These are ships that have a primary and a light flavor of a secondary skill set. That's fine, Science ships and escorts have the exact same variation. You can get an engineer flavor patrol escort or a science flavored advanced escort. A tactical flavored Recon Science vessel, or an engineer style Deep Space science vessel.

That's fine and it all makes sense.

I think the Galaxy-R is attempting to stay in the same design philosophy as the long range retrofit, the Voyager-R with its ablative hull armor, which has 3 science boffs. But low level science abilities are more useful in general. And don't have as much overlap. The Defiant-R is the same with three tactical boffs. That's how they've set up the TNG era "hero" ships.

But the Dreadnaught is a different animal. There isn't actually a parallel in the other classes it's a unique ship. That said, it could probably parallel with the Advanced Research Retrofit, the Nebula, which is a science ship with a LtCdr engineer slot, a commander science, an ens science, a Lt tac and a Lt Universal. That's an incredible cruiser science hybrid right there. It's rather sad that the equivalent of that is the layout what the Avenger got. Heck an ens engineer-commander engineer with a Lt Tac and an Lt Universal would've worked out better than the current one. It's not really an update to current standards.

Giving it the Avenger's boff layout wouldn't have made them identical. The Avenger has higher mobility less tankiness in the ship's base stats and there would be a difference between five cannons vs the Phaser lance. Actually just take off the dual cannon ability for the G-X and they're different.


Quote:
Originally Posted by reyan01 View Post
Doesn't always miss; just finished a fleet alert where:
[Combat (Self)] Your Phaser Spinal Lance deals 29789 Phaser Damage(Critical) to Ureon.

Not bad considering it was a completely unbuffed shot.

But it's accuracy is generally poor.
Terrifying thing. I did 30k crit with a BO3 on a Dual Beam Bank three mk XI phaser relays (one purple two blue). I'm not even kidding.

The Lance should consistently outperform a BO3 otherwise what's the point.
Yes I support This

"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:08 AM.