Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,116
# 2701
08-28-2013, 05:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
You mean the sovereign is replacing the Excelsior?
That seems likeable, since the Excelsior is almost 130 years in service, at least it is more likely than the Sov. replacing the GCS. Not only that, but i think the relative similarity of the Sovereigns appearance to the Excelsior may even point to it. (...)
At least I think so. All those vessels (Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador with a question mark since they never really produced many of those I think) are roughly one "weight class". I think the Sovereign is an attempt to streamline that entire "line" of heavy cruisers so that you can produce Sovereign Class ships in many shipyards and replace all of those aforementioned. The Sovereign class can easily be explorer, patrolcraft, diplomatic vessel and confrontation cruiser - this way you don't have to patch your taskforces together using (exaggerated) twenty ship classes.

If you think about it, Starfleet really has only three to four major lines of vessels: Light cruisers that are meant for short to mid range missions and supportive escort duty which are probably Miranda/Constellation (which do seem to get phased out eventually), Centaur, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre Classes.

Medium cruisers like the Intrepid and possibly the New Orleans class or Caeger Class (maybe even Springfield, another one of those classes that never really "existed") that may have very special tasks (the intrepid being a deep-space long range vessel and the others... we don't know )

Heavy cruisers like the Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador, Nebula and Sovereign, whereas the Sovereign could replace all of those except for the Nebula which still would have it's use due to the mission pod

All other ships are kinda specialized classes. Oberth, Olympic and Nova are not really suitable for combat and see scientific/humanitarian missions above all else, the Defiant and the Prometheus being dedicated battleships for tactical situations and the Galaxy being the "flagship"/command ship not only in a military sense but for example being in command of a whole colonization operation with it's huge storage capabilities and auxilliary craft.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh

Last edited by angrytarg; 08-28-2013 at 05:11 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,825
# 2702
08-28-2013, 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
I have to disagree here. It's a well known fact that the Enterprise is the flagship of the United Federation of Planets - it has been, it is and it always will be the flagship. The name Enterprise has a long tradition as the flagship of Starfleet that outlives any of it's Captains.
So yes, the Sovereign class Enterprise-E was in fact the Federation's flagship. If Starfleet considered Picard a fail for losing the "D" they wouldn't give him command of a new Enterprise, they'd assign him to another vessel. The certainly wouldn't take away the tradition and priviledge of being a flagship from the name "Enterprise" just because Picard has to command the Enterprise, because he in fact - doesn't.

Now, that being said, I'm inclined to agree with veraticus on what is being discussed here. What many people are missing is that the pinacle of Federation technology doesn't mean a Death Star. The Sovereign in the time of her creation was the pinacle of Federation technology, no doubt about it. And she was the flagship of the UFP. What people have to realize is that Starfleet's philosophy doesn't revolve around big guns or killing stuff. They are explorers and scientists first and foremost and you can expect their flagship to represent those ideals....
I don't think that every ship called Enterprise automaticly becomes the Flagship, that would be nonsense. What if the ship gets destroyed (the -D) or outdated (Kirks ship)?
About Picard, he left his ship in a potential dangeous situation and let his first officer carelessly loose it. I think every military court would be right to degrade him and put him to a desktop office.
Giving him a sovereign was more than he deserved IMO, especially since he always was the most professional Captain of them all.


As stated many times here, the -D was just a demonstration of federation ethics, not on a exploration or military assignment. So having Families on board wasn't that much of a problem.
Later ships (especially at and after the DW) certainly didn't have families on board, it just wasn't practical at all.

Btw. i never stated that the GCS was build to be a battleship, it was build as a Multi mission ship which includes being a combat vessel, that's a difference IMO. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion would think that "real" Starfleet is something like Cryptics bizarre Starfleet travesty.
I just meant that the "real" GCS isn't nearly as toothless than Cryptics Galaxy -R. I mean how wrong can someone make a ship for a video game? Especially since just that ship is the best documented of them all...
I don't get it, really.



Another point is that the design of a Starship thake much longer than just a few years. The Sovereign cannot be designed and build to replace the GCS, that would be nonsense, since the GCS is still early in her life. Such a big project as the Galaxy Class won't be replaced in the next 80 years.
It makes much more sense if the Sov. was supposed to replace the Excelsior, heck they even look much alike.
Just look at Dontdrunks comparison graphics, it clearly shows that the GCS and Sov. aren't even in the same league.

So i think both ships have their place in Starfleet, one is a less expensive but mass production capable ship and the other a expensive and huge multi mission ship. I don't see any problem with that.

Don't missunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with the Sov. being a Excelsior replacement, i think making her next enterprise is much more handy for the writers, since it is always difficult to create situations where the most powerful ship is in danger.





Quote:
Originally Posted by angrytarg View Post
At least I think so. All those vessels (Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador with a question mark since they never really produced many of those I think) are roughly one "weight class". I think the Sovereign is an attempt to streamline that entire "line" of heavy cruisers so that you can produce Sovereign Class ships in many shipyards and replace all of those aforementioned. The Sovereign class can easily be explorer, patrolcraft, diplomatic vessel and confrontation cruiser - this way you don't have to patch your taskforces together using (exaggerated) twenty ship classes.

If you think about it, Starfleet really has only three to four major lines of vessels: Light cruisers that are meant for short to mid range missions and supportive escort duty which are probably Miranda/Constellation (which do seem to get phased out eventually), Centaur, Steamrunner, Norway, Sabre Classes.

Medium cruisers like the Intrepid and possibly the New Orleans class that may have very special tasks (the intrepid being a deep-space long range vessel and the new orleans... we don't know )

Heavy cruisers like the Excelsior, Cheyenne, Akira, Ambassador, Nebula and Sovereign, whereas the Sovereign could replace all of those except for the Nebula which still would have it's use due to the mission pod

All other ships are kinda specialized classes. Oberth, Olympic and Nova are not really suitable for combat and see scientific/humanitarian missions above all else, the Defiant and the Prometheus being dedicated battleships for tactical situations and the Galaxy being the "flagship"/command ship not only in a military sense but for example being in command of a whole colonization operation with it's huge storage capabilities and auxilliary craft.
That would be a appropriate arrangement for starfleet ships in STO, instead of Escort/Crusier/Science !

I agree with you that the GCS and the Nebula are exceptions. The Nebula a much more science oriented smaller/more compact version of the GCS and the Galaxy being almost a mobile Starbase.



I think Cryptic did the common mistake to fall into gigantism, completely forgetting that a ship like the GCS is HUGE and almost too big, creating a ship like the Odyssey is rediculus IMO. Especially so "short" after the GCS, if anything a ship the size of the Odyssey should be introduced in the late 25th beginning 26th century IMHO.

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-
T6 Guardian Class design / A 25th century Ambassador refit
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,988
# 2703
08-28-2013, 06:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
I don't think that every ship called Enterprise automaticly becomes the Flagship, that would be nonsense.
Actually, not only it's not nonsence in Star Trek terms, but something that Starfleet clearly was and is doing throughout the whole history of Star Trek. The U.S.S. Enterprise is the flagship of the U.F.P. in any of her incarnations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
What if the ship gets destroyed (the -D)
Then a new Enterprise-E is comissioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
or outdated (Kirks ship)?
Is suceeded by Enterprise-B.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
About Picard, he left his ship in a potential dangeous situation and let his first officer carelessly loose it. I think every military court would be right to degrade him and put him to a desktop office.
Giving him a sovereign was more than he deserved IMO, especially since he always was the most professional Captain of them all.
Starfleet is not a military organization, therefore I'm not sure a military court would apply, especially for the circumistances during the loss of the "D". Starfleet has a different angle on dealing with things.

Now, first of all I'll say that only the first part of my post was a reply to the part of your post I quoted. I say this because I think that there's some communication issues following.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
As stated many times here, the -D was just a demonstration of federation ethics, not on a exploration or military assignment. So having Families on board wasn't that much of a problem.
Later ships (especially at and after the DW) certainly didn't have families on board, it just wasn't practical at all.
That's what I said as well. The "D" was the flagship and was configured like that so it represents the Federation philosphy, ethics and beliefs.
Configured for pure raw combat it's probably the most powerfull (except the Odyssey in STO terms, but I don't know where and how that one fits) ship in Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that she would neccessarily must be the flagship.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Btw. i never stated that the GCS was build to be a battleship, it was build as a Multi mission ship which includes being a combat vessel, that's a difference IMO. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion would think that "real" Starfleet is something like Cryptics bizarre Starfleet travesty.
Ok, now I'm really feeling like I'm falling into a parallel universe. Just to clarify, is this part here aimed as a reply to my post?

Because I never came to the conclusion that Starfleet is something like what Cryptic is portraying it to be in STO, quite the opposite actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
I just meant that the "real" GCS isn't nearly as toothless than Cryptics Galaxy -R. I mean how wrong can someone make a ship for a video game? Especially since just that ship is the best documented of them all...
I don't get it, really.
Ofcourse it's not. My Renault Megane has more teeth than Cryptic's Galaxy-R.
You get no argument from me there, based on everything that we've seen in the shows and the tech manual, the Galaxy's interpretation in STO makes little to no sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Another point is that the design of a Starship thake much longer than just a few years. The Sovereign cannot be designed and build to replace the GCS, that would be nonsense, since the GCS is still early in her life. Such a big project as the Galaxy Class won't be replaced in the next 80 years.
It makes much more sense if the Sov. was supposed to replace the Excelsior, heck they even look much alike.
Just look at Dontdrunks comparison graphics, it clearly shows that the GCS and Sov. aren't even in the same league.

So i think both ships have their place in Starfleet, one is a less expensive but mass production capable ship and the other a expensive and huge multi mission ship. I don't see any problem with that.
True, the Sovereign was probably not designed with the intent of replacing the Galaxy class. However, circumistances allowed the Sovereign to bear the name Enterprise and become the next flagship of the Federation, due to the loss of the Enterprise-D.
If the "D" haven't been lost, she probably would continue her jorney as the flagship of the Federation, she was created with a lifespan of 100 years anyway.
But after that, Starfleet probably reevaluated their position on civilians and families on board ships and taking that into consideration, they decided to make the new, more advanced and more compact Sovereign the next Enterprise and give it to Picard and his crew. Now, I'm not saying there are no holes in the theory or the writing of Trek, but this can easily be explained by - without the excees need of space and facilities on board because of civilian personel, Picard's crew will do a good job in the smaller, more fitted to the number of crew and it's intended role - Sovereign.

I never said that the Sovereign was designed to replace the Galaxy. That would be stupid taking into consideration that a Galaxy class is suposed to be the most modular design in Starfleet with a lifespan of over 100 years.
What I'm saying is that the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy as the flagship of the Federation. Not replacing the ship or class itself, but the position of flagship. Starfleet obviously doesn't consider the flagship the most powerfull one, or the largest one, etc. They probably have a different thing going on there regarding that. For ex. - look at the Excelsior. It was better than the Connie in every possible way, it was better than the Connie Refit and yet the flagship Enterprise remained a Constitution class, only slightly refited rather than fully going Excelsior. (I'm obviously talking about the "A", since the "B" was an Excelsior)

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Don't missunderstand me, there is nothing wrong with the Sov. being a Excelsior replacement, i think making her next enterprise is much more handy for the writers, since it is always difficult to create situations where the most powerful ship is in danger.
Well, I can't quite agree with this simply because they had no problems creating situations with the most powerfull ship in danger during the entire TNG.

What I think happened is they wanted something new and shiny, to breathe in a bit of the new visual efects tech. and refresh the look of the TNG movies, so they came up with a ridiculous way to dispose of the "D" as soon as possible, so they can introduce the new shiny and refreshing Sovereign as the new Enterprise. Purely for marketing reasons if you ask me. Remember we are Trek fans, but the writing for Trek was less than stellar on quite a few ocassions.
Show your support for the Revamped Galaxy Class Exploration Cruiser here!
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,825
# 2704
08-28-2013, 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Actually, not only it's not nonsence in Star Trek terms, but something that Starfleet clearly was and is doing throughout the whole history of Star Trek. The U.S.S. Enterprise is the flagship of the U.F.P. in any of her incarnations.

...

Then a new Enterprise-E is comissioned.

...

Is suceeded by Enterprise-B.
What in the meantime? Starfleet without a Flagship for several years?

Anyway, there is absolutely NO canon indication whatsoever that any other Enterprise besides the -D was starfleets Flagship, ever.
Please check some reliable sources if you don't belive me.
You just assume the others where flagships too, but in canon there isn't any clue that would confirm that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
That's what I said as well. The "D" was the flagship and was configured like that so it represents the Federation philosphy, ethics and beliefs.
Configured for pure raw combat it's probably the most powerfull (except the Odyssey in STO terms, but I don't know where and how that one fits) ship in Starfleet, but that doesn't mean that she would neccessarily must be the flagship.
My thoughts exactly.



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Ok, now I'm really feeling like I'm falling into a parallel universe. Just to clarify, is this part here aimed as a reply to my post?

Because I never came to the conclusion that Starfleet is something like what Cryptic is portraying it to be in STO, quite the opposite actually.
No, but your statements indicated that you where thinking i would belive Starfleet was a primary militaric organisation, similar to Cryptics Starfleet.



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Ofcourse it's not. My Renault Megane has more teeth than Cryptic's Galaxy-R.
You get no argument from me there, based on everything that we've seen in the shows and the tech manual, the Galaxy's interpretation in STO makes little to no sense.




Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
I never said that the Sovereign was designed to replace the Galaxy. That would be stupid taking into consideration that a Galaxy class is suposed to be the most modular design in Starfleet with a lifespan of over 100 years.
What I'm saying is that the Sovereign replaced the Galaxy as the flagship of the Federation. Not replacing the ship or class itself, but the position of flagship.
...
Ah, i must have missunderstood something. sry.



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Well, I can't quite agree with this simply because they had no problems creating situations with the most powerfull ship in danger during the entire TNG.

What I think happened is they wanted something new and shiny, to breathe in a bit of the new visual efects tech. and refresh the look of the TNG movies, so they came up with a ridiculous way to dispose of the "D" as soon as possible, so they can introduce the new shiny and refreshing Sovereign as the new Enterprise. Purely for marketing reasons if you ask me. Remember we are Trek fans, but the writing for Trek was less than stellar on quite a few ocassions.
Outside ST universe:
In my opinion they just got rid of the GCS, because they wanted a new ship that resembles more Kirks Enterprise more.
For me, the Sovereign has much more similarities to a Constitution refit than a GCS. So i think they just wanted to show the audience a more familiar ship.

If they would have been ok with the Style of the GCS, they easily could have updated the Design in the next Movie without problem. (maybe something like STOs venture Class but without the ugly engineering section and the too close pylons)
They reworked Kirks ship too, at TMP.
A completely new ship but they kept the general design. But ST:8 showed a completely different design than a Galaxy Class.

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-
T6 Guardian Class design / A 25th century Ambassador refit
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,337
# 2705
08-28-2013, 07:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neo1nx View Post
yes, even the exelsior, this ship can be quite tanky if you want to but...
i was speaking in an earlier post ( i don't remember if it is this thread ) that what is important, is the balance between offence and defense.
the exelsior have acces to ltcommander tact slot ( cstore version ) wich make all the difference, combine with it better turn rate and inertia.
he is not just a punchbag, he can also punch back more consistently, that is what save him.
if a player specced this ship more in defense than offense he is missusing the ship exactly like a star cruiser specced for damage would be.

every fed cruiser can serve as punchbag but some will be better at it than other.
but on the other hand, not every fed cruiser have the abilitie to "punch back" consistently.
I run a cannon/180 Q-torp/turret Fleet Excel, it can "punch back", but only in a limited manner. If a person uses beams, BO3 might give a good single hit punch, but the power drain (even with engineer bonus's, EPTX, Aux2batt, etc.) makes the following shots weak. CRF2 is helpful, but more for critting' and procs' than actual "balanced" pain giving. If Beam Overload wasn't such a drain to the system, I would be more inclined to agree with you.

The bane of cruisers is that the Engie' Boff skils, especially damage/debuff skills are much weaker than the other two Boff classes.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,415
# 2706
08-28-2013, 07:44 AM
It has been figured that the Soverreign was a long running program. Idea was if need to quickly produce a more tactical ship when needed. thus every 10 years a design team meets and redsigns the ship for the latest tech. When conflict was becoming more likely and most of the first gen Gals dead the decided to bring her out. Also for Enterprise. Only D and E confirmed that they are flagships. the rest just famous ships like Hood or Constitution. Thus why i also go with Yamato haven't the first stated name not Okuda's.

Akira though in from succeds Mirada but funtion replaces Excel. Galaxy still had use and did well in DW but she's a peace leaning multi mission ship. Sov is tacitcal leaning ship. but like most ships Starfleet makes can function in peace or war.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,988
# 2707
08-28-2013, 08:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
What in the meantime? Starfleet without a Flagship for several years?
No, and come to think of it, this can be partially the explanation of the Enterprise-E becomming a Sovereign class. The "D" was gone and they had a couple of Sovereign class starships just fresh out of the owen, ready to go. With the added value of being the technologically most advanced starship at the moment, it's easy to deduct why they made the "E" a Sovereign class.

Anyway, Starfleet wouldn't be without a flagship for several years because the starship design and production is an ongoing process, so I supose they already have the possible substitutes when a ship class slowly ages and becomes obsolete. For example, there were Excelsiors long before the Enterprise become an Excelsior class.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Anyway, there is absolutely NO canon indication whatsoever that any other Enterprise besides the -D was starfleets Flagship, ever.
Please check some reliable sources if you don't belive me.
You just assume the others where flagships too, but in canon there isn't any clue that would confirm that.
True, there was no clear canon statement of this or at least none that I can remeber of atm. However, the happenings throughout the show that involved the ships bearing the name "Enterprise" clearly portrayed her as the flagship. For ex:
Why would they send Kirk with his "A" to negotiate a historic agreement of peace with Gorkon and the Klingon Empire?
Why would there be such media coverage at the launch of the Enterprise-B, when there were Excelsiors flying for years before that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
No but your statements indicated that you where thinking i would belive Starfleet was a primary militaric organisation, similar to Cryptics Starfleet.
Nah, like I said before - only the first paragraph of my post was directed as a reply to you. The rest was general talk in regard to the discussion in the last couple of pages. I know your posts and opinions, so I know better than to believe you think of Starfleet as a military organisation. You're one of the last people I'd expect that from.


Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Ah, i must have missunderstood something. sry.
No worries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yreodred View Post
Outside ST universe:
In my opinion they just got rid of the GCS, because they wanted a new ship that resembles more Kirks Enterprise more.
For me, the Sovereign has much more similarities to a Constitution refit than a GCS. So i think they just wanted to show the audience a more familiar ship.

If they would have been ok with the Style of the GCS, they easily could have updated the Design in the next Movie without problem. (maybe something like STOs venture Class but without the ugly engineering section and the too close pylons)
They reworked Kirks ship too, at TMP.
A completely new ship but they kept the general design. But ST:8 showed a completely different design than a Galaxy Class.
Well, you might be onto something, though personally when I first saw the Sovereign - the Constitution never came to mind. Just doesn't resemble it for me I guess. *shrugs*
However I believe their intention was to refresh the Enterprise with a new look, so they can create a bit more hype for the movies, sth. in a "Come see the new era of TNG movies with a completely new and awesome Enterprise!" kind of way.
Show your support for the Revamped Galaxy Class Exploration Cruiser here!
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,116
# 2708
08-28-2013, 10:16 AM
Regarding the Enterprise, a interesting real life fact is that they actually changed the Galaxy Class model to be the Ent-E ( http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/...laxy_class.jpg ) - I wonder what they had in mind
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,825
# 2709
08-28-2013, 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
No, and come to think of it, this can be partially the explanation of the Enterprise-E becomming a Sovereign class. The "D" was gone and they had a couple of Sovereign class starships just fresh out of the owen, ready to go. With the added value of being the technologically most advanced starship at the moment, it's easy to deduct why they made the "E" a Sovereign class.
At least i don't understand, why picard got the command of another Enterpise.
Nor do i understand why they made a sovereign the next enterprise, just because it was technically a bit more advanced at that time?
What if the most advanced ship would have been a Nova or Intrepid Class?
I hope you see my problem with that. In my opinion Starfleet should have made the next Eneterprise (-E) a Galaxy Class and give Picard and his fellows a Sovereign Class bearing another name.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
True, there was no clear canon statement of this or at least none that I can remeber of atm. However, the happenings throughout the show that involved the ships bearing the name "Enterprise" clearly portrayed her as the flagship. For ex:
Why would they send Kirk with his "A" to negotiate a historic agreement of peace with Gorkon and the Klingon Empire?
Why would there be such media coverage at the launch of the Enterprise-B, when there were Excelsiors flying for years before that?
Fact is we don't know.
There could be hundreds of ships doing similar missions all the time. they could have being assigned because of their experience witrh the Klingons.
Or they could have got that assignment because they where "volunteering"* for that mission.

*Spock did that, if you watch the movie.

The media presence at the maiden voyage of the -B could have been just because of the history of ships called Enterprise (let's not forget the NX-01).
There could have been thousands other reaqsons for this and that, fakt is the big D was the only Enterprise being designated as Starfleets Flagship.
(whatever that may mean, btw.)



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Nah, like I said before - only the first paragraph of my post was directed as a reply to you. The rest was general talk in regard to the discussion in the last couple of pages. I know your posts and opinions, so I know better than to believe you think of Starfleet as a military organisation. You're one of the last people I'd expect that from.
Thanks



Quote:
Originally Posted by shpoks View Post
Well, you might be onto something, though personally when I first saw the Sovereign - the Constitution never came to mind. Just doesn't resemble it for me I guess. *shrugs*
However I believe their intention was to refresh the Enterprise with a new look, so they can create a bit more hype for the movies, sth. in a "Come see the new era of TNG movies with a completely new and awesome Enterprise!" kind of way.
Maybe that was just my personal and purely subjective observation, but for me the Sovereign looks much less advanced that a GCS. Yeah, i know many will say now "hey it looks sleeker and faster!".
For me certain design elements of that ship don't look more advanced at all. Especially the oversized Nacelles and the huge bussard collectors look almost a bit retro for me.
The comparable huge Impuls engines don't look as if they where from the same century as the GCS.
There are many more things like the less fluid shape and the somehow artificially streched overall look of the ship that make it look odd to me. The huge nacelles but their fragile connection to the rest of the ship in contrast to the sturdy looking Engineering - Saucer connection look just strange IMO.
It looks as if someone from Kirks era who wanted to create a faster looking ship.
Something just isn't right, but i can't pinpoint it.


For me it's not only just the technical things that make it not a sucessor to the GCS, its design clearly is descending from the Excelsior but not the GCS.
So i think the idea of the Sovereign being a replacement to the Excelsior is much more appropriate on more than just one level.


But on the other hand i thing the Ambassador and Galaxy are much more likeable to have another deisgn line then the Excel/Sovereign.


I could imagine that somewhen in the late 23rd/beginning 24th century, Starfleet decided they needed two types of heavy ships.
One being a sturd and mass produceable while the another one being a much more heavy and bigger but also more expensive shipclass. Maybe with the withdrawal of the Constitution class from service and the extension of federation territory in the mean time they needed to difference the fleet somehow.

The mass produced line of ships being represented by the Excelsior and other ships like the Cheyenne and others for more that a hundred years now is going to be replaced by the Sovereign and Akira.

The Ambassador which was designed later than the Excelsior served more like a heavy Version of the previous one, but was replaced by the GCS, maybe because it was too small for the requested mission profile. So they decided to start the Nebula and Galaxy Class project. Both ship types have their purpose IMO.

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-
T6 Guardian Class design / A 25th century Ambassador refit
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 857
# 2710
08-28-2013, 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whamhammer1 View Post
I run a cannon/180 Q-torp/turret Fleet Excel, it can "punch back", but only in a limited manner. If a person uses beams, BO3 might give a good single hit punch, but the power drain (even with engineer bonus's, EPTX, Aux2batt, etc.) makes the following shots weak. CRF2 is helpful, but more for critting' and procs' than actual "balanced" pain giving. If Beam Overload wasn't such a drain to the system, I would be more inclined to agree with you.

The bane of cruisers is that the Engie' Boff skils, especially damage/debuff skills are much weaker than the other two Boff classes.
single canon are not effective enought and BO3 alone is not that good too, i was more thinking of BO2 and attack pattern delta or omega with an double auxtobat build with leech console, batterie if needed, and red matter capacitor.
here you got something that can kick especially with a tact captain.


http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/sh...28931&page=271
Closed Thread

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 10:40 PM.