Fantastic Game - Suggestions

posted on November 13th, 2013, 5:36 pm

The Enterprise D, while powerful and strong, is routinely outclassed by alien ships of similar size or a couple ships of smaller size (and theoretical ability).

It's almost invariably the "alien of the week" that outclasses the Galaxy, though, and mostly because the writers use it as a lazy way to say "force isn't an option". When pitted against "local" threats (Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, privateers) the implication is that it's at least a match one-on-one for any ship deployed by those groups in the TNG timeframe. In "The Defector", Tomalak's sense of superiority was based entirely on having two to one odds, and melted quickly when Picard reversed the ratio. In "Yesterday's Enterprise", it's strongly implied that if the D wasn't hobbled by having to cover (and literally take fire for) the C, then the fight against the three K'Vorts would have been far more even (being completely free to manoeuvre, the likely result would have been that the D destroys one then withdraws with some damage).

Of course, this accounts primarily for the TNG period. In the advanced timeframe of Fleet Ops, we can expect the Galaxy class to no longer be quite the pinnacle it was, but then neither should the D'Deridex, Negh'Var, and other vessels of the period. And while we can expect that significant uprating of defence systems will have happened at least twice (first as part of the response to the Borg threat, second as response to the Dominion threat and subsequent war), it'll still be behind hypermodern vessels like the Descent and the Phalanx (and the Prometheus, but that ship has sailed -- or rather will never sail in Fleet Ops).

posted on November 13th, 2013, 7:46 pm

]
The prime-universe episode where the crew lost their identity also called it a battleship after one look at its specs, so it's probably not called a battleship for the same reason Defiant's called an 'escort'.

Just saying: that's actually 2 episodes, 1 not an alternate timeline.

Are you referencing "Conundrum"? I believe that there are some mitigating circumstances in that episode. First, the person who calls the Enterprise a "battleship" is the imposter alien who's presence is to convince the crew that they are fighting a war and on the spearhead ship. Of course he is going to call the Enterprise a battleship. Secondly, in the eyes of the imposter's race (and his enemies), the Enterprise IS a battleship. In fact, she more like a god-ship; blowing away the "enemy ships" while remaining completely unharmed.

Worf listed the ships tactical systems, then agreed with the assesment based on that. It apparently matches what Starfleet officers would consider a battleship, that's something Worf would know.

posted on November 13th, 2013, 11:08 pm

it makes sense that building a giant exploration ship with lots of labs et etc, with all the crew and families on board has the responsibilities of protecting them, with a very powerful array of weapons.

the term battleship hints at it being for war and only war. but navel battleships dont have labs and civilians etc irl.

so its a collection of things (a ship for exploration and science, that has the power of a battleship)

posted on November 14th, 2013, 2:25 am

Just to keep debate varied, I'm going to bring this point up:

Regardless if the Enterprise D was a battleship or not, it was definitely the Federation's 'flagship' and is referred to as such in TNG. So... while its primary focus was definitely exploration, we can assume that it was one of the most - if not the most - powerful ships in the Federation during its time. With this in mind, pegging the Galaxy as a purely exploratory vessel is simply silly. She was equipped with the pinnacle of the Federation's combat systems.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the Galaxy, which was designed for a peaceful time, is more powerful then the Defiant, which was built in a time of war, but it does mean that the Galaxy, which is still a relatively 'new' class compared to other classes in FleetOps, is not a simple science vessel.

Personally (and when I write this realize that I am speaking from an opinionated perspective,) I believe Galaxy > Defiant in terms of firepower. They are definitely bound to be close, but the Galaxy has a much larger power source, and I would assume that it could maintain shielding for much longer then the Decent could. I actually think that that is represented well in FleetOps at the Galaxy's veteran level.

[/opinion]

posted on November 14th, 2013, 4:00 am

I would agree that the Galaxy would be a essentially a battleship when It comes to military actions, she was the Federation's ship of the line at the time. I while the alien infiltrator called it a battleship, its never referred to as such by the Federation. Its always been classified as an explorer. Agreed its likely due to the same reason the Defiant is called an escort as Tyler pointed out, but with the Defiant there is on screen evidence to support the battleship classification, not for the Galaxy class however. One can assume that based on the episode Yesterdays Enterprise, if the Federation commissioned the ship during a war, it would be called a battleship. Obviously though in Yesterdays Enterprise the ship has been optimized for wartime, while the prime universe it had a more balanced configuration. Given the size of the ship and how customizable it was, you could argue that it could be made into a much more effective combat ship when stripped of all the science gear and research labs.

To me it seems like the Galaxy has two personalities, on the one hand you have the explorer, the ship we are accustom to, a balanced load out with ample research ability and good combat ability. On the other you have the Yesterdays Enterprise (and presumably some of the Galaxy class ships shown in DS9) battleship version, stripped of its science and research equipment and geared for war. One of the most lethal ships in the Federation fleet.

posted on November 14th, 2013, 5:11 pm

It's almost invariably the "alien of the week" that outclasses the Galaxy, though, and mostly because the writers use it as a lazy way to say "force isn't an option". When pitted against "local" threats (Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, privateers) the implication is that it's at least a match one-on-one for any ship deployed by those groups in the TNG timeframe. In "The Defector", Tomalak's sense of superiority was based entirely on having two to one odds, and melted quickly when Picard reversed the ratio. In "Yesterday's Enterprise", it's strongly implied that if the D wasn't hobbled by having to cover (and literally take fire for) the C, then the fight against the three K'Vorts would have been far more even (being completely free to manoeuvre, the likely result would have been that the D destroys one then withdraws with some damage).
.

Right you are. In general, your first sentence was what I was referencing. I know those were typically lazy writing issues, but nevertheless...

Granted in "Yesterday's Enterprise", the Ent-D is an alternate version.

I think the overall point here, that most of us agree upon, is that the Enterprise is first and foremost an exploratory vessel with secondary combat intentions. Being the most advanced at the time, perhaps the Galaxy class was the battleship of Starfleet in the 2360s. However, I personally do not believe that she is up to par with the battleships of other factions, which tend to be more combat oriented or larger to begin with.

Personally (and when I write this realize that I am speaking from an opinionated perspective,) I believe Galaxy > Defiant in terms of firepower. They are definitely bound to be close, but the Galaxy has a much larger power source, and I would assume that it could maintain shielding for much longer then the [Defiant] could.

Along this vein I would venture to say in 1 on 1:

Galaxy vs D'Deridex <D'Deridex
Galaxy vs Negh'var <Negh'var
Galaxy vs Vorcha = toss up
Galaxy vs Dom V-13 <V-13
Galaxy vs Sovereign < Sovereign
Galaxy vs Defiant < Galaxy - close, but size is an implied advantage here

While it is my opinion, I believe that to be pretty accurate. Some of those are pretty obvious.

posted on November 18th, 2013, 9:59 pm

Along this vein I would venture to say in 1 on 1:

Galaxy vs D'Deridex <D'Deridex
Galaxy vs Negh'var <Negh'var
Galaxy vs Vorcha = toss up
Galaxy vs Dom V-13 <V-13
Galaxy vs Sovereign < Sovereign
Galaxy vs Defiant < Galaxy - close, but size is an implied advantage here

Been a few days since I've had a chance to look at this thread, but several of these I disagree with.

Galaxy vs D'Deridex -- D'Deridex may have larger dimensions, but usable internal volume is less than the Ambassador. It always struck me as a "white elephant" design. Romulans never were happy facing off against the Galaxy in just one. Advantage Galaxy, but see separate "cloak vs no cloak" comment.

Galaxy vs Negh'var -- Negh'var is a newer design than the Galaxy; probably designed in response. Likely will also have some Federation technology traded as a benefit of the alliance. Happy to give the Klingon flagship the advantage there.

Galaxy vs Vorcha -- Strong advantage Galaxy. The Vorcha is generally shown to be flimsier under fire than the Galaxy. But see "cloak vs no cloak".

Galaxy vs V13 -- Sure, 3 bugs take out a Galaxy at the start of the war, but by the time of the mass battles of "Sacrifice of Angels" etc, we see the position reversed. We see very little of what the V13 is capable of -- blowing up an already-damaged Miranda is the only memorable shooting that comes to my mind -- so a big question mark here. One big point in the Federation vessel's favour, though, is that even when strongly outnumbered in "Sacrifice of Angels", the Federation fleet held its own against the Dominion, and when combined with the Klingons were able to first break through then rout their enemy fleet. Dominion superiority was always predicated on numbers and technological wrinkles (Polaron weapons, then the Breen energy dampener); but when their tech advantages were neutralised, their individual ships weren't actually that strong. So, probably advantage Galaxy, as long as it has the war upgrades.

Galaxy vs Sovereign -- The Sovereign was intended to be stronger than the Galaxy.

Galaxy vs Defiant -- The Defiant was on par with the Lakota, an upgraded Excelsior. I've seen people argue that the Defiant should easily have won that fight as they weren't really trying to hurt it ... well, the Lakota's captain was shown to have had serious doubts about firing on another Starfleet vessel as well

Cloak vs non cloak -- Most of the scenarios are assuming good intel on both sides. Adding the cloak can and will skew things. The outcome will depend entirely on the current point on the sensors vs cloak arms race (something that's been explicitly ongoing since TOS). We've seen the Enterprise completely surprised by cloaks, and then a year or so later be able to detect the exotic emissions of a cloaked ship in enough time to at least get the shields up.

posted on November 19th, 2013, 11:24 am

So but by "Hyper-modern vessels like the Descent" made me crack up. You mean fan-made non-canon rubbish then right? Before anyone else says the Galaxy is not a battleship. Anyone remember the "Venture Refit" from Deep Space Nine, essentially a Galaxy war model.

Its funny how people slag the Galaxy's combat capabilities but fail to recall that their was only three Defiant Class ships ever seen (Defiant, Valiant, Sau Palo (The next Defiant). (Obviously not a very effective ship if it wasn't mass produced like the Saber, Steamrunner etc...). Also please remember that besides the Odyssey, which was overpowered by a technological mismatch, Starfleet had never encountered phased polaron weapon before, not a SINGLE GALAXY was seen destroyed in ANY of the battle scenes. Feel free to go check...

In canon, out of ALL the ship classes, the Galaxy was the class that fared best and had the highest level of mission successes. So yeah, obsolete its an obsolete "explorer".

There are three other things too...

1. The Galaxy was Starfleet's first MODULAR starship design, meaning it could be adapted to many different roles. Obviously the Enterprise-D was the FIRST GENERATION of the Galaxy Class and various combat upgrades were made to the Galaxy and new neck armour introduced during the Dominion War (See Venture Refit)

2. You all keep going on about how "Starfleet has moved on" and yet, the Excelsior is in the game and it has a second variant. I also would like to point out that the Galaxy Class, U.S.S. Challenger became the testbed for all experimental Federation Engineering technologies because of its highly reliable warp drive and large phaser arrays. This was in 2380 so this ship is certainly NOT obsolete and continues to be a frontline vessel.

3. The Sovereign was NOT intended to replace the Galaxy, nor be stronger then the Galaxy. I am not sure where you get this information from but it does seem odd the Starfleet would replace the Galaxy with the Sovereign only ten years after its launch. The Sovereign was actually designed and envisioned at the SAME TIME as the Galaxy but its technologies, unique and ground-breaking kept it on hold for a while. The Sovereign was designed to replace the ailing Excelsior Class starships as a frontline diplomatic and combat vessel for Flagofficers, who had previously travelled on the old Excelsior Class. It was also designed with the Borg in mind as the Borg became more of a threat.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Sovereign_class

posted on November 19th, 2013, 11:59 am

Anyone remember the "Venture Refit" from Deep Space Nine, essentially a Galaxy war model.

you mean the refit where they tacked two plastic things onto the nacelles. the refit that was seen before any war at the start of series 4.

Its funny how people slag the Galaxy's combat capabilities but fail to recall that their was only three Defiant Class ships ever seen (Defiant, Valiant, Sau Palo (The next Defiant).

you haven't actually watched ds9 have you? in DS9 526 Call to arms we can see that the Second Fleet includes multiple defiant classes. and that's just the part of the fleet that's on screen. sadly for later episodes we don't get to see them as sisko's defiant is the hero ship, so it has to be unique on the screen. just like how they weren't allowed to use the sovereign in ds9 because it was reserved for the movies.

also i doubt you've watched voyager either, in VOY 414 Message in a bottle two more defiant class ships appear. and even more in VOY 725 Endgame.

you've spewed so much rubbish in this thread that's either provably incorrect, or pure conjecture with no evidence.

[LHoffman]

posted on November 19th, 2013, 2:26 pm

Last edited by LHoffman on November 19th, 2013, 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Been a few days since I've had a chance to look at this thread, but several of these I disagree with.

It is difficult to account for differing attributes between factions... such as better weapons or shields or hull integrity. By that I mean it is difficult if not impossible to accurately assess those characteristics from the TV shows or movies, because they are not explained. However, in a game like Fleet Ops, the development team has extrapolated generalities based on accepted characteristics. Such as higher shield values for the Federation and higher weapons values for the Klingons. I am not sure how we can reconcile these factors in a manner that we can all agree.

If we are to go solely on what occurs on screen (which is rife with inaccuracies and inconsistencies of its own), then I would agree that, for example, the Vorcha is generally weaker than the Galaxy. But we have such a small on-screen sample size for (actual) engagements between the Galaxy and the D'Deridex, how do we justify which would win one-on-one? Even the V-13, as you point out, has such little screen time, how do we characterize it at all?

posted on November 19th, 2013, 3:16 pm

In canon, out of ALL the ship classes, the Galaxy was the class that fared best and had the highest level of mission successes. So yeah, obsolete its an obsolete "explorer".

No one has made the argument that the Galaxy is obsolete, just that it's design outmoded. Obsolescence suggests a lack of usefulness, which is absolutely not true of the Galaxy. If you had the choice between a 3rd generation car model and the 4th generation of the same car model, would you not choose the 4th? Theoretically, it is more advanced, higher performing, has better features, a more efficient engine, a more powerful engine... Why would you get the old one other than for aesthetic or nostalgic reasons? More to the point, why as a company, would you continue to produce the older model? Especially when it is (implied to be) larger and more expensive than necessary.

I believe if you had to give an award for highest mission success (however that might be defined), you'd have to give it to the Excelsior or maybe Miranda. Serving almost 100 years, still viable in multiple capacities and with a large number of sample units... seems much more successful than any other Federation design.

Not sure why you need to use "explorer" in quotes. That is what the Galaxy is called. Heck, that is what the Sovereign is called too: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Sovereign_class "The official cutaway poster of the vessel that was released for First Contact designates the ship as an "Explorer Type 2"." - under Background Information near the bottom.

And the DS9 Manual classifies the Galaxy as an explorer. http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Galaxy_class - bottom.

3. The Sovereign was NOT intended to replace the Galaxy, nor be stronger then the Galaxy. I am not sure where you get this information from but it does seem odd the Starfleet would replace the Galaxy with the Sovereign only ten years after its launch. The Sovereign was actually designed and envisioned at the SAME TIME as the Galaxy but its technologies, unique and ground-breaking kept it on hold for a while. The Sovereign was designed to replace the ailing Excelsior Class starships as a frontline diplomatic and combat vessel for Flagofficers, who had previously travelled on the old Excelsior Class. It was also designed with the Borg in mind as the Borg became more of a threat.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Sovereign_class

I believe that is the implication with the Enterprise-E being of the Sovereign class and not another Galaxy class ship. When the original Enterprise was destroyed, they made the Enterprise-A another Constitution class refit, implying that it was still the best ship around. They did not do the same with the Enterprise-E.

The Sovereign was never explicitly said to be a replacement for the Galaxy. Again, it is implied because of all the surrounding factors, perhaps most importantly because the Enterprise-E is a new ship type.

The Galaxy class began development in the 2340s with its basis in the Ambassador class immediately prior. According to the Next Gen Tech Manual the Galaxy replaced the Ambassador class. The Galaxy and the Ambassador shared many of the same components and design features, but the Galaxy was clearly the "improved version". Why can't you take this same step with the Sovereign? The Sovereign program was not concurrent with the Galaxy program either. The Soveriegn program began in the 2360s, well into the Galaxy's service life. Most governments begin designing and planning the replacements for their current weapons systems just as the new one is going in. They do so to keep apace with the technology curve. Why is it such a stretch to apply that here?

Also, I do not know where you got that last piece of information about the Sovereign being intended to replace the Excelsior. It is not in any pseudo-canon book I have ever seen and certainly not in the movies.

posted on November 19th, 2013, 3:45 pm

Its funny how people slag the Galaxy's combat capabilities but fail to recall that their was only three Defiant Class ships ever seen (Defiant, Valiant, Sau Palo (The next Defiant). (Obviously not a very effective ship if it wasn't mass produced like the Saber, Steamrunner etc...).

That has to be some of the worst logic I've seen in this thread yet... Because they built less of them they must be ineffective? Couldn't possibly be that they were just expensive or that the Feds don't like mass producing warships.

posted on November 19th, 2013, 5:41 pm

Its funny how people slag the Galaxy's combat capabilities but fail to recall that their was only three Defiant Class ships ever seen (Defiant, Valiant, Sau Palo (The next Defiant). (Obviously not a very effective ship if it wasn't mass produced like the Saber, Steamrunner etc...).

That has to be some of the worst logic I've seen in this thread yet... Because they built less of them they must be ineffective? Couldn't possibly be that they were just expensive or that the Feds don't like mass producing warships.

Take it as you will but its also backed up with the fact that the Defiant totally and utterly failed at its original mission parameters. It was designed to fight and defeat the Borg, it was badly constructed, over-gunned and over-powered for a ship of its size. It also failed to engage the Dominion at the first time and then was ultimately destroyed. Really effective ship... yeah...

I think you people are just sore that the Enterprise-E had to save the Defiant from being destroyed in the battle of Sector 001. Truthfully, the Akira and the Steamrunner did better in that battle then the Defiant.

Well I first read about the Sovereign being designed to replace the Excelsior here, http://techspecs.acalltoduty.com/sovereign.html under "Mission Parameters". The Sovereign was also frequently seen on diplomatic duty during the Dominion War (Star Trek: Insurrection) and not on the frontlines, which if it was as wonderful as you and the devs think it is, it would have been leading the charge as the flagship.

The reason I refer to the Galaxy as an "Explorer", is because the "Explorer" is a made up category of ship. In technical military terminology, the Galaxy would be classed as a "Battleship".

posted on November 19th, 2013, 6:11 pm

It also failed to engage the Dominion at the first time and then was ultimately destroyed. Really effective ship... yeah...

you don't even read your own posts.

you defended the galaxy on the destruction of the odyssey because (quite rightly) the dominion had exotic weapons (in reality they were just made overpowered in their early eps like most sci-fi bad guys). the defiant 1 episode later suffered the exact same fate, yet is weak. hypocrisy.

when the jemhadar stopped being new (and are allowed to be killed en masse) the defiant took out half a dozen fighters in DS9 321 The die is cast. then continued destroying them in 1 volley for the rest of the show until the breen were introduced with their fancy new gun. all but one allied ship were destroyed. sadly no galaxy class ships were even invited to that battle. out of a fleet of over 300 ships we never saw a single galaxy class (yet saw several klink ktingas). that speaks volumes about how many were built.

posted on November 19th, 2013, 6:44 pm

sadly no galaxy class ships were even invited to that battle. out of a fleet of over 300 ships we never saw a single galaxy class (yet saw several klink ktingas). that speaks volumes about how many were built.

That says nothing about their total numbers, just that we saw none on-screen in that fleet. Hardly conclusive.