Cheyenne, New Orleans, Freedom, Springfield, and Challenger classes all entered service before the Galaxy did. Just because they don't show up much on screen doesn't mean they exist.
Last edited:
Linked contents
Absolutely none of them are Galaxy family designs
I said design family. Not direct family
Aka using similar systems, parts, and design style. And among other things testing stuff to see what would work for the Galaxy class.
I mean for heavens sake IRL the models are literally Galaxy kitbashes
Last edited:
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. They are post TNG designs, so of course they now presage the TNG. Like Best of Both Worlds Designs, as much as I use them for my quest, really were not meant to have backstories, and the simplest explanation is Doylist: they had the Enterprise kits and they were cheap, so they used them for the scene.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
What's with us not adding more dakka for the size of the ship and the means to bring it to bear effectively lately for most of our recent designs.
We're not in the TNG era yet where doing that was cool. And since its not TNG we're not in a postion where short of the borg or Dominion showing up it would take several major foes of the Federation ganging up to have a chance of beating the Federation.
Tactical prowess is literally needs to be on the top 3 priorities of any front or 2nd line starship we design even if they're for other roles most of the time.
Plus we're meant to be the crazy human designer teams who learned from those who made stuff like the Stingray and Thunderchuls. Heck with how long ST human lifespans are some of us in quest should legitimately be said designers.
What's with us not adding more dakka for the size of the ship and the means to bring it to bear effectively lately for most of our recent designs.
We're not in the TNG era yet where doing that was cool. And since its not TNG we're not in a postion where short of the borg or Dominion showing up it would take several major foes of the Federation ganging up to have a chance of beating the Federation.
Tactical prowess is literally needs to be on the top 3 priorities of any front or 2nd line starship we design even if they're for other roles most of the time.
Plus we're meant to be the crazy human designer teams who learned from those who made stuff like the Stingray and Thunderchuls. Heck with how long ST human lifespans are some of us in quest should legitimately be said designers.
Last edited:
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Just having this sort of capability will be a deterrent in itself.
I'd be curious to see in the review how these ships will be regarded by potential opponents, considering they're going to be used primarily in the Science role by Starfleet.
Just having this sort of capability will be a deterrent in itself.
I'd be curious to see in the review how these ships will be regarded by potential opponents, considering they're going to be used primarily in the Science role by Starfleet.
Where did you get that? The Galaxy and Nebula are obviously closely related designs, and perhaps the Nebula was designed afterwards, but are you implying there's canon stating the Nebula is some sort of improved Galaxy-class variant?? I always figured they fitted different niches, the Nebula's more focused and economical, the Galaxy is more expensive but more jack-of-all-trades (to an extreme degree, tbh).
I'd be intrigued to see an honest Klingon internal review of our ship designs, actually. If Sayle's not interested, someone could do an Omake. Can anyone do one? Do they have to consult QM beforehand?
Last edited:
There isnt canon per se, but the production dates suggest they are cheaper Galaxy class starships. Given the cost of a Galaxy it's also fairly logically consistent.
- Location
- Kiel; Germany
First off, if you feel the need to apologize for it, then don't do it.
Secondly, I did take an option with torpedos.
Thirdly, I HATE users who can't accept my votes - especially if I stay away from the discussion.
I grew tired of the constant min/maxing in the threat. I make my decision based on fluff and nothing else. I don't give a crap about any new information that comes to light doing the discussions (which grew so out of proportion and become pointless quickly).
I don't know why you have the need to make everyone see things your way.
I will be honest with you: you're one of the reasons why I don't like to give my opinion on why I vote a certain way.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
WilyMachineKing1
Executive Manager of Limbus Company
- Location
- Reno Nevada
And it is very understandable.
I mean the other thing is that the Klingons, whose doctrine, if SFB is any indication, tends towards more heavily armed (but relatively more fragile) ships with forward-weighted shields and good agility for their size, are not the only people who the Federation might get into scraps in. Folks like a hypothetical SFB-Gorn, who have ships which are super tough but have kinda bad maneuverability, are also potential challengers and in that case having two torp launchers on a relatively unmaneuverable platform is going to get a workout in a reasonable amount of time.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Is it correct to think of Infrastructure here like ammunition in the military? Where it's like traditional to just randonly blow up any stock you have left at the end of your budget period to prevent outside observers from thinking your initial budget was too big.
So with an Infrastructure-efficient ship our navy would just end up """accidentally""" losing torpedo launchers because not using up your budget is bad.
So with an Infrastructure-efficient ship our navy would just end up """accidentally""" losing torpedo launchers because not using up your budget is bad.
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
I didn't realise how long it's been since we did a torpedo design and I agree that we're at risk of loosing the manufacturing capability and institutional knowledge. Not to mention when we do start needing them the designs will be horribly out of date.
Therefore I went back and changed my vote:
6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Therefore I went back and changed my vote:
6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
- Location
- Outside the Box
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The Selachii had two torpedo launchers, and was finished in 2190, essentially two 'turns' ago. Moreover, they were heavily used during the Federation-Kzinti War, which ended in 2197, or ten years ago. Given the pace of the quest and it's technology development, we couldn't have more recently used torpedoes unless we had put them in the Pharos Starbase just one design cycle ago.
Night
Widow Null
- Location
- Hoff
It's a good thing I was referring to a tactical limitation, not a physical one. Escorts don't get to maneuver freely even when they have the ability: their job is to hold formation and add their firepower to the defense of high-value targets. The constraints on them are not physical, but tactical, and this ship was never going to be a formation centerpiece. Nor was it going to be a "destroyer", maneuvering wildly at speed yet still able to maintain rough station, both because we already have one (the Selachii), and because we opted not to make it one.
And look, man, I've seen you get this obsessional all the way back to Cherno where it culminated in you calling me a sockpuppet. You needed to chill several posts before this and your lament about how you are a community notes golden retriever.
Last edited:
TheShadowDeamon
Mighty Dragon
My bad I saw what someone said and didn't fact check. However given all the arguments, I think it's better to have and not need, instead of need and not having.
[X] 4 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Honestly, content with either of these winning, although I'd prefer the latter. I'm kind of hoping that having the torpedo launchers on the design inspires someone to come up with the "strip the warhead out of a torpedo and use it as a probe" trick that first popped up in canon with TNG - at which point, having torpedo tubes on a science ship would actually make quite a bit of sense, instead of needing to shove probes out of a shuttlebay all the time.
[X] 6 Phaser Banks, 2 Forward Torpedo Launchers
Honestly, content with either of these winning, although I'd prefer the latter. I'm kind of hoping that having the torpedo launchers on the design inspires someone to come up with the "strip the warhead out of a torpedo and use it as a probe" trick that first popped up in canon with TNG - at which point, having torpedo tubes on a science ship would actually make quite a bit of sense, instead of needing to shove probes out of a shuttlebay all the time.
Warning: You really should not mass-ping people.
you really should not mass-ping people.
This is a fast-moving thread and this post is 8 pages behind so I would normally not say anything, but because it is often in the fast-moving and contentious threads that this kind of thing occurs, I'm going to anyway.
Mass-pinging people in threads is generally not OK. You should not spam other people with notifications.
This is a fast-moving thread and this post is 8 pages behind so I would normally not say anything, but because it is often in the fast-moving and contentious threads that this kind of thing occurs, I'm going to anyway.
Mass-pinging people in threads is generally not OK. You should not spam other people with notifications.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Talking about guns is fun! Especially when they're space guns.