StarDestroyer.Net BBS

vote for the ship design do you feel is the Federation's best, and tell us why you think so

oh, i vote akira, i like the torpedo load and i like the fact it carries a fighter wing....and it's actually pretty damn cool looking.

Sabre class. Designed to be quick, with generous fields of fire and protected warp nacelles. It is the only one, other than the Defiant, that truly attempts to protect its more vulnerable areas, and changes the standard SF design considerably.

Master of Ossus wrote:Sabre class. Designed to be quick, with generous fields of fire and protected warp nacelles. It is the only one, other than the Defiant, that truly attempts to protect its more vulnerable areas, and changes the standard SF design considerably.

the steamrunner has similar protection, and is a far bit larger..... a destroyer to the sabre frigate. the reason i went akira is because it is the only fed ship with a significant fighter compliment.

Before Nemesis I would have voted for the Nebula. It has near equal torpedo capability to the Akira, but greater phasers and superior forward torpedo capability. However after having seen Nemesis, I am rather impressed with the Sovereign MK-2. Its been nearly doubled on torpedo capacity as well as having its phaser arcs improved. It can take a serious beating and its hull hugging shields are some of the best ever seen in Trek. Its Ablative armor also allows it to take damage that would cripple or outright destroy any other ship.

Honorable mentions go to the Nebula, because it uses similar parts to the GCS but has superior combat capability and superior shielding, or with other mission changes it becomes a superior command and control ship. Akira, because it has 15 freaking launchers on such a small ship as well as being able to carry a fair number of fighter craft. Defiant, first true Warship of the Federation in a very long time, built for combat and very well armed for its size. Sabre, a good destroyer type ship taking the capabilities of the Miranda and putting them in a much more compact ship. War-Galaxy, with various versions out there it can serve as a carrier, a superior heavy cruiser, or backbone of large fleet operations.

Not the Defiant.

Sovereign class. Looks good, has good fire power. With a good captain would be a deadly ship.

Damn, can't decide, I like them all.

Galaxy looks the prettiest, and would be a match for the Soveriegn if the Feds learned how to properly utilize space.

The Defiant, while on the exterior being cool, simply is prone to far too much console sparking.

I like the Enterprise-E and her sister ships. There is no particular technical reason (except the traversing quantum torpedo turret... ), but I do think it is a very effective-looking design. Frankly, the Sovereign-class is the ship that they should have had for the TNG TV series.

Sovereign has got to be the best.

I agree, the upgraded Soverign is the best feddie ship around.

For the stated purpose of Starfleet, the Galaxy. For the actual purpose, the Sovereign.

Steamrunner. As it is depicted as a dedicated warship (destroyer) in the FX. It deploy's its weapons in a forward arc and there is no info on it being a "exploration" vessel.

I went for Defiant Class. It is such a cool ship[ and was such a shock to trekies of the time that their wannabe-commie-uber-pc federation would design a ship for war and only war. It heralded a change in policy that made Trek worth watchign again.

Uraniun235 wrote:Galaxy looks the prettiest, and would be a match for the Soveriegn if the Feds learned how to properly utilize space.

Hehehe...a Galaxy class would get ass-raped by the Soveriegn class in ways that even RayCav couldn't imagine. As for the prettiest, that's just personal taste, personally my favorite ship class in terms of looks is the Ambassador.

Here is my proof:

I'm pretty sure they are much faster (Going 9.9 with no problems at all?)

MUCH better shielding, remember that this thing was taking on the Scimitar pretty much 1-1 considering that all those other romulan ships did was provide alternative targets.

Better weaponry, once again, the Enterprise-E took on the Scimitar and was doing alright for itself. I'm not exactly sure of the percentage but I'm almost positive that the Scimitars shields went below 50%, and they only hit them how many times?

More manuverable, the E-E was doing dives and twists in Nemisis and FC that I don't think ships it's size should be able to do, can anyone give me an example of a Galaxy class manuvering?

Captain_Cyran wrote:

Uraniun235 wrote:Galaxy looks the prettiest, and would be a match for the Soveriegn if the Feds learned how to properly utilize space.

Hehehe...a Galaxy class would get ass-raped by the Soveriegn class in ways that even RayCav couldn't imagine.

Emphasis mine.

Howedar wrote:

Captain_Cyran wrote:

Uraniun235 wrote:Galaxy looks the prettiest, and would be a match for the Soveriegn if the Feds learned how to properly utilize space.

Hehehe...a Galaxy class would get ass-raped by the Soveriegn class in ways that even RayCav couldn't imagine.

Emphasis mine.

Yeah, but then the same would go with the sovereign class would it not? In which case the sovereign would still win.

I personally like the Steamrunner simply because it's different, and it has a standoff loadout. If you're asking which ship is more combat effective, it's probably a tossup between the Akira (space cavalry), Galaxy-X (workhorse of the fleet, right?) and Sabre (disruption, should be massproduced in greater numbers)

closet sci-fi fan wrote:There's more space on a GCS than a sovereign... strip those luxury quarters, orca + dolphin tanks( ), etc. and you've got a lot room for additional reactors and weapons.

Yeah, I suppose you do have a point there.

Galaxy class is the largest ship built by the Federation. Theoretically you can put the largest number of weapons on it AND give it more shields then other ships.

Captain_Cyran wrote:

closet sci-fi fan wrote:There's more space on a GCS than a sovereign... strip those luxury quarters, orca + dolphin tanks( ), etc. and you've got a lot room for additional reactors and weapons.

Yeah, I suppose you do have a point there.

But you can't forget the massive empty space on the E-E in Nemesis.

IG-88E wrote:

Captain_Cyran wrote:

closet sci-fi fan wrote:There's more space on a GCS than a sovereign... strip those luxury quarters, orca + dolphin tanks( ), etc. and you've got a lot room for additional reactors and weapons.

Yeah, I suppose you do have a point there.

But you can't forget the massive empty space on the E-E in Nemesis.

Well, I think now would be a good time to check the stats on sovereigns and Galaxies, to see how much open space each one has.

If Starfleet took the Galaxy hull and fitted it with the same tech as the Soveriegn, with the same mentality (more militaristic), the Galaxy by virtue of greater volume should be able to outgun and outlast the Soveriegn. Manuevering *should* (I cannot emphasize this enough) be a non-issue when dealing with ships that are over half a kilometer long and weigh over 4.5 million metric tons... the only effective combat manuevering should be getting into optimum firing position, and the occasional warp jump to reposition. ("Peak Performance")

Unfortunately this is not the case... however, with it's larger volume, the Galaxy could probably afford to take more hits than the Soveriegn would gain while twisting out of the line of torpedo fire. Although if we went by the torpedo speed seen in "The Survivors", it would be hard even for the E-E to evade...