Yeah but we don't know all the specific situations going on. Ship might be damaged, conserving power, etc.
Spoilers Starship Design in Star Trek: Picard
- Thread starter pst
- Start date
Yeah but we don't know all the specific situations going on. Ship might be damaged, conserving power, etc.
Or the CG artists forgot about them and accidentally nerfed the whole fleet of them!
I find this scenario more likely.
I find this scenario more likely.
Or the CG artists forgot about them and accidentally nerfed the whole fleet of them!
I find this scenario more likely.
Sure, but I don't care about any out-of-universe explanations. That's no fun.
My theory is that ships only have so much power they can put into a phaser beam, and the individual bank/strip can channel that much power or more. Firing more beams is just splitting the same amount of energy. There can be reasons to do that, precision-targeting multiple small targets or subsystems on a ship, or tuning each bank to a different frequency when fighting the Borg, but all things being equal, firing more than one beam at once just means spreading out the energy and making it easier to absorb (the difference between hitting a nail into a wall with a hammer versus hitting a brick into a wall with a hammer).
Maybe that's why Galaxy's can do more. They have a larger power generator and can expend more energy. Plus heat waste.
Plus 2 behind the saucer on the top, inside of the impulse engines. It almost looks like one of those is lighting up on the first ship, but we don't see a beam. Then there's the dorsal & ventral aft and ventral fore strips. Bev used the ventral aft ones for the first time we ever saw AFAIK.there are arrays on the pylons as well that they could have been firing.
Of course I realize that DS9 was doing all they could with the CGI they had at the time, so I'm not complaining about that. Just that the Galaxy class could easily be used as a massive weapons platform, even without the phaser strips on top of the warp nacelles left over from the Galaxy X. I can't remember which ship they showed with those left on.
All this talk of splitting the same amount of energy when in Picard the rebuilt Syra-prise fires multiple beams and multiple torpedoes simultaneously. I just think the special effects artists for DS9 didnt have the time, budget or technology to fully showcase the Galaxy Class' capabilities, and thats okay. Make up your own reasons for the ships slow speed and firing only one phaser beam at a time. I see it as the ship focusing all weapon energy into one supercharged phaser beam, firing at a tactically significant system of the enemy vessel.
If you go that way, I imagine a phaser emitter has a maximum level of input/output, unless you go full StarFleet Battles (or ENT) and purposely overload the thing. Too much power and it'll burn out.
This is probably why the Galaxy X uber cannon was so frickin' huge.
Find the outlier
I mean it's really not so much about the size of the ship, but about how it performs.Size comparisons of the Enterprise-F with its two immediate predecessors.
Granted - size helps a lot, but when it comes down to it, manoeuvrability, speed and sturdiness matter more. Others might also care about aesthetics and texture. Some think longer and sleeker is better, others prefer thick and wide. Everyone has their own preferred shape (even if some are more popular than others). But when it comes down to it - even if it comes short - if it's used well, everybody will be happy!
Unlike the rest of the canon-fodder, we never see a Galaxy get destroyed in the Dominion War. They obviously learnt the lessons of the Odyssey.
I love that shot in WYLB with the Galaxy standing still in the middle of the action and vaporising Jem’Hadar ships with a single shot. At least that’s what I imagine is happening, we don’t actually see if the phaser beams hit anything!
If DS9 ever gets remastered, I would be in favour of replacing the reused footage from Tears of the Prophets and Sacrifice of Angels with something new.
I love that shot in WYLB with the Galaxy standing still in the middle of the action and vaporising Jem’Hadar ships with a single shot. At least that’s what I imagine is happening, we don’t actually see if the phaser beams hit anything!
If DS9 ever gets remastered, I would be in favour of replacing the reused footage from Tears of the Prophets and Sacrifice of Angels with something new.
Find the outlier
The fourth one, because the lengths for all the others are proportionally accurate* but that one's based on the batshit scaling given in the famously wrong DS9 Technical Manual.
*Don't get me started on how the Odyssey-class is about 500m longer than it should be just because STO wanted it to be obviously bigger than any canon-derived Starfleet design.
As much as I love the Odyssey-class, I wasn't a fan of the design being over a kilometer-long. For my own fanfic, I easily shaved off 200 meters--enough to make it considerably bigger than the Sovereign-class, but still showing at least some restraint.
Dave Blass's scale chart still has it at the STO size.
I don't remember the exact reason, but it wasn't that.
Yeah, the clear reuse of stock footage of the battle (especially in the series finale) just made the show look lazy and cheap. Not to mention the emotional impact of the Defiant getting destroyed only to have another one appear a few episodes later just so they could reuse the footage of the old Defiant. Not that I think they're going to change anything if DS9 gets remastered.
Remastering TOS and TNG was a passion project for the people involved. Other than PIC Season 3, I haven't felt the same amount of passion to the franchise from the people involved. With these people, and with the economics involved in doing the task, I don't think DS9 or VOY will ever get remastered.
Thank goodness ENT was already widescreen HDTV when it originally aired.
Strange New Worlds clearly has passion behind it, same with Lower Decks and Prodigy.
Yeah, all these shows are made by people who are passionate and that shines through, from the cast and the writers to the production designers and art departments.
You not liking something doesn't mean the people involved didn't have sufficient belief in the project.
You not liking something doesn't mean the people involved didn't have sufficient belief in the project.
