• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Poll: Sovereign love it or hate it?

Do you like the overall design of the Sovereign Class?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 54 80.6%
  • No!

    Votes: 13 19.4%

  • Total voters
    67
Its a big step up from the galaxy. The galaxy looked really awkward and unbalanced to me, like at any point it would just nose dive because of the largeness of the saucer section (even though they are in space)
 
Yes! I would make a few changes, but overall I think that it is a excellent design.
I would like some clarification on the number of decks, though. I thought it was 24, but Nemesis confused that a lot.
 
I don't really love it or hate it. It was a pretty meh design. I was never really all that happy with having a little battleship as the next Enterprise, it didn't fit the TNG look at all. The oversized engines made it look even smaller than it was.

It was supposedly the most advanced ship in the fleet but looked like an old design, essentially it was a stretched Excelsior-class ship with hints of the connie.

That in combination with the bridge that was almost the same as the ENT-A bridge made it look like an outdated ship that had been refitted with TNG equipment.
 
There are several points about the design I dislike. For one, it doesn't follow the evolutionary line very well. It's detailing makes it look like some kind of 24th century Excelsior, ignoring the Ambassador and Galaxy/Nebula lines that came before it. It also has a horrendous amount of unnecessary surface detailing. We had 9 years of established design precedents from TNG, DS9 and Voy displaying a simplification of starship design in the 24th century. Heck, the Ent-D is practically sculptural in design. Then the Ent-E appears, with all it's angles and, well, stuff all over it. It simply doesn't fit into the established design lineage. I still can't understand WHY Eaves designed such a cluttered bridge to be a newer version of the Ent-D's beautiful (and established) simplicity. (my concession is that I liked the Generations version of the D's bridge best) In short: The E just looks like a step backward, not forward.
 
Yeah, it's like theBruce Dickinson came in to Utopia Planetia and said "That.. that doesn't work for me. I gotta have more triangles! I've got a fever... and the only perscritpion... is more triangles!!"
 
I like the design alot, mostly because it feels like its evoking the look of the old school constitution class.
 
I only can love or hate it? Is there nothing in-between? Because I really didn't care for the design, to be honest. It was neither the best ship design of Star Trek nor the ugliest starship ever comitted to the silver screen.
 
I think it was a highly logical progression given the newer threats to the Federation. It integrates and expands the technology of the Galaxies in an even more battle-worthy ship. But don't get me started on the joystick.
 
I like the ship but I think it was a step back from the Galaxy Class.

The Galaxy class just looked more modern IMO.
 
I like the way the E looks. I like that she doesn't have a "neck". I saw this as something she had in common with Voyager and Prometheus. When First Contact came out I thought she was the shit, but that view has mellowed. The bridge could've been so much cooler and in line with the whole less is more idea that the D had. I also don't like that the E is smaller than the D. Eventhough she is supposed to be more powerful and a warship.
 
I like the way the E looks. I like that she doesn't have a "neck". I saw this as something she had in common with Voyager and Prometheus. When First Contact came out I thought she was the shit, but that view has mellowed. The bridge could've been so much cooler and in line with the whole less is more idea that the D had. I also don't like that the E is smaller than the D. Eventhough she is supposed to be more powerful and a warship.
The whole size difference actualy makes sense. Unlike the D which carried families and what not, the E seemed to be more combat focused and didn't have the whole city in space/starship filled with civilians thing going on. Since there werent civilians, it would make sense that the size of the ship could be smaller
 
I like the way the E looks. I like that she doesn't have a "neck". I saw this as something she had in common with Voyager and Prometheus. When First Contact came out I thought she was the shit, but that view has mellowed. The bridge could've been so much cooler and in line with the whole less is more idea that the D had. I also don't like that the E is smaller than the D. Eventhough she is supposed to be more powerful and a warship.
The whole size difference actualy makes sense. Unlike the D which carried families and what not, the E seemed to be more combat focused and didn't have the whole city in space/starship filled with civilians thing going on. Since there werent civilians, it would make sense that the size of the ship could be smaller
I agree:techman: I just want my new Enterprises to be bigger. I liked that the D was bigger than the C, and the C was bigger than the B, and the B was bigger than the A, and the A-well it was the same size as the original so i guess i'm working myself into a whole. But thats why it lost some prestige with me. Is the E mentioned as the flagship anywhere, or would that duty fall to a Galaxy?
 
i like the sovereign maybe not as a heron ship but it has a voyager styling to it with a 'a' feel to it
 
Question:
Whoever said the Enterprise-E never had families on board?
Was it established on-screen?
If so, where exactly?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top