What are ships which are worse than the Galaxy-class?

[Reliant121]

The Defiant gets my pick. It is an extraordinarily disgusting ship to look at, but i would let that pass, if it werent for what it is. Simply put, its a fan-wank. So much power, in such a little hull. Thats not right. It can take on uber-upgraded Excelsiors with probably more firepower than a Galaxy, and still come out on top.

Last time I checked, the Defiant and Lakota were practically even in that battle. Either one could've destroyed the other if they fired their quantum torpedoes.

I will concede that I put a sligh "optimistic" edge to my words, but even then, a frigate /destoyer sized ship drawing with a heavy/battlecruiser?

[Captain Seafort]

Nope - a frigate/destroyer sized dedicated warship matching a cruiser-sized jack-of-all-trades "explorer". The fact that Defiant is, at the very least, the equal of an Excelsior, and possibly equal or superior to a GCS given their respective performances against bugs in "The Jem'Hadar" and "The Search", is a demonstration of the sort of power-to-weight ratio Starfleet can produce in a ship when they put their minds to it. The ship is a damning direct canon indictment of the design philosophy of the GCS.

[Reliant121]

Was not the Lakota designed to be a combat ship?

If not, then fine. IU it can be the uber ship that it is legitimately.

[Captain Seafort]

Was not the Lakota designed to be a combat ship?

She's an Excelsior. Regardless of the specifics of the refit, or the more military nature of the Kirk-era Starfleet for which the class was designed, she started out as a typical Starfleet jack-of-all-trades design, and a ninety year old one to boot.

[Lt. Staplic]

I don't mind the Defiant. It may be a little over powered for it's design, but that is explained with the Quantum Torpedoes and Phaser Pulse Cannons (however I agree even with these it's still a little over the top). Aesthiticly it leaves a little to be desired, but I wouldn't call it ugly.

If I had to pick a ship worse off than the Galaxy, I would have to say...either the Yeager or the Oberth. Both are IMO useless designs. the Oberth seperates it's saucer and drive hull without any easy manual means of transport. the Yeager is basicly just adding armor and mass to the Intrepid to make it a more batte orientated ship which IMO is pointless, just use the resources you were using to armor all the Intrepids to make yourself a new warship. The two are also, again IMO, ugly.


However just as Rochey was pointing out we need more info as to how you mean worse off, here I gave examples of ships that weren't needed, however in a direct comparison to the GCS both classes still stand up better to havig the paint scratched.

[Mark]

The Sabre class. Not fast enough, too lightly armed, and a tiny crew. And it's supposed to be a scout ship.

[stitch626]

The Klingon BoP. It has an identity crises because no one knows what size its supposed to be.

[Mark]

I forgot about that one

[Graham Kennedy]

Depends what you mean by better or worse. In universe, out of universe?

As a personal preference thing, I have always quite liked the Galaxy. Somebody put a LOT of thought into the ship and how it worked. So ones which are worse are quite common...

Defiant. Yeah, the CONCEPT is awesome, and the ship gets many basics right in design. But the problems with it nag at me. It's too small for what it does. The pulse phaser cannon are FAR too small. If it had been twice as big with mucking great cannon on it I'd have loved it.

Intrepid. In general a great, solid design. But the tilting nacelles annoy me no end. They serve no purpose that I have ever been able to decide on. The IU explanation often bandied about is that new design tilting nacelles don't pollute space. But since the Sovereign and other new ships don't have them, then even IU Voyager's engines are a failed technological avenue.

Ent-B/Lakota. The Excelsior has lovely smooth clean lines. Sticking greebles all over it ruined the design.

Prometheus. MVAM, like the Intrepids tilting engines, is poorly explained and destined to be a novelty.

Constellation. Only one step clear of being a kitbash. Nice to see a four nacelled ship, but the design doesn't appeal to me.

Ambassador. I like it, generally, but the window rows in the engineering hull curve. Curved decks? Nonsense.

The entire Frankenstein fleet. Bleagh.

[Sonic Glitch]

Intrepid. In general a great, solid design. But the tilting nacelles annoy me no end. They serve no purpose that I have ever been able to decide on. The IU explanation often bandied about is that new design tilting nacelles don't pollute space. But since the Sovereign and other new ships don't have them, then even IU Voyager's engines are a failed technological avenue.

Personally I always figured that since the Sovereign and other ships don't have the bendy nacelles, starfleet figured out how to get the same effect without the bending. Or just chalk it up to

[Nickswitz]

Or just chalk it up to

This makes more sense than the other one, lol

[Sonic Glitch]

Or just chalk it up to

This makes more sense than the other one, lol

More sense than an incremental advancement in technology?

[Nickswitz]

No, that they used that idea on one ship and then figured out how to do it on every other ship. It doesn't make sense that they would only use bending nacelles on one ship, they may have increased tech fast enough, but I don't think that they would not use the bending nacelles on any ship but the Intrepid.

[Teaos]

Yeah I figured by the time the Soz came around they figured out how to stop pollution with out the bend bits. Makes sense since the Intrepid looks to have old style nacelles like the GCS.

[Mark]

Well, if Starfleet figured out how to get around those damned moving nacelles, then do you suppose the next run of Intrepids will have fixed nacelles then?