Galaxy Class Saucer Sep?

[seaquest3062]

I don't know if this has been touched on or not. Couldn't find a reference anywhere. Do ya'll think it'll be cool if Cryptic puts the Galaxy Class saucer separation ingame? I think it would be a neat touch. Especially since that's one of the hallmarks of the galaxy class. What are your thoughts?

[RookActual]

I don't know if this has been touched on or not. Couldn't find a reference anywhere. Do ya'll think it'll be cool if Cryptic puts the Galaxy Class saucer separation ingame? I think it would be a neat touch. Especially since that's one of the hallmarks of the galaxy class. What are your thoughts?

I wouldn't see why not, but considering what it's usually been used for...I don't want to have to push the separation button.

[Father_Origin]

I hear ya, it would be tough to do with 1 ship 1 captain...however, there is a way.
when the sauser separates, it losses most (if not all) weapon systems, with the loss of
warp power.
However, the bottom section stays combat ready AND with the sauser gone, it
reveals fresh phaser banks (fewer than the sauser has) that where covered by the
sauser.

so

It is possible that a captain that is in that ship, and has been heavily damaged (in the sauser section),
can break away from battle long enuff to separate, can send the sauser to the nearest
friendly star base (using game AI) and continue the fight in the lower section of the ship using
the fresh undamaged small phaser array.

lotta IF's there

but possible

[RookActual]

In a saucer separation, the Star Drive would likely become a pet. The First Officer would probably be onboard the StarDrive.

[seaquest3062]

I was also thinking along the lines of 2 ship battle... if it came to that point. I mainly want the Galaxy for the exploration value it has. But in the case of a warp core breach, it'd be nice to have an escape vehicle with all hands, rather than trying to cram them all into escape pods, or have a cut cinematic of the ship exploding. I like that there's not permadeath, but I don't wanna be knocked down a ship class, I want the one I'm gonna have to work hard to get. And the saucer separation gives you more options for strategy in combat and rescue operations than an all in one solid class of ship. Akira defiant voyager for example.

[RookActual]

Other than being neat, I've never really felt there was much practicality in the separation. Escape pods are found throughout the ship, and using jefferies tubes would be a slow way to gain access to the saucer section. Turbolifts would be a log jam. It just seems like one of those neat things they threw in there as a plot device to deal with the Borg. There is a lot of explanation available in favor of it, but really, I just don't buy it.

[njdss4]

In a saucer separation, the Star Drive would likely become a pet. The First Officer would probably be onboard the StarDrive.

I was just thinking the same thing. Except I would make the saucer section the pet section. The drive section has warp drive, photon torpedoes, and phaser banks. The saucer section only has phasers. Plus I think the drive section is more maneuverable.

[RookActual]

After reading up on it more, I absolutely agree.

[ajaco3025]

There are two posts regarding this topic. Both have the words "Saucer separation" in the title. I know because I created the first one.


Here is the link:

http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=9504



Type "Saucer Separation" and select "by Topic" in the search box.

[RookActual]

Maybe they'll get merged. It's a forgiveable mistake.

[ajaco3025]

Maybe they'll get merged. It's a forgiveable mistake.

Well, counting this one there are three threads.

[RookActual]

Well, counting this one there are three threads.

Stuff gets buried, people neglect the search option. It's just really annoying when the same topic gets posted on the same day. I definitely get your point, though.

[Nimisis]

Well, counting this one there are three threads.

There sure are other threads bout this, a nice one to from what I remember - I don't mind multiple threads bout it though, cause I want it to be an ingame feature for sure!

[Czyrek]

and using jefferies tubes would be a slow way to gain access to the saucer section. Turbolifts would be a log jam.

I agree.. no way they could get hundreds of people into the saucer in the few seconds they allow for saucer seperation v.v unless they transported them all assuden, still it would take more time then they allowed

[ThosaH]

regardless of all the implausibilities or difficulties in actual gameplay... saucer seperation was a real ability of the galaxy class, and constitution class vessles... maybe others as well. i think they should impliment it and make one of the component vessels a pet of the other.

[Allardyn]

Saucer seperation is so passe now its all about multi vector assult mode.

The idea behind the saucer seperation as explained in TNG was to keep the civilians/children/families out of harms way. So in essence I dont think you would use it for attacking anyway, perhaps a distraction at best such as in Best of Both Worlds.

[RookActual]

Saucer seperation is so passe now its all about multi vector assult mode.


MVAM was abandoned as it was one of the most downright stupid ideas the writers had to try to dazzle and impress the fans. It did it's job, it's done. Thank god.

[Stronin]

MVAM was abandoned as it was one of the most downright stupid ideas the writers had to try to dazzle and impress the fans. It did it's job, it's done. Thank god.

What are you talking about eh?

[hinaito]

hmmm... saucer seperation in the game. that would be cool, but i couldn't possibly imagine what it would be used for. it would be useless in battle because you wouldn't get any time to seperate it and use it as a duel attack mode. and you really wouldn't know that you were about to get into a fight so that you could saucer seper. it would be cool to have that feature though.

[TheMasterpiece]

This really isnt a big deal to me, its a small aspect and though it might be cool i dont really mind one way or another

[Aerelleus]

the only good thing i see about saucer sep is serving your crew up for a POW camp due to it not having warp capabilities. once they vap the lower section its like saying to the Klingons " look we even giift wrapped ourselves for ya have at it" or if you want to make a permanant city on a planet go crash into it with that saucer. I guess this means i hate the idea lol

[OrabIbo]

The only good thing you can do with MVAM is confuse your target of 1. If there is two, forget about it. your better off to stay in one piece.

I've always seen MVAM secondary piece being NPC controlled but you can give it commands for attacking. and why not allow yourself to beam yourself one one ship to another. So you can experience battle from two different angles. 3 if you got a ship similar to the Prometheus.

[RookActual]

What are you talking about eh?

My personal biased opinion on the matter. It makes no sense that the firepower of one thing can triple when it separates, the firepower should be just as equal. It would have the capability of creating multiple targets, and firing from multiple avenues, but the firepower from these equivalent parts would still be the sum of the whole. I'd find it a little bit riskier, because now you have to generate three separate deflector shields, and provide energy for three separate sets of engines.

I'm not incapable of comprehending it, but I know what a force multiplier is and what one isn't. I truly believe there are simply better ways to achieve what the M-VA mode was attempting to with far less complexity.

[Aerelleus]

My personal biased opinion on the matter. It makes no sense that the firepower of one thing can triple when it separates, the firepower should be just as equal. It would have the capability of creating multiple targets, and firing from multiple avenues, but the firepower from these equivalent parts would still be the sum of the whole. I'd find it a little bit riskier, because now you have to generate three separate deflector shields, and provide energy for three separate sets of engines.

I'm not incapable of comprehending it, but I know what a force multiplier is and what one isn't. There are simply better ways to achieve what the M-VA mode was attempting to.


Yeah what he said

[kevinj]

My personal biased opinion on the matter. It makes no sense that the firepower of one thing can triple when it separates, the firepower should be just as equal. It would have the capability of creating multiple targets, and firing from multiple avenues, but the firepower from these equivalent parts would still be the sum of the whole. I'd find it a little bit riskier, because now you have to generate three separate deflector shields, and provide energy for three separate sets of engines.

I'm not incapable of comprehending it, but I know what a force multiplier is and what one isn't. I truly believe there are simply better ways to achieve what the M-VA mode was attempting to with far less complexity.

I believe that the idea behind MVAM was to make it so that more weapon arcs could be brought to target at the same time. The problem that is inherent with a starship is that it gets in its own way with some weapons in terms of firing arcs.

Now, I agree that MVAM would be a completely useless waste of developer time because as you said, that means you have more hulls to put shieldings and engines on. It might be good for the surprise affect against a single foe, but that is it, because as the battle dragged on, power supplies would start to become limited, as would shield power.

[RookActual]

I believe that the idea behind MVAM was to make it so that more weapon arcs could be brought to target at the same time. The problem that is inherent with a starship is that it gets in its own way with some weapons in terms of firing arcs.

I don't debate the merits of this tactic, I debate the approach to how M-VAM accomplishes this tactic.

[Decius]

I don't debate the merits of this tactic, I debate the approach to how M-VAM accomplishes this tactic.

I just view it as multiple targets to shoot at. Aside from that, I can see the use.. say if the enemy's shields are weakened and they transfer reserve power to forward shields, the multiple ships from MVAM could swarm around it and strike it where it's shields are weakest.

[RookActual]

I just view it as multiple targets to shoot at. Aside from that, I can see the use.. say if the enemy's shields are weakened and they transfer reserve power to forward shields, the multiple ships from MVAM could swarm around it and strike it where it's shields are weakest.

Again, the idea of multiple separate platforms cooperating to deliver fire superiority is obvious. The idea that your vessel should be Voltron to do it is an overcomplication of basic fire and maneuver principles.

[Decius]

Again, the idea of multiple separate platforms cooperating to deliver fire superiority is obvious. The idea that your vessel should be Voltron to do it is an overcomplication of basic fire and maneuver principles.

I thought Prometheus was a pretty cool ship, I liked the MVAM aspect. I think the MVAM is a helpful utility in the regard that I specified. Aside from the tripling the power while doing so argument, I could see some additional uses for it..

1. Splitting apart and patrolling a wider area.
2. The whole "attacking from several angles" deal.
3. Perhaps appearing on long range sensors as "3 ships" instead of just a single ship.
4. Need to accomplish multiple missions at once, split the ship and there you go.
5. One part of the ship is extremely damaged and incapable of going to warp like that as a whole, seperate and let the other pieces go to warp themselves.
6. Multiple rescue operations at different locations, split the ship (sort of like #4).

I don't think "tripling the power" is a correct assumption, even if the writer said it like that. In my eyes I always considered the ship even split just as powerful as the whole when combined. Perhaps bringing more weapons to bare (the ones hidden when combined) does influence it's power factor, who knows.

[RookActual]

I thought Prometheus was a pretty cool ship, I liked the MVAM aspect. I think the MVAM is a helpful utility in the regard that I specified. Aside from the tripling the power while doing so argument, I could see some additional uses for it..

1. Splitting apart and patrolling a wider area.
2. The whole "attacking from several angles" deal.
3. Perhaps appearing on long range sensors as "3 ships" instead of just a single ship.
4. Need to accomplish multiple missions at once, split the ship and there you go.
5. One part of the ship is extremely damaged and incapable of going to warp like that as a whole, seperate and let the other pieces go to warp themselves.
6. Multiple rescue operations at different locations, split the ship (sort of like #4).

I don't think "tripling the power" is a correct assumption, even if the writer said it like that. In my eyes I always considered the ship even split just as powerful as the whole when combined. Perhaps bringing more weapons to bare (the ones hidden when combined) does influence it's power factor, who knows.

Well, I really was keeping my answers simple as I didn't feel this topic was relevant, and I've stated all my arguments in the appropriate thread. I'm not trying to cut you short, and I'm not running from the debate, but we're talking about M-VAM on the Prometheus class when we should be talking about Saucer Separation on the Galaxy class. It's my fault for responding to the first post in this thread regarding the issue.

[Decius]

Well, I really was keeping my answers simple as I didn't feel this topic was relevant, and I've stated all my arguments in the appropriate thread. I'm not trying to cut you short, and I'm not running from the debate, but we're talking about M-VAM on the Prometheus class when we should be talking about Saucer Separation on the Galaxy class. It's my fault for responding to the first post in this thread regarding the issue.

That's fine, no biggie.

As for the Galaxy class saucer seperation, I don't think it's really needed in STO. From what I remember (also brushed up if I missed anything here (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Saucer_separation)) it's not really used too much in even the tv show, and even when it was it was very plot driven.

[Father_Origin]

There are only two real reasons to separate the sauser.

1. the sauser took massive damage one the star drive part is in good shape AND you have more fighting
to do.

2. you need to ram something to save the universe and the star drive will be enuff (that way you
can save most the rest of the crew)

ok, maybe one more

3. you are bored and you just killing time til the other fleet players log on.

[RookActual]

That's fine, no biggie.

As for the Galaxy class saucer seperation, I don't think it's really needed in STO. From what I remember (also brushed up if I missed anything here (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Saucer_separation)) it's not really used too much in even the tv show, and even when it was it was very plot driven.

I don't see any reason not to incorporate it, if it doesn't complicate things. However, I really can't imagine it being really necessary in anything but a story mission that required it, and not every vessel has the capability so it'd be difficult to make that requirement. In every game I've played that has saucer separation, engaging it usually meant you were only taking half a ship back when you could have just as easily taken a slightly damaged but still complete one. Bridge Commander and Armada being the best examples.

[Decius]

I don't see any reason not to incorporate it, if it doesn't complicate things. However, I really can't imagine it being really necessary in anything but a story mission that required it, and not every vessel has the capability so it'd be difficult to make that requirement. In every game I've played that has saucer separation, engaging it usually meant you were only taking half a ship back when you could have just as easily taken a slightly damaged but still complete one. Bridge Commander and Armada being the best examples.

I thought the seperation in Bridge Commander was via mod only, I don't remember using it in the vanilla version of the game. How can you take the saucer back to a starbase (or whatever) when it doesn't go warp speed? Is it going back at impulse or people towing it or something?

[RookActual]

I thought the seperation in Bridge Commander was via mod only, I don't remember using it in the vanilla version of the game. How can you take the saucer back to a starbase (or whatever) when it doesn't go warp speed? Is it going back at impulse or people towing it or something?

I haven't ever played the game unmodded, but it justifies my point just as well the original version didn't incorporate it. I can't honestly tell you how it goes after separation, because I really never did it. In Armada, thought, it was completely useless.

[hinaito]

The only good thing you can do with MVAM is confuse your target of 1. If there is two, forget about it. your better off to stay in one piece.

I've always seen MVAM secondary piece being NPC controlled but you can give it commands for attacking. and why not allow yourself to beam yourself one one ship to another. So you can experience battle from two different angles. 3 if you got a ship similar to the Prometheus.

the prometheus class... now that's a ship i can see with the seperation addon in the game. all three parts are all built for attack. the galaxy's saucer seper was only used like twice, wasn't it. and it was always for escape from something. you could control one, and the other two would be like pet npcs on the prometheus. that would be awesome

[Decius]

I haven't ever played the game unmodded, but it justifies my point just as well the original version didn't incorporate it. I can't honestly tell you how it goes after separation, because I really never did it. In Armada, thought, it was completely useless.

Well, I don't think they should spend time incorporating that aspect into STO if there is no solid reason to spend time doing so. It might be a neat gimmick, but that's all I'm seeing it as right now.

[RookActual]

Well, I don't think they should spend time incorporating that aspect into STO if there is no solid reason to spend time doing so. It might be a neat gimmick, but that's all I'm seeing it as right now.

Thats what I always felt separation and M-VAM were: gimmicks.

[Decius]

Thats what I always felt separation and M-VAM were: gimmicks.

That's cool, when I was talking about the MVAM I wasn't even contemplating as to whether they should implement that into STO or not, I was just talking about what the possible reasons were behind it. If they do put it in, I suppose it can serve some special ability or something. As for the Galaxy saucer seperation, it doesn't split up and fire or anything.. it just... splits up.

edit: changed "or" to "and"

[cocoa-jin]

I would only think the saucer seperation would leave the combat drive easier to defeat(assuming the saucer leaves the area). It would have less hull, slightly less weapons. It would hit almost as hard, but would take less of a beating before loss of systems and structural integrity.

[captainlukea]

i think the galaxy class starship should separate. it is a serious feature of not only this class of starship but also other ships aswell, e.g. the promethius class. separates into 3 individual ships forming a multi vectral assult mode. you simply cannot have this ship without this feature. it is also a very recent development and is extremely powerfull, a worthy opponant even to a defiant class. if this ship is developed with the separation feature then the galaxy class cirtainly should be. it would be a first aswell.

captain luke arnold
USS CHALLENGER
NCC 71099
galaxy class dreadnaught