View Full Version : Galaxy Class/Nebula Class
Ruzzell
10-20-2009, 09:42 AM
I noticed their is no nebula class listed under the ships page, but does the nebula class fit under the galaxy configuration?
USS_Parallax
10-20-2009, 09:43 AM
Nobody knows. They mentioned the Nebula was a Science Vessel in one thing. However that would mean so far there's literally no place it could go (since the last 3 ships we don't know of are Cryptic Creations).
I'd hope it would be under the Galaxy...
Belenus
10-20-2009, 09:44 AM
There better be a Nebula Class or some heads are going to roll...:eek:
Rakkis
10-20-2009, 09:46 AM
You can probally make it out of the galaxy class.... ship customization and such
Possibly. We don't know.
Look, see - we know that while the Excelsior isn't listed in the Ships of the Line page, Gozer said (on IRC) that the Excelsior is actually just another visual option for the Tier 2 Cruisers (the same tier as Constitution and Excalibur). So we know this sorta thing is going on.
The Nebula's been used as an example in Cryptic's dev chats and so on, so we know they haven't forgotten it. So where is the Nebula? Well, as you say, it could be a Galaxy alternate config. It could be a Luna alternate, also...the Luna's layout is similar in some ways to the Nebula. We don't know yet.
AdmiralHocking
10-20-2009, 09:47 AM
Going by the image of the Chyenne Class customisations in the recent STO article in PC Gamer (US), I would lean towards the Nebula being classed under a possible Galaxy Class customisation. Quite an oversight if it's not possible in my opinion though.
ransomwk
10-20-2009, 09:49 AM
It would make sense to put the Nebula and the Galaxy together, since they use basically the same parts. Although, those parts are arranged a little differently, I don't know if cryptic's ship creator can handle the different attachment points. It would be nice if someone from cryptic would come out and say something about it.
The big mission pod sitting on top wold make it an interesting ship to work with. It could be made into a ship capable of changing from one type to another. Such as having it fall under the Escort category if the player chooses a weapon pod, or the science category if the player chooses a sensor pod. Further, since the pod is completely swapped out, there isn't much of a restriction on the size or type of stuff that can be placed there.
Rekkert
10-20-2009, 09:51 AM
It could be a Luna alternate, also...the Luna's layout is similar in some ways to the Nebula.
I'm also expecting this.
I mean, having the Nebula and the Galaxy in the same config doesn't make any sense, they have completely different roles, it would be like putting a Constitution and a Miranda in the same config just because they have the same parts.
USS_Parallax
10-20-2009, 09:54 AM
The Nebula is in every way inferior to the Galaxy. It had better not be a tier up.
Constitution/Excalibur - different parts, same overall layout.
Intrepid/Discovery - different parts, same overall layout.
Defiant/Valiant - different parts, same overall layout.
Galaxy/Nebula - same parts, different overall layout.
I would also expect the Nebula to be in the Luna configuaration; there really isn't anywhere else that it fits.
Late_wolfy
10-20-2009, 10:10 AM
The only place I can see it being is either an alteration to the Luna class as they share the same profile, or the Nebula Class has received a large refit and given a new class (or sub-class) name, specifically the Sol or Polaris classes maybe being an upgrade of the nebula class.
Like how the Oslo class is an upgrade of the Norway class, and how the Enterprise in the first few movies was an upgraded Constitution Class, yet some called it Enterprise Class (however, i dont hink thats TOTALLY canon :P)
THORN74
10-20-2009, 10:11 AM
i would bet a brand new warp core that the Galaxy Configuration would allow u to build a Nebula Class in the customization. They share 90% or the same parts, and have about 90% the same capabillities.
Rangerrob
10-20-2009, 10:13 AM
I'm thinking the "Celestial" class will be the Nebula (Refit). Listed right under Galaxy on the ship of the line page.
Why they don't they call it a Nebula...who knows.
If it isn't, maybe they are saving it for an expansion, maybe it will be a "Buy this class with credits"
The Nebula is in every way inferior to the Galaxy. It had better not be a tier up.
The thing about both the Galaxy and the Nebula class ships is that, they are so large that if they were to be refited into more specialized roles, they would be the most powerfull ships in their fields.
If you gave the Nebula a specialized science pod (keeping in mind that the Nebula's pod is larger than a Defiant class starship), and filled a decent amount of its free space with labs, you would have a powerfull science platform. You wouldn't really need to take anything out, so its performance as a cruiser would not be affected; but it could become both a good cruiser and an awsome science vessel.
The Galaxy has continued in its role as a cruiser, which means it still has a lot of unused space (the Galaxy was always supposed to have a lot of unused space, and large carrying capacity seems to be a characteristic of cruisers in STO) and its upgrades have been far more general.
So, a teir upgrade for the Nebula within the science category makes sense to me.
Deltab
10-20-2009, 10:33 AM
If the Steamrunner is a class under the Akira config, then it would be logical that the Nebula would be under the Galaxy config.
vobedarkelf
10-20-2009, 10:45 AM
Actually you guys are very off base. Yes I know that from a model standpoint the Nebula 'uses the same parts', but the truth is, the Nebula is supposed to be a much smaller ship than the Galaxy.
I highly recommend reading about the Nebula here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/nebula.htm
I can see the ship fitting into a Cruiser or Science role at either T2 or T3, but it really cant just be a veriant of the Galaxy or Luna.
USS_Parallax
10-20-2009, 10:47 AM
Actually you guys are very off base. Yes I know that from a model standpoint the Nebula 'uses the same parts', but the truth is, the Nebula is supposed to be a much smaller ship than the Galaxy.
I highly recommend reading about the Nebula here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/nebula.htm
I can see the ship fitting into a Cruiser or Science role at either T2 or T3, but it really cant just be a veriant of the Galaxy or Luna.
No no no no no. Highly incorrect. While there seems to have been a few odd tiny Nebula (be it special effects mistakes or not) all the most current Nebula have been basically a Galaxy-class with a different configuration. Same scale and all.
If I were to try to put lore reasons for the tiny Nebula I'd say they were prototyping the Nebula technology using hulls more like the Freedom and New Orleans class size. Then they went on to bigger hulls.
However in the end I'd say that it's a special effects mistake.
Norexan-Guy
10-20-2009, 10:56 AM
Celestial or Sol could be Nebula refits...
THORN74
10-20-2009, 10:57 AM
the saucer, and warp nacells are EXACTLY the same. the engineering hull is 90% the same, they only moved the nacelle mounting arms. the biggest difference is the "neck" and the mission pod. the neck is reconfigured so the saucer and secondary hull are much closer together, leaving only the mission pod as the biggest difference.
vobedarkelf
10-20-2009, 11:04 AM
However in the end I'd say that it's a special effects mistake.
That is what I was trying to tell you. It was a mistake that it looked as big as it did in the first place. If you read that article, one of the first things they do is quote the original designer saying that the ship was intended to be smaller.
It is a mixed bag. Even in later episodes the Nebula still looks like a Galaxy sized ship, although in other videogames like Armada, they made sure to made the Nebula proper sized. This is also beside the point that there is not supposed to be other ships nearly as large as the Galaxy at that point in time.
This is one of the many things in the StarTrek universe that doesn't really fit together.
Size aside however, it just isnt supposed to be equal to a Galaxy, so it cant be a variant. Likewise, the Luna is a very new ship design, and a T4 ship in STO. A Nebula is not going to be a T4 ship in STO, comparable to a Luna, if the Galaxy is sitting at T3.
the saucer, and warp nacells are EXACTLY the same. the engineering hull is 90% the same, they only moved the nacelle mounting arms. the biggest difference is the "neck" and the mission pod. the neck is reconfigured so the saucer and secondary hull are much closer together, leaving only the mission pod as the biggest difference.
None of which matters. The Nebula and Galaxy have different silhouettes, they are arranged differently, they are not the same configuration.
I will say it again: the Intrepid and Discovery do not sare any components, they are in the same configuration because they have the same basic layout or silhouette. Same with the Constitution and Excalibur. Same with the Defiant and Vigilant.
The components are the only thing linking the Galaxy and Nebula; but the components don't count, only the way they are stuck together does.
Plus there is the fact that the Nebula has been called a science ship, which means it can't be in a cruiser config.
I'm sorry to keep banging on about this THORN, but you've been looking at this backwards all along. :o
blujester
10-20-2009, 11:13 AM
Ok lets look at this logically.
If it has 4 nacels and a roundish saucer and no secondary hull it's a Constellation. If it has a saucer and low slung trailing nacels with no secondary hull it's an Akira. If it has variable pylons and no neck but both primary and secondary hulls it's an Intrepid.
Logic would indicate that if it has low slung nacels, no neck, both a primary and secondary hull and a huge Mission pod mounted on a roll bar/minor neck. It would be a Luna. Thus I still think the Nebula is in the Luna class if at all.
Bj
Size aside however, it just isnt supposed to be equal to a Galaxy, so it cant be a variant. Likewise, the Luna is a very new ship design, and a T4 ship in STO. A Nebula is not going to be a T4 ship in STO, comparable to a Luna, if the Galaxy is sitting at T3.
We know that there's a minimal difference between Tier 5 and Tier 4. The devs have repeatedly said the Tier 5 vessels are only very slightly better than the Tier 4 ships.
(Yes, five and four - they're calling the Miranda 'Tier 1' now, and the max vessels 'Tier 5'.)
So let's say we have a Tier 4 Galaxy Cruiser and a Tier 5 Nebula Science vessel...the Nebula would never outdo the Galaxy in some areas. Like, say, crew complement, toughness, engineering capacity, and so on.
Likewise, the Galaxy will never outdo the Tier 5 Science vessel at science stuff. But that's fair - the Galaxy doesn't have that massive mission pod.
kobayashi_maru
10-20-2009, 11:24 AM
Instead of thinking about it in terms of functionality, think about it in terms of the kit that you would use to create it. While it's difficult to know just how much "kitbashing" the Cryptic engine will allow, the same parts are used in the Galaxy (just configured differently) so my assumption the Galaxy kit would probably allow for the nebula class.
Also remember that Cryptic has indicated cosmetics of a ship have no reflection on it's true configuration ability.
Rangerrob
10-20-2009, 11:28 AM
Here is a logic test for yah...
Galaxy is to Nebula
as
Constitution (Refit) is to __________
The correct answer is Miranda. You know the guy in the effect shop, used the Miranda as a template when building the Nebula out of parts from the Galaxy model. Logically, if the Connie and Miranda are separate classes, the Galaxy and Nebula should be as well.
blujester
10-20-2009, 11:31 AM
Instead of thinking about it in terms of functionality, think about it in terms of the kit that you would use to create it. While it's difficult to know just how much "kitbashing" the Cryptic engine will allow, the same parts are used in the Galaxy (just configured differently) so my assumption the Galaxy kit would probably allow for the nebula class.
Also remember that Cryptic has indicated cosmetics of a ship have no reflection on it's true configuration ability.
The silhouette and size is the deciding factor not the parts used. The Constellation config can have a very Intrepid looking saucer but the 4 nacels and no secondary hull define it more than if it uses Galaxy looking nacels or Constitution style saucers.
The Miranda is made from Connie parts but is way different looking than a Connie.
Bj
vobedarkelf
10-20-2009, 11:44 AM
The correct answer is Miranda. You know the guy in the effect shop, used the Miranda as a template when building the Nebula out of parts from the Galaxy model. Logically, if the Connie and Miranda are separate classes, the Galaxy and Nebula should be as well.
I like your logic, but it is not perfect. This is the Star Trek universe. We cannot be thinking in terms of real world kitbashing. The reason the constitution refit and the miranda look similar is because they are from the same tech period. Like how a 2009 Dodge Dakota has a similar appearance to a 2009 Dodge Charger. They are very different vehicles, but share characteristics.
A Nebula looks a lot like a Galaxy, but you cannot just move a few parts around and call it a Nebula. This ship is already well established as its own unique class. It deserves the same in STO.
Frankly, what ****es me off about this nebula subject is that Cryptic is adding all these "cryptic original" ship designs to the game, yet they cannot find room to bump one of those in order to include the Nebula class. Do we really need the "Cochrane Class" at T3 Science? Why can't it be Intrepid, Discovery, Nebula? I can say the same thing about other missing ships.
Rangerrob
10-20-2009, 11:47 AM
You're makin' my point. I want the Nebula to be a separate class as well. :)
Edit: took out the "Dude" prefix, when I saw the cleavage on the avatar. :o
WinterPark1701
10-20-2009, 12:12 PM
I've herd that the Galaxy will be modded into the Nebula. Truthfully I always liked the Nebula much better then the Galaxy myself.
Bastrol
10-20-2009, 12:38 PM
Who cares, the Nebula class is an ugly ship made from extra parts. Its an abonomation that should be excluded from the game ;)
Seriously though just like other ppl have mentioned its either a Galaxy or Luna varient. I would bet good money that its in the game at launch.
vobedarkelf
10-20-2009, 01:28 PM
You're makin' my point. I want the Nebula to be a separate class as well. :)
Yea, I was agreeing with you, I just didnt like your example.
Seriously though just like other ppl have mentioned its either a Galaxy or Luna varient. I would bet good money that its in the game at launch.
Either way, I plan to pester them about it until they add it. I would rather see every established ship class properly represented in game, before they start filling in the gaps with their 'cryptic originals'.
WinterPark1701
10-20-2009, 02:51 PM
So far as Feddy ships I'd have to rank the nebula as my #2 second only to the defiant-class.
Arokh72
10-20-2009, 02:58 PM
I wonder if this ( http://images.mmorpg.com/features/3635/images/3635_1.jpg ) is a Nebula class for STO? The saucer section is too thick for Galaxy.
vobedarkelf
10-20-2009, 03:12 PM
No, that is definately a Galaxy. Keep in mind that we will be able to chose from a selection of saucers on each ship. That one is probably just one of several options.
Admiral-Darren-Wright
10-20-2009, 03:18 PM
I noticed their is no nebula class listed under the ships page, but does the nebula class fit under the galaxy configuration?
Zinc has said the Nebula is a high Tier Science vessel, but actually we have not heard anything on this ship since that interview.
So really we just have to believe Zinc has her as a high tier science ship somewhere's on game.
(Why shes not in the ship list overveiw = who knows )
THORN74
10-20-2009, 05:05 PM
None of which matters. The Nebula and Galaxy have different silhouettes, they are arranged differently, they are not the same configuration.
I will say it again: the Intrepid and Discovery do not sare any components, they are in the same configuration because they have the same basic layout or silhouette. Same with the Constitution and Excalibur. Same with the Defiant and Vigilant.
The components are the only thing linking the Galaxy and Nebula; but the components don't count, only the way they are stuck together does.
Plus there is the fact that the Nebula has been called a science ship, which means it can't be in a cruiser config.
I'm sorry to keep banging on about this THORN, but you've been looking at this backwards all along. :o
following ur logic on silouettes the Excalibur, excelsior, ambassador, and galaxy are ALL Constitution Configurations as they are all the same silouette. I have always looked at it as each config was a box or parts bin, and each ship class was a different possible version u could make with the parts in the bin.
i am afraid we will have to agree to dis-agree at this point. we will learn the truth soon enough.
blujester
10-20-2009, 05:31 PM
following ur logic on silouettes the Excalibur, excelsior, ambassador, and galaxy are ALL Constitution Configurations as they are all the same silouette. I have always looked at it as each config was a box or parts bin, and each ship class was a different possible version u could make with the parts in the bin.
i am afraid we will have to agree to dis-agree at this point. we will learn the truth soon enough.
Unless of course you were to actually look at the silhouette of the Constitution and Galaxy and surmised that...hey one is twice the beam and 6 times the mass and they look no more alike than an Intrepid looks like a Constitution. An Ambassador looks very much like a Galaxy and an Excalibur and Excelsior look very much like a Constitution but a Nebula looks like a Luna built with Galaxy parts just as a Luna looks like a Nebula built with Sovereign parts.
Defining characteristics of the Nebula Silhouette are low slung nacels, secondary hull joined to primary with no neck, mission pod/3rd hull mounted overhead.
Defining characteristics of the Luna Silhouette are low slung nacels, secondary hull joined to primary with no neck, mission pod/3rd hull mounted overhead.
It's simply logical.
Bj