test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Now that the T5 B'rel is here...

1235»

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'm not out to flame, lol.

    Could have fooled me. :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Pasquatic wrote:
    If you had bothered to read The Path to 2409 you might realize just how ignorant you have shown yourself to be.

    Like I said before, the Kiddie Horde is on the stampede to ensure that this game goes down as TNG Online.


    Just for the record, my all time favorite Star Trek ship is... THE GALAXY CLASS!!!!

    I was just using the TOS Connie to make a point that I think everyone should be able to use whatever ship they want at end game and still be able to compete.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Armsman wrote: »
    Oh please. You realize Star Trek is a FICTIONAL entity right; (and FYI the fact that you saw Miranda, Excelsior, etc. 'old' ship models from the TOS films in TNG was a budget issue - ie they wanted gto show different ships and had perfectly good film quality models at ILM, and reusing those saved on effect production cost - so even TPTB and TNG producers weren't all that concerned with the fictional 'Star Trek timeline'.

    Again, this isn't the "Star Trek 25th Century Virtiual Life Simulator" - it's an MMORPG based on the 45 year IP known as Star Trek; and is using EVERYTHING (old and new) from that IP. I assume you're also upset we're not required to sit at out computer for days staring at Sector Space just to reach the planet Vulcan on the map (as by most accounts it for 4 days to go from Earth to Vulcan.) the fact it takes less than 30 seconds must really be frustrating eh?

    It's not crappy or sloppy to decide that they want to cater to fans of the 45 year old IP; and give them the tools to tailor theiir game experience to their liking. It's a sound business decision, just like the TNG producers decision to recycle good film models from films made just 4 years earlier when they needed/wanted more starships to be shown on TNG.

    If you rweally want a Star Trek simulation, I hear teh MMO Second Life has a HIUGE area devoted to fans of 24th century Star Trek; and you can spend hours walking around in size appropriate areas fiddling with appropriate looking control consoles to hyour hearts content.

    I think you've single-handedly won this debate!!!! :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    redheadguy wrote:
    Could have fooled me. :rolleyes:

    Well, I'm glad i'm so good at deception :D


    Why should people be able to fly whatever ship they want? Give me a good reason why I should think that a TOS connie should be T5.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    You mean gimped?

    And its because the ship you wanna fly blows klingon goobers :p

    But seriously, I think the debate is pointless because many people are just not willing to waver.

    Kinda like you? :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Well, I'm glad i'm so good at deception :D


    Why should people be able to fly whatever ship they want? Give me a good reason why I should think that a TOS connie should be T5.

    Try re-reading the posts by Armsman and JAM062307. I don't feel like re-inventing the wheel or in this case re-wording what is already well writen by others.

    Maybe this time you could try and be open-minded? Your tone has been very, umm, rough to put it nicly.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I maintain the cool way to do it in-game would be to actually have a group of memorable, named Starfleet Klingons make fun of the Starfleet Corps of Engineers for redesigning their ships every 100 years or so, turn engineering on its head with Klingon know-how and prove that a lot of the "design evolution" is aesthetic and arbitrary by upgrading a Connie to take on a Sovereign, proving that Starfleet can stand to learn a thing or two from the Klingons.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    And at the risk of spoiling something that may be a plot point in one of my Foundry missions...

    Look back at "Relics" (TNG).

    Scotty purposefully lowballed all of the manuals he wrote on the ships of his day and seemed to regard it as a common practice. Not for safety (although that may have been a consideration) but to give himself and his fellow engineers more breathing room. This notion was alien to Geordi.

    It's entirely possible that the improvements of the last 150 years are not nearly as pronounced as people tend to think if TOS engineers and designers were routinely falsifying specs to indicate their ships were much less capable than they actually were and the average engineers in the field and their successors were taking the designers at their word.

    So people come along and design a new ship, believing it's an upgrade when it actually isn't because TOS engineers were purposefully fabricating lower numbers for their ships' capabilities.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Except a wormhole almost tore the enterprise to pieces O.o
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    redheadguy wrote:
    Kinda like you? :p

    Well, if you can't give me a good reason, why should my mind change?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    You mean gimped?

    And its because the ship you wanna fly blows klingon goobers :p

    But seriously, I think the debate is pointless because many people are just not willing to waver.

    Which is also what you are doing... (back from work BTW)

    You wont budge an inch with your opinion...why should others?


    I'll ask this just one more time...

    Why should what you want, override what other's want,,, ?

    What makes your self-centerd opinion right and everybody else's self-centered opinion wrong...??

    Why would putting something in the game you can easily ignore/not use, make it so you would not be able to have fun playing the game... ???

    What pedestal have you placed yourself upon, that gives you the impression that your intolerance is somehow better for the overall health of the game... ????

    And finally...,

    What are we having for lunch tomorrow... ????? ;)


    (I luv debates that start well before I have to go to work and are still hummin' along, when I get home ten hours later.. :D)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    DaveyNY wrote: »
    Which is also what you are doing... (back from work BTW)

    You wont budge an inch with your opinion...why should others?

    I'm not the one striving to "disrupt the status quo". If you want something and want others to agree with you, a good arguement for its implementation should be presented. How it improves everyones experience playing the game. All I see so far is "I want it cuz I do". Sorry, that doesn't work on me. I'm a jerk like that I guess.
    I'll ask this just one more time...

    Why should what you want, override what other's want,,, ?

    I never said it does. Have you bothered to read my long-winded posts? Because I've said just the opposite.
    What makes your self-centerd opinion right and everybody else's self-centered opinion wrong...??

    Again.... I said the complete opposite. Read my previous posts.
    Why would putting something in the game you can easily ignore/not use, make it so you would not be able to have fun playing the game... ???

    I can't ignore it when theres a hundred of them on my screen. (exageration) Plus there's the advirtising on the launcher, on the home page, and in the banner often enough. Its not ignorable. Also, ignoring isn't the same as not using.

    I mean, those biothermal things drove people nuts, yet actually didn't cause any real problem except a graphical inconvenience.
    What pedestal have you placed yourself upon, that gives you the impression that your intolerance is somehow better for the overall health of the game... ????

    Intolerance is equal. Its not that I'm intolerant of your wish's, nor do I not understand them. I'm a big fan of a mod for the Century Class, and I used it in SFC. But in SFC my ship was unique, and I could RP why my ship was out of place. That doesn't work when a chunk of people are flying in TOS connies in T5 PvP matches.

    I'm just arrogant. I'm not on a pedestal :D
    And finally...,

    What are we having for lunch tomorrow... ????? ;)

    McDonald's w00t :)
    (I luv debates that start well before I have to go to work and are still hummin' along, when I get home ten hours later.. :D)

    Same problem.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'm not the one striving to "disrupt the status quo". If you want something and want others to agree with you, a good argument for its implementation should be presented. How it improves everyones experience playing the game. All I see so far is "I want it cuz I do". Sorry, that doesn't work on me. I'm a jerk like that I guess.



    I never said it does. Have you bothered to read my long-winded posts? Because I've said just the opposite.



    Again.... I said the complete opposite. Read my previous posts.



    I can't ignore it when theres a hundred of them on my screen. (exaggeration) Plus there's the advertising on the launcher, on the home page, and in the banner often enough. Its not ignorable. Also, ignoring isn't the same as not using.

    I mean, those biothermal things drove people nuts, yet actually didn't cause any real problem except a graphical inconvenience.



    Intolerance is equal. Its not that I'm intolerant of your wishes, nor do I not understand them. I'm a big fan of a mod for the Century Class, and I used it in SFC. But in SFC my ship was unique, and I could RP why my ship was out of place. That doesn't work when a chunk of people are flying in TOS connies in T5 PvP matches.

    I'm just arrogant. I'm not on a pedestal :D



    McDonald's w00t :)

    I can't do Mickey Dee's anymore ( indigestion city) can we do Wendy's instead?

    Arrogance can be fun occasionally... but it almost always limit's yer social circle to family and casual acquaintance's. ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    DaveyNY wrote: »
    I can't do Mickey Dee's anymore ( indigestion city) can we do Wendy's instead?

    Arrogance can be fun occasionally... but it almost always limit's yer social circle to family and casual acquaintance's. ;)

    Ya know... That's totally true.

    It stems from a childhood of seclusion, lol. Spent a lot of time in hospitals, so my social skills aren't very awesome, lol. Plus the natural limits of text based comunication.

    I'm actually trying to be clear, and somewhat funny, through exaggeration and ridiculousness, lol.

    Wendy's is awesome too.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Ya know... That's totally true.

    It stems from a childhood of seclusion, lol. Spent a lot of time in hospitals, so my social skills aren't very awesome, lol. Plus the natural limits of text based comunication.

    I'm actually trying to be clear, and somewhat funny, through exaggeration and ridiculousness, lol.

    Wendy's is awesome too.

    Ya know what's really funny.... I've spend a lot of time in hospitals also... the last 34 years to be exact...:D


    As an employee though... and I've forced myself to learn how to exploit the social skills I never had, as a kid... :)


    One learns fairly quickly how to be very social, when one is working constantly with mostly grumpy, sick people that want constant attention. :rolleyes:

    (never mind the sometimes grumpy and annoying fellow employees.) <chuckle>
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Look...they should just sell us holodisks on the Cstore for storing ship appearance, so we can apply it like an off duty costume. That way no more need for refits, you just save your ships "outfit" and apply it like a hologram to your current ship.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    redheadguy wrote:
    So your saying a ships size should determine who wins in a fight? :eek: Really?

    Here I thought a players skill was supposed to count for something.

    No. i m not. I was saying that a ship the same class and faction as mine but a fourth of my size has no business equaling me in all stats.

    It ruins the factions inner consistency.





    And as for skills:

    So... how about you try to select a tiny ship in a npc spam pvp situation while its zipping around.....

    Players skill my TRIBBLE.

    Stop trying to bend my words to suit your needs. I said a little ship being as good as a much more larger ship of the same class and faction is just weird and i dislike it.

    It als oraises the question why we do not build a carrier that launches goddamned connies.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    And as for skills:

    So... how about you try to select a tiny ship in a npc spam pvp situation while its zipping around.....

    Welcome to Sisko ship Online :D

    /10chars ftw
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I thought I'd chime in before the GM's shut it down for too much warring.


    I an far more forgiving about Tier 5 B'Rel and Uniforms.

    The B'rel because its info in canon is pretty elastic, and there seemed to be a lot of em so the Klingon improving it to be a better ship makes some sense.

    On the other hand, the TOS Connie is never seen beyond the mid 23rd century. For Starfleet, in the middle of a war to devote precious resources to refitting the outdated design makes little sense. What is the benefit?

    I can accept a Tier 1 Connie as old, mothballed or museum ships rushed into service, explaining why they have the minimal weapon slots.

    And as for the uniforms. To make one, you walk up to a replicator, ask for the design and you get it.
    The ship would require way too many resources for it to happen, for no benefits other than look.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Well, if you can't give me a good reason, why should my mind change?

    What about the fact that there are older ships at T5 in game already? Forget about the 200 year old TOS Connie, this would be a brand new ship anyway....with the look of the TOS Connie along with all the T2 skins.

    D'Kyr

    This Vulcan starship has been in continual use since the 22nd century, although the Vulcans have continually upgraded its technology. First used as a combat cruiser by the Vulcan High Command, later versions of the D'Kyr were used for planetary defense, scientific exploration and rescue missions.

    NK

    After Starfleet starships were converted to a modular design, a group from the Starfleet Corps of Engineers working at Utopia Planitia wondered if vessels from the Federation's past could be constructed in this manner. Working with Federation historian Geoffrey Pacelli, the SCE officers chose the famed NX Class for reconstruction. The NX Class Starship Replica sports the classic look of Earth's starships from the 22nd century, but has been updated with modern technology to meet current Starfleet specifications for Lieutenant-rank missions. (so...now make one for Admiral-rank missions and call it an escort)

    Marauder

    The Orion Syndicate has made the design of their famed Marauder Patrol Cruiser available to the Klingon Defense Force. Marauders are made for quick raids, but have the strength to last through a pitched battle.
    (22nd century ship)

    Excalibur

    Updating the iconic profile of the Constitution class, the Excalibur is the first of a group of new, state-of-the-art cruisers intended to fill a variety of roles for Starfleet. Designed with the modular construction favored by the Starfleet Corps of Engineers, the Excalibur can tackle almost any task. Its expanded cargo capacity and advanced warp core make it an ideal solo exploration vessel, but it also performs well as a support ship during fleet actions. (make a T5 version with TOS ship skin option...if it's still too hard to believe...well turn it into a T5 Science/Escort with Cm. Sci and LtCm. Tac. with a 3/3 weapon slots)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The Excalibur isn't T5, nice try though.

    The Vulcan ship is a science whip, hence it can't go toe to toe w/ a sovereign and pwn it like some (that's right, some, not all) people who want the connie want.

    Maybe when T6 comes out, I won't care as much, but atm, I'm against a T5 connie, and your grabbing for examples from other races doesn't faze my thoughts on it. Especially since the recreated connie's are T2, and that's according to the games lore. I find it a better arguement against a T5 connie than for it.

    Also, The NX is a T1 alternate, not a T5. So basically what people are asking for is already in-game.

    Plus, someone did Infected w/ me and a group yesterday in a T2 connie, and it did fine, diluting the arguement presented for a T5 connie even more.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The Excalibur isn't T5, nice try though.

    The Vulcan ship is a science whip, hence it can't go toe to toe w/ a sovereign and pwn it like some (that's right, some, not all) people who want the connie want.

    Maybe when T6 comes out, I won't care as much, but atm, I'm against a T5 connie, and your grabbing for examples from other races doesn't faze my thoughts on it. Especially since the recreated connie's are T2, and that's according to the games lore. I find it a better arguement against a T5 connie than for it.

    Also, The NX is a T1 alternate, not a T5. So basically what people are asking for is already in-game.

    Plus, someone did Infected w/ me and a group yesterday in a T2 connie, and it did fine, diluting the arguement presented for a T5 connie even more.

    I fail to understand your logic...you're saying you won't care if they release a tier 6 Connie but you DO care if they release a tier 5?

    Who says the D'Kyr can't go toe to toe with an assault cruiser? In fact one of the easiest ways to take out a cruiser is with a science vessel. And the very point of this thread is the fact that they made a tier 1 Klingon ship into a tier 5...if that can be done without everyone complaining about it, why is it such a big deal if they made the NX into a tier 5 escort? I'm not saying I want to fly one, but the escort ship I do want to fly is the Andorian ship, which is just as old as the NX and the D'Kyr, and that's going to be tier 5 as well. I'm simply not grasping why anyone thinks it's a bad idea to retrofit...they're not old ships, they're new ships in a classic hull.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The Excalibur isn't T5, nice try though.

    Where did I say there was a T5 version? I said make one.
    The Vulcan ship is a science whip, hence it can't go toe to toe w/ a sovereign and pwn it like some (that's right, some, not all) people who want the connie want.

    That's dependent on player skill not stats.
    your grabbing for examples from other races doesn't faze my thoughts on it.
    Really? Cause all I did was show proof that Starfleet (in STO) uses older designs.
    Especially since the recreated connie's are T2, and that's according to the games lore. I find it a better arguement against a T5 connie than for it.

    Ya? Game lore also allows for refitting, so maybe the brand new T2 Connie can be refit to T5. Even if it's not a cruiser, it can still be a Sci/Escort...or a mini cruiser but I feel it would fall short in PvP. But I see no reason why it couldn't have 26-30k hull with a 3/3 weapon slot.
    Also, The NX is a T1 alternate, not a T5. So basically what people are asking for is already in-game.

    Hey...the B'rel was T1, now they have a T5 version.
    Plus, someone did Infected w/ me and a group yesterday in a T2 connie, and it did fine, diluting the arguement presented for a T5 connie even more.

    I have to say...that's pretty cool. Good...so what's the big deal with it having a T5 BO layout with a little more hull?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Maybe when T6 comes out, I won't care as much, but atm, I'm against a T5 connie, and your grabbing for examples from other races doesn't faze my thoughts on it. Especially since the recreated connie's are T2, and that's according to the games lore. I find it a better arguement against a T5 connie than for it.

    Okay, so the T3 Excelsior and Nebula are an argument against the T5 versions?:D
    Plus, someone did Infected w/ me and a group yesterday in a T2 connie, and it did fine, diluting the arguement presented for a T5 connie even more.

    "Fine" is a matter of opinion in that regard. I tested the T2 Connie at vice admiral against the Breen, and yeah, I could hold her together and the Breen died after a while. But it took a lot longer, it was less fun, and I never would do it to anybody to team up for admiral-level content with her. I would consider that unfair to the rest of the team.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'm more inclined to accept T5 B'Rel and Excelsiors because as long lasting, durable designs used frequently and in great numbers, it is very logical and resource saving then a new ship.

    Once you improve it, you can then refit the rest of them.

    The TOS Connie is a ship not in service since around 2270, so having a Starfleet Engineer group finding a way to put brand new gear they were never designed for inside an old spaceframe AND to make it look exactly the same on the outside makes no sense. Especially since its a war.

    For them to refit Excelsiors (and B'Rel) makes more sense because

    1) Less work needs to be done (they have already been partially modernized anyway)
    2) Instead of having to build entirely new ships, they can now just refit existing ships.


    I can accept these old ships at Tier 0 and 1 because in a war, rushing those ships into service makes sense as it wouldn't be as good as more modern ships but would be cheaper (but designing em from the ground up to be much higher tech would be quite wasteful).


    As for the Vulcan ship, I already find it ridiculous, and I don't think compounding one mistake with another is a good idea.

    I can however kinda see it, as it is possible the Vulcans over time simply refitted older designs to serve as a local defense fleet, when Starfleet wasn't around and to deal with local problems, and when war broke out, they loaned several to to Starfleet. The advanced nature could be attributed to Vulcans refitting them over time. And possibly making them so advanced during the Dominion War. (I'm grasping for some kind of logical reason)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'll say this: I'd be happy with a T5 Excalibur and maybe give it holo-emitter devices for the T1 and T2 Connie looks.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I'll say this: I'd be happy with a T5 Excalibur and maybe give it holo-emitter devices for the T1 and T2 Connie looks.

    Awww, what about the poor Vesper? Just let the T2 cruiser be retrofitted with all 3 options, so everybody can make his favourite kitbash. It won't matter anyway if Cryptic realizes the plans to make refits craftable.
Sign In or Register to comment.