Now watch the Enterprise episode "Azati Prime." A Nova and a Prometheus take on the sphere builders along with the Enterprise J...600 years from the STO timeline.
I will cite budget reasons as to why those ships appeared on screen for that clip. They barely had the time and budget to make a single new ship model (the Ent-J). They couldn't afford to make any more, so they grabbed a couple of their newest models and threw them in as well.
No, it didn't have *more* weapons, it just had the ability to fire more at once. Since the main warp core no longer had to power the entire saucer section (more than half the ship, including all the power-hungry science labs and such), they could channel a lot more power into the phaser banks.
Actually the Enterprise-D did have more weapons when split...
Go back and look at the top of the star drive without the primary hull attached.
We've given several reason why your arguments are wrong.
You just choose not to accept them.
"They're already here"
That's a copout.
"Cryptic says they are modular designs made to LOOK like old ships, but they aren't old ships."
That doesn't solve basic engineering problems with the shape and structure.
(silence)
"Some people want to fly the ships they know from <insert screen appearance here>."
This is not the era they appeared in, they don't belong here. See above for the rest of this argument and how it has played out so far.
"Making older ships and selling them in the C-store makes more money for the game's development"
No, it just puts money into corporate's pocket. It only pays for the development of the item itself, not other content. That means it is actually TAKING AWAY manpower that could be used for other things, such as new game mechanics, better missions, etc.
"No, it all goes into a big pot, which Atari stirs and then divides up according to each department's merits"
See my previous statement concerning how that actually works.
There's more in this thread, but you get the general idea. Everyone is deflecting, not disproving or discrediting. I'm using logic against opinion. You can think your opinion is right, but until you back it up with logic, you're just blowing smoke.
By the way. I'm a fan of all Era's and I love how Cryptic is putting in ships from all Era's on both factions [THANK YOU ].
I am sure he likes to hear that.
---
On the real topic:
I don't begrudge people wanting to fly the "old" ships competitively. A large part of the reason we all play this game is that we are Startrek fans, and the "old" ships is that we identify with, and we wanted to pretend being Captains of those ships.
But regardless of whether we call the NX-01 a Replica or call it Admiral Archer Class or whatever - it strains the immersion of many players. Is it really likely that in the 25th century, Startrek has no better goal as to create replicas and retrofits of old ships? And at the same time they create entirely new ship classes like the Majestic or the Valiant?
Sure, Cryptic can make up a story to justify all this(see: Replica), but there are stories that are easy to believe and stories that are hard to believe.
Personally, I can live with it. Heck - I wanted to see the Excelsior and Defiant at end-game, because they are some of my favorite ship designs, and I am willing to live with the "replica" and retrofit stories. But there is no denying the story is unlikely, and getting more and more unlikely the older the ships.
Maybe, one day, Cryptic will get around and create a "player specified conformance" view mode that alters the looks of all ships and costumes to the players preferrance. You just selected a selection of ship parts and costumes that you wish to see, and all NPCs and player charactesr and ship will conform to that look, even if they are still the TOS Tier 5 Replicas or Imperial Assault Cruisers under the hood.
Maybe, one day, Cryptic will get around and create a "player specified conformance" view mode that alters the looks of all ships and costumes to the players preferrance. You just selected a selection of ship parts and costumes that you wish to see, and all NPCs and player charactesr and ship will conform to that look, even if they are still the TOS Tier 5 Replicas or Imperial Assault Cruisers under the hood.
Sounds good on paper, until you realize that people (most likely myself included) would continue to be bothered by the fact that people are still flying ships that don't belong, even if we have the ability to visually alter them. It's the principle, not the visual.
Also sounds good until you realize the hugely massive amount of work this would entail for the devs. Unless we're really to believe every ship in the Federation is a Constitution, or an NX, etc.
"Cryptic says they are modular designs made to LOOK like old ships, but they aren't old ships."
That doesn't solve basic engineering problems with the shape and structure.
What basic engineering problems? The Constitution was Starfleets most successful design ever. It was extremely versatile, which is why there are still original connie refits serving in starfleet as of 2409. Even with 23rd century tech, the TOS could stand way more pounding then it was ever designed for. You put 25th century tech in it, and it will take even more pounding.
There's a reason Starfleet Engineers went back to these designs. Because they were THAT GOOD.
Perhaps they found out the same thing about the NX class too. I wouldn't know. I could never get into ST:Ent.
For the record, I have no problem with that logic, just the numbers. I feel the Defiant should remain tier 4, and the Akira should be tier 5, right up there with the Prometheus. I also feel the Akira should be a Federation carrier.
Now, wait a minute. You made an argument against miniaturization as a factor on ship's power and ability, with a statement along the lines of "to hand with the big ships, you have to have big technology."
But now you argue that the Defiant should still be Tier 4, even though it is the smallest canon ship in the fleet, smaller than the original Enterprise and the Nova. By your own argument, the Defiant should be weaker, because of it's reduced size, since you don't support the idea that a smaller warp core can produce similar power levels as a Sovereign's.
Yet, we saw on screen, just how effective the Defiant can be with that smaller warp core.
So which way is it?
If you don't want small ships up at the top, then the Defiant needs a serious down-ranking. And if you maintain that the Defiant should still be at the top, then miniaturization is an acceptable means of explanation for smaller ships to have effective power levels and weapons output, IE there is no reason that a Nova, Excalibur, etc. couldn't have a T5 Retrofit.
And sometimes you love the new tech and you love the old body and are ready to say world and price be damned my 1973 T-bird will have the stock body, some modified interior and lighting, and an onboard computer controlled fuel injected beast of a fuel sipper that can get the groceries and still tear up the track on the weekends thank you very much, my money, my old Insert vehicle of choice including starships with new tech.
and ignore any body who doesn't like it cuase in the end as long as the law allows it, only the owner has to like it.
I mostly think I have difficulty with the idea of even a retrofit Excelsior outgunning a Sovvy because, and purely because... I don't want to see an older enterprise outperform a newer (and yes, Sovvy is probably my favourite enterprise model.) It's personal taste, and love for a ship called Enterprise.
Obviously, YMMV.
now enough QQ'ing more Pew pew pewing.
Wow called from 2005. They want their obnoxious forum putdown back.
Perhaps they found out the same thing about the NX class too. I wouldn't know. I could never get into ST:Ent.
The NX class was always shown to be inferior in combat, and was retired after only 10 years of service. Not a glowing recommendation.
Unrefit Constitution still in service? Show me one, anywhere in all of Star Trek outside of the original TV show, or a time travel mission. The only time we ever hear of an unrefit version even mentioned is Picard saying he visited one in the fleet museum. The only time we see a refit Constitution is as wreckage at Wolf 359.
The only ships from that time period we see is the Excelsior and Miranda, and even then we only see the Miranda popping like a soap bubble.
The NX class was always shown to be inferior in combat, and was retired after only 10 years of service. Not a glowing recommendation.
Unrefit Constitution still in service? Show me one, anywhere in all of Star Trek outside of the original TV show. The only time we ever hear of an unrefit version even mentioned is Picard saying he visited one in the fleet museum. The only time we see a refit Constitution is as wreckage at Wolf 359.
The only ships from that time period we see is the Excelsior and Miranda, and even then we only see the Miranda popping like a soap bubble.
you either misunderstood everything i said, or chose to ignore it
Yes, but some of us don't like living in the past, we like living in the future. In fact, that's one of the largest reasons any of us like Star Trek - it shows what we COULD be. So why don't we stop living in Trek's "past", and move forward? Nostalgia is the most useless thing in the world, afterall.
So then you have the right to tell me i can't fly a connie becuase nostalgia makes you sick?
Who gives you the right to tell anyone they can't have the old stuff becuase it makes you sick?
i bet you live in a gated or atleast heavily sanctioned HOA and if you don't you would fit in one.
you could be the guy telling new buyers that they can't have their 67 Camaro(regardless of how nice it is) simply becuase they have the 2011 that looks kinda like the old one.
further more if you don't want a guy with three T5 weopans and T5 gear in general on his T1 ship owning you in pvp then either change pvp maps or learn how to fly your 5+ weopan T5 everything ship in a way they can't get you.
Now, wait a minute. You made an argument against miniaturization as a factor on ship's power and ability, with a statement along the lines of "to hand with the big ships, you have to have big technology."
But now you argue that the Defiant should still be Tier 4, even though it is the smallest canon ship in the fleet, smaller than the original Enterprise and the Nova. By your own argument, the Defiant should be weaker, because of it's reduced size, since you don't support the idea that a smaller warp core can produce similar power levels as a Sovereign's.
Yet, we saw on screen, just how effective the Defiant can be with that smaller warp core.
So which way is it?
If you don't want small ships up at the top, then the Defiant needs a serious down-ranking. And if you maintain that the Defiant should still be at the top, then miniaturization is an acceptable means of explanation for smaller ships to have effective power levels and weapons output, IE there is no reason that a Nova, Excalibur, etc. couldn't have a T5 Retrofit.
The Defiant is a life support shell built around engines, guns and a 5 deck tall reactor. It doesn't do much of anything besides fight. The only time its ever seen on a science type mission...a runabout is actually doing the dirty work.
The difference here is the Defiant has a much smaller crew to support, no science labs, smaller sensor arrays, etc etc. Its a stripped down, short to medium range fighting ship, not an explorer, medical ship, research ship or even a light cruiser.
If it is built with modern tech on the inside, then theres no reason it shouldnt match a ship of the same proportions. Remember, these ARENT old ships. They are NEW ships that LOOK old. That has NOTHING to do with their power.
Emphasis mine.
A TOS Constitution replica, completely updated with the latest technology, will be unable to compete with current T5 cruisers simply because of scale. It won't have the power, the number of weapons, the internal space for crew or consoles, or the structural resilience of a much larger T5 cruiser. Miniaturization will account for some improvements, but quadrupling a ships' aft weapons, doubling the front weapons, doubling (at least) console and BO positions, and more than tripling its hull is unlikely. Even granting that, a TOS T5 replica still has 1/5th the crew.
Another reason against unlimited refit for low tier ships is the NX-class replica itself. It's built using the newest technologies and meets current Starfleet standards. It is only T1. The same tier as the (refit) TOS starter ship. That alone speaks volumes for how well refitting other T1 ships will go. T2? Sure. T3? Maybe. T5? Very unlikely.
Personally, I think ships should be able to be refit to two tiers above their current level, to the max tier allowed in-game. So the TOS starter ship and the NX-class could be refit to T3, and the Sovereign to T6 (if/when that opens up). But regardless I'll live with whatever decision Cryptic makes. I'm a lifer, after all. I won't even pretend your ship doesn't exist (unless you name it the U.S.S. GingerNutz, or something similar).
He flew his ship against a tos or simaliarly ranked ship in pvp thinking hmm easy kill then was proven wrong and is now angry becuase the t1 ship knocked him around. An emberassing moment i'm sure.
But to flame people in t1 replica ships and tell everyone hey you no fly t1 replica ships and kill my t5 ship. this i beleive violates everyone else's rights. including mine.
and i strongly dissagree that everyone who pays subs has the right to go to cryptic and say stuff like
I'm a klingon General and beleive that the feds should be unable to use any heals in pvp. yes you have the freedom of speach to say it, but not the right to enforce this on other players.
No, it didn't have *more* weapons, it just had the ability to fire more at once. Since the main warp core no longer had to power the entire saucer section (more than half the ship, including all the power-hungry science labs and such), they could channel a lot more power into the phaser banks.
Oh for gods sake how often do we need to debunk this bs TRIBBLE of an argument?
Laboratories do not EAT UP THE POWER OF A WARPCORE.
AND YOU CAN SWITCH THEM OFF.
As for the Saucer section:
The Saucer includes most of the Auxiliary power generators (yes, when they say auxiliary power to TRIBBLE its THOSE generators that prevent the shields from buckling).
Not to mention that the Main arrays fitted there EACH have more firepower than ALL OTHER arrays on the ship (excluding the other main array) combined. Full stop. Each one of those 2 arrays out does all other arrays on the ship combined. COMPREHEND THAT PLEASE.
Separating the saucer was an emergency measure to ensure the safety of the civilian crew. And it only has been used as such except for exactly ONE TIME, which was Best of both worlds where there was no safety for civilians.
The Move to use the saucer in that situation baffled the borg exactly BECAUSE it is ridiculously stupid to separate your 2 most powerful weapons and a huge portion of your auxiliary power in a combat situation.
Also note the dominion war, where no galaxy was EVER met without its saucer firmly attached. Exactly because it houses so much important stuff.
Now, as for t5 refit connies:
The Constitution has about 1/6th of the volume available to house machinery compared to the big t5 cruisers.
That means, when all ships use the same technology, that the bigger ones WIN per default. Because they have more internal volume to house machinery.
AND they have more bulk (in terms of simply mass that an offender needs to work his way through) to absorb punishment.
There simply is no way you can make a ship as powerful as a modern cruiser but only the size of a rowboat. Especialy since we have to ask the question why starfleet stil lbuilds big cruisers if the small ones are just as good. Logical fallacy right there.
As for the NX replica:
Please take note that theres also is a TOS conni replica already in game.
Did you notice what both of these products of modern modular-oldship-replica-technology have in common?
THEY ARE T1!
Both ships are replicas of ancient ships and made with the best starfleet had. And yet they aren't t5. Why? Because they are pint sized rowboats compared to the t5 ships.
Whats even more damming to this whole pro t5 conni argument is:
Starfleet already made start of the art tech refits of that ship: Its called cruiser and serves any ltcom Captain who wants it. Excalibur, Vesper and aptly named CONSTITUITION.
So you not only have 2(!) constitution replicas in STO already, but BOTH have been build with the best tech starfleet could muster and BOTH are properly placed at the lower tiers because logic flat out FORBIDS them to be at t5, competing with vessels 6 times their size and volume.
Having a t5 conni is like having a child, trained in muay thai, fight a adult, trained in muay thai. The child may have the knowledge, the technique but he does not have the bulk and raw power that being bigger does provide.
The kid will get destroyed in the fight.
The Mans LEG can already be bigger than the kids waist. for gods sake...
There are some very simple engineering thruths that apply here, one of the most important being: more room to fit stuff in beats less room to fit stuff in.
He flew his ship against a tos or simaliarly ranked ship in pvp thinking hmm easy kill then was proven wrong and is now angry becuase the t1 ship knocked him around. An emberassing moment i'm sure.
But to flame people in t1 replica ships and tell everyone hey you no fly t1 replica ships and kill my t5 ship. this i beleive violates everyone else's rights. including mine.
Given that it is impossible to lose a fight vs a t1 in a t5 ship, unless one captain is simply so incompetent that the universe itself forms an aura of suck round him, your "argument" is simply stupid.
Because you pulled it out of thin air.
Please show me the person who complains about having his t5 ships killed by a t1. I want to see this person, take a photo and paste it to the wall next to a gigantic neon sign saying "incompetent dolt".
So then you have the right to tell me i can't fly a connie becuase nostalgia makes you sick?
Who gives you the right to tell anyone they can't have the old stuff becuase it makes you sick?
i bet you live in a gated or atleast heavily sanctioned HOA and if you don't you would fit in one.
you could be the guy telling new buyers that they can't have their 67 Camaro(regardless of how nice it is) simply becuase they have the 2011 that looks kinda like the old one.
No one said you anyone couldn't fly old stuff. Just that your NX "Replica" shouldn't be able to stand up to the Defiant (or insert later generation ship here). To the most logical extreme I can think of, I think I should be able to fly Zephram Cochrane's warp ship. If I spend enough credits upgrading and refitting it surely I can go toe to toe with Enterprise J. I invested 11.2 trillion EC right?
IF that logic were true, you could have a Ford, Model-T competing with a Lamborgini Gallado. They're the same general size right? Same general shape right? Serves the same purpose.... However most (sane) people would say that is an absurd concept in reality.
It isn't that people want to keep you from enjoying your favorite antique ship. The point several people have been trying to make is that there is a limit as to how far any design can be taken. Yes I'm sure I'll see someone going on and on about new technology X or special design Y. to make it look the same, but be better.
But very often newer technology doesn't work in older designs, I can't drop a viper engine into a Ford Model-T. Now if I spent an exorbanant sum of money I could have a custom one of a kind viper engine forged miniturized and eventually put into the frame of a Model-T.
But the engine wouldn't be the same; the displacement, cylinder size etc would all be different to fit the frame. And overall it would be worse than the original design. BUT It's got newer Technology in it, while looking like the original right? (YES before anyone even comments I know that sometimes this works to a point in reality. You can make 1000HP Fieros with V8's etc, but there is a limit eventually.) "Fucntion follows form."
Bottom line however is that new designs in ships/carriers/cars/homes/boats/planes are most often designed around engines, life support systems, HVAC, reactors and advances in new technlogies. Not only because they can't be retrofitted, but because it is more COST effective, and more efficient to create a newer design to use the technology while removing defects from previous designs. "Form follows function."
And while I realize this is a game, it's a science fiction game set in the Star Trek Next Generation Era, and as powerful as science is there, it isn't without limitations. Truly if so many people wanted an TOS MMO, they should petition cryptic to Make STO: Year 1.
Oh for gods sake how often do we need to debunk this bs TRIBBLE of an argument?
Laboratories do not EAT UP THE POWER OF A WARPCORE.
AND YOU CAN SWITCH THEM OFF.
As for the Saucer section:
The Saucer includes most of the Auxiliary power generators (yes, when they say auxiliary power to TRIBBLE its THOSE generators that prevent the shields from buckling).
Not to mention that the Main arrays fitted there EACH have more firepower than ALL OTHER arrays on the ship (excluding the other main array) combined. Full stop. Each one of those 2 arrays out does all other arrays on the ship combined. COMPREHEND THAT PLEASE.
Separating the saucer was an emergency measure to ensure the safety of the civilian crew. And it only has been used as such except for exactly ONE TIME, which was Best of both worlds where there was no safety for civilians.
The Move to use the saucer in that situation baffled the borg exactly BECAUSE it is ridiculously stupid to separate your 2 most powerful weapons and a huge portion of your auxiliary power in a combat situation.
Also note the dominion war, where no galaxy was EVER met without its saucer firmly attached. Exactly because it houses so much important stuff.
Now, as for t5 refit connies:
The Constitution has about 1/6th of the volume available to house machinery compared to the big t5 cruisers.
That means, when all ships use the same technology, that the bigger ones WIN per default. Because they have more internal volume to house machinery.
AND they have more bulk (in terms of simply mass that an offender needs to work his way through) to absorb punishment.
There simply is no way you can make a ship as powerful as a modern cruiser but only the size of a rowboat. Especialy since we have to ask the question why starfleet stil lbuilds big cruisers if the small ones are just as good. Logical fallacy right there.
As for the NX replica:
Please take note that theres also is a TOS conni replica already in game.
Did you notice what both of these products of modern modular-oldship-replica-technology have in common?
THEY ARE T1!
Both ships are replicas of ancient ships and made with the best starfleet had. And yet they aren't t5. Why? Because they are pint sized rowboats compared to the t5 ships.
Whats even more damming to this whole pro t5 conni argument is:
Starfleet already made start of the art tech refits of that ship: Its called cruiser and serves any ltcom Captain who wants it. Excalibur, Vesper and aptly named CONSTITUITION.
So you not only have 2(!) constitution replicas in STO already, but BOTH have been build with the best tech starfleet could muster and BOTH are properly placed at the lower tiers because logic flat out FORBIDS them to be at t5, competing with vessels 6 times their size and volume.
Having a t5 conni is like having a child, trained in muay thai, fight a adult, trained in muay thai. The child may have the knowledge, the technique but he does not have the bulk and raw power that being bigger does provide.
The kid will get destroyed in the fight.
The Mans LEG can already be bigger than the kids waist. for gods sake...
There are some very simple engineering thruths that apply here, one of the most important being: more room to fit stuff in beats less room to fit stuff in.
Given that it is impossible to lose a fight vs a t1 in a t5 ship, unless one captain is simply so incompetent that the universe itself forms an aura of suck round him, your "argument" is simply stupid.
Because you pulled it out of thin air.
Please show me the person who complains about having his t5 ships killed by a t1. I want to see this person, take a photo and paste it to the wall next to a gigantic neon sign saying "incompetent dolt".
Then please fill us in as why every so often the kid rings the adults bell and please don't try to dismiss it as the adult had some illness.
And also this doesn't appear to be i met a t5 connie in Tribble test and got my t5 assualt cruiser cuase other than looks the t5 sov can be any of the 3 or 4 if you include the imperial class costume, t5 cruisers.
hey was in a pvp match against a t1 or possably the t2 connie replica, and got smoked. to me this sounds like he was overconfident that the t1 or 2 connie was no match and only halfway fought the other guy.
and emberassed came to the forums to say hey that sucked but somehow ended up with this hornets nest of other posters trying to eat his lunch for complaining about how the t5 refits should never happen and older ships not be in the game.
ok sorry missread but the original poster decade complete mentions that atleast one person was outclassed in a war games pvp match by a t1 and the outclassed was in a t5. so although wrong on my end, the OP has posted that that is who they hear it from the most.
No one said you anyone couldn't fly old stuff. Just that your NX "Replica" shouldn't be able to stand up to the Defiant (or insert later generation ship here). To the most logical extreme I can think of, I think I should be able to fly Zephram Cochrane's warp ship. If I spend enough credits upgrading and refitting it surely I can go toe to toe with Enterprise J. I invested 11.2 trillion EC right?
IF that logic were true, you could have a Ford, Model-T competing with a Lamborgini Gallado. They're the same general size right? Same general shape right? Serves the same purpose.... However most (sane) people would say that is an absurd concept in reality.
It isn't that people want to keep you from enjoying your favorite antique ship. The point several people have been trying to make is that there is a limit as to how far any design can be taken. Yes I'm sure I'll see someone going on and on about new technology X or special design Y. to make it look the same, but be better.
But very often newer technology doesn't work in older designs, I can't drop a viper engine into a Ford Model-T. Now if I spent an exorbanant sum of money I could have a custom one of a kind viper engine forged miniturized and eventually put into the frame of a Model-T.
But the engine wouldn't be the same; the displacement, cylinder size etc would all be different to fit the frame. And overall it would be worse than the original design. BUT It's got newer Technology in it, while looking like the original right? (YES before anyone even comments I know that sometimes this works to a point in reality. You can make 1000HP Fieros with V8's etc, but there is a limit eventually.) "Fucntion follows form."
Bottom line however is that new designs in ships/carriers/cars/homes/boats/planes are most often designed around engines, life support systems, HVAC, reactors and advances in new technlogies. Not only because they can't be retrofitted, but because it is more COST effective, and more efficient to create a newer design to use the technology while removing defects from previous designs. "Form follows function."
And while I realize this is a game, it's a science fiction game set in the Star Trek Next Generation Era, and as powerful as science is there, it isn't without limitations. Truly if so many people wanted an TOS MMO, they should petition cryptic to Make STO: Year 1.
wheres the quote i quoted, he said hey no more old stuff move on. this is the 25th century nothing from earlier than the 24th. this was the jist of the quote i quoted. if i do fly it he doesn't want me to be able to enter the sector he is in.
his entire point is nothing old or old looking belongs in games, i guess he only means ships, as with tech and time travel scotty ids still alive and at last count so was kirk and spock. oh and whbile we are arguing against old stuff don't forget the current star bases most are 400 years old and are still safe from newer ships attacks, especialy with a fleet.
also there is the argument for some older ships what about civ use? i hope thast one day all factions will have a civilian character choice.
or what about fleet support by itself maybe a t1-t3 is suck. but with a gfleet of them or a sov or two backing them up? after all isn't every ship a part of a tiny fleet and all fleets part of a majaor fleet or wing in trek even in tos times the enterprise was part of a fleet that got bigger as the threat did. of course for the movies it was always the only ship able to respond.
Oh for gods sake how often do we need to debunk this bs TRIBBLE of an argument?
Claydermunch, I most always find your posts so filled with incredulous shock I can't help but smile when I read them. They're usually filled with good points though.
wheres the quote i quoted, he said hey no more old stuff move on. this is the 25th century nothing from earlier than the 24th. this was the jist of the quote i quoted. if i do fly it he doesn't want me to be able to enter the sector he is in.
@Jewkesman I sort of intended my post to be a well reasoned response to both extremes of this discussion, I wasn't trying to single you out and I agree that seperating ship instances isn't fair/right or in anyway appropriate.
Certainly my biggest point is fly your ship and i'll fly mine. and sometimes right or wrong posting up about something just isn't worth the argument it'l start.\
and i never said my t1 should be able to stand up to a t3 or higher it might survive against a t2 as that t3 isn't much improvement, but if i happen to be quick on the draw with my powers and my weopans are what i have trained into and i can shuck and jive a bit, and the other guy flys straight on and decides to only use t1 attacks on me, then if i manage to best him, even if it's only once and only by chance then you know what i still bested the guy.
Any military can have a superior anything lets say fighter plane. now fly it against an enemy in a world war II or even Vietnam era fighter, now if in the superior jet i laugh until i wet my pants and do almost nothing and he gets behind me or straifes me i can just as easily be brought down by him as a jet from the same era mine is from.]
soimply put even a blind squirel gets an acorn every once and a while. would i be ****ed i got shot down by something period, you bet even more cuase of how old the other fighter was, even more so yes. would i demand all older fighters removed from service? maybe maybe not how stupid would i sound to command i was affraid of an older fighter?
To be honest, I wouldn't care which way we go, whether we have a T5 Constitution or not. All I know is I'd like something that at least looks like a more up to date version of the constitution, mainly the neck.
I know that's a stupid thing to want but the tall necks of the Galaxy and Constitution has always stood out to me. Hell, even if they gave us something that looks like the Sovvie but with a taller neck and so it doesn't look like the saucer is connected almost directly to the hull I'd be happy.
Edit: Basically the older enterprises, from the constitution to the galaxy, always had a very powerful look to them in my opinion and i think a lot of that is due to the tall necks, where the Sovvie almost looks more like an oversized fighter to me. In my opinion, the ships in TOS and TNG had a consistent flow and trademark looks, then you get to DS9 and beyond with the defiant, voyager, etc. etc. etc. and they look almost Star Warsy. Personally I can't wait until who the winner of the Enterprise F is and hopefully it will have the trademark look but with a very modern (in STO terms) feel.
Kinda like newer mustangs, after the 90's mustangs they kinda went back to the classic look, yet you can tell it's a newer model.
Comments
I will cite budget reasons as to why those ships appeared on screen for that clip. They barely had the time and budget to make a single new ship model (the Ent-J). They couldn't afford to make any more, so they grabbed a couple of their newest models and threw them in as well.
I don't think so, all the 'logical' reasons have been poorly thought out and repeatedly pointed out as such.
Here's my suggestion: http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=207798
Never said that. I merely provided my opinion so that people don't get the wrong idea about why I'm arguing my point.
I have as yet to see anyone debunk my arguments. All people seem to be doing is deflect them, not disprove or discredit them.
Actually the Enterprise-D did have more weapons when split...
Go back and look at the top of the star drive without the primary hull attached.
It's my understanding that those were part of the saucer arrays, used as a sort of power conduit until separated.
there were phaser beam arrays there
2 of them
Then you are only seeing what you want to see...
We've given several reason why your arguments are wrong.
You just choose not to accept them.
"They're already here"
That's a copout.
"Cryptic says they are modular designs made to LOOK like old ships, but they aren't old ships."
That doesn't solve basic engineering problems with the shape and structure.
(silence)
"Some people want to fly the ships they know from <insert screen appearance here>."
This is not the era they appeared in, they don't belong here. See above for the rest of this argument and how it has played out so far.
"Making older ships and selling them in the C-store makes more money for the game's development"
No, it just puts money into corporate's pocket. It only pays for the development of the item itself, not other content. That means it is actually TAKING AWAY manpower that could be used for other things, such as new game mechanics, better missions, etc.
"No, it all goes into a big pot, which Atari stirs and then divides up according to each department's merits"
See my previous statement concerning how that actually works.
There's more in this thread, but you get the general idea. Everyone is deflecting, not disproving or discrediting. I'm using logic against opinion. You can think your opinion is right, but until you back it up with logic, you're just blowing smoke.
---
On the real topic:
I don't begrudge people wanting to fly the "old" ships competitively. A large part of the reason we all play this game is that we are Startrek fans, and the "old" ships is that we identify with, and we wanted to pretend being Captains of those ships.
But regardless of whether we call the NX-01 a Replica or call it Admiral Archer Class or whatever - it strains the immersion of many players. Is it really likely that in the 25th century, Startrek has no better goal as to create replicas and retrofits of old ships? And at the same time they create entirely new ship classes like the Majestic or the Valiant?
Sure, Cryptic can make up a story to justify all this(see: Replica), but there are stories that are easy to believe and stories that are hard to believe.
Personally, I can live with it. Heck - I wanted to see the Excelsior and Defiant at end-game, because they are some of my favorite ship designs, and I am willing to live with the "replica" and retrofit stories. But there is no denying the story is unlikely, and getting more and more unlikely the older the ships.
Maybe, one day, Cryptic will get around and create a "player specified conformance" view mode that alters the looks of all ships and costumes to the players preferrance. You just selected a selection of ship parts and costumes that you wish to see, and all NPCs and player charactesr and ship will conform to that look, even if they are still the TOS Tier 5 Replicas or Imperial Assault Cruisers under the hood.
Sounds good on paper, until you realize that people (most likely myself included) would continue to be bothered by the fact that people are still flying ships that don't belong, even if we have the ability to visually alter them. It's the principle, not the visual.
Also sounds good until you realize the hugely massive amount of work this would entail for the devs. Unless we're really to believe every ship in the Federation is a Constitution, or an NX, etc.
What basic engineering problems? The Constitution was Starfleets most successful design ever. It was extremely versatile, which is why there are still original connie refits serving in starfleet as of 2409. Even with 23rd century tech, the TOS could stand way more pounding then it was ever designed for. You put 25th century tech in it, and it will take even more pounding.
There's a reason Starfleet Engineers went back to these designs. Because they were THAT GOOD.
Perhaps they found out the same thing about the NX class too. I wouldn't know. I could never get into ST:Ent.
As I stated above in this reply, we still have connie refits serving in starfleet. This is not a coupout. It is fact.
The rest of your post has been explained to you.
Now, wait a minute. You made an argument against miniaturization as a factor on ship's power and ability, with a statement along the lines of "to hand with the big ships, you have to have big technology."
But now you argue that the Defiant should still be Tier 4, even though it is the smallest canon ship in the fleet, smaller than the original Enterprise and the Nova. By your own argument, the Defiant should be weaker, because of it's reduced size, since you don't support the idea that a smaller warp core can produce similar power levels as a Sovereign's.
Yet, we saw on screen, just how effective the Defiant can be with that smaller warp core.
So which way is it?
If you don't want small ships up at the top, then the Defiant needs a serious down-ranking. And if you maintain that the Defiant should still be at the top, then miniaturization is an acceptable means of explanation for smaller ships to have effective power levels and weapons output, IE there is no reason that a Nova, Excalibur, etc. couldn't have a T5 Retrofit.
and ignore any body who doesn't like it cuase in the end as long as the law allows it, only the owner has to like it.
now enough QQ'ing more Pew pew pewing.
Obviously, YMMV.
Wow called from 2005. They want their obnoxious forum putdown back.
The NX class was always shown to be inferior in combat, and was retired after only 10 years of service. Not a glowing recommendation.
Unrefit Constitution still in service? Show me one, anywhere in all of Star Trek outside of the original TV show, or a time travel mission. The only time we ever hear of an unrefit version even mentioned is Picard saying he visited one in the fleet museum. The only time we see a refit Constitution is as wreckage at Wolf 359.
The only ships from that time period we see is the Excelsior and Miranda, and even then we only see the Miranda popping like a soap bubble.
you either misunderstood everything i said, or chose to ignore it
whatever
Or what you said I don't agree with at all.
whatever :rolleyes:
So then you have the right to tell me i can't fly a connie becuase nostalgia makes you sick?
Who gives you the right to tell anyone they can't have the old stuff becuase it makes you sick?
i bet you live in a gated or atleast heavily sanctioned HOA and if you don't you would fit in one.
you could be the guy telling new buyers that they can't have their 67 Camaro(regardless of how nice it is) simply becuase they have the 2011 that looks kinda like the old one.
further more if you don't want a guy with three T5 weopans and T5 gear in general on his T1 ship owning you in pvp then either change pvp maps or learn how to fly your 5+ weopan T5 everything ship in a way they can't get you.
The Defiant is a life support shell built around engines, guns and a 5 deck tall reactor. It doesn't do much of anything besides fight. The only time its ever seen on a science type mission...a runabout is actually doing the dirty work.
The difference here is the Defiant has a much smaller crew to support, no science labs, smaller sensor arrays, etc etc. Its a stripped down, short to medium range fighting ship, not an explorer, medical ship, research ship or even a light cruiser.
Emphasis mine.
A TOS Constitution replica, completely updated with the latest technology, will be unable to compete with current T5 cruisers simply because of scale. It won't have the power, the number of weapons, the internal space for crew or consoles, or the structural resilience of a much larger T5 cruiser. Miniaturization will account for some improvements, but quadrupling a ships' aft weapons, doubling the front weapons, doubling (at least) console and BO positions, and more than tripling its hull is unlikely. Even granting that, a TOS T5 replica still has 1/5th the crew.
Another reason against unlimited refit for low tier ships is the NX-class replica itself. It's built using the newest technologies and meets current Starfleet standards. It is only T1. The same tier as the (refit) TOS starter ship. That alone speaks volumes for how well refitting other T1 ships will go. T2? Sure. T3? Maybe. T5? Very unlikely.
Personally, I think ships should be able to be refit to two tiers above their current level, to the max tier allowed in-game. So the TOS starter ship and the NX-class could be refit to T3, and the Sovereign to T6 (if/when that opens up). But regardless I'll live with whatever decision Cryptic makes. I'm a lifer, after all. I won't even pretend your ship doesn't exist (unless you name it the U.S.S. GingerNutz, or something similar).
Z
He flew his ship against a tos or simaliarly ranked ship in pvp thinking hmm easy kill then was proven wrong and is now angry becuase the t1 ship knocked him around. An emberassing moment i'm sure.
But to flame people in t1 replica ships and tell everyone hey you no fly t1 replica ships and kill my t5 ship. this i beleive violates everyone else's rights. including mine.
and i strongly dissagree that everyone who pays subs has the right to go to cryptic and say stuff like
I'm a klingon General and beleive that the feds should be unable to use any heals in pvp. yes you have the freedom of speach to say it, but not the right to enforce this on other players.
Oh for gods sake how often do we need to debunk this bs TRIBBLE of an argument?
Laboratories do not EAT UP THE POWER OF A WARPCORE.
AND YOU CAN SWITCH THEM OFF.
As for the Saucer section:
The Saucer includes most of the Auxiliary power generators (yes, when they say auxiliary power to TRIBBLE its THOSE generators that prevent the shields from buckling).
Not to mention that the Main arrays fitted there EACH have more firepower than ALL OTHER arrays on the ship (excluding the other main array) combined. Full stop. Each one of those 2 arrays out does all other arrays on the ship combined. COMPREHEND THAT PLEASE.
Separating the saucer was an emergency measure to ensure the safety of the civilian crew. And it only has been used as such except for exactly ONE TIME, which was Best of both worlds where there was no safety for civilians.
The Move to use the saucer in that situation baffled the borg exactly BECAUSE it is ridiculously stupid to separate your 2 most powerful weapons and a huge portion of your auxiliary power in a combat situation.
Also note the dominion war, where no galaxy was EVER met without its saucer firmly attached. Exactly because it houses so much important stuff.
Now, as for t5 refit connies:
The Constitution has about 1/6th of the volume available to house machinery compared to the big t5 cruisers.
That means, when all ships use the same technology, that the bigger ones WIN per default. Because they have more internal volume to house machinery.
AND they have more bulk (in terms of simply mass that an offender needs to work his way through) to absorb punishment.
There simply is no way you can make a ship as powerful as a modern cruiser but only the size of a rowboat. Especialy since we have to ask the question why starfleet stil lbuilds big cruisers if the small ones are just as good. Logical fallacy right there.
As for the NX replica:
Please take note that theres also is a TOS conni replica already in game.
Did you notice what both of these products of modern modular-oldship-replica-technology have in common?
THEY ARE T1!
Both ships are replicas of ancient ships and made with the best starfleet had. And yet they aren't t5. Why? Because they are pint sized rowboats compared to the t5 ships.
Whats even more damming to this whole pro t5 conni argument is:
Starfleet already made start of the art tech refits of that ship: Its called cruiser and serves any ltcom Captain who wants it. Excalibur, Vesper and aptly named CONSTITUITION.
So you not only have 2(!) constitution replicas in STO already, but BOTH have been build with the best tech starfleet could muster and BOTH are properly placed at the lower tiers because logic flat out FORBIDS them to be at t5, competing with vessels 6 times their size and volume.
Having a t5 conni is like having a child, trained in muay thai, fight a adult, trained in muay thai. The child may have the knowledge, the technique but he does not have the bulk and raw power that being bigger does provide.
The kid will get destroyed in the fight.
The Mans LEG can already be bigger than the kids waist. for gods sake...
There are some very simple engineering thruths that apply here, one of the most important being: more room to fit stuff in beats less room to fit stuff in.
Given that it is impossible to lose a fight vs a t1 in a t5 ship, unless one captain is simply so incompetent that the universe itself forms an aura of suck round him, your "argument" is simply stupid.
Because you pulled it out of thin air.
Please show me the person who complains about having his t5 ships killed by a t1. I want to see this person, take a photo and paste it to the wall next to a gigantic neon sign saying "incompetent dolt".
No one said you anyone couldn't fly old stuff. Just that your NX "Replica" shouldn't be able to stand up to the Defiant (or insert later generation ship here). To the most logical extreme I can think of, I think I should be able to fly Zephram Cochrane's warp ship. If I spend enough credits upgrading and refitting it surely I can go toe to toe with Enterprise J. I invested 11.2 trillion EC right?
IF that logic were true, you could have a Ford, Model-T competing with a Lamborgini Gallado. They're the same general size right? Same general shape right? Serves the same purpose.... However most (sane) people would say that is an absurd concept in reality.
It isn't that people want to keep you from enjoying your favorite antique ship. The point several people have been trying to make is that there is a limit as to how far any design can be taken. Yes I'm sure I'll see someone going on and on about new technology X or special design Y. to make it look the same, but be better.
But very often newer technology doesn't work in older designs, I can't drop a viper engine into a Ford Model-T. Now if I spent an exorbanant sum of money I could have a custom one of a kind viper engine forged miniturized and eventually put into the frame of a Model-T.
But the engine wouldn't be the same; the displacement, cylinder size etc would all be different to fit the frame. And overall it would be worse than the original design. BUT It's got newer Technology in it, while looking like the original right? (YES before anyone even comments I know that sometimes this works to a point in reality. You can make 1000HP Fieros with V8's etc, but there is a limit eventually.) "Fucntion follows form."
Bottom line however is that new designs in ships/carriers/cars/homes/boats/planes are most often designed around engines, life support systems, HVAC, reactors and advances in new technlogies. Not only because they can't be retrofitted, but because it is more COST effective, and more efficient to create a newer design to use the technology while removing defects from previous designs. "Form follows function."
And while I realize this is a game, it's a science fiction game set in the Star Trek Next Generation Era, and as powerful as science is there, it isn't without limitations. Truly if so many people wanted an TOS MMO, they should petition cryptic to Make STO: Year 1.
Then please fill us in as why every so often the kid rings the adults bell and please don't try to dismiss it as the adult had some illness.
And also this doesn't appear to be i met a t5 connie in Tribble test and got my t5 assualt cruiser cuase other than looks the t5 sov can be any of the 3 or 4 if you include the imperial class costume, t5 cruisers.
hey was in a pvp match against a t1 or possably the t2 connie replica, and got smoked. to me this sounds like he was overconfident that the t1 or 2 connie was no match and only halfway fought the other guy.
and emberassed came to the forums to say hey that sucked but somehow ended up with this hornets nest of other posters trying to eat his lunch for complaining about how the t5 refits should never happen and older ships not be in the game.
ok sorry missread but the original poster decade complete mentions that atleast one person was outclassed in a war games pvp match by a t1 and the outclassed was in a t5. so although wrong on my end, the OP has posted that that is who they hear it from the most.
wheres the quote i quoted, he said hey no more old stuff move on. this is the 25th century nothing from earlier than the 24th. this was the jist of the quote i quoted. if i do fly it he doesn't want me to be able to enter the sector he is in.
his entire point is nothing old or old looking belongs in games, i guess he only means ships, as with tech and time travel scotty ids still alive and at last count so was kirk and spock. oh and whbile we are arguing against old stuff don't forget the current star bases most are 400 years old and are still safe from newer ships attacks, especialy with a fleet.
also there is the argument for some older ships what about civ use? i hope thast one day all factions will have a civilian character choice.
or what about fleet support by itself maybe a t1-t3 is suck. but with a gfleet of them or a sov or two backing them up? after all isn't every ship a part of a tiny fleet and all fleets part of a majaor fleet or wing in trek even in tos times the enterprise was part of a fleet that got bigger as the threat did. of course for the movies it was always the only ship able to respond.
Claydermunch, I most always find your posts so filled with incredulous shock I can't help but smile when I read them. They're usually filled with good points though.
@Jewkesman I sort of intended my post to be a well reasoned response to both extremes of this discussion, I wasn't trying to single you out and I agree that seperating ship instances isn't fair/right or in anyway appropriate.
and i never said my t1 should be able to stand up to a t3 or higher it might survive against a t2 as that t3 isn't much improvement, but if i happen to be quick on the draw with my powers and my weopans are what i have trained into and i can shuck and jive a bit, and the other guy flys straight on and decides to only use t1 attacks on me, then if i manage to best him, even if it's only once and only by chance then you know what i still bested the guy.
Any military can have a superior anything lets say fighter plane. now fly it against an enemy in a world war II or even Vietnam era fighter, now if in the superior jet i laugh until i wet my pants and do almost nothing and he gets behind me or straifes me i can just as easily be brought down by him as a jet from the same era mine is from.]
soimply put even a blind squirel gets an acorn every once and a while. would i be ****ed i got shot down by something period, you bet even more cuase of how old the other fighter was, even more so yes. would i demand all older fighters removed from service? maybe maybe not how stupid would i sound to command i was affraid of an older fighter?
I know that's a stupid thing to want but the tall necks of the Galaxy and Constitution has always stood out to me. Hell, even if they gave us something that looks like the Sovvie but with a taller neck and so it doesn't look like the saucer is connected almost directly to the hull I'd be happy.
Edit: Basically the older enterprises, from the constitution to the galaxy, always had a very powerful look to them in my opinion and i think a lot of that is due to the tall necks, where the Sovvie almost looks more like an oversized fighter to me. In my opinion, the ships in TOS and TNG had a consistent flow and trademark looks, then you get to DS9 and beyond with the defiant, voyager, etc. etc. etc. and they look almost Star Warsy. Personally I can't wait until who the winner of the Enterprise F is and hopefully it will have the trademark look but with a very modern (in STO terms) feel.
Kinda like newer mustangs, after the 90's mustangs they kinda went back to the classic look, yet you can tell it's a newer model.