I like the original sketch better then the clay model. The clay model saucer looks too close to the -E and would look better if it was a little rounder. The saucer is too close the secondary hull and the saucer pylons look really thick from the front. Finally the secondary hull looks really fat and rounded compared to the drawing.
while the secondary hull is a bit fat, it's actually less so in the clay model, at least from what i see
as for me, i'd actually prefer it if the secondary hull's underside was a bit more like the side-view from the submission (that curved way it is now in the clay model... is a little awkward-looking to me)
I think it's a little too early to be saying what I like or dislike about Cryptic's take on the design, since, as dStahl mentioned, this is the first of several design diaries, and I feel that the finished product will look different enough for me not to base my opinion of it on the current clay model.
There's no reason to be petulant about people wanting the devs to make full use of the multiple-appearance tech for ships in the game.
While I kinda hope there will be some customization options, the dual neck would probably exist in all variations of the ship, just like the moveable warp pylons exist for all Intrepid Class Ships, Saucer Seperation for all Galaxy-Retrofit variants, quad nacelles for the regular Tier 3 Cruiser and Advanced Escorts.
Which I personally don't mind, as the dual neck thing is an interesting feature that doesn't bother me. I don't expect Startrek ships to look realistic, I expect them to look different and unique to the franchise.
just like the moveable warp pylons exist for all Intrepid Class Ships
As an aside, I really wish they'd make that a toggle or change the main orientation for the Discovery pylons - they used to be my favorite, but now they look ooky when out of combat.
As an aside, I really wish they'd make that a toggle or change the main orientation for the Discovery pylons - they used to be my favorite, but now they look ooky when out of combat.
as long as the one neck or no neck options come with a trade off of some sort i'd totally be up to it
You know, considering the fact the devs give us so many options as is, I would not be surprised if there is going to be a version we can make in the ship editor that will have less than or more than 2 necks.
Example: Difficulty slider (remember that debacle)!
I really like the concept of the new J. I think it really grabs and the old and new puts them together nicely....
Heck I think I heard that before. LOL!!!
Anyway I think we can beat this bird to death with what if's, like my grandpa use to say "If a Bull Frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's but everytime it jumped!!"
I really like the concept of the new J. I think it really grabs and the old and new puts them together nicely....
Heck I think I heard that before. LOL!!!
Anyway I think we can beat this bird to death with what if's, like my grandpa use to say "If a Bull Frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's but everytime it jumped!!"
this isn't the new J, it's the Enterprise-F
if Star Trek goes that far, we'll still have the G, H and I before we even get to the J (and if i remember correctly, the J we saw was from an alternate universe, and therefore not the prime universe's Enterprise-J)
if i remember correctly, the J we saw was from an alternate universe, and therefore not the prime universe's Enterprise-J)
Daniels took Archer into the prime universe's future, a time where the Federation would battle the Sphere Builders and win.
The Xindi storyline were the Sphere Builders attempting to change the prime universe's timeline by destroying Earth and preventing the Federation from being created to oppose them in 26th century.
You rasie a great point, even at Wolf 359 or Chintoka, most of the ships that "bought the farm" so to speak had their primary hull get smashed to bits. In fact, the only time I've seen a neck get done in was when Jem'Hadar attack ships were making kamikaze runs, and it's a Vor'cha that we saw it happen to. Even the super fragile Oberth mostly died conventionally, not from pylon exploitation shots/damage.
In my "internal fluff manual" I'm guessing most people don't shoot at nacelles/pylons in a firefight because it wouldn't actually hurt the targets sub-warp combat ability. If you wanted to run away, sure, but if you want to kill a ship it isn't a valuable target since all you've done is crippled FTL travel...the target would still be moving and shooting.
For the neck...honestly, considering what structural integrity fields are supposed to do, I would think the main targets in an attack are *always* going to be A) Weapon systems Shield Systems C) Energy generation/distribution D) Sub-warp maneuvering capacity E) Command and control. Once any of those go down, you've won 90% of the fight.
From the fluff, as long as a ship has a working energy source and it's power distribution grid is solid, breaking chunks off of a given ship is not trivial, even for the 'skinny' bits. In Wrath of Khan the Enterprise took damage at the neck but she wasn't cut in two or anything, and that was a sustained, full power phaser cannon attack from point blank range. In fact, I don't think structural integrity even came up after that attack. In the movie it was a good target though, since the neck attack hit engineering (power distribution/generation).
Once you have managed to disrupt power/shields on your target you are going to be shooting at weapon hard points, power distribution nodes, anti-matter tanks, warp cores, impulse engines, etc.
Anyway, TL;dr: Because of structural integrity fields, direct structural damage is not crippling to a target unless it is dramatic and if you have the weapon power to overwhelm shields/SIF and shear off a nacelle/neck, you'd have the weapon power to snipe a warp core or bridge and pop the ship immediately.
Demanding that there be a penalty for people who want to change how it looks.
i'm just trying to consider the gameplay balance, and i didn't demand it (i said if there was a tradeoff, i'd be okay with it, not demanding it happen)
Daniels took Archer into the prime universe's future, a time where the Federation would battle the Sphere Builders and win.
The Xindi storyline were the Sphere Builders attempting to change the prime universe's timeline by destroying Earth and preventing the Federation from being created to oppose them in 26th century.
i stand corrected (and not just your quote, but from a little research)
Redundant warp cores. Space for slipstream drive components. Larger size due to bulked up structure and armor. Repair drone storage. Heavily armored torpedo storage for torpedo turrets. Living quarters and storage bays for mechanized infantry. Enlarged fighter bays.
Whee....that's fun.
Of course it is, but I still want to see some sort of explanation in the game.
The STO writers may not be good in the sense that I would want to read a novel written by them, but the dev team as a whole generally does a good job of letting stories unfold within the context of the game (using more than just text to tell a story, which is what most MMORPG developers fail to do).
i'm just trying to consider the gameplay balance, and i didn't demand it (i said if there was a tradeoff, i'd be okay with it, not demanding it happen)
It's only a visual change. It doesn't have an effect on in-game balance. xD
I think you are thinking about it way to hard. Speculating about the design intentions of fictional engineers and fictional ships is just a bit 'obsessive". The star trek universe is filled with designs to please our human sensibilites, to evoke emotions. The Akira looks the way it does because an artist said 'that looks cool" and then went about the justifications. Do you think an engineer sat down and designed any of these ships?
Calling people's concerns about the technical design issues "obsessive" is uncalled for. For people like this, which includes myself, the internal structure of Federation Starships are just as important as the aesthetics of the ships appearance. Even with the exessive technobabble and made up particles, Star Trek writters and design staff have made efforts to keep their designed rooted in reality. The technology and ship designs are believe extensions of past and current technology. The TNG and beyond art departments where "obsessed" when designing the ships interior and design details when the scripts called for them. The obsessions designers and other outside of the ST production staff (Starting with Matt Jefferies) is a major part of my love for Star Trek. The starships are beautiful designs in the aesthetic sense, and totally believable that they could in fact exist in the future. I don't have to "suspend belief" (that much) to accept the "reality" of Star Trek.
I think this diary was a great idea. I look forward to following the trials and tribble-ations toward a final design.
Having read some of the critical observations thus far, I'm reminded of a debate I got into with a fellow fan when The Next Generation first aired on television.
Me: So what do you think of the Galaxy-class?
Friend: How could they? It flies in the face of warp dynamics!
Yoyodyne Division? I assume they were testing an Oscillation Overthruster too?
Didn't you know that the Overthruster is an integral part of technology in the 22nd Centry and onward.
The ST production staff were big fans of the "Buckaroo Banzai" films. They stuck overthrusters all over the the place. Take a gander at Doug Drexlers: Drexfiles to see (link below).
The reason for the thin pylons is the same reason the original NCC-1701 has thin. Matt Jeffries wanted show a ship that was almost magical in terms of it's high technology. Powerful propulsion engines set far away from the mail hull set on seemingly thin and flimsy pylons. And yet they propel this huge vessel through space at multiples the speed of light. Dough Drexler used the same aesthetic in designing the Enterprise-J.
Simply this, Starfleet as a military organization primarily a navy based organization. Evaluates its designs for new ship classes based on a number of Criteria.
1. Removal of structural defects exposed in previous classes through combat with the enemy.
2. A substantial improvement across the board in ship wide performance. In virtually every system on the ship.
3. Cost and Resource efficient construction.
4. The ability to engage in substantial long term combat actions and survive with the absolute minimal loss in crew.
Now, this new Enterprise design. Through the use of technobabble and other fictional sci fi mumbo jumbo. Can readily check off numbers 2 and 3 on my little list there. Trust me a real navy requirement list would be way longer and more extensive. However based on actual cannon, this design cannot and will not satisfy numbers 1 and 4. The Sovereign class was soundly the only Enterprise to date that could have rammed another ship, Like the Scimitar believably without tearing her own saucer off at the neck. This ship is supposed to be larger then both the galaxy and the Sovereign class. In all honesty with a saucer that huge, all an enemy would have to do is take out one of those necks. Sorry ladies and gentleman but a SIF is not doing anything at all for a neck that is structurally severed. Which two Quantum torps to one of those necks will do the job quite nicely in turning that support structure to mush. At that point all the SIFs in starfleet is not going to do a thing to keep that remaining neck from failure, structural stress from movement at impulse would be enough for failure. Which would be damning in combat. Not to mention warp would be impossible even for towing with that kind of damage. It would be an embarrassment to starfleet to spend all of those resources to build its new flagship only to watch her be taken out from a suicide strike to one of the necks....then watch the remaining one rip free and the saucer take out both nacelles and the whole ship goes up. That would be starfleet's HMS Hood moment. Only instead of having the misgivings of sending an aging under armored outdated old ship going against the most modern warship of its day. You would have the most modern ship of its day being taken out....by a stripped down kamakazi fighter loaded with two hot torpedoes. Any tactical officer with a brain would go for one of those necks. The fans who are against this dual neck design simply don't wanna see the Ent-F end up like the Ent-C where we only see her for an episode and shes gone, we want a ship that is going to stick around a while. Visually the design only has one fairly unique innovative feature and that is the dual neck. For the most part it looks like more of the same from star trek ship design....and that is another kitbash. There is nothing about this design other then the neck that screams new direction. Even the new clay model screams. Sovereign....and if we are just going to get a Sovereign with a bonnet style neck then why bother. What is it about this design that makes it so far superior to its predecessor. Every Enterprise had vast marked improvements over its predecessors that made it tactically and technically superior in every way. It takes more then a visual curiosity to make a Enterprise. You have the general shape given to you by the artist please do not, turn it into a Sovereign kitbash, which is what the new clay model is starting very much to look like. One last thing, please guys look at the other threads calling for runners up and fuzzy's ship to be put into the game. They are not the Enterprise but they do deserve to be in the game none the less, a lot of us would pay for some of these designs in the c-store!
I liked some of the other designs as well, but I think this one will be fine. Also, The Necks would be structurally sound, and for all I care, they could say they're plated with 2 feet of solid neutronium for structural strength.
This ship is supposed to have saucer seperations (why, I have no clue. Never thought saucer sep was all that cool) So the dual necks would minimize the connective area. I don't know if the dev's plan to add a 3rd, smaller, neck down the middle, but its surely doable, and then the arguement about the structural stability of the outlying necks turns right around. Then what?
The detail on the top of the clay model was just to give it some texture and scale. Didn't any of you read the dev diary? lol. Most likely that'll go, replaced by something unique, and perhaps more fitting.
I, for one, don't see the necks as a structural issue - I just think it looks bad, especially with how the necks wrap and curve at the join with the saucer. It makes my eyes hurt in a 'Lovecraftian geometry' sort of way. And since the neck is the only part that isn't just a bland, lumpy mashup of Enterprises that have come before... *shrug*
The only thing I'd almost like about it is the whole 'necks as warp ring' idea that Ihle went with while refining the idea after the announcement (I can't remember if he came up with it or it was suggested to him). Then there would be something resembling a purpose. Of course, since Cryptic rejected all his input besides the concept drawing, I'm sure that won't be happening.
ah now i remember what is familiar with the ship, i used to pilot a ship similar to this back when starfleet command series was around....those were good days
Comments
as for me, i'd actually prefer it if the secondary hull's underside was a bit more like the side-view from the submission (that curved way it is now in the clay model... is a little awkward-looking to me)
:rolleyes:
There's no reason to be petulant about people wanting the devs to make full use of the multiple-appearance tech for ships in the game.
Which I personally don't mind, as the dual neck thing is an interesting feature that doesn't bother me. I don't expect Startrek ships to look realistic, I expect them to look different and unique to the franchise.
As an aside, I really wish they'd make that a toggle or change the main orientation for the Discovery pylons - they used to be my favorite, but now they look ooky when out of combat.
You know, considering the fact the devs give us so many options as is, I would not be surprised if there is going to be a version we can make in the ship editor that will have less than or more than 2 necks.
Example: Difficulty slider (remember that debacle)!
Heck I think I heard that before. LOL!!!
Anyway I think we can beat this bird to death with what if's, like my grandpa use to say "If a Bull Frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's but everytime it jumped!!"
if Star Trek goes that far, we'll still have the G, H and I before we even get to the J (and if i remember correctly, the J we saw was from an alternate universe, and therefore not the prime universe's Enterprise-J)
Daniels took Archer into the prime universe's future, a time where the Federation would battle the Sphere Builders and win.
The Xindi storyline were the Sphere Builders attempting to change the prime universe's timeline by destroying Earth and preventing the Federation from being created to oppose them in 26th century.
In my "internal fluff manual" I'm guessing most people don't shoot at nacelles/pylons in a firefight because it wouldn't actually hurt the targets sub-warp combat ability. If you wanted to run away, sure, but if you want to kill a ship it isn't a valuable target since all you've done is crippled FTL travel...the target would still be moving and shooting.
For the neck...honestly, considering what structural integrity fields are supposed to do, I would think the main targets in an attack are *always* going to be A) Weapon systems
From the fluff, as long as a ship has a working energy source and it's power distribution grid is solid, breaking chunks off of a given ship is not trivial, even for the 'skinny' bits. In Wrath of Khan the Enterprise took damage at the neck but she wasn't cut in two or anything, and that was a sustained, full power phaser cannon attack from point blank range. In fact, I don't think structural integrity even came up after that attack. In the movie it was a good target though, since the neck attack hit engineering (power distribution/generation).
Once you have managed to disrupt power/shields on your target you are going to be shooting at weapon hard points, power distribution nodes, anti-matter tanks, warp cores, impulse engines, etc.
Anyway, TL;dr: Because of structural integrity fields, direct structural damage is not crippling to a target unless it is dramatic and if you have the weapon power to overwhelm shields/SIF and shear off a nacelle/neck, you'd have the weapon power to snipe a warp core or bridge and pop the ship immediately.
Demanding that there be a penalty for people who want to change how it looks.
The shape of it, and seeing that it's almost like an Ent E, Oberth, Typhoon, combo......just blah :eek:
that's what i'm doing, even as i like the look now
Of course it is, but I still want to see some sort of explanation in the game.
The STO writers may not be good in the sense that I would want to read a novel written by them, but the dev team as a whole generally does a good job of letting stories unfold within the context of the game (using more than just text to tell a story, which is what most MMORPG developers fail to do).
anyone know?
It's only a visual change. It doesn't have an effect on in-game balance. xD
Calling people's concerns about the technical design issues "obsessive" is uncalled for. For people like this, which includes myself, the internal structure of Federation Starships are just as important as the aesthetics of the ships appearance. Even with the exessive technobabble and made up particles, Star Trek writters and design staff have made efforts to keep their designed rooted in reality. The technology and ship designs are believe extensions of past and current technology. The TNG and beyond art departments where "obsessed" when designing the ships interior and design details when the scripts called for them. The obsessions designers and other outside of the ST production staff (Starting with Matt Jefferies) is a major part of my love for Star Trek. The starships are beautiful designs in the aesthetic sense, and totally believable that they could in fact exist in the future. I don't have to "suspend belief" (that much) to accept the "reality" of Star Trek.
Were his initials J.D.?
Didn't you know that the Overthruster is an integral part of technology in the 22nd Centry and onward.
The ST production staff were big fans of the "Buckaroo Banzai" films. They stuck overthrusters all over the the place. Take a gander at Doug Drexlers: Drexfiles to see (link below).
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Adrexfiles.wordpress.com+overthruster&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a.
The reason for the thin pylons is the same reason the original NCC-1701 has thin. Matt Jeffries wanted show a ship that was almost magical in terms of it's high technology. Powerful propulsion engines set far away from the mail hull set on seemingly thin and flimsy pylons. And yet they propel this huge vessel through space at multiples the speed of light. Dough Drexler used the same aesthetic in designing the Enterprise-J.
1. Removal of structural defects exposed in previous classes through combat with the enemy.
2. A substantial improvement across the board in ship wide performance. In virtually every system on the ship.
3. Cost and Resource efficient construction.
4. The ability to engage in substantial long term combat actions and survive with the absolute minimal loss in crew.
Now, this new Enterprise design. Through the use of technobabble and other fictional sci fi mumbo jumbo. Can readily check off numbers 2 and 3 on my little list there. Trust me a real navy requirement list would be way longer and more extensive. However based on actual cannon, this design cannot and will not satisfy numbers 1 and 4. The Sovereign class was soundly the only Enterprise to date that could have rammed another ship, Like the Scimitar believably without tearing her own saucer off at the neck. This ship is supposed to be larger then both the galaxy and the Sovereign class. In all honesty with a saucer that huge, all an enemy would have to do is take out one of those necks. Sorry ladies and gentleman but a SIF is not doing anything at all for a neck that is structurally severed. Which two Quantum torps to one of those necks will do the job quite nicely in turning that support structure to mush. At that point all the SIFs in starfleet is not going to do a thing to keep that remaining neck from failure, structural stress from movement at impulse would be enough for failure. Which would be damning in combat. Not to mention warp would be impossible even for towing with that kind of damage. It would be an embarrassment to starfleet to spend all of those resources to build its new flagship only to watch her be taken out from a suicide strike to one of the necks....then watch the remaining one rip free and the saucer take out both nacelles and the whole ship goes up. That would be starfleet's HMS Hood moment. Only instead of having the misgivings of sending an aging under armored outdated old ship going against the most modern warship of its day. You would have the most modern ship of its day being taken out....by a stripped down kamakazi fighter loaded with two hot torpedoes. Any tactical officer with a brain would go for one of those necks. The fans who are against this dual neck design simply don't wanna see the Ent-F end up like the Ent-C where we only see her for an episode and shes gone, we want a ship that is going to stick around a while. Visually the design only has one fairly unique innovative feature and that is the dual neck. For the most part it looks like more of the same from star trek ship design....and that is another kitbash. There is nothing about this design other then the neck that screams new direction. Even the new clay model screams. Sovereign....and if we are just going to get a Sovereign with a bonnet style neck then why bother. What is it about this design that makes it so far superior to its predecessor. Every Enterprise had vast marked improvements over its predecessors that made it tactically and technically superior in every way. It takes more then a visual curiosity to make a Enterprise. You have the general shape given to you by the artist please do not, turn it into a Sovereign kitbash, which is what the new clay model is starting very much to look like. One last thing, please guys look at the other threads calling for runners up and fuzzy's ship to be put into the game. They are not the Enterprise but they do deserve to be in the game none the less, a lot of us would pay for some of these designs in the c-store!
Would you please break it down in legible paragraphs?
This ship is supposed to have saucer seperations (why, I have no clue. Never thought saucer sep was all that cool) So the dual necks would minimize the connective area. I don't know if the dev's plan to add a 3rd, smaller, neck down the middle, but its surely doable, and then the arguement about the structural stability of the outlying necks turns right around. Then what?
The detail on the top of the clay model was just to give it some texture and scale. Didn't any of you read the dev diary? lol. Most likely that'll go, replaced by something unique, and perhaps more fitting.
The only thing I'd almost like about it is the whole 'necks as warp ring' idea that Ihle went with while refining the idea after the announcement (I can't remember if he came up with it or it was suggested to him). Then there would be something resembling a purpose. Of course, since Cryptic rejected all his input besides the concept drawing, I'm sure that won't be happening.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Ulysses+Class+Dreadnought&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&oe=&rlz=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1916&bih=1060