test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Devs: Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
ccarmichael07
Member Posts: 755 Arc User
This is a question directly to the Devs.
There has been alot of discussion and boundless amounts of questions regarding the apparent lack of a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit.
Regardless of what the answer is, can we get a definitive answer?
Will there be a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
Is the Fleet Cruiser Retrofit being held back or not considered, because of the T5 Connie debate?
and...
Do the devs recognize the distinction between the Connie Refit at Tier 2, and the 2400s designs reflected by the Excalibur and the Vesper, which would seem logical candidates for a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
Any answer, regardless of it being Yes or No, would be most appreciated.
C_Carmichael
There has been alot of discussion and boundless amounts of questions regarding the apparent lack of a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit.
Regardless of what the answer is, can we get a definitive answer?
Will there be a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
Is the Fleet Cruiser Retrofit being held back or not considered, because of the T5 Connie debate?
and...
Do the devs recognize the distinction between the Connie Refit at Tier 2, and the 2400s designs reflected by the Excalibur and the Vesper, which would seem logical candidates for a Fleet Cruiser Retrofit?
Any answer, regardless of it being Yes or No, would be most appreciated.
C_Carmichael
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Post edited by ccarmichael07 on
0
Comments
Maybe so.
But really, I'd just like to hear an official answer from Cryptic, as well as the reasoning if the answer is "No".
But Cryptic has remained silent on this, simply not answering the question. I think at the very least they could give us a definitive answer.
As I pointed out, as well as others on this board have, the Excalibur and the Vesper are NOT Connies, therefore shouldn't be subject to a T5 Connie ban, unless of course Cryptic is going to retcon their own material so these ships WEREN'T developed in the 2400's, and further retcon Star Trek canon to make them variations on the actual Connie Refit.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Nonsense. There are lots of people who would be willing to compromise and make do with the T5 Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter. They would be happy and it would cut the number of people who complain at least by half. Basic divide and conquer.
However, the longer Cryptic ignores the question the more I doubt the story about the Constitution ban. That CBS allows the D7, B'rel, Excelsior and D'kyr at T5 but not the Constitution COULD be believed. After all there would be a true to scale Constitution standing in Vegas if not for one stupid Paramount executive. However CBS banning the Constitution from T5 and Cryptic ignoring all questions after the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? That's just fishy.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Yeah, as I said, it is believable. (Even though CBS doesn't produce anything TOS-related anymore, so don't really have a reason to care.) However, the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter never were in any movie or series and are in no danger of being mistaken for the Connie. That Cryptic simply ignores all questions about them makes the whole thing seem fishy.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
But that shouldn't apply to the Excalibur and the Vesper, should it?
Neither of those ships appeared in any series or movie. They are the direct creations of Cryptic, Inc. and their "backstory" if you will, is that they were built in the 2400's.
Being brand new ships, they share no direct link to the Constitution class, other than general shape and size.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I understand what you're saying about having no direct link, but there are others that already take it as some sort of personal insult that the Connie isn't T5, and this will only give them more fuel for the fire. I think Cryptic knows this, which is probably why they haven't answered so far, and will probably continue not answering.
I think we are getting off in the weeds a bit here, so let's head back to the road.
The debate about if it should or shouldn't be, wasn't the purpose of the thread.
The purpose is to attempt to get a definitive answer from Cryptic one way or the other.
(I'm just as much to blame for getting sidetracked, and will attempt to stay more on topic)
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Yeah, probably won't get an answer.
But I gotta keep trying. I'm like a bulldog on stuff like this. When I don't understand something, or have unanswered questions, I don't stop till I get an answer.
Just my nature I guess.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
So? It's not as if it would be the first flame war nor would it be the last. What do you think the KDF-players will do on the day the Romulan faction is announced?:D They have the choice between annoying fans of all T2 cruiser models and making fans of 3 models very happy while making those of one furious.
Threads like yours have a tiny problem. You can ask the devs a question, but the thread will quickly vanish, as far as I know bumping is against the rules. What keeps threads afloat are discussions. And whether or not the devs should tell us isn't really much of a discussion topic.;)
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
You have a point.
However, if everyone on these forums who has a "dog in the fight" so to speak, on getting an answer, came in here and posted a request for an answer, I think it would be rather hard for the devs to keep ignoring the elephant in the room.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
To put it quite simply, the T5 connie being denied by CBS is completely irrelevant to the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter. The tech *already* exists to lock certain skins, so they could easily put a T5 version in the fleet store without the connie skin if CBS wont allow that. If they refuse to do so they cant blame it on CBS this time.
Those people have been complaining for a very long time, and will continue to do so as long as there is no T5 connie(aka forever). However just because Cryptic cannot give those customers what they want is not a valid justification for *refusing* to give other costumers something they want and that they actually *could* give them.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
But CBS refusing to allow the T5 Connie in any manner doesn't make sense. Would CBS honestly want to cut the profits a T5 Connie would give? Even if it's just the Exeter and whatnot?
That doesn't sound like the CBS I know.....
suspicious_face.jpg
It may not make sense, but like I said above:
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
We don't know that CBS would make MORE money, necessarily, or that they'd want to dillute the brand.
My feeling is that CBS sees this as the 2409 Star Trek MMO. We know it's not exclusive because of how Infinite Space was shaping up.
CBS may want to have a TOS MMO licensed to a second publisher, running concurrently with STO.
That is how Paramount tried to handle the 90s collectible card games. But they ran into the loophole that TOS characters who appeared on DS9 (including the Connie) were included with the DS9 license. So the CBS policy now might be to have one license for "all of Trek" (just to get past the loopholes) but also be shopping separate licensees for individual Trek licenses, such as Infinite Space as a DS9 MMO and someone else paying a separate fee for a TOS MMO.
If I were interested in licensing out a separate TOS MMO, I'd be gunning to keep TOS iconography in STO to a minimum, basically limited to the kinds of things we saw in TNG/Voyager/DS9. So you bundle it into the license because you know someone with the DS9 license can use TOS assets... But you shop a separate licensee for a TOS-only game. And you don't want to jeopardize that, so you keep STO focused on TNG and post-TNG stuff.
I wonder why they just won't answer the question.
For crying out loud, we are big boys (and girls) and if the answer is no, then let's get on with it already, so the matter can be put to rest once and for all.
Definitive answer would be the best course of action in this case, rather than the suspicious silence.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
As I said previously though, they wont be able to blame a "no" answer on CBS this time because these ships arent connies. They *can* add these ships to the fleet store if they want. The question is simply whether they actually care that people want them or not.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Like I pointed out before, I'm not saying if they should or shouldn't include it, I'm just pointing out why I think they aren't answering. I honestly can't remember the last time a dev touched on the Connie issue in any way on the forums, at least not since the days of WishStone. Few mentions in podcasts, but not here.
I think they're just avoiding the whole issue like the plague because of the hornet's nest it tends to stir up.
http://subspace-radio.net/menu-latest-news/41-subspace-radio/18161-subspace-radio-interviews-captain-geko
Apparently it would be easier to get the approval to put the NX or Miranda at Tier 5 and maybe they will do that at some point as far as I understand. But somehow they don't want to give me my Excalibur/Exeter-kitbash.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Just so everyone is clear, they did not say *anything* about that.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
This is almost maddening. :rolleyes:
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Believe it or not, this is a pretty new subject. Until we found out about the fleet store and all the low level ships getting T5 versions no one really ever thought that much about a T5 Excal/etc.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Sorry, I guess I missed all that. Either way though, it hasnt been something that very many people were talking about until now.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Seriously, I can completely understand no tier 5 Connie, but the cryptic designs should not be a problem. I would love to see a fleet Exeter as a match for the fleet Vorcha.
Sounds needlessly complicated....
This is troubling.