I just fought one in the Kahless Expanse. I don't understand why there is such drama about removing it from the forums when it's been left in the game.
The next patch should remove it, it is gone on tribble.
I really do hope this will be the 1000 vet reward ship, because that would just make my day. Its problably the one ship cept the galaxy x that ive been waiting to come into game. Just hope its a playable ship.. again 1000 vet reward
Do wish I got to see it but ill just have to wait it out and see what happens. Hopefully theyll come out with the outfits, and bridge to go with it too
No books are canon. The only ones that can be considered canon are the three Crucible books which were commissioned for the 40th(?) anniversary.
Crucible: Spock--The Fire and the Rose Crucible: McCoy: Provenance of Shadows Crucible: Kirk: The Star to Every Wandering
THE BEST Star Trek BOOKS EVER. And David R. George III doesn't contradict Star Trek canon here.
god not this old chestnut again :rolleyes:
sto throws canon out of the nearest airlock , the recon science vessel that was in game at bloody launch is from a book too
god not this old chestnut again :rolleyes:
sto throws canon out of the nearest airlock , the recon science vessel that was in game at bloody launch is from a book too
It depends really, STO takes a lot of "Soft Canon" stuff like the books and video games, and incorporates them into the STOverse. That's why we have the Recon vessel and (Eventually) the Vesta. But either way, it's not really worth getting bent up over.
No Books are considered canon, ever. Only things seen on screen are considered canon.
That doesn't make them untrue either.
A fair amount of canon came from taking things in the books and adapting them onscreen.
The books are, ultimately, a non-canon source that canon does crib from.
And we're talking "Star Trek canon" here. Every body of works has a canon. There's a "Squarebob Spongepants canon," a "How I Met Your Mother" canon, a "Ronald McDonald canon."
And by that token, a "Star Trek Online canon," which is what's relevant to the game. It includes all of the shows. It includes some of the books. (The tie in novel by Martin seems to suggest that pre-Destiny books are a part of STO's canon but not a part of the post-Destiny novel canon. In particular, the STO novel indicates that the Genesis Wave books are a part of STO's past and NOT a part of the current books' past.)
well Cryptic screwed up a few things.
One: transphasic torpedoes should rip a cube to shreds, yet they made them the weakest projectile in the game. I understand that some people wouldn't find it logical for transphasic torpedoes to destroy a cube in two volleys WITHIN the game. But come-on. We need SOME consistency where the weapons are concerned.
Assuming that the Borg never adapted, which they would have had plenty of incentive to do.
Two: the Vulcan ship should be at least 4 times larger than an NX. Also it is mis-categorized in-game.
Assuming the modern incarnation of the Vulcan ship is the same displacement as the original incarnation as seen on Enterprise, and assuming we are seeing actual relative sizes of anything rather than computer animated images used for easy target identification and acquisition.
Do you really believe that starships are piloted by looking through a conventional optical telescope?
Three: The Belerophon (intrepid-class) ship has a description which states it was at Wolf-359 during the Borg attack. Which is completely wrong. It was the NEBULA-CLASS belerophon that was at Wolf-359.
It was a big fight.. couldn't both classes have been there?
Four: this isn't really a mistake, but when is cryptic going to come up with an authentic NX bridge??
Those are just the main examples. There are other smaller, similar, things, but you get the picture.
Its a replica. Sacrifices had to be made to keep the bridge functional with respect to modern tech (well that is a bit of a stretch, but seriously, how much of a market is there for the NX bridge?)
Yeah, Trek Canon is easier to follow then Star Wars Canon.
In Star Wars canon EVERYTHING is canon unless it is strictly said to be not canon.
Star Wars canon does have levels, but that is only to determine how canon it is.
Everything is canon, but somethings are more canon then others.
Yeah. In Trek, there's one canon.
But something being from a book or game doesn't make it untrue, just unconfirmed.
For example, the first names of a good chunk of characters.
Winona Kirk, Nyota Uhura, Hikaru Sulu.
Heck, one thing I think WAS nifty about J.J. Trek was how much it actually confirmed things that had been assumed or been soft canon.
You can disagree with it in the broad strokes of execution but I don't think it can be disputed that Orci and Kurtzman did do a lot of research.
Exactly.... that episode didn't muck up the rest of the series.
In fact if anything, ST has a habit of 'one of' appearances rather than the other way around.
I know some disliked it. I watched it with DVD commentary by Brannon Braga recently and was struck how much he perceived it as a case of "real science that popular science fiction shied away from."
I mean, TOS had a couple of episodes with alternate universes and parallels wasn't even the first TNG episode to use them.
I'm even more surprised when I run into people who don't believe in them.
Granted, I think there are misunderstandings in the typical sci-fi portrayal of alternate universes.
The principal one being that "choices" have something to do with free will or human choices. Real, scientific notions of the concept deal with particles making choices. The universes are less likely to be themed in key ways.
I mean, just the difference between the universe where you had sausage and the universe where you had bacon for breakfast would be massive and there would many many, many universes you'd never see any difference between without sophisticated tools, assuming you could travel between them. And it might well be likelier that you'd be dead or never have been born than that you had a different breakfast choice.
Of course, that assumes they're separate to begin with.
I was reading an article not long ago that suggested that within what we think of as a universe, there are degrees of truth and that mutually exclusive events occur.
So if that applied to a grand scale, you might have bacon and not sausage, sausage and not bacon and be a vegetarian who has never had meat, all within a single universe. And some future researcher might find evidence of all three, if it applied on a human scale.
Which it might not. But the article I was reading did suggest that the universe may have multiple, contradictory origins and that we might be seeing conflicting pasts folded together as time goes on.
Exactly.... that episode didn't muck up the rest of the series.
In fact if anything, ST has a habit of 'one of' appearances rather than the other way around.
I loved that episode for the fact that it showed how subtle some of the changes from universe to universe can be, like a painting changing on the wall, and that's it.
There can be universes to similar to ours that the only difference is the color of a fish in the ocean, in one universe this particular fish is red, in another universe, it is orange. Or even getting more micro, it could be way down to a simple proton being in a different place, you'd never notice you were in another universe altogether. And then of course there can be big changes you'd notice.
I know some disliked it. I watched it with DVD commentary by Brannon Braga recently and was struck how much he perceived it as a case of "real science that popular science fiction shied away from."
I mean, TOS had a couple of episodes with alternate universes and parallels wasn't even the first TNG episode to use them.
I'm even more surprised when I run into people who don't believe in them.
Granted, I think there are misunderstandings in the typical sci-fi portrayal of alternate universes.
The principal one being that "choices" have something to do with free will or human choices. Real, scientific notions of the concept deal with particles making choices. The universes are less likely to be themed in key ways.
I mean, just the difference between the universe where you had sausage and the universe where you had bacon for breakfast would be massive and there would many many, many universes you'd never see any difference between without sophisticated tools, assuming you could travel between them. And it might well be likelier that you'd be dead or never have been born than that you had a different breakfast choice.
Of course, that assumes they're separate to begin with.
I was reading an article not long ago that suggested that within what we think of as a universe, there are degrees of truth and that mutually exclusive events occur.
So if that applied to a grand scale, you might have bacon and not sausage, sausage and not bacon and be a vegetarian who has never had meat, all within a single universe. And some future researcher might find evidence of all three, if it applied on a human scale.
Which it might not. But the article I was reading did suggest that the universe may have multiple, contradictory origins and that we might be seeing conflicting pasts folded together as time goes on.
I think you are over thinking it. The degree of difference can be subtle and tiny or huge and glaring. It really depends on which parallels you are comparing.
They can't co-exist within the same universe pretty much by definition. If someone from one shifts to another, that isn't co-existence. The fact that it might seem shroeinger's breakfast to a researcher doesn't change that the person actually ate only one of the choices. To declare they ate all three that meal is an academic cop out.
So is saying that if we don't know the truth, there is no truth. That is basically saying that the world literally was flat and only became round somehow when we were able to prove it such.. which begs the question as to what mechanism suddenly made it round.
I loved that episode for the fact that it showed how subtle some of the changes from universe to universe can be, like a painting changing on the wall, and that's it.
There can be universes to similar to ours that the only difference is the color of a fish in the ocean, in one universe this particular fish is red, in another universe, it is orange. Or even getting more micro, it could be way down to a simple proton being in a different place, you'd never notice you were in another universe altogether. And then of course there can be big changes you'd notice.
Exactly, while simultaneously giving Worf a reason for character development.
Exactly, while simultaneously giving Worf a reason for character development.
This is where the sci-fi usage of this stuff excels: as a storytelling and introspection tool.
In fact, in the commentary, Braga kept going on about Worf/Troi. Which is funny because I see that as a plot that fizzled.
And it fizzled because the actors weren't into it. Well, I think Dorn was happy to have something to do but I recall Sirtis hating it.
It's funny to me how these things work. Nana Visitor hated Kira/Odo too. Chakotay/Seven wasn't Jeri Ryan's cup of tea but I think Beltran, again, was happy to have something to do as an actor.
I wonder if any references to Seven will crop up with the Wells. She seemed to have multiple intersecting plots with them, both from when they deputized her and her nanoprobes infected the Doctor's armband.
Comments
The next patch should remove it, it is gone on tribble.
Do wish I got to see it but ill just have to wait it out and see what happens. Hopefully theyll come out with the outfits, and bridge to go with it too
Those weapons can be upgraded to current standards though, such as the ship on the cstore implies
god not this old chestnut again :rolleyes:
sto throws canon out of the nearest airlock , the recon science vessel that was in game at bloody launch is from a book too
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
It depends really, STO takes a lot of "Soft Canon" stuff like the books and video games, and incorporates them into the STOverse. That's why we have the Recon vessel and (Eventually) the Vesta. But either way, it's not really worth getting bent up over.
No Books are considered canon, ever. Only things seen on screen are considered canon.
That doesn't make them untrue either.
A fair amount of canon came from taking things in the books and adapting them onscreen.
The books are, ultimately, a non-canon source that canon does crib from.
And we're talking "Star Trek canon" here. Every body of works has a canon. There's a "Squarebob Spongepants canon," a "How I Met Your Mother" canon, a "Ronald McDonald canon."
And by that token, a "Star Trek Online canon," which is what's relevant to the game. It includes all of the shows. It includes some of the books. (The tie in novel by Martin seems to suggest that pre-Destiny books are a part of STO's canon but not a part of the post-Destiny novel canon. In particular, the STO novel indicates that the Genesis Wave books are a part of STO's past and NOT a part of the current books' past.)
all the movies/tv shows is one time line.
all the books follow multiple different time lines
all the games each follow their own time line.
the multiverse thingy.
the book- star trek online: the needs of the many, actually touch on this.
give it a read.
Too many universes can make things messy.
http://www.trekp.com/posters/gw410-multiverse2.jpg
Assuming that the Borg never adapted, which they would have had plenty of incentive to do.
Assuming the modern incarnation of the Vulcan ship is the same displacement as the original incarnation as seen on Enterprise, and assuming we are seeing actual relative sizes of anything rather than computer animated images used for easy target identification and acquisition.
Do you really believe that starships are piloted by looking through a conventional optical telescope?
It was a big fight.. couldn't both classes have been there?
Its a replica. Sacrifices had to be made to keep the bridge functional with respect to modern tech
that . is . glorious .
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
They already established that there are a nigh infinite number of parallel universes.
As long as the barriers between them are strong, it allows for plot hooks.
If the barriers are weak and they are allowed to interact constantly, then yes, very messy indeed.
Yeah, Trek Canon is easier to follow then Star Wars Canon.
In Star Wars canon EVERYTHING is canon unless it is strictly said to be not canon, or until something new comes along and Retcons it.
Star Wars canon does have levels, but that is only to determine how canon it is.
Everything is canon, but somethings are more canon then others.
I'm reminded of the many Worf episode
JustGaming4US - https://www.youtube.com/user/JustGaming4Us/
Twitter - https://twitter.com/Brent_Justice
Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/brentjustice
Exactly.... that episode didn't muck up the rest of the series.
In fact if anything, ST has a habit of 'one of' appearances rather than the other way around.
Yeah. In Trek, there's one canon.
But something being from a book or game doesn't make it untrue, just unconfirmed.
For example, the first names of a good chunk of characters.
Winona Kirk, Nyota Uhura, Hikaru Sulu.
Heck, one thing I think WAS nifty about J.J. Trek was how much it actually confirmed things that had been assumed or been soft canon.
You can disagree with it in the broad strokes of execution but I don't think it can be disputed that Orci and Kurtzman did do a lot of research.
I know some disliked it. I watched it with DVD commentary by Brannon Braga recently and was struck how much he perceived it as a case of "real science that popular science fiction shied away from."
I mean, TOS had a couple of episodes with alternate universes and parallels wasn't even the first TNG episode to use them.
I'm even more surprised when I run into people who don't believe in them.
Granted, I think there are misunderstandings in the typical sci-fi portrayal of alternate universes.
The principal one being that "choices" have something to do with free will or human choices. Real, scientific notions of the concept deal with particles making choices. The universes are less likely to be themed in key ways.
I mean, just the difference between the universe where you had sausage and the universe where you had bacon for breakfast would be massive and there would many many, many universes you'd never see any difference between without sophisticated tools, assuming you could travel between them. And it might well be likelier that you'd be dead or never have been born than that you had a different breakfast choice.
Of course, that assumes they're separate to begin with.
I was reading an article not long ago that suggested that within what we think of as a universe, there are degrees of truth and that mutually exclusive events occur.
So if that applied to a grand scale, you might have bacon and not sausage, sausage and not bacon and be a vegetarian who has never had meat, all within a single universe. And some future researcher might find evidence of all three, if it applied on a human scale.
Which it might not. But the article I was reading did suggest that the universe may have multiple, contradictory origins and that we might be seeing conflicting pasts folded together as time goes on.
I loved that episode for the fact that it showed how subtle some of the changes from universe to universe can be, like a painting changing on the wall, and that's it.
There can be universes to similar to ours that the only difference is the color of a fish in the ocean, in one universe this particular fish is red, in another universe, it is orange. Or even getting more micro, it could be way down to a simple proton being in a different place, you'd never notice you were in another universe altogether. And then of course there can be big changes you'd notice.
JustGaming4US - https://www.youtube.com/user/JustGaming4Us/
Twitter - https://twitter.com/Brent_Justice
Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/brentjustice
I think you are over thinking it. The degree of difference can be subtle and tiny or huge and glaring. It really depends on which parallels you are comparing.
They can't co-exist within the same universe pretty much by definition. If someone from one shifts to another, that isn't co-existence. The fact that it might seem shroeinger's breakfast to a researcher doesn't change that the person actually ate only one of the choices. To declare they ate all three that meal is an academic cop out.
So is saying that if we don't know the truth, there is no truth. That is basically saying that the world literally was flat and only became round somehow when we were able to prove it such.. which begs the question as to what mechanism suddenly made it round.
Exactly, while simultaneously giving Worf a reason for character development.
This is where the sci-fi usage of this stuff excels: as a storytelling and introspection tool.
In fact, in the commentary, Braga kept going on about Worf/Troi. Which is funny because I see that as a plot that fizzled.
And it fizzled because the actors weren't into it. Well, I think Dorn was happy to have something to do but I recall Sirtis hating it.
It's funny to me how these things work. Nana Visitor hated Kira/Odo too. Chakotay/Seven wasn't Jeri Ryan's cup of tea but I think Beltran, again, was happy to have something to do as an actor.
I wonder if any references to Seven will crop up with the Wells. She seemed to have multiple intersecting plots with them, both from when they deputized her and her nanoprobes infected the Doctor's armband.
Would be cool to see a 29th century drone akin to One. http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/One
Something just hit me... If this is a playable ship, it really calls for a bridge. If it has a bridge, 29th century uniforms would be ideal.
That's about the only good thing that came out of those episodes. Credit where it's due, those uniforms were pretty cool.
I enjoyed them as well.
Uh, actually, it does; because this is FICTION.