What contradiction? Check the base stats, there is only minor stats differences between a standard ship and it's tier 5 fleet counterpart, now, taking that into consideration, logic dictates that the same would apply to the Miranda and Constitution, so therefore, as T5 ships go those would be at the bottom of the barrel stats wise compared to any other T5 ship and no they are not going to give those ships any sort of special treatment by giving them a stats bump that they don't offer the other ships simply because a few people want it. I want a cloaking device for my Odyssey, will I get one? doubtful, we all want something but we're not going to get it, deal with it, move on, and would a mod close this thread already, it's so old it's grandkids are dead.
Maneuverability, base shield mod, and "class special abilities", in the Sci's case, subsystem targetting, all identical.
However, consoles, BOffs, devices, hull, weapons loadout, etc. all brought up to "T5" levels.
Going from T2 to T5: Consoles, more than doubled. BOff powers, more than doubled. Hull, +84%. (aka almost doubled).
Yeah, doubling everything isn't a "substantial" boost.
Doubling the Connie's stats: Hull: 12,000 -> 24,000 (900 off the T5 Sci). 3 -> 6 weapons placed into standard 3/3 loadout. 4 -> 9 consoles, no different than T2 -> T5. Give "subsystem targetting" and increase shield modifier from 1 to 1.3 for the "usual science ship matchup". Heck, keep the T1 manueverability levels, though maybe inertia needs an adjustment to fit into T5 science ranges better. Poof - Connie that's comparable for T5 action...
Summarize: Double stats (or a little more than double), convert to Science vessel, tweak inertia for maneuverability...
Random question back at you. Most cloakers give up something to get their cloak - whether it's hull, maneuver, a console, something. What would you give up to get the ability to fit the Defiant's / Galaxy-X's cloak console on your Oddy???
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
The 5 or 6 people that keep bringing this tired old argument up does not constitute the majority. And if the demand was so huge why is it you hardly see anyone in game flying the thing. I always see people in every other ship, almost never that one. Aaaand finally, this thread isn't about that anyway, this is a thread started by someone as a anti Miranda/connie argument thread, you people already have 3 or 4 hundred pro Miranda/connie threads that no one ever response to. Stop trying to hijack other people's threads in an attempt to force your stuff down everyone else's throats
So in a thread about the legitimacy of tier 5 fan favorites you want us to stop discussing the issue? Didn't TNG have episodes about the importance of not censoring the opposition?
It's true that other threads are about the issue too but trolls who like to bring up false or inconsequential information kept this one alive and we fell for it. The really funny part is that this thread was made while there were other tier 5 Connie threads that hadn't reached their post determined experarion date yet. If you'd like to let this die I'm with you, in a few days il finally make my proposal for a tier 5 Connie and you can argue in it all day.
And for the record a new poster comes to the forums to ask for this every few months.
the counter-argument hub for any thread that tries to "prove" that the above ships "should" be in the game. Anyone who posts here, does so to support the status quo of keeping these outdated ships out of the T5 list.
trolls who like to bring up false or inconsequential information kept this one alive and we fell for it.
It is unfortunate that trolls are trying to fit their way in with the forum posters who truly do not want a T5 starship in the T5 ranks (and who provide canon examples / proof / logical deductions as part of their reasoning). But I'm not a moderator, and I can't kick trolls out of this thread. Sorry
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
It is unfortunate that trolls are trying to fit their way in with the forum posters who truly do not want a T5 starship in the T5 ranks (and who provide canon examples / proof / logical deductions as part of their reasoning). But I'm not a moderator, and I can't kick trolls out of this thread. Sorry
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not so il try and respond as if you weren't. You can't have an argument hub for only one side of an argument. Claiming possession of all posts as supportive just doesn't work because the posters are all living people with adaptive positions. There is no argument without opposition and it's no different in nature than a pro-Connie thread.
Were all your posts in pro-Connie threads in support of the thread goal? Forums are purpose built towards discussion and that doesn't exclude differences in opinion. If you neglected to include the idea of an argument in your original post I might have stayed away.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not so il try and respond as if you weren't. You can't have an argument hub for only one side of an argument. Claiming possession of all posts as supportive just doesn't work because the posters are all living people with adaptive positions. There is no argument without opposition and it's no different in nature than a pro-Connie thread.
Were all your posts in pro-Connie threads in support of the thread goal? Forums are purpose built towards discussion and that doesn't exclude differences in opinion. If you neglected to include the idea of an argument in your original post I might have stayed away.
No sarcasm was intended, and I apologize for any confusion.
Just to clarify (and I will update the original post shortly):
This thread is based on two points of concern, 1) numerous uninformed individuals consistently spam the forums with requests for lower tiered ships to be bumped up to T5, and 2) such ships have no place in the T5 category.
The basis of this thread is to argue against forum spamming and lower tiered/older ships being bumped up to T5. Posters should use canon or apocryphal sources, logical deduction, or official documentation from CBS, PWE, Paramount, etc.
You are correct, there is no point in having a forum discussion that has no discussion. Thanks for addressing this.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
This thread is based on two points of concern, 1) numerous uninformed individuals consistently spam the forums with requests for lower tiered ships to be bumped up to T5, and 2) such ships have no place in the T5 category.
The basis of this thread is to argue against forum spamming and lower tiered/older ships being bumped up to T5. Posters should use canon or apocryphal sources, logical deduction, or official documentation from CBS, PWE, Paramount, etc.
See, there is a tiny problem: All your points (beside CBS having forbidden the Constitution and the Oberth sucking like a black hole) have already been disproven by the means you asked for. In spite of that you are still repeating them as if nothing happened.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
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.
I would say the best argument against a T5 version of the T1 ships is the fact that the developers probably have better things to do like fixing glitchs and bugs and working on the next big update. Myself, I'd much preffer seeing new content added to the game than I would seeing the developers spending their time hashing over old stuff. Before anyone says it, yes maybe it wouldn't take long for them to stop what they are doing to add T5 remakes but why bother, sure the KDF has a T5 version of a T1 ship but is anyone even using it? and those that do use it, do they use it for anything more than sitting around rping on it? doubtful, after all if I was going to do a stf or pvp thing or something,I don't say to myself, why not pick my crappiest ship to do it in. And, before anyone lectures me on the high demand for T5 versions of T1 ships lemme ask, how many people have you seen in the game asking if anyone has a fleet with a T1 shipyard they can join or if anyone can sell them access to a T1 shipyard? I'm guessing 0 because everyone wants the biggest and best fleet ships or c shop ships or lock box ships, theres not a big demand for a remake of some old relic.
Before anyone says it, yes maybe it wouldn't take long for them to stop what they are doing to add T5 remakes but why bother, sure the KDF has a T5 version of a T1 ship but is anyone even using it?
Is anyone using the iconic Chang-type bird of prey? Are you for real? Of-freaking-course!
and those that do use it, do they use it for anything more than sitting around rping on it? doubtful, after all if I was going to do a stf or pvp thing or something,I don't say to myself, why not pick my crappiest ship to do it in.
So T5 ships that are updated lower-tier ships are crappy? Do you even play this game?:eek:
And, before anyone lectures me on the high demand for T5 versions of T1 ships lemme ask, how many people have you seen in the game asking if anyone has a fleet with a T1 shipyard they can join or if anyone can sell them access to a T1 shipyard?
No one asks because you can build a T1 shipyard by yourself. I did it and I'm happy owner of a a fleet T'varo light warbird. Also ship tier has nothing to do with the age of the ships. Most of the Federation fleet ships you get from a T1 shipyard are from the 25th century.
I'm guessing 0 because everyone wants the biggest and best fleet ships or c shop ships or lock box ships, theres not a big demand for a remake of some old relic.
Ask how many people agree that the remake of the 22nd century Romulan bird of prey is the most badass Romulan ship in the game. Ask how many people think if the Excelsior is an awesome cruiser. So yeah, it's impossible to be more wrong than you.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
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.
I would say the best argument against a T5 version of the T1 ships is the fact that the developers probably have better things to do like fixing glitchs and bugs and working on the next big update.
You must be new to this game. STO history shows a stark contrast in what you are saying. This game has spent far more time and resources on making new store bought items than it has fixing glitches and working on updates.
Discussion should not be curtailed. but the pro T1 guys face this ships like the Connie are old and outdated to starfleet. the ONLY reason the miranda and Excel are in for the the sheer numbers build of them. And yes the Ecel is a good ship in this game whicvh brings in other points discussed on other threads. But as much As i love the connie she has no place in this time. IF STO made a TMP server I be all for it.
again.
explain the exeter, excalliber, vesper, shikhar, centaur and possibly the miriam if its added.
and while you are at it, explain the venture, monarch, envoy and celestial.
Cryptics idea for allowing customizable ships. have different skins. But in the end they are STIll Connie, Miranda, Centaur, and Galaxy.
In truth the Commander Excel and the connie should be reversed. For Excel still in service not the connie
try harder not to argue against yourself.
the "connie" has both the exeter, excalliber and vesper as contemporaries
the mrianda has the shikhar, centaur and may get the miriam.
the nx design is already mirrored in the steamrunner and could easly be given several variants.
so, take your own advice.
Whoops. I'm not sure why the Connie's other skins are in the list, I'll remove them. (Holdovers, I suppose. i do make mistakes.)
As for the Shi'kahr and the Centaur, they are eligible for the T5 status. Especially the Centaur; it has been seen as a fast frigate, on par with much more heavily armed vessels. As I've said several pages back, the Centaur is not a variant of either the Miranda or the Excelsior classes, it's a separate ship. Cryptic just doesn't know what kitbash means.
As for the NX, that's a weak argument. Chronologically, the Steamrunner design likely was based off of the NX, similar to the Akira (which looks far closer to the NX than any other 23rd century starship). The Steamrunner and the Akira are not variants, they are their own separate starship due to size, design evolution, and advanced technologies. It's akin to saying the Sovereign is a TMP Connie variant, just because they share a general design similarity.
stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9 My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
The whole "ship age" discussion is really superflous since it implies that ANYTHING in STO has rhyme or reason. But the truth is that you can wear your TOS uniforms, wield TOS era weaponry and put all that in and on a Odyssey Star Cruiser. STO is meant to be a Trek themed "theme park" MMO. The Miranda and the Excelsior or whatever are two of the few designs we actually saw on screen. Locking them out from endgame content holds no valid basis whatsoever.
I'd say open up all ship skins for endgame. I don't know in which categories they'd fit but artificially denying certain ships use doesn't make sense.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The whole "ship age" discussion is really superflous since it implies that ANYTHING in STO has rhyme or reason. But the truth is that you can wear your TOS uniforms, wield TOS era weaponry and put all that in and on a Odyssey Star Cruiser. STO is meant to be a Trek themed "theme park" MMO. The Miranda and the Excelsior or whatever are two of the few designs we actually saw on screen. Locking them out from endgame content holds no valid basis whatsoever.
I'd say open up all ship skins for endgame. I don't know in which categories they'd fit but artificially denying certain ships use doesn't make sense.
Theme parkish yes. thus I want some common sense brought in. Again why would Starfleet bring in Obsolete ships. especially make them T5. sorry a Galaxy and Excel should out preform a connie.
As I mentioned before in this thread, permanent hologram costumes is the best way to go IMO. People that want a T5 Connie will get a ship that looks like the Connie and can show it off in end game content without being a hindrance to their team. People that don't want a T5 Connie get their wish that they won't ever have to worry about a 150 year old ship design that is as strong as the Sovereign or Odyssey. The most important part is that GPL would actually have a use.
Theme parkish yes. thus I want some common sense brought in. Again why would Starfleet bring in Obsolete ships. especially make them T5. sorry a Galaxy and Excel should out preform a connie.
You can argue that way but the game does not use common sense at all. You just fly your 29th century temporal vessel while wielding TOS style type 2 phasers. You mount a bioweapon warhead on your type 8 shuttle. You fly a T5 Excelsior Class with antiproton DHCs with a bridge crew that consists of androids and liberated borg.
Don't try to reason within STO - it doesn't work that way. And if people want to fly a NX class or Constitution at endgame, because they saw that on screen and want their crew to wear the appropriate uniforms and just use that ship then let them. If STO had the guts to choose a specific setting in the universe and let us follow a set of rules I could understand your desire. But STO is not a consistent gaming experience, it's just a theme park with lottery boxes that award you gimmick ships and stuff
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Mr. Redstone never sent that letter, as he would never write it the way it was written. You're a liar, or your Head Admin lied to you. It's as simple as that.
There are dozens of websites you can go to that prove Sumner never retired. As I've said 4 times now, you can go directly to CBS and Viacom and see that he is listed as the Chairman of the Board of those two corporations. You can go to those websites and see that Sumner is still the head of National Amusements. You can see that National Amusements is still the owner, via voting rights, of CBS and Viacom. All of that is PUBLIC RECORD that anyone can find in 2 minutes on the internet.
Sumner still owns CBS and Viacom. Les is the CEO of CBS, but he works for Sumner, the Chairman of the Board of CBS. This is all public record and has nothing to do with a 7 year old letter your Admin says he got.
So be as POed as you want to be. That want stop you from being completely wrong.
To you know him personally Mr. Redstone if not you Fxxx of what you are talking about.It is indeed a letter hand written.What makes you think it isn't?You have no proof and I ma pretty sure Harry Lang made a posting in that thread.You don't know who harry Lang is do you smart a55.We have never posted on the front page of Star Trek-Gamers any or false information and if that were the case we could get sued for lialbilty which my head admin owuld prefer to avoid.
So go take long walk in the park and don't turn back.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer Star Trek Gamers
To you know him personally Mr. Redstone if not you Fxxx of what you are talking about.It is indeed a letter hand written.What makes you think it isn't?You have no proof and I ma pretty sure Harry Lang made a posting in that thread.You don't know who harry Lang is do you smart a55.We have never posted on the front page of Star Trek-Gamers any or false information and if that were the case we could get sued for lialbilty which my head admin owuld prefer to avoid.
So go take long walk in the park and don't turn back.
man, you really need to get your facts straight. the link you postet didn't even mention any letter..."handwritten"...do you even know what the word means, it doesn't seem that way.
your "headadmin" was refering to a statement made in 2005, nothing less and nothing more. It clearly says so in the text, which obviously you didn't even care to read before linking it.
and that may be the most important part, the info is 8 YEARS OLD! It was already 5 years old when STO was released. Things change in nearly a decade.
also, save your self a response, i couldn't care less about what you have to say or what your reasoning is, and so do most people on THIS forum, and presumably on your fabled ST gamers forum too.
a simple google research has already invalidated everything you said.
then the shi-kahr & centaur should out perform a defiant.
since the defiant never worked properly in the first place.
that being a gamble and flaw.
technically in regards to the weapons you can dress an mp7 up as a tommy gun for example.
theis games life-support is the adopted branding of the startrek universe, if it doesnt maintain the integrity of the st franchise its trying to sell itslef on, then it becomes... just another antiquated mmo where every thing from the team npc 'powers', to the npc stats, npc behaviors, and foundational mechanics are at minimum 10 years past their sell by date. and thats before you get to the cut& pasted gui and radar map thats completly out of place due to lack of z-axis data.
Defiant nearly tore itself apart in trails it wasn't till Obrien's modifications and the Marour that made her work well. but Centuar can't outpreform a Defiant. it's an older design. SHir Kar is a miranda skin nothing more and even older then Centaur.
well within their life cycle. its canon that starfleet wanted to refit them with mk10 phasers in the dm, that would have made them equipped with comparable tech, built for similar tasks, but, the centaur would be bigger than the defiant.
that means centaur > defiant.
only way your argument can possibly work is if you;
ignore that both designs are 40 years old at least.
ignore that the defiant was a failure, where the centaur was proven.
ignore that both can be fitted with the latest tech ingame.
also, the shikahr is a more modern design than the defiant.
Centaur was not designed as a compact Warship, Defiant was. and in the end Defiant on par with Lakota refitted Excel Also Centaur design far older than Defiant. Considering parts it is made from. it is likely an early 23rd design while Defiant late design. Also Defiant did not truely fail. It had problems during test and then when Borg threat not as big mothballed. It was then reactivated after oddy blew and has since been in production. She is a short range compact warship. and will likely be assigned to station or world defense.
No sarcasm was intended, and I apologize for any confusion.
Just to clarify (and I will update the original post shortly):
This thread is based on two points of concern, 1) numerous uninformed individuals consistently spam the forums with requests for lower tiered ships to be bumped up to T5, and 2) such ships have no place in the T5 category.
The basis of this thread is to argue against forum spamming and lower tiered/older ships being bumped up to T5. Posters should use canon or apocryphal sources, logical deduction, or official documentation from CBS, PWE, Paramount, etc.
You are correct, there is no point in having a forum discussion that has no discussion. Thanks for addressing this.
You don't have to apologize to me. Im not above a few good cracks or rubbing noses into a post, I shoot loaded questions all the time but I make sure they're backed up by facts. I look forward to reading the new OP.
Centaur was not designed as a compact Warship, Defiant was. and in the end Defiant on par with Lakota refitted Excel Also Centaur design far older than Defiant. Considering parts it is made from. it is likely an early 23rd design while Defiant late design. Also Defiant did not truely fail. It had problems during test and then when Borg threat not as big mothballed. It was then reactivated after oddy blew and has since been in production. She is a short range compact warship. and will likely be assigned to station or world defense.
Shir Khar, new skin of old ship nothing more.
So star fleet is designing new skins for old ships even though they're quality tops off before a newer designs quality would stop increasing? I don't like the Star Fleet you work for its not long for this life. They could just make a genuinely newer ship with a longer lifespan of upgrades.
The Defiant has been designed for pure combat and unfortunately Tiers are all about combat. The Miranda has been designed to be an all purpose ship. The Defiant has most of its space filled with weaponry and other systems to make it do well in combat and the minimum amount of space for life support which includes quarters and corridors. The Miranda has a ton of luxuries like Science Labs and Holodecks that would never be found on the Defiant. The weaponry on a Miranda is set at a minimum. So to make a Miranda Tier 5, then the Miranda would have to replace most of its systems with Weaponry and other combat systems, but that ruins the whole purpose of the ship.
A way to make the Miranda Tier 5 without ruining its purpose would be to add Tier Categories. A Defiant would be Tier 5 in Combat, but Tier 1 in Exploration, Science, Colonization support, etc. So the Defiant is good at combat, but sucks at everything else. A Miranda might be Tier 1 in Combat, but Tier 5 in Exploration, Science, Colonization support, etc. So the Miranda could suck at combat, but good at everything else. The Tiers could be adjusted accordingly for the Miranda. A ship like the Sovereign could be Tier 5 in everything.
Comments
Compare the T2 Science ship with the T5 Sci. Retrofit
Maneuverability, base shield mod, and "class special abilities", in the Sci's case, subsystem targetting, all identical.
However, consoles, BOffs, devices, hull, weapons loadout, etc. all brought up to "T5" levels.
Going from T2 to T5: Consoles, more than doubled. BOff powers, more than doubled. Hull, +84%. (aka almost doubled).
Yeah, doubling everything isn't a "substantial" boost.
Doubling the Connie's stats: Hull: 12,000 -> 24,000 (900 off the T5 Sci). 3 -> 6 weapons placed into standard 3/3 loadout. 4 -> 9 consoles, no different than T2 -> T5. Give "subsystem targetting" and increase shield modifier from 1 to 1.3 for the "usual science ship matchup". Heck, keep the T1 manueverability levels, though maybe inertia needs an adjustment to fit into T5 science ranges better. Poof - Connie that's comparable for T5 action...
Summarize: Double stats (or a little more than double), convert to Science vessel, tweak inertia for maneuverability...
Random question back at you. Most cloakers give up something to get their cloak - whether it's hull, maneuver, a console, something. What would you give up to get the ability to fit the Defiant's / Galaxy-X's cloak console on your Oddy???
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
So in a thread about the legitimacy of tier 5 fan favorites you want us to stop discussing the issue? Didn't TNG have episodes about the importance of not censoring the opposition?
It's true that other threads are about the issue too but trolls who like to bring up false or inconsequential information kept this one alive and we fell for it. The really funny part is that this thread was made while there were other tier 5 Connie threads that hadn't reached their post determined experarion date yet. If you'd like to let this die I'm with you, in a few days il finally make my proposal for a tier 5 Connie and you can argue in it all day.
And for the record a new poster comes to the forums to ask for this every few months.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
It is unfortunate that trolls are trying to fit their way in with the forum posters who truly do not want a T5 starship in the T5 ranks (and who provide canon examples / proof / logical deductions as part of their reasoning). But I'm not a moderator, and I can't kick trolls out of this thread. Sorry
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not so il try and respond as if you weren't. You can't have an argument hub for only one side of an argument. Claiming possession of all posts as supportive just doesn't work because the posters are all living people with adaptive positions. There is no argument without opposition and it's no different in nature than a pro-Connie thread.
Were all your posts in pro-Connie threads in support of the thread goal? Forums are purpose built towards discussion and that doesn't exclude differences in opinion. If you neglected to include the idea of an argument in your original post I might have stayed away.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
No sarcasm was intended, and I apologize for any confusion.
Just to clarify (and I will update the original post shortly):
This thread is based on two points of concern, 1) numerous uninformed individuals consistently spam the forums with requests for lower tiered ships to be bumped up to T5, and 2) such ships have no place in the T5 category.
The basis of this thread is to argue against forum spamming and lower tiered/older ships being bumped up to T5. Posters should use canon or apocryphal sources, logical deduction, or official documentation from CBS, PWE, Paramount, etc.
You are correct, there is no point in having a forum discussion that has no discussion. Thanks for addressing this.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
See, there is a tiny problem: All your points (beside CBS having forbidden the Constitution and the Oberth sucking like a black hole) have already been disproven by the means you asked for. In spite of that you are still repeating them as if nothing happened.
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.
Is anyone using the iconic Chang-type bird of prey? Are you for real? Of-freaking-course!
So T5 ships that are updated lower-tier ships are crappy? Do you even play this game?:eek:
No one asks because you can build a T1 shipyard by yourself. I did it and I'm happy owner of a a fleet T'varo light warbird. Also ship tier has nothing to do with the age of the ships. Most of the Federation fleet ships you get from a T1 shipyard are from the 25th century.
Ask how many people agree that the remake of the 22nd century Romulan bird of prey is the most badass Romulan ship in the game. Ask how many people think if the Excelsior is an awesome cruiser. So yeah, it's impossible to be more wrong than you.
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 must be new to this game. STO history shows a stark contrast in what you are saying. This game has spent far more time and resources on making new store bought items than it has fixing glitches and working on updates.
Cryptics idea for allowing customizable ships. have different skins. But in the end they are STIll Connie, Miranda, Centaur, and Galaxy.
In truth the Commander Excel and the connie should be reversed. For Excel still in service not the connie
Whoops. I'm not sure why the Connie's other skins are in the list, I'll remove them. (Holdovers, I suppose. i do make mistakes.)
As for the Shi'kahr and the Centaur, they are eligible for the T5 status. Especially the Centaur; it has been seen as a fast frigate, on par with much more heavily armed vessels. As I've said several pages back, the Centaur is not a variant of either the Miranda or the Excelsior classes, it's a separate ship. Cryptic just doesn't know what kitbash means.
As for the NX, that's a weak argument. Chronologically, the Steamrunner design likely was based off of the NX, similar to the Akira (which looks far closer to the NX than any other 23rd century starship). The Steamrunner and the Akira are not variants, they are their own separate starship due to size, design evolution, and advanced technologies. It's akin to saying the Sovereign is a TMP Connie variant, just because they share a general design similarity.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I'd say open up all ship skins for endgame. I don't know in which categories they'd fit but artificially denying certain ships use doesn't make sense.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Theme parkish yes. thus I want some common sense brought in. Again why would Starfleet bring in Obsolete ships. especially make them T5. sorry a Galaxy and Excel should out preform a connie.
You can argue that way but the game does not use common sense at all. You just fly your 29th century temporal vessel while wielding TOS style type 2 phasers. You mount a bioweapon warhead on your type 8 shuttle. You fly a T5 Excelsior Class with antiproton DHCs with a bridge crew that consists of androids and liberated borg.
Don't try to reason within STO - it doesn't work that way. And if people want to fly a NX class or Constitution at endgame, because they saw that on screen and want their crew to wear the appropriate uniforms and just use that ship then let them. If STO had the guts to choose a specific setting in the universe and let us follow a set of rules I could understand your desire. But STO is not a consistent gaming experience, it's just a theme park with lottery boxes that award you gimmick ships and stuff
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
So go take long walk in the park and don't turn back.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
man, you really need to get your facts straight. the link you postet didn't even mention any letter..."handwritten"...do you even know what the word means, it doesn't seem that way.
your "headadmin" was refering to a statement made in 2005, nothing less and nothing more. It clearly says so in the text, which obviously you didn't even care to read before linking it.
and that may be the most important part, the info is 8 YEARS OLD! It was already 5 years old when STO was released. Things change in nearly a decade.
also, save your self a response, i couldn't care less about what you have to say or what your reasoning is, and so do most people on THIS forum, and presumably on your fabled ST gamers forum too.
a simple google research has already invalidated everything you said.
Defiant nearly tore itself apart in trails it wasn't till Obrien's modifications and the Marour that made her work well. but Centuar can't outpreform a Defiant. it's an older design. SHir Kar is a miranda skin nothing more and even older then Centaur.
Centaur was not designed as a compact Warship, Defiant was. and in the end Defiant on par with Lakota refitted Excel Also Centaur design far older than Defiant. Considering parts it is made from. it is likely an early 23rd design while Defiant late design. Also Defiant did not truely fail. It had problems during test and then when Borg threat not as big mothballed. It was then reactivated after oddy blew and has since been in production. She is a short range compact warship. and will likely be assigned to station or world defense.
Shir Khar, new skin of old ship nothing more.
You don't have to apologize to me. Im not above a few good cracks or rubbing noses into a post, I shoot loaded questions all the time but I make sure they're backed up by facts. I look forward to reading the new OP.
So star fleet is designing new skins for old ships even though they're quality tops off before a newer designs quality would stop increasing? I don't like the Star Fleet you work for its not long for this life. They could just make a genuinely newer ship with a longer lifespan of upgrades.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
A way to make the Miranda Tier 5 without ruining its purpose would be to add Tier Categories. A Defiant would be Tier 5 in Combat, but Tier 1 in Exploration, Science, Colonization support, etc. So the Defiant is good at combat, but sucks at everything else. A Miranda might be Tier 1 in Combat, but Tier 5 in Exploration, Science, Colonization support, etc. So the Miranda could suck at combat, but good at everything else. The Tiers could be adjusted accordingly for the Miranda. A ship like the Sovereign could be Tier 5 in everything.