test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Breen Ship and the USS/IKS Name Prefixs

2»

Comments

  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    similon wrote: »
    snip

    I honestly understand that people want to play their own game and by their own rules, but unfortunately this isn't a sandbox type MMO. There are plenty of games out there where you can be what you want, do what you want, call your ships what you want etc. but these aren't free to play in the same way as this is.

    Flexibility choice and options are all great, but there is only so far you can logically go before this stops being Star Trek Online and starts to become Generic Space Sim Online.
    In the same way if you start adjusting the rules of Baseball and make them more like Cricket, you're not playing Baseball you're playing Cricket.
  • sunseahlsunseahl Member Posts: 827 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    tc10b wrote: »
    Thank you for your outright attack because I dared to disagree with you.

    "Normal" people play a Star Trek game because they like Star Trek not because they want to play Star Wars/Battlestar/Mass Effect/Star Citizen/Eve but can't afford it.
    Most "normal" people play a game the way it is intended to be played and most "normal" people don't go into Indian Restaurants and demand that they are served cheeseburgers.

    You and others can pretend you're Han Solo in the Millennium Falcon all you want, that's up to you, it doesn't mean that the whole game should be turned into that to fulfill that fantasy.

    I didn't attack you....

    I never said that i wanted a Millennium Falcon..... In fact I'd prefer the ship from Flight of the Navigator.

    I actually did come to STO because i was no longer able to pay for EVE AND enjoyed Star Trek in my youth AND liked that it was free to play so that assertion can go right up your spotted owl....





    Anyway, the reason this thread is pointless is because normal players want options...

    Meanwhile all the Trekkies want "correctness."

    Well guess what? You can't be both and you can't be neither. Now, you can claim to be a victim all you wish, truth is people who want complete and utter lore correctness in this game fail to even understand the nature of Star Trek as an MMO... 100% lore correctness as you MAKE LORE is impossible... end of story.


    You can counter argue people who want Breen, Galor, Dominion and what ever else ship they make's designations but making it about rescinding designations because-

    *Ancient Aliens Guy* "Lore"

    -is like arguing for the reduction in size of DS9... it's just you guys stroking your "Look at me I know lore and you gotta fix this cause it's wrong" ego and it's NOT gonna happen, in fact, it's only going to get worse in your opinion.

    alikain wrote: »
    @Sunseahl; it is you who doesn't get the whole thing. Romulan captains are in the service of the Romulan navy not the starfleet nor Klingon defence force. take the Vulcan defence force as an example, they are part of the federation but they don't use the USS prefix, so why should another faction like the Romulans navy allow it captain to use another faction prefix. It doesn't make sense. Even the Cardassian who are under the control of the federation don't use the starfleet prefix on the local system defence force. So please don't tell me they have no bearing of the one flying the ship because they do. The only reason faction would want to keep a prefix is if they want to use the vessel to Infiltrate the faction which the vessel belong. If you want more example take the Bajoran, before they became a member world of the federation, and were Affiliated with the federation why didn't they add the federation prefix to their ships. The B'rel class ship use by the Ferengi in the TNG episode Rascals, why didn't they keep the KDf prefix. So you see they do have bearing.


    See above
    Member of the "Disenchanted"
    We don't want what the Feds have. We want the equivalent. We want fairer treatment. Concern, desire, greed to some extent, and passionate belief that the enough people would buy KDF items to make it worth Cryptic's while.
  • kamenriderzero1kamenriderzero1 Member Posts: 906 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I do kinda remember the days when you had no choice. My first mirror ship IIRC, was stuck with the USS designation.

    The system the game operates on isn't perfect, there has to be some sort of give and take between "following canon" and "making a playable game". We can't have every single thing we want the game to be, since that will alienate someone else. I freely admit I joined this game as a Trekkie, I wanted a better challenge from other Trek games, since I knew MMO games evolved over time.
    Everywhere I look, people are screaming about how bad Cryptic is.
    What's my position?
    That people should know what they're screaming about!
    (paraphrased from "The Newsroom)
  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    sunseahl wrote: »
    I didn't attack you....

    I never said that i wanted a Millennium Falcon..... In fact I'd prefer the ship from Flight of the Navigator.

    I actually did come to STO because i was no longer able to pay for EVE AND enjoyed Star Trek in my youth AND liked that it was free to play so that assertion can go right up your spotted owl....

    You did attack me, you called me abnormal by inference along with many other things by association and you continue to be outright offensive. Bravo.

    So because ironically, you did come here because you could no longer afford to play EvE and are advocating making it more like that, how am I wrong and why should I take that fact and shove it where the sun doesn't shine? To politely paraphrase you.

    Simple fact of the matter is, the game mechanics do not support the sandbox type thing you are used to. The setting is fixed and you have a set identity, you can pretend otherwise but that is your own imagination doesn't mean the game should support it indeed it can't because it's not been designed that way. If you don't like the set menu, try another restaurant.

    You don't like the suggestions put forward by people about what is proper and canon about how a ship should be named. That's fine, but provide a cogent argument as to why people should do things your way that don't include petty insults.
  • sunseahlsunseahl Member Posts: 827 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    tc10b wrote: »
    You did attack me, you called me abnormal by inference along with many other things by association and you continue to be outright offensive. Bravo.

    You know what? If you think trekkie is a term to make you "abnormal" then fine by me. that's your issue, not mine.
    tc10b wrote: »
    So because ironically, you did come here because you could no longer afford to play EvE and are advocating making it more like that, how am I wrong and why should I take that fact and shove it where the sun doesn't shine? To politely paraphrase you.

    I never made a thread that said I should be able to steal, scam and generally Starfleet Dental(Goonswarm Federation) players when ever i wanted.... nor have I advocated making STO "Spreadsheets Online." In that assertion you are wrong to accuse me of advocating making this game any more complicated.... I never advocated for territory control.... Others have.... I never wanted PVP like other MMOs... Others did.

    All I've ever wanted from STO is a good story and it's only NOW that that's even somewhat happening. and even though it's a small start so far I am grateful for it.

    Sure I do criticize STO, and rightfully so for stumbling face first into bugs I never knew existed because of a setup i never used only to find out it's BEEN a bug for a long time but you can hardly call that me wanting STO to be EVE.
    tc10b wrote: »
    Simple fact of the matter is, the game mechanics do not support the sandbox type thing you are used to. The setting is fixed and you have a set identity, you can pretend otherwise but that is your own imagination doesn't mean the game should support it indeed it can't because it's not been designed that way. If you don't like the set menu, try another restaurant.

    again.... This discussion is not about me jumping in the the most expensive ship on the market... fitting it with super powered weapons and going out to generally pound people in a PvP setting... OH WAIT... THIS GAME HAS THAT ALREADY!

    At this point i'm not sure if you're even competent to know what "sandbox" means, let alone claim that others are arguing for it, when the discussion at hand is the PREFIX ON A SHIP NAME, not me going wherever the hell i feel like and getting my ship trashed or thrashing others ships.

    tc10b wrote: »
    You don't like the suggestions put forward by people about what is proper and canon about how a ship should be named. That's fine, but provide a cogent argument as to why people should do things your way that don't include petty insults.

    "What is proper and canon" CAN NOT WORK 100% ALL THE TIME IN STO.... It's an MMO, not an air once set in stone TV series....

    the content is persistent, dynamic and all around fluid in it's existence.... Just look at LoR in which the entire Romulan Feature Series arc was CHANGED based on just introducing ONE new playable half-faction.

    You can NOT claim to have any sort of correctness on your side because you know "lore" or can read a wiki on the issue when the entire GAME can be changed like a snap from Q's fingers. Debating "lore" in a fluid-lore environment is like a Republican screaming any manner of obscenities and blame at chandelier because the power went out. It doesn't turn the power back on it just makes YOU look self-righteous.
    Member of the "Disenchanted"
    We don't want what the Feds have. We want the equivalent. We want fairer treatment. Concern, desire, greed to some extent, and passionate belief that the enough people would buy KDF items to make it worth Cryptic's while.
  • acrosscatacrosscat Member Posts: 84 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    sunseahl wrote: »
    You know what? If you think trekkie is a term to make you "abnormal" then fine by me. that's your issue, not mine.

    Take this to heart, tc10b. The distinction between hardcore lore-abiding roleplayers or Star Trek affecionados already exists, and these are already their own focus group in MMO marketing.

    You're not the norm, simply put.
    sunseahl wrote: »
    "What is proper and canon" CAN NOT WORK 100% ALL THE TIME IN STO.... It's an MMO, not an air once set in stone TV series....

    the content is persistent, dynamic and all around fluid in it's existence.... Just look at LoR in which the entire Romulan Feature Series arc was CHANGED based on just introducing ONE new playable half-faction.

    You can NOT claim to have any sort of correctness on your side because you know "lore" or can read a wiki on the issue when the entire GAME can be changed like a snap from Q's fingers. Debating "lore" in a fluid-lore environment is like a Republican screaming any manner of obscenities and blame at chandelier because the power went out. It doesn't turn the power back on it just makes YOU look self-righteous.

    US politics chat aside, this is the core point that must be considered.

    Star Trek Online is first and foremost a Massive Multiplayer Online game. Its intellectual property is closely guarded and maintained within the game's universe and overall design, but in the end, STO is a game first and foremost.

    While I'm as keen on immersion in the Star Trek lore as anyone else, and would very much like some manner of fleet designation consideration a la the Risan escort cruiser (if by going by recent additions), STO is a game with noted factions and player versus player combat interactions. As such, it must adhere to a series of rules and guidelines for communication to the player and sacrifices must be made in favour of gameplay.

    At a glance of a ship, one must readily identify factions for the sake of gameplay. While this was pretty straight-forward back in pre-Legacy of Romulus days, especially in PVP, these days the waters are a wee bit muddied. If not by appearance, targetting and seeing a name pop up with its identifiers in the prefix allows for immediate designation of friend and foe. It is a simple gameplay concession that has been cooked into the game pretty much from day one.

    I suppose it's even simpler due to the fact enemies are tab-targetted and cycled with a simple /target_enemy_near, thus ignoring my claim of fleet designation prefixes being 'a thing' with regards to design and gameplay concessions. But always assume players don't know and need to have their information readily available.

    EDIT:
    sunseahl wrote: »
    I never made a thread that said I should be able to steal, scam and generally Starfleet Dental(Goonswarm Federation) players when ever i wanted.... nor have I advocated making STO "Spreadsheets Online."

    Could we for once not ████ing bring up Dental when it's not bloody warranted?
    ____GREAT LEADERS LET THEIR ACTIONS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    The Millennium Falcon was in Star Trek First Contact, it' canon bring it Here!! :rolleyes:
    GwaoHAD.png
  • sunseahlsunseahl Member Posts: 827 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    The Millennium Falcon was in Star Trek First Contact, it' canon bring it Here!! :rolleyes:

    WOW..... You're really going to town on the STO Wiki... arnt'cha?
    Member of the "Disenchanted"
    We don't want what the Feds have. We want the equivalent. We want fairer treatment. Concern, desire, greed to some extent, and passionate belief that the enough people would buy KDF items to make it worth Cryptic's while.
  • similonsimilon Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    sunseahl wrote: »
    WOW..... You're really going to town on the STO Wiki... arnt'cha?

    To be fair, that's pretty common Trivia. Hell, I've heard it in pub quizes.
    ___________________________
    The day will not save them. And we own the night.
  • sunseahlsunseahl Member Posts: 827 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    I still want Max....


    "See you later Navigator!"
    Member of the "Disenchanted"
    We don't want what the Feds have. We want the equivalent. We want fairer treatment. Concern, desire, greed to some extent, and passionate belief that the enough people would buy KDF items to make it worth Cryptic's while.
  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    acrosscat wrote: »
    Take this to heart, tc10b. The distinction between hardcore lore-abiding roleplayers or Star Trek affecionados already exists, and these are already their own focus group in MMO marketing.

    You're not the norm, simply put.

    I didn't bring up lore, Star Trek trivia, roleplay or anything else, nor am I representative of it. I'm simply arguing for not having thousands of different name tags just so that a minority of the hard core RPers can have their Millennium Falcons, Moya and whatever ships they feel like they are pretending to fly that week because it looked good on TV.

    Just because I have an understanding of history doesn't make me a hard core trek nerd or any other thinly veiled insult you and the unhinged want to band about just because I don't agree with your opinions. I don't see why this game should be changed, adapted and bastardised to accommodate the immigrants from other games non F2P games and turned into Generic Space Sim online and there are hundreds of examples of this in the game already, some blatant, some not so.

    And to be perfectly honest if you and he despise Star Trek "nerds" so vehemently perhaps a forum for a (former) Star Trek game is not the place you should come.
    acrosscat wrote: »
    Could we for once not ████ing bring up Dental when it's not bloody warranted?

    Quite, guilt by association is a poor debating technique at best.
  • acrosscatacrosscat Member Posts: 84 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    tc10b wrote: »
    Just because I have an understanding of history doesn't make me a hard core trek nerd or any other thinly veiled insult you -

    Woah. Hey. Step back a moment to my first and only post in this thread before this reply.

    I try not to head into insults, nor do I start tossing them around.

    Second:
    tc10b wrote: »
    I didn't bring up lore, Star Trek trivia, roleplay or anything else, nor am I representative of it. I'm simply arguing for not having thousands of different name tags just so that a minority of the hard core RPers can have their Millennium Falcons, Moya and whatever ships they feel like they are pretending to fly that week because it looked good on TV.

    Yes you did. And I completely agree with you that we can't have every single class name under the sun be represented, or freely inserted. Heck, I even made that same argument. Some more designations would be nice, but for the sake of gameplay and design, that is most likely not going to happen.

    Third:
    tc10b wrote: »
    And to be perfectly honest if you and he despise Star Trek "nerds" so vehemently perhaps a forum for a (former) Star Trek game is not the place you should come.

    You really need to chill out. I have made no claims to any such allegations.
    ____GREAT LEADERS LET THEIR ACTIONS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    acrosscat wrote: »
    Woah. Hey. Step back a moment to my first and only post in this thread before this reply.

    I try not to head into insults, nor do I start tossing them around.

    You defined me as abnormal something which I do not appreciate however "well intentioned" it may have been especially given the abuse that previous posters have gone in for earlier in the thread.
    acrosscat wrote: »
    Yes you did. And I completely agree with you that we can't have every single class name under the sun be represented, or freely inserted. Heck, I even made that same argument. Some more designations would be nice, but for the sake of gameplay and design, that is most likely not going to happen.

    That is not Trek lore, that is common sense and basic Military History thrown in. You and he percieve it as Trek lore because you don't understand the fact that Trek like every other military drama set in space is based on contemporary military history in terms of backstory as well as storyline content.
    It would still apply whether this was a Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5 or any other type of game following contemporary military style naming conventions for ships.

    If it shows any kind of "nerdity" it is of a through study of modern and military history, it's context and how it is perceived in modern television. Which ironically is why things like Star Trek often get it so, so wrong on so many levels because it has little to no understanding of proper military doctrine or procedure.

    There is still no call for stating that I use this knowledge as a masturbatory aid as was explicitly stated in previous posts in this thread which I considered grossly offensive.
    Thus continuing with your justification of why I was abnormal is at best misguided and at worst insulting and degrading as you were effectively echoing his previous derisory statement.

    And I will chill out, when such statements cease to be made in an attempt to silence people who oppose certain ideas.
  • acrosscatacrosscat Member Posts: 84 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    tc10b wrote: »
    You defined me as abnormal something which I do not appreciate however "well intentioned" it may have been especially given the abuse that previous posters have gone in for earlier in the thread.

    Quote me.
    tc10b wrote: »
    There is still no call for stating that I use this knowledge as a masturbatory aid as was explicitly stated in previous posts in this thread which I considered grossly offensive.

    Thus continuing with your justification of why I was abnormal is at best misguided and at worst insulting and degrading as you were effectively echoing his previous derisory statement.

    Quote m-
    tc10b wrote: »
    And I will chill out, when such statements cease to be made in an attempt to silence people who oppose certain ideas.

    You know what? I'll gracefully bow out.

    You have managed to have someone who was agreeing with your arguments against giving out fleet designations willy-nilly effectively distance themselves from any further points you'd make because you read slander where none is written.
    ____GREAT LEADERS LET THEIR ACTIONS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    sunseahl wrote: »
    Trekkies want lore-strick Trek-stroking till they can nerdgasm.... which won't happen here. Sorry.
    acrosscat wrote: »
    Take this to heart, tc10b... You're not the norm, simply put.

    Quotely thusly for your own perusal. That's outright offensive from both of you and was completely uncalled for whether or not you agree with my point of view or not.

    He made the offensive comments in an attempt to silence me, you just gave him validation by agreeing with his offensive comments and saying that I was abnormal.

    But view it as you see fit and of course whatever you do, don't apologise.
  • sunseahlsunseahl Member Posts: 827 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    tc10b wrote: »
    Quotely thusly for your own perusal. That's outright offensive from both of you and was completely uncalled for whether or not you agree with my point of view or not.

    He made the offensive comments in an attempt to silence me, you just gave him validation by agreeing with his offensive comments and saying that I was abnormal.

    But view it as you see fit and of course whatever you do, don't apologies.




    1. I'm not a he, don't assume such...

    2. It's funny that you can't separate what's being said from your hurt feelings

    -- cat was talking about lore-lovers being a sell-to demographic and THAT making you "abnormal"

    --me. I just said you were such a lore nerd that you'd argue something using lore just to stroke your own ego.

    3. Trek DOES follow naval tradition in fact Roddenberry was a naval man. Who else would have a security officer named Tasha Yar? Roddenberry was as obsessed with military tradition in his writing as some people of his series....
    Member of the "Disenchanted"
    We don't want what the Feds have. We want the equivalent. We want fairer treatment. Concern, desire, greed to some extent, and passionate belief that the enough people would buy KDF items to make it worth Cryptic's while.
  • tc10btc10b Member Posts: 1,549 Arc User
    edited September 2013
    sunseahl wrote: »
    1. I'm not a he, don't assume such...

    Why not, you all do on a daily basis. You can search all 1000+ of my posts if you so wish, but lets not get into that debate shall we?
    sunseahl wrote: »
    3. Trek DOES follow naval tradition in fact Roddenberry was a naval man. Who else would have a security officer named Tasha Yar? Roddenberry was as obsessed with military tradition in his writing as some people of his series....

    Roddenberry was US Army Air Corps later LA Police, he was never in the Navy (US or otherwise). He based his whole series on his interpretation of Naval Tradition from Horatio Hornblower novels, of themselves written by a doctor. But I suspect you know that and are just posting factual inaccuracies to be irritating.

    I don't do it to "stroke my own ego" I do it because I understand things and I like to share that information with others. I do however understand that many people such as yourself would rather revel in ignorance than know the truth and that's fine too.
  • edited September 2013
    This content has been removed.
Sign In or Register to comment.