As for, 'anachronism', I don't believe that's how that word is supposed to be used...
Nah, I used it properly. The Cheyenne, or heck let's just skip right to the T'Varo ... taking out a Borg Tactical Cube is an anachronism. One ship was utterly destoryed handily by a regular cube at Wolf 359.
The other ship is from Archer's era.
The gameplay here is an ananchronism. At least, if the game follows the rules you keep trying to apply to it.
But the game doesn't follow those rules. So either you agree that it's an anachronism. Or if it isn't then there's more than enough room in this game for the Constitution to stand toe to toe with a Borg Cube just like a T'Varo does. It's bigger than a T'Varo. And like a hundred or so years NEWER.
And finally, there's the recurring theme of you not seeming to comprehend how the Constitution-class is a different tier of ship entirely than the T'varo, Excelsior, Ambassador.
The T'Varo is a retrofit of the ship that is the same tier as the TOS Constitution.
~looks at your signature~ Well, I get the feeling you don't like TNG much. I'm not sure why...
I factored in age for that, primarily because TNG started in 1987. That's 27 years ago. TOS, started in 1966. That's 48 years ago.
Well, yes, that's sort of what requesting a T5 version of the Connie is saying.
"We want you to take this ship that's in game, and then boost it up to be equal to the other endgame ships so we can use it at level 50."
So, yes, that's exactly what you're saying.
The Connie is in STO, and you're free to use it at level 50. You're not content with that, however. You want a version of the ship that can go toe-to-toe with a Sovereign and win.
Does that not seem a bit... I don't know... absurd?
...but, alas, this is the internet, and nobody ever changes someone's mind arguing on the internet, but, I find watching your arguments incredibly amusing. So.... your move, T5 Connie guys.
I am not asking for a connie that can win against a sovy. Not every tier 5 ship is equal...some t5's are better than others. Can a T5 Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit go toe to toe with a Fleet Avenger?
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
The B'rels are the KDF equivalent to the Miranda anyways, which is an overworked, underpowered starship that's likely to explode should it enter combat with anything better armed than a freighter or a shuttle. The B'rel just has a cloaking device, which keeps it still useful as a scout and raider.
Not really... the B'rel was still the KDF mainstay for the Dominion War, with Martok using one as his flagship.
But this post beautifully illustrates the problem with the T5 Connie's "Anti" argument. The B'rel is indeed a small, lightweight attack ship which (in canon) depends on speed and numbers to take down larger opponents - like the JHAS. Yet both these ships, in-game, are capable of taking on an Odyssey class 1:1 and the JHAS is widely regarded as a more formidable combatant.
I would argue that logic in T5 ships went with the inclusion of the B'rel retrofit (pre-F2P!) - Cryptic could have preserved some consistency by using the skin for the larger K'vort but they had to make it the teeny-tiny B'rel. At this stage, there are so many other glaring anomalies that saying "NO T5 CONNIE!" is sheer bloody-mindedness motivated by the iconic nature of that ship (ironic, really). I wonder how many of the Anti-Connie mob wander round ESD raging at the people in TOS or ENT uniforms?
Does a T5 Connie make sense? No. Do dozens of other ships and uniforms in-game? No. Would people enjoy playing a Connie at Endgame? Yes.
I think I vote with the "let people have fun" argument here. If the presence of a T5 Connie is a gamebreaker, you should probably have quit STO over the other violations of logic a long time ago...
Not really... the B'rel was still the KDF mainstay for the Dominion War, with Martok using one as his flagship.
But this post beautifully illustrates the problem with the T5 Connie's "Anti" argument. The B'rel is indeed a small, lightweight attack ship which (in canon) depends on speed and numbers to take down larger opponents - like the JHAS. Yet both these ships, in-game, are capable of taking on an Odyssey class 1:1 and the JHAS is widely regarded as a more formidable combatant.
I would argue that logic in T5 ships went with the inclusion of the B'rel retrofit (pre-F2P!) - Cryptic could have preserved some consistency by using the skin for the larger K'vort but they had to make it the teeny-tiny B'rel. At this stage, there are so many other glaring anomalies that saying "NO T5 CONNIE!" is sheer bloody-mindedness motivated by the iconic nature of that ship (ironic, really). I wonder how many of the Anti-Connie mob wander round ESD raging at the people in TOS or ENT uniforms?
Does a T5 Connie make sense? No. Do dozens of other ships and uniforms in-game? No. Would people enjoy playing a Connie at Endgame? Yes.
I think I vote with the "let people have fun" argument here. If the presence of a T5 Connie is a gamebreaker, you should probably have quit STO over the other violations of logic a long time ago...
This so hard...Let's be honest...I don't understand why the connie is where we draw the line...when pretty much every manner of ship is flown by STO Starfleet.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
This is sort of a moot point, seeing as it's not (as you seem to think) "Cryptic's head dev twirling his absurdly oversized and perfectly manicured handlebar mustache, cackling evilly as he reads this thread and enjoys all the sadness and misery from the poor people, whom all they want is to have a Connie capable of going up against a Sovereign-class and winning", it's CBS who's tied Cryptic's hands with this... so go complain to CBS. Call them on the phone. Send them emails. Picket their headquarters, complain on their forums. That will likely get you somewhere. A T5 Connie? Probably not.
Regardless, there's a certain wrongness about the thought of seeing a pre refit Connie enter combat against the Sovereign-class and having an actual chance to emerge victorious on pure firepower. A comparison to a WWI-era flight-deck cruiser having a fighting chance against a modern U.S. Navy carrier, a biplane with a guy with a .45 caliber pistol shooting down an A-10 Warthog, etc.
And finally, once again, you keep ignoring my "it's time to let the past become the past and look to the future." It's 2409. Let the Connie die a peaceful death, instead of trying to drag it into the future. Everything dies, and things that live on past their time, become a joke. Let the Connie have it's death.
Regardless of your opinion of the Odyssey's appearance (it's an ugly, gary stu replacement for the Sovereign), STO claims that the dual neck design makes it more efficient at warp speed, therefore, "shape does matter."
I am not asking for a connie that can win against a sovy. Not every tier 5 ship is equal...some t5's are better than others.
Yes, actually, you sort of are. That's what makes them T5 ships - their ability to go up against any other T5 ship and, depending on terrain and build, emerge victorious. All T5 ships will have a fighting chance against any other T5 ship, assuming you're using it properly. An escort build will not work on a Vesta, because it's a science ship. Well, maybe that's a bad example. A LRSV build will not work on a Saber. An Odyssey build will not work on a Defiant. I could go on. I won't, but I could.
Can a T5 Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit go toe to toe with a Fleet Avenger?
That's a joke, right? Right?
If you're talking about "sitting still and shooting at each other like a civil war-era battle", then no, of course not, the Avenger's DHC will emerge victorious in a most un-Starfleet manner. If you're talking about a no holds barred 1v1 FFA brawl? A properly setup LRSV will gut the Avenger with ease, no contest.
Avenger decloaks behind the LRSV for a CRF alphastrike and the LRSV pops Feedback Pulse III, Polarize Hull, an aux battery and Emergency Power to Shields. "What's that? You're trying to kill me? HIT ME HARDER SO I CAN KILL YOU!" Then for good measure and maximum rage inducing, as soon as the Avenger's tac abilities cycle and they activate them, Subnucleaonic Beam. Sensor scan, viral matrix, toss in any other offensive disabling abilities, circle and strafe until dead.
There's things like power creep (Avenger 101, I think) to factor in, but I would bet on a properly setup science ship over an Avenger any day.
The T'Varo is a retrofit of the ship that is the same tier as the TOS Constitution.
That's not what I meant, and I'm not sure if you know that or not.
It's a different level of ship, in recognizably. Iconic-ness, so to speak. If you show someone a picture of the TOS Connie, most people will go "Oh yeah, that's Kirk's ship. Enterprise, 1701."
If you show someone a picture of the T'varo, people will go "what is that thing?"
A B'rel will get "oh, yeah, Klingon bird of prey, right?"
The T'varo will just get a blank look, "yeah, i have no idea what that thing is."
I factored in age for that, primarily because TNG started in 1987. That's 27 years ago. TOS, started in 1966. That's 48 years ago.
Irrelevant number is irrelevant. Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the NCC-1701 became part of popular culture, even to people who have never seen a single Star Trek episode or movie from any segment of the franchise, regardless of age. It's 'Beam me up, Scotty', not 'Beam me up, Geordi'.
Regardless of your opinion of the Odyssey's appearance (it's an ugly, gary stu replacement for the Sovereign), STO claims that the dual neck design makes it more efficient at warp speed, therefore, "shape does matter."
That's either a rationalization for such a ridiculous design or the devs are clueless about the theory of warp bubbles.
This is sort of a moot point, seeing as it's not (as you seem to think) "Cryptic's head dev twirling his absurdly oversized and perfectly manicured handlebar mustache, cackling evilly as he reads this thread and enjoys all the sadness and misery from the poor people, whom all they want is to have a Connie capable of going up against a Sovereign-class and winning", it's CBS who's tied Cryptic's hands with this... so go complain to CBS. Call them on the phone. Send them emails. Picket their headquarters, complain on their forums. That will likely get you somewhere. A T5 Connie? Probably not.
I'll believe that when I hear it straight from the horse's mouth.
not to get technical but WWII carriers can launch their strikes way faster than a modern carrier, an yea i would like a connie variant, or maybe a upgrade tree to keep refitting until its where i want it.
also the U.S.S. Missouri WWII battleship can sink anything on the water and its 75 years old
Section 31Lane/Jeffjr/Varek @jeffjr USS Stadi/USS Grendel/USS AshigaruDreadnought Class Refit / Avenger Class Refit/Rhode Island Class Refit"With your shield or on it"/"Mors venit ad omnes."/"One with courage is a majority"https://www.youtube.com/@jeffjr84
not to get technical but WWII carriers can launch their strikes way faster than a modern carrier, an yea i would like a connie variant, or maybe a upgrade tree to keep refitting until its where i want it.
Something that was proposed back in 2010 was an option for players to start with their preferred ship skin at T1 and make upgrading and improving it part of game play. Look how far that idea got.
Something that was proposed back in 2010 was an option for players to start with their preferred ship skin at T1 and make upgrading and improving it part of game play. Look how far that idea got.
That would have been awesome and much more in the spirit of Star Trek. Captains didn't change the ships like socks anyway and the ship was a big part, dare I say - centerpiece, of each ST show. Remember how loyal Kirk and the crew were to their Constitution?
This is sort of a moot point, seeing as it's not (as you seem to think) "Cryptic's head dev twirling his absurdly oversized and perfectly manicured handlebar mustache, cackling evilly as he reads this thread and enjoys all the sadness and misery from the poor people, whom all they want is to have a Connie capable of going up against a Sovereign-class and winning", it's CBS who's tied Cryptic's hands with this... so go complain to CBS. Call them on the phone. Send them emails. Picket their headquarters, complain on their forums. That will likely get you somewhere. A T5 Connie? Probably not.
I'll believe that when I hear it straight from the horse's mouth.
Feel free to search the archives for it. I'm not gonna. I don't recall which Dev said it first, but it's all "Archived Post" anyhow.
We were clearly told "CBS said no".
No specific reasons were given that I can recall, but I can guess at quite a few possible reasons.
At this point in the game, Cryptic now presumably has many reasons of their own for not wanting to do a T5 Constitution. Even if you could change CBS' position, you might not sway PWE. Not that the Devs wouldn't love to build one, but because it's frankly not the best use of their time right now.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Feel free to search the archives for it. I'm not gonna. I don't recall which Dev said it first, but it's all "Archived Post" anyhow.
We were clearly told "CBS said no".
No specific reasons were given that I can recall, but I can guess at quite a few possible reasons.
At this point in the game, Cryptic now presumably has many reasons of their own for not wanting to do a T5 Constitution. Even if you could change CBS' position, you might not sway PWE. Not that the Devs wouldn't love to build one, but because it's frankly not the best use of their time right now.
bluegeek... get ready for rage posts.
CBS said no. No = no. If CBS said yes, the T5 Connie would be in the game right now and everyone would buy it.
Feel free to search the archives for it. I'm not gonna. I don't recall which Dev said it first, but it's all "Archived Post" anyhow.
We were clearly told "CBS said no".
No specific reasons were given that I can recall, but I can guess at quite a few possible reasons.
At this point in the game, Cryptic now presumably has many reasons of their own for not wanting to do a T5 Constitution. Even if you could change CBS' position, you might not sway PWE. Not that the Devs wouldn't love to build one, but because it's frankly not the best use of their time right now.
You didn't understand me bluegeek. When I said "horse's mouth", I ment from a CBS representative.
With all due respect, I'm at a point where I have some...difficulties trusting everything Cryptic says, especially about statements made in the particular period when the 'CBS said no' popped out.
I remember Cryptic saying that CBS doesn't want too many Federation/KDF players flying alien ships when people asked the lockbox ships to be put in the C-Store, so they have to be very limited. After only 2 lockboxes we got the first lobi ship, which turned very limited into just very expensive, but not limited any more. And then they started giving free alien ships to everyone during events.
So I hope you understand when I say that in order for me to really believe that, I need to hear it from CBS themselves.
CBS has better things to personally tend to the matter of "people desiring a particular ship they've already said no to". So, good luck. Find out who is in charge of this. Email them. Pester their secretary to get an appointment with them.
Irrelevant number is irrelevant. Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the NCC-1701 became part of popular culture, even to people who have never seen a single Star Trek episode or movie from any segment of the franchise, regardless of age. It's 'Beam me up, Scotty', not 'Beam me up, Geordi'.
not to get technical but WWII carriers can launch their strikes way faster than a modern carrier.
You don't seem to understand the point.
WWII-era carriers launch WWII-era aircraft.
Modern day naval aircraft, such as the Harrier or the F18 Super Hornet, would decimate WWII-era aircraft such as the F4 Corsair or the F8 Wildcat. Even at a 1:4 ratio, the modern aircraft would win with no contest. They're faster, more agile with much better radar (assuming the WWII craft even had radar) and could down the prop planes before they even knew the jets were there.
This wouldn't be a contest, or a fluke. Yes, there would be a chance the WWII-era aircraft could sneak up on the jets and shoot one of them down. Yes, they may even be able to down the whole squadron, but at MASSIVE cost. Dozens of prop planes to down a dozen jets. Yes, they can launch their planes faster, but they're launching immensely inferior planes.
e:
mentioned it to a friend and she pointed out that it wouldn't actually be possible.
[7:59:36 PM] [REDACTED]: Vmax for a F4U is 400mph, versus the F/A-18's max admitted combat speed of ~1,200mph
[7:59:54 PM] [REDACTED]: the combat speed of an F4U is slower than the F/A-18's stall speed
[8:00:14 PM] [REDACTED]: the Hornet litterally, cannot slow down enough to engage the F4U
also the U.S.S. Missouri WWII battleship can sink anything on the water and its 75 years old
Firing huge shells at something is a good way to sink or destroy it.
Have you wondered why the USN don't use them, or have you been all "HUE HUE HUE STUPID USN DOESNT KNOW HOW AWESOME THE MISSOURI IS"? It's fairly simple why they don't use battleships like that - they're not cost effective. A DDG (That's NATO terminology for "Guided Missile Destroyer") can do all the functions of a battleship for a fraction of the cost, in addition to being faster and a much smaller loss if lost. And unlike Star Trek battleships, Cold war-era battleships aren't all that well armored. A torpedo strike to the lower hull is going to sink it, particularly with modern torpedoes, regardless of how thick the armor is. If you make an armor tough enough to survive a specific caliber weapon, someone will make a round capable of penetrating that armor. That's how it's always been, and that's how it always be.
You know, I wanted to make an articulated post here, but then I read that you said that you actually think something happening here is canon. lol:D After reading that, what's the point?
It takes itself seriously and CBS regulates it. Does that not make it a separate-but-equal universe like JJTrek and the novelverse? And ~shudders~ the Shatnerverse?
CBS has better things to personally tend to the matter of "people desiring a particular ship they've already said no to". So, good luck. Find out who is in charge of this. Email them. Pester their secretary to get an appointment with them.
By chance, I did that earlier this morning. Once I get a reply back from CBS Interactive, I'll let you know.
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!
Irrelevant opinion is irrelevant. Cryptic states this as canon, CBS either backs it or simply doesn't contradict it. Therefore, it is canon.
Pointless point is pointless. A ship traveling at warp speed is inside a warp bubble (Alcubierre drive). Holes in the ship will not improve the warp bubble. Because it's a bubble. Bubbles are round.
Pointless point is pointless. A ship traveling at warp speed is inside a warp bubble (Alcubierre drive). Holes in the ship will not improve the warp bubble. Because it's a bubble. Bubbles are round.
Doesn't the warp bubble, uh, form itself around the ship closely? As opposed to "a bubble around the ship", "a closely formed bubble wrapped around the ship"?
It takes itself seriously and CBS regulates it. Does that not make it a separate-but-equal universe like JJTrek and the novelverse? And ~shudders~ the Shatnerverse?
Novelverse and Shatnerverse are not canon. Furthermore there are more than a few different novelverses that directly contradict eachother. That's why that stuff is not, nor it even was considered canon. Soft-canon in certain examples, at best.
J.J. Trek is a different thing. Unlike the previous, J.J. is canon, only set in a different timeline/universe/ reality/whatever.
^This is all per CBS declaration of what they consider to be canon. As they've said - what can be considered as canon is everything we've seen on screen with the Star Trek logo and other materials that the IP holder specially approved as canon. In case those materials contradict in any possible way with something seen on screen, the filmed 'on screen' canon trumps everything else.
STO is a game based on Star Trek. And even as such, it's in a pretty bad mess itself. Nothing going on here can be even remotely related to soft-canon, not to even mention something here being canon.
Doesn't the warp bubble, uh, form itself around the ship closely? As opposed to "a bubble around the ship", "a closely formed bubble wrapped around the ship"?
A "bubble" is a poor way to phrase it.
It's a "subspace field". Similar to an electric field, but with Treknobabble.
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!
How is it full of BS? Abram's Connie is bigger then a Sovereign. It's a huge ship full of a lot of tech that Gene never thought of.
^^^takes deep breath to Calm and Center Self^^^
---clears throat---
The Abramsverse Reboot has a great cast, on that count only, did it succeed. From the uniforms to the ships they have gone overboard reinventing the proverbial wheel! JJ's Enterprise is not what most fans expected much less wanted. My Revulsion at the JJ Enterprise was orders of magnitude greater than what I felt initially for the Galaxy-class. Whereas my revulsion for the Galaxy-class has mellowed somewhat, my revulsion for the JJ Enterprise remains very high.
There's a really good article or two at Ex Astris Scientia with regard to scaling issues. Alternate "canon" sources give contradictory dimensions for the JJ Enterprise at sizes ranging from Trek's Sovereign-class ships to an Imperial-class Star Destroyer! This blatant Star Wars-envy is made all the more ridiculous by the fact that a simple comparison of details on the JJ Enterprise to the TOS Constitution-class and the Enterprise/Constitution Refit-class reveals the true size/scaling of the JJ Enterprise is 366m! Not 750m!! Not 1500m!!! A size I can learn to live with.
As for the "tech that Gene never thought of", I don't know what I can call that without violating Forum Community Policy. Except perhaps the fact it was totally incorrect. The Red Matter is the only tech shown in the movie that is conceptually new. Everything about the JJ Enterprise is just a 'reimagining' of the TOS' tech and aesthetics. A reimagining Gone Wrong, imho.
[SIGPIC]Sarvour Shipyards[/SIGPIC]Sarvour Shipyards =A=Commodore Joshua Daniel Sarvour, S.C.E.
U.S.S. AKAGI NX-93347, Enterprise-class Battle Cruiser =A= U.S.S. T'KORA'S WRATH NX-110047, Odyssey-class Battle Cruiser "There Ain't No Grave, Can Hold My Body Down..." PS - I fully support a T6 Nova, fixing the Nova skins. I am also rooting for a T6 Science Cruiser, that can use Nova/Rhode Island skins. T6 Nova/Rhode Island, T6 Oberth & T6 Constellation are needed. Also needed a T6 Science Cruiser, that can wear any Science or Cruiser skin.
^^^takes deep breath to Calm and Center Self^^^
---clears throat---
The Abramsverse Reboot has a great cast, on that count only, did it succeed. From the uniforms to the ships they have gone overboard reinventing the proverbial wheel! JJ's Enterprise is not what most fans expected much less wanted. My Revulsion at the JJ Enterprise was orders of magnitude greater than what I felt initially for the Galaxy-class. Whereas my revulsion for the Galaxy-class has mellowed somewhat, my revulsion for the JJ Enterprise remains very high.
There's a really good article or two at Ex Astris Scientia with regard to scaling issues. Alternate "canon" sources give contradictory dimensions for the JJ Enterprise at sizes ranging from Trek's Sovereign-class ships to an Imperial-class Star Destroyer! This blatant Star Wars-envy is made all the more ridiculous by the fact that a simple comparison of details on the JJ Enterprise to the TOS Constitution-class and the Enterprise/Constitution Refit-class reveals the true size/scaling of the JJ Enterprise is 366m! Not 750m!! Not 1500m!!! A size I can learn to live with.
As for the "tech that Gene never thought of", I don't know what I can call that without violating Forum Community Policy. Except perhaps the fact it was totally incorrect. The Red Matter is the only tech shown in the movie that is conceptually new. Everything about the JJ Enterprise is just a 'reimagining' of the TOS' tech and aesthetics. A reimagining Gone Wrong, imho.
You honestly think that ship corridors that GIGANTIC, an engineering area god knows how many times of the Galaxy plus in the second movie that gigantic area mid ships, and you're going to cram that into 366 M?
That is flatly and physically impossible. To get the sizes of the halls, bridge, and rest of the ship at a bare MINIMUM it would have to be the size of a galaxy, if not a tad bigger. And the galaxy didn't have a bridge, or hallways that big.
Just pointing that out.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
You didn't understand me bluegeek. When I said "horse's mouth", I ment from a CBS representative.
With all due respect, I'm at a point where I have some...difficulties trusting everything Cryptic says, especially about statements made in the particular period when the 'CBS said no' popped out.
I remember Cryptic saying that CBS doesn't want too many Federation/KDF players flying alien ships when people asked the lockbox ships to be put in the C-Store, so they have to be very limited. After only 2 lockboxes we got the first lobi ship, which turned very limited into just very expensive, but not limited any more. And then they started giving free alien ships to everyone during events.
So I hope you understand when I say that in order for me to really believe that, I need to hear it from CBS themselves.
Okay, I get that you don't trust them on this.
Let's suppose that CBS didn't say no. And just for argument's sake, let's assume that a T5 Connie would make Cryptic a Galaxy-full of money.
How then do you explain why we don't already have one? Cryptic's never been shy about making ships that they can sell us. What makes this one different?
They've never given us any other answer than "CBS said no". Never said it doesn't fit their vision for the game. Never said it would never sell. Never said it was canonically impossible that a Connie could match a Sovereign. Never said Geko hates Connies, as far as I know. None of that.
Cryptic doesn't seem to have any good reason to exclude Connies from the retrofit treatment that wouldn't be solved by a lot of time and money. They've shown themselves willing to justify a lot of things that some players claim would be "uncanonical". Starfleet and KDF flying alien ships just for example. "Dinosaurs with lasers" as a more recent example.
The only other reason I can come up with is that they think they'll get blowback if they don't produce a T5 Connie that can kick everything else's butts, or criticism that they "didn't do it right" so they don't even want to touch it. Even then, I see no good reason for them to pin that on CBS.
So what's the limiting factor here? I find the "CBS said no" argument to be entirely plausible under those terms. It's not the only thing we've ever been told that CBS put restrictions on.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
In The Motionless Picture we learned that warp engine imbalances can create worm holes instead of warp bubbles. A millisecond after that picture was taken the child was sucked into the wormhole and was sent across the known universe. I hope he landed safely. He might have 'sploded.
Let's suppose that CBS didn't say no. And just for argument's sake, let's assume that a T5 Connie would make Cryptic a Galaxy-full of money.
How then do you explain why we don't already have one? Cryptic's never been shy about making ships that they can sell us. What makes this one different?
Honestly, and do consider that I didn't use to think like this, but watching how reluctant they seem to be in doing any significant improvements to the Galaxy-R it gets me wondering wheather all the people that said Cryptic is afraid to do a stronger Galaxy bacause it may leed to reduced purchases of future ships (which I considered and still partially consider nothing more than conspiracy theories) could be in fact right.
And if they're right, that would mean that Cryptic would be even more reluctant to release a T5 Connie if they feel it may hurt future sales by having people happy with their one legendary ship.
They've never given us any other answer than "CBS said no". Never said it doesn't fit their vision for the game. Never said it would never sell. Never said it was canonically impossible that a Connie could match a Sovereign. Never said Geko hates Connies, as far as I know. None of that.
Exactly. I'm not saying it's not true because I have no way of really knowing that, but there is the looming suspicion that they're using it as an excuse, considering what I previously mentioned to be true.
Cryptic doesn't seem to have any good reason to exclude Connies from the retrofit treatment that wouldn't be solved by a lot of time and money. They've shown themselves willing to justify a lot of things that some players claim would be "uncanonical". Starfleet and KDF flying alien ships just for example. "Dinosaurs with lasers" as a more recent example.
And this is actually the part that has me wondering the most. If CBS has no issue with Starfleet & KDF Captains having unlimited access to various alien ships or "Dinos with frickin' lasers" and such, what could possibly their issue be with the Constitution?
The only other reason I can come up with is that they think they'll get blowback if they don't produce a T5 Connie that can kick everything else's butts, or criticism that they "didn't do it right" so they don't even want to touch it. Even then, I see no good reason for them to pin that on CBS.
So what's the limiting factor here? I find the "CBS said no" argument to be entirely plausible under those terms. It's not the only thing we've ever been told that CBS put restrictions on.
I'm not saying that the 'CBS said no' argument is not plausible. It's perfectly plausible, they're the IP holder and they can do whatever they please - no doubt about it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of the dedicated Connie fans that feels he must have the ship, I just emphatize with those people, especially after seing many things that make even less sense make it into the game.
What I'm saying is that we need an oficial confirmation from a CBS representative who will say "Yes we say no to T5 Constitution Class, we can't ellaborate why but we have our reasons." so we can finally tie this endless Connie debate. No room for suspicion, no room for speculation - whenever someone starts a Connie thread, you (the mods) could just link the CBS reply and be done with it.
Comments
The other ship is from Archer's era.
The gameplay here is an ananchronism. At least, if the game follows the rules you keep trying to apply to it.
But the game doesn't follow those rules. So either you agree that it's an anachronism. Or if it isn't then there's more than enough room in this game for the Constitution to stand toe to toe with a Borg Cube just like a T'Varo does. It's bigger than a T'Varo. And like a hundred or so years NEWER.
The T'Varo is a retrofit of the ship that is the same tier as the TOS Constitution.
I am not asking for a connie that can win against a sovy. Not every tier 5 ship is equal...some t5's are better than others. Can a T5 Fleet Long Range Science Vessel Retrofit go toe to toe with a Fleet Avenger?
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Not really... the B'rel was still the KDF mainstay for the Dominion War, with Martok using one as his flagship.
But this post beautifully illustrates the problem with the T5 Connie's "Anti" argument. The B'rel is indeed a small, lightweight attack ship which (in canon) depends on speed and numbers to take down larger opponents - like the JHAS. Yet both these ships, in-game, are capable of taking on an Odyssey class 1:1 and the JHAS is widely regarded as a more formidable combatant.
I would argue that logic in T5 ships went with the inclusion of the B'rel retrofit (pre-F2P!) - Cryptic could have preserved some consistency by using the skin for the larger K'vort but they had to make it the teeny-tiny B'rel. At this stage, there are so many other glaring anomalies that saying "NO T5 CONNIE!" is sheer bloody-mindedness motivated by the iconic nature of that ship (ironic, really). I wonder how many of the Anti-Connie mob wander round ESD raging at the people in TOS or ENT uniforms?
Does a T5 Connie make sense? No. Do dozens of other ships and uniforms in-game? No. Would people enjoy playing a Connie at Endgame? Yes.
I think I vote with the "let people have fun" argument here. If the presence of a T5 Connie is a gamebreaker, you should probably have quit STO over the other violations of logic a long time ago...
This so hard...Let's be honest...I don't understand why the connie is where we draw the line...when pretty much every manner of ship is flown by STO Starfleet.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Regardless, there's a certain wrongness about the thought of seeing a pre refit Connie enter combat against the Sovereign-class and having an actual chance to emerge victorious on pure firepower. A comparison to a WWI-era flight-deck cruiser having a fighting chance against a modern U.S. Navy carrier, a biplane with a guy with a .45 caliber pistol shooting down an A-10 Warthog, etc.
And finally, once again, you keep ignoring my "it's time to let the past become the past and look to the future." It's 2409. Let the Connie die a peaceful death, instead of trying to drag it into the future. Everything dies, and things that live on past their time, become a joke. Let the Connie have it's death.
Regardless of your opinion of the Odyssey's appearance (it's an ugly, gary stu replacement for the Sovereign), STO claims that the dual neck design makes it more efficient at warp speed, therefore, "shape does matter."
Yes, actually, you sort of are. That's what makes them T5 ships - their ability to go up against any other T5 ship and, depending on terrain and build, emerge victorious. All T5 ships will have a fighting chance against any other T5 ship, assuming you're using it properly. An escort build will not work on a Vesta, because it's a science ship. Well, maybe that's a bad example. A LRSV build will not work on a Saber. An Odyssey build will not work on a Defiant. I could go on. I won't, but I could.
That's a joke, right? Right?
If you're talking about "sitting still and shooting at each other like a civil war-era battle", then no, of course not, the Avenger's DHC will emerge victorious in a most un-Starfleet manner. If you're talking about a no holds barred 1v1 FFA brawl? A properly setup LRSV will gut the Avenger with ease, no contest.
Avenger decloaks behind the LRSV for a CRF alphastrike and the LRSV pops Feedback Pulse III, Polarize Hull, an aux battery and Emergency Power to Shields. "What's that? You're trying to kill me? HIT ME HARDER SO I CAN KILL YOU!" Then for good measure and maximum rage inducing, as soon as the Avenger's tac abilities cycle and they activate them, Subnucleaonic Beam. Sensor scan, viral matrix, toss in any other offensive disabling abilities, circle and strafe until dead.
There's things like power creep (Avenger 101, I think) to factor in, but I would bet on a properly setup science ship over an Avenger any day.
That's not what I meant, and I'm not sure if you know that or not.
It's a different level of ship, in recognizably. Iconic-ness, so to speak. If you show someone a picture of the TOS Connie, most people will go "Oh yeah, that's Kirk's ship. Enterprise, 1701."
If you show someone a picture of the T'varo, people will go "what is that thing?"
A B'rel will get "oh, yeah, Klingon bird of prey, right?"
The T'varo will just get a blank look, "yeah, i have no idea what that thing is."
I'll believe that when I hear it straight from the horse's mouth.
also the U.S.S. Missouri WWII battleship can sink anything on the water and its 75 years old
That would have been awesome and much more in the spirit of Star Trek. Captains didn't change the ships like socks anyway and the ship was a big part, dare I say - centerpiece, of each ST show. Remember how loyal Kirk and the crew were to their Constitution?
Feel free to search the archives for it. I'm not gonna. I don't recall which Dev said it first, but it's all "Archived Post" anyhow.
We were clearly told "CBS said no".
No specific reasons were given that I can recall, but I can guess at quite a few possible reasons.
At this point in the game, Cryptic now presumably has many reasons of their own for not wanting to do a T5 Constitution. Even if you could change CBS' position, you might not sway PWE. Not that the Devs wouldn't love to build one, but because it's frankly not the best use of their time right now.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
bluegeek... get ready for rage posts.
CBS said no. No = no. If CBS said yes, the T5 Connie would be in the game right now and everyone would buy it.
Good point. Right now they're busy rebooting the Galaxy family of ships.
You didn't understand me bluegeek. When I said "horse's mouth", I ment from a CBS representative.
With all due respect, I'm at a point where I have some...difficulties trusting everything Cryptic says, especially about statements made in the particular period when the 'CBS said no' popped out.
I remember Cryptic saying that CBS doesn't want too many Federation/KDF players flying alien ships when people asked the lockbox ships to be put in the C-Store, so they have to be very limited. After only 2 lockboxes we got the first lobi ship, which turned very limited into just very expensive, but not limited any more. And then they started giving free alien ships to everyone during events.
So I hope you understand when I say that in order for me to really believe that, I need to hear it from CBS themselves.
This post made me laugh.
Good luck with that, shpoks.
Touche.
Irrelevant opinion is irrelevant. Cryptic states this as canon, CBS either backs it or simply doesn't contradict it. Therefore, it is canon.
You don't seem to understand the point.
WWII-era carriers launch WWII-era aircraft.
Modern day naval aircraft, such as the Harrier or the F18 Super Hornet, would decimate WWII-era aircraft such as the F4 Corsair or the F8 Wildcat. Even at a 1:4 ratio, the modern aircraft would win with no contest. They're faster, more agile with much better radar (assuming the WWII craft even had radar) and could down the prop planes before they even knew the jets were there.
This wouldn't be a contest, or a fluke. Yes, there would be a chance the WWII-era aircraft could sneak up on the jets and shoot one of them down. Yes, they may even be able to down the whole squadron, but at MASSIVE cost. Dozens of prop planes to down a dozen jets. Yes, they can launch their planes faster, but they're launching immensely inferior planes.
e:
mentioned it to a friend and she pointed out that it wouldn't actually be possible.
[7:59:36 PM] [REDACTED]: Vmax for a F4U is 400mph, versus the F/A-18's max admitted combat speed of ~1,200mph
[7:59:54 PM] [REDACTED]: the combat speed of an F4U is slower than the F/A-18's stall speed
[8:00:14 PM] [REDACTED]: the Hornet litterally, cannot slow down enough to engage the F4U
I would like this, however. An option to upgrade your ships to keep them still useful at higher tiers.
Firing huge shells at something is a good way to sink or destroy it.
Have you wondered why the USN don't use them, or have you been all "HUE HUE HUE STUPID USN DOESNT KNOW HOW AWESOME THE MISSOURI IS"? It's fairly simple why they don't use battleships like that - they're not cost effective. A DDG (That's NATO terminology for "Guided Missile Destroyer") can do all the functions of a battleship for a fraction of the cost, in addition to being faster and a much smaller loss if lost. And unlike Star Trek battleships, Cold war-era battleships aren't all that well armored. A torpedo strike to the lower hull is going to sink it, particularly with modern torpedoes, regardless of how thick the armor is. If you make an armor tough enough to survive a specific caliber weapon, someone will make a round capable of penetrating that armor. That's how it's always been, and that's how it always be.
You know, I wanted to make an articulated post here, but then I read that you said that you actually think something happening here is canon. lol:D After reading that, what's the point?
By chance, I did that earlier this morning. Once I get a reply back from CBS Interactive, I'll let you know.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Except this one.
Doesn't the warp bubble, uh, form itself around the ship closely? As opposed to "a bubble around the ship", "a closely formed bubble wrapped around the ship"?
Novelverse and Shatnerverse are not canon. Furthermore there are more than a few different novelverses that directly contradict eachother. That's why that stuff is not, nor it even was considered canon. Soft-canon in certain examples, at best.
J.J. Trek is a different thing. Unlike the previous, J.J. is canon, only set in a different timeline/universe/ reality/whatever.
^This is all per CBS declaration of what they consider to be canon. As they've said - what can be considered as canon is everything we've seen on screen with the Star Trek logo and other materials that the IP holder specially approved as canon. In case those materials contradict in any possible way with something seen on screen, the filmed 'on screen' canon trumps everything else.
STO is a game based on Star Trek. And even as such, it's in a pretty bad mess itself. Nothing going on here can be even remotely related to soft-canon, not to even mention something here being canon.
A "bubble" is a poor way to phrase it.
It's a "subspace field". Similar to an electric field, but with Treknobabble.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
^^^takes deep breath to Calm and Center Self^^^
---clears throat---
The Abramsverse Reboot has a great cast, on that count only, did it succeed. From the uniforms to the ships they have gone overboard reinventing the proverbial wheel! JJ's Enterprise is not what most fans expected much less wanted. My Revulsion at the JJ Enterprise was orders of magnitude greater than what I felt initially for the Galaxy-class. Whereas my revulsion for the Galaxy-class has mellowed somewhat, my revulsion for the JJ Enterprise remains very high.
There's a really good article or two at Ex Astris Scientia with regard to scaling issues. Alternate "canon" sources give contradictory dimensions for the JJ Enterprise at sizes ranging from Trek's Sovereign-class ships to an Imperial-class Star Destroyer! This blatant Star Wars-envy is made all the more ridiculous by the fact that a simple comparison of details on the JJ Enterprise to the TOS Constitution-class and the Enterprise/Constitution Refit-class reveals the true size/scaling of the JJ Enterprise is 366m! Not 750m!! Not 1500m!!! A size I can learn to live with.
As for the "tech that Gene never thought of", I don't know what I can call that without violating Forum Community Policy. Except perhaps the fact it was totally incorrect. The Red Matter is the only tech shown in the movie that is conceptually new. Everything about the JJ Enterprise is just a 'reimagining' of the TOS' tech and aesthetics. A reimagining Gone Wrong, imho.
[SIGPIC]Sarvour Shipyards[/SIGPIC]Sarvour Shipyards
=A=Commodore Joshua Daniel Sarvour, S.C.E.
U.S.S. AKAGI NX-93347, Enterprise-class Battle Cruiser =A= U.S.S. T'KORA'S WRATH NX-110047, Odyssey-class Battle Cruiser
"There Ain't No Grave, Can Hold My Body Down..."
PS - I fully support a T6 Nova, fixing the Nova skins. I am also rooting for a T6 Science Cruiser, that can use Nova/Rhode Island skins.
T6 Nova/Rhode Island, T6 Oberth & T6 Constellation are needed. Also needed a T6 Science Cruiser, that can wear any Science or Cruiser skin.
You honestly think that ship corridors that GIGANTIC, an engineering area god knows how many times of the Galaxy plus in the second movie that gigantic area mid ships, and you're going to cram that into 366 M?
That is flatly and physically impossible. To get the sizes of the halls, bridge, and rest of the ship at a bare MINIMUM it would have to be the size of a galaxy, if not a tad bigger. And the galaxy didn't have a bridge, or hallways that big.
Just pointing that out.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Okay, I get that you don't trust them on this.
Let's suppose that CBS didn't say no. And just for argument's sake, let's assume that a T5 Connie would make Cryptic a Galaxy-full of money.
How then do you explain why we don't already have one? Cryptic's never been shy about making ships that they can sell us. What makes this one different?
They've never given us any other answer than "CBS said no". Never said it doesn't fit their vision for the game. Never said it would never sell. Never said it was canonically impossible that a Connie could match a Sovereign. Never said Geko hates Connies, as far as I know. None of that.
Cryptic doesn't seem to have any good reason to exclude Connies from the retrofit treatment that wouldn't be solved by a lot of time and money. They've shown themselves willing to justify a lot of things that some players claim would be "uncanonical". Starfleet and KDF flying alien ships just for example. "Dinosaurs with lasers" as a more recent example.
The only other reason I can come up with is that they think they'll get blowback if they don't produce a T5 Connie that can kick everything else's butts, or criticism that they "didn't do it right" so they don't even want to touch it. Even then, I see no good reason for them to pin that on CBS.
So what's the limiting factor here? I find the "CBS said no" argument to be entirely plausible under those terms. It's not the only thing we've ever been told that CBS put restrictions on.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Honestly, and do consider that I didn't use to think like this, but watching how reluctant they seem to be in doing any significant improvements to the Galaxy-R it gets me wondering wheather all the people that said Cryptic is afraid to do a stronger Galaxy bacause it may leed to reduced purchases of future ships (which I considered and still partially consider nothing more than conspiracy theories) could be in fact right.
And if they're right, that would mean that Cryptic would be even more reluctant to release a T5 Connie if they feel it may hurt future sales by having people happy with their one legendary ship.
Exactly. I'm not saying it's not true because I have no way of really knowing that, but there is the looming suspicion that they're using it as an excuse, considering what I previously mentioned to be true.
And this is actually the part that has me wondering the most. If CBS has no issue with Starfleet & KDF Captains having unlimited access to various alien ships or "Dinos with frickin' lasers" and such, what could possibly their issue be with the Constitution?
I'm not saying that the 'CBS said no' argument is not plausible. It's perfectly plausible, they're the IP holder and they can do whatever they please - no doubt about it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of the dedicated Connie fans that feels he must have the ship, I just emphatize with those people, especially after seing many things that make even less sense make it into the game.
What I'm saying is that we need an oficial confirmation from a CBS representative who will say "Yes we say no to T5 Constitution Class, we can't ellaborate why but we have our reasons." so we can finally tie this endless Connie debate. No room for suspicion, no room for speculation - whenever someone starts a Connie thread, you (the mods) could just link the CBS reply and be done with it.