it has me wondering if Cryptic are actually really afraid to make the most popular ships availible and usefull due to perceived decline in ship sales. Which, if it's the truth, is pretty stupid thing to think - most of the players play different ships of different chars. I use my Galaxy-R on one char, not all of them.
Unfortunately it makes sense from a business perspective. People buy ships not just because of stats, but because of looks or a combination of different factors.
If they sold a ship that both looked great, was popular in Trek fandom and is the best ship in the game, people would only buy that ship. Cryptic would make less money than a more evenly distributed platform like they have right now.
Unfortunately that's the way it is. The only contradictory example I can think of right now is the Scimitar, which may be a pilot project for them to see if "star" vessels from the TV shows/movies can be both effective and popular, and still make them money.
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!
If they sold a ship that both looked great, was popular in Trek fandom and is the best ship in the game, people would only buy that ship.
Back in the Escorts Online days, the Defiant didn't really affect people buying other ships.
Currently the Avenger and the Scimitar don't ward people off of other ships either.
People all have different goals and styles when they play. Some have to have the best. Some don't care enough. Some people buy new ships to collect them. Others only do it to min max.
There's just different target demographics at work here. And the Constitution is mired in licensing issues, not marketing issues. Those licensing issues will come up again so maybe, someday, the circumstances will change.
In the meantime, a T5 Centaur: DO WANT
A Constie Skin for the T5 fleet and mirror Cheyenne: HECK YEAH!
A T5 O to tha @#$%@#'n Berth: DO WANT
A T5 Wambundu: YES PLZ!
A T5 New Orleans: Absolutely!
Back in the Escorts Online days, the Defiant didn't really affect people buying other ships.
Currently the Avenger and the Scimitar don't ward people off of other ships either.
People all have different goals and styles when they play. Some have to have the best. Some don't care enough. Some people buy new ships to collect them. Others only do it to min max.
There's just different target demographics at work here. And the Constitution is mired in licensing issues, not marketing issues. Those licensing issues will come up again so maybe, someday, the circumstances will change.
In the meantime, a T5 Centaur: DO WANT
A Constie Skin for the T5 fleet and mirror Cheyenne: HECK YEAH!
A T5 O to tha @#$%@#'n Berth: DO WANT
A T5 Wambundu: YES PLZ!
A T5 New Orleans: Absolutely!
True.
And I say yes to all five of the ships you listed there. I'll raise you one Andrew Probert Ambassador to boot.
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!
Back in the Escorts Online days, the Defiant didn't really affect people buying other ships.
Currently the Avenger and the Scimitar don't ward people off of other ships either.
People all have different goals and styles when they play. Some have to have the best. Some don't care enough. Some people buy new ships to collect them. Others only do it to min max.
There's just different target demographics at work here. And the Constitution is mired in licensing issues, not marketing issues. Those licensing issues will come up again so maybe, someday, the circumstances will change.
In the meantime, a T5 Centaur: DO WANT
A Constie Skin for the T5 fleet and mirror Cheyenne: HECK YEAH!
A T5 O to tha @#$%@#'n Berth: DO WANT
A T5 Wambundu: YES PLZ!
A T5 New Orleans: Absolutely!
I cant find a decent Wambundu picture, just the one from front.
I know have something to stove towards...I have a character that I am keeping in the TOS gear...but I've been flying the exeter...it gives a little more fire power than the connie
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.
I cant find a decent Wambundu picture, just the one from front.
any idea where to find that?
Well you won't. It's not a canon design, even the class name is only from the encyclopaedia.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
K-7. That still operates & I don't see any differences between a space station & a ship being worthy 100 or so years later for Starfleet service.
Lets put this in naval terms. It's like having a destroyer from 1914 on duty today trying to do the job of an Areleigh Burke guided missle destroyer.
Sorry sometimes a ship is simply out of damn date.
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!
Lets put this in naval terms. It's like having a destroyer from 1914 on duty today trying to do the job of an Areleigh Burke guided missle destroyer.
Sorry sometimes a ship is simply out of damn date.
In OUR time, yes. As was stated in TNG most of the systems had not changed basic function in 75 years. You simply cannot compare technology now to Star Trek dates. It just doesn't work.
Edit: By this I am not saying the phasers of the 2270s are comparable to the weapon systems of 2409. Obviously you upgrade these things. Look at it this way - The Aquarius is smaller, yes? How is it at all logical to say the same systems couldn't fit into the Constitutions. Push come to shove & given a few upgrades I think some old WW2 vessels could be used today. I'd need to check & If you really want me to I do believe some of the Australian Navy's ships still in service are quite old.
"I'm a science officer. It's my job to have a better idea."
In OUR time, yes. As was stated in TNG most of the systems had not changed basic function in 75 years. You simply cannot compare technology now to Star Trek dates. It just doesn't work.
Edit: By this I am not saying the phasers of the 2270s are comparable to the weapon systems of 2409. Obviously you upgrade these things. Look at it this way - The Aquarius is smaller, yes? How is it at all logical to say the same systems couldn't fit into the Constitutions. Push come to shove & given a few upgrades I think some old WW2 vessels could be used today. I'd need to check & If you really want me to I do believe some of the Australian Navy's ships still in service are quite old.
Here's the catch. You'd literally in both cases have to rip the guts out of the entire ship and start over. In the time and cost[for today's terms] you'd just be better off building a brand new ship.
That's why the federation went ahead and started building Vespers/Excaliburs/Exeters instead of using Constitutions.
Only reason we have them in game, is to satisfy fanbois who want to fly the most iconic ships ever. Well for 10 levels should you choose to, you can.
Now having said that, why they don't have a tier 5 Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur, that's one that has me scratching my head since they are some of the newest, advanced ships in the fleet.
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!
Well you won't. It's not a canon design, even the class name is only from the encyclopaedia.
Yup it was never on screen.
Still, I'd like to defend the encyclopedia for a moment. It predates Memory Alpha (the website), was originally created to be a writer's resource and is generally accepted as a source of canon.
But yeah, the Wambundu was a creation within the context of the encyclopedia, to group a certain number of ships that were mentioned or seen on the readouts in some episodes, and given that classification. Kind of an Okuda easter egg that went a bit further.
Which means for this game, it'd be the perfect opportunity to MAKE the ship. Crytpic has carte blanche. And it would kind of fall into that fun little zone of being a TNG era ship but having a Cryptic design. Ship artists would have some fun I'd bet.
So yeah, I would love to see a Wambundu added to the ships in this game.
Here's the catch. You'd literally in both cases have to rip the guts out of the entire ship and start over. In the time and cost[for today's terms] you'd just be better off building a brand new ship.
That's why the federation went ahead and started building Vespers/Excaliburs/Exeters instead of using Constitutions.
Only reason we have them in game, is to satisfy fanbois who want to fly the most iconic ships ever. Well for 10 levels should you choose to, you can.
Now having said that, why they don't have a tier 5 Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur, that's one that has me scratching my head since they are some of the newest, advanced ships in the fleet.
Those classes I would accept to be perfectly honest. I really don't see it a far stretch, technically speaking, for the ship to be in semi active service. I don't believe I or anyone else is saying there will be thousands of them. But as a light frigate I think the Constitution would make a fine ship. I still went ahead & did a bit more research on it & I found these.
BRP Rajah Humabon - Keel laid - 14 January 1943. Decommissioned several times to find it's way into active service under the Philippine Navy.
BRP Quezon - Keel laid - 28 November 1942. Again decommissioned several times to find it's way into active service under the Philippine Navy.
BAP Almirante Grau - Keel laid - September 5, 1939. Same old story finding it's way into the hands of the Peruvian Navy.
BAP Puno - Keel laid - 1861. Hospital ship used by the Peruvian Navy.
"I'm a science officer. It's my job to have a better idea."
Here's the catch. You'd literally in both cases have to rip the guts out of the entire ship and start over. In the time and cost[for today's terms] you'd just be better off building a brand new ship.
You've got it backwards though. These are brand new ships. With retro exteriors. Everything inside (and technically outside) is brand spanking new. The outer shell is just designed to have an older visual look. That's it. And that's how it's roughly explained in the STO novel.
Which is only in the timeline in there to explain why the ships worked the way did at launch. Why a Miranda, Centaur and Shikar work exactly the same but are three different ships from different eras. (Or if you like the Cheyenne, Dakota and Stargazer ... or Sovereign, Noble and Majestic).
It's just a thing. They're all brand new. But some captains prefer an older "look" on the outside. So they wrote it into the novel.
K-7. That still operates & I don't see any differences between a space station & a ship being worthy 100 or so years later for Starfleet service.
I'm pretty sure there are naval bases today that are much older than ships in fleets. Bases are easy to retrofit, since you have land to work with. Ships, not so much.
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!
You've got it backwards though. These are brand new ships. With retro exteriors. Everything inside (and technically outside) is brand spanking new. The outer shell is just designed to have an older visual look. That's it. And that's how it's roughly explained in the STO novel.
I do not remember if it was explained that way in the novel, but that is how it is explained in the C-Store - which is why they are called Replica Ships.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
And I say yes to all five of the ships you listed there. I'll raise you one Andrew Probert Ambassador to boot.
Yeah, I'd be cool with that ship as well. There's a lot more fun Starfleet ships that can be added. We must get the ship artists overflowing with more work! Heh.
Here's the catch. You'd literally in both cases have to rip the guts out of the entire ship and start over. In the time and cost[for today's terms] you'd just be better off building a brand new ship.
Gutting a ship and putting a new interior in it takes very little time or resources, you can already do it in the game. It can cost anywhere from zero EC to 2000 C-points. It can cost lobi too but I don't have the details on that. The 2000 C-point mark is where you can gut a modern starship and make its interior look just like an original Constitution class interior with no loss in functionality. You are not charged any amount for switching gear.
That's why the federation went ahead and started building Vespers/Excaliburs/Exeters instead of using Constitutions.
Only reason we have them in game, is to satisfy fanbois who want to fly the most iconic ships ever. Well for 10 levels should you choose to, you can.
Now having said that, why they don't have a tier 5 Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur, that's one that has me scratching my head since they are some of the newest, advanced ships in the fleet.
The Federation is still making Connie refits and retros if you don't like it that's fine but you can't pretend it's not actually happening.
You want the Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur at the end game but can't deal with the fact that the universe could handle the Connie refit there with them. Why won't you just buckle down and admit that we want the same thing? The thing we want is what's stopping you from getting what you want as well.
I finally figured it out! The problem isn't that we don't have a T5 TOS/Refit Connie, the problem is the rest of the game is OP and needs nerfing! Now according to the forums the Devs have a soft spot for nerfing so if we make a big enough noise about this they will see it and make it happen!
"The U.S.S. Texas is a Federation Cruiser active in 2409." I think this tends to shatter most arguments that the Constitution isn't an active class of ship in this era. Yes it may not be 100% canon driven but again who's ship story truly is? Why does the basis of this debate need to be that it must adhere to canon? I'm as bigger Star Trek fan as the next guy but ignoring CBS for the moment is a canon argument really all there is stopping the Connie?
"I'm a science officer. It's my job to have a better idea."
"The U.S.S. Texas is a Federation Cruiser active in 2409." I think this tends to shatter most arguments that the Constitution isn't an active class of ship in this era. Yes it may not be 100% canon driven but again who's ship story truly is? Why does the basis of this debate need to be that it must adhere to canon? I'm as bigger Star Trek fan as the next guy but ignoring CBS for the moment is a canon argument really all there is stopping the Connie?
no one ever said it wasnt active in the game.... just it cant be a T5 endgame ship.
"The U.S.S. Texas is a Federation Cruiser active in 2409." I think this tends to shatter most arguments that the Constitution isn't an active class of ship in this era. Yes it may not be 100% canon driven but again who's ship story truly is? Why does the basis of this debate need to be that it must adhere to canon? I'm as bigger Star Trek fan as the next guy but ignoring CBS for the moment is a canon argument really all there is stopping the Connie?
I've had it be a T2 Connie twice, Vesta once, and Exeter once. That is just the game spawning a T2 cruiser.
Comments
Unfortunately it makes sense from a business perspective. People buy ships not just because of stats, but because of looks or a combination of different factors.
If they sold a ship that both looked great, was popular in Trek fandom and is the best ship in the game, people would only buy that ship. Cryptic would make less money than a more evenly distributed platform like they have right now.
Unfortunately that's the way it is. The only contradictory example I can think of right now is the Scimitar, which may be a pilot project for them to see if "star" vessels from the TV shows/movies can be both effective and popular, and still make them money.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Then lets get rid of the K'tinga and the B;rel T5 they are over 100 years old by the 25 Century.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
Probably because CBS just cashes the licensing checks. And occasionally says yes or no to things.
Back in the Escorts Online days, the Defiant didn't really affect people buying other ships.
Currently the Avenger and the Scimitar don't ward people off of other ships either.
People all have different goals and styles when they play. Some have to have the best. Some don't care enough. Some people buy new ships to collect them. Others only do it to min max.
There's just different target demographics at work here. And the Constitution is mired in licensing issues, not marketing issues. Those licensing issues will come up again so maybe, someday, the circumstances will change.
In the meantime, a T5 Centaur: DO WANT
A Constie Skin for the T5 fleet and mirror Cheyenne: HECK YEAH!
A T5 O to tha @#$%@#'n Berth: DO WANT
A T5 Wambundu: YES PLZ!
A T5 New Orleans: Absolutely!
I wonder why these people can use the ship in fan made searies
http://www.startrekphase2.com/
http://www.starshipexeter.com/
It just goes to show you how very Popular this ship is.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
http://www.stoacademy.com/tools/skillplanner/?build=tier5toslightcriser_0
True.
And I say yes to all five of the ships you listed there. I'll raise you one Andrew Probert Ambassador to boot.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
I cant find a decent Wambundu picture, just the one from front.
any idea where to find that?
I know have something to stove towards...I have a character that I am keeping in the TOS gear...but I've been flying the exeter...it gives a little more fire power than the connie
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.
Well you won't. It's not a canon design, even the class name is only from the encyclopaedia.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
K-7. That still operates & I don't see any differences between a space station & a ship being worthy 100 or so years later for Starfleet service.
Lets put this in naval terms. It's like having a destroyer from 1914 on duty today trying to do the job of an Areleigh Burke guided missle destroyer.
Sorry sometimes a ship is simply out of damn date.
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
In OUR time, yes. As was stated in TNG most of the systems had not changed basic function in 75 years. You simply cannot compare technology now to Star Trek dates. It just doesn't work.
Edit: By this I am not saying the phasers of the 2270s are comparable to the weapon systems of 2409. Obviously you upgrade these things. Look at it this way - The Aquarius is smaller, yes? How is it at all logical to say the same systems couldn't fit into the Constitutions. Push come to shove & given a few upgrades I think some old WW2 vessels could be used today. I'd need to check & If you really want me to I do believe some of the Australian Navy's ships still in service are quite old.
Here's the catch. You'd literally in both cases have to rip the guts out of the entire ship and start over. In the time and cost[for today's terms] you'd just be better off building a brand new ship.
That's why the federation went ahead and started building Vespers/Excaliburs/Exeters instead of using Constitutions.
Only reason we have them in game, is to satisfy fanbois who want to fly the most iconic ships ever. Well for 10 levels should you choose to, you can.
Now having said that, why they don't have a tier 5 Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur, that's one that has me scratching my head since they are some of the newest, advanced ships in the fleet.
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
Yup it was never on screen.
Still, I'd like to defend the encyclopedia for a moment. It predates Memory Alpha (the website), was originally created to be a writer's resource and is generally accepted as a source of canon.
But yeah, the Wambundu was a creation within the context of the encyclopedia, to group a certain number of ships that were mentioned or seen on the readouts in some episodes, and given that classification. Kind of an Okuda easter egg that went a bit further.
Which means for this game, it'd be the perfect opportunity to MAKE the ship. Crytpic has carte blanche. And it would kind of fall into that fun little zone of being a TNG era ship but having a Cryptic design. Ship artists would have some fun I'd bet.
So yeah, I would love to see a Wambundu added to the ships in this game.
Those classes I would accept to be perfectly honest. I really don't see it a far stretch, technically speaking, for the ship to be in semi active service. I don't believe I or anyone else is saying there will be thousands of them. But as a light frigate I think the Constitution would make a fine ship. I still went ahead & did a bit more research on it & I found these.
BRP Rajah Humabon - Keel laid - 14 January 1943. Decommissioned several times to find it's way into active service under the Philippine Navy.
BRP Quezon - Keel laid - 28 November 1942. Again decommissioned several times to find it's way into active service under the Philippine Navy.
BAP Almirante Grau - Keel laid - September 5, 1939. Same old story finding it's way into the hands of the Peruvian Navy.
BAP Puno - Keel laid - 1861. Hospital ship used by the Peruvian Navy.
You've got it backwards though. These are brand new ships. With retro exteriors. Everything inside (and technically outside) is brand spanking new. The outer shell is just designed to have an older visual look. That's it. And that's how it's roughly explained in the STO novel.
Which is only in the timeline in there to explain why the ships worked the way did at launch. Why a Miranda, Centaur and Shikar work exactly the same but are three different ships from different eras. (Or if you like the Cheyenne, Dakota and Stargazer ... or Sovereign, Noble and Majestic).
It's just a thing. They're all brand new. But some captains prefer an older "look" on the outside. So they wrote it into the novel.
Exactly.
It would save resources to do it this way as you don't need to build the ship from absolute scratch. By my reckoning it would be quicker too.
I'm pretty sure there are naval bases today that are much older than ships in fleets. Bases are easy to retrofit, since you have land to work with. Ships, not so much.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
Yeah, I'd be cool with that ship as well. There's a lot more fun Starfleet ships that can be added. We must get the ship artists overflowing with more work! Heh.
Gutting a ship and putting a new interior in it takes very little time or resources, you can already do it in the game. It can cost anywhere from zero EC to 2000 C-points. It can cost lobi too but I don't have the details on that. The 2000 C-point mark is where you can gut a modern starship and make its interior look just like an original Constitution class interior with no loss in functionality. You are not charged any amount for switching gear.
The Federation is still making Connie refits and retros if you don't like it that's fine but you can't pretend it's not actually happening.
You want the Vesper/Exeter/Excalibur at the end game but can't deal with the fact that the universe could handle the Connie refit there with them. Why won't you just buckle down and admit that we want the same thing? The thing we want is what's stopping you from getting what you want as well.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
http://i.imgur.com/VWuKNHN.jpg
http://sto.gamepedia.com/U.S.S._Texas
"The U.S.S. Texas is a Federation Cruiser active in 2409." I think this tends to shatter most arguments that the Constitution isn't an active class of ship in this era. Yes it may not be 100% canon driven but again who's ship story truly is? Why does the basis of this debate need to be that it must adhere to canon? I'm as bigger Star Trek fan as the next guy but ignoring CBS for the moment is a canon argument really all there is stopping the Connie?
no one ever said it wasnt active in the game.... just it cant be a T5 endgame ship.
I've had it be a T2 Connie twice, Vesta once, and Exeter once. That is just the game spawning a T2 cruiser.
It still spawns as a Connie....
Why is it so hard for people to accept that we want to play the ship we want to play?
I would like a T5 Connie. I've suggested making it cost 5000 Zen, of which 2500 Zen was a bribe to CBS to allow it.
Doesn't mean using this example to support your point is valid - it is just the game filling a Tier 2 cruiser slot.