With respect, Feds just got a ship that is comparable to bugship.... for about 1/10 the price.... so lol.
I don't know what you intend to accomplish by protesting on this thread that the Federation does not need anymore ships. If you intend to persuade us to close the thread and stop campaigning for the release of the Typhoon and Jupiter then might I suggest you find a better use of your time, because I assure you we're not going to stop supporting the release of the Typhoon, and you if you think you can get us to do otherwise then you're more naive then I had originally thought.
I'm not one for calling someone out because of their age I understand there are many young people who are mature and if you can give to me sensible reason of why the Typhoon and Jupiter should not be released at this time that is not followed by the word "lol" then I'll be happy to listen.
I don't know what you intend to accomplish by protesting on this thread that the Federation does not need anymore ships. If you intend to persuade us to close the thread and stop campaigning for the release of the Typhoon and Jupiter then might I suggest you find a better use of your time, because I assure you we're not going to stop supporting the release of the Typhoon, and you if you think you can get us to do otherwise then you're more naive then I had originally thought.
I'm not one for calling someone out because of their age I understand there are many young people who are mature and if you can give to me sensible reason of why the Typhoon and Jupiter should not be released at this time that is not followed by the word "lol" then I'll be happy to listen.
hit thenailon the head
and wth happened? i leave for a while and my thread has a heart attack? hmm? who fed it mcdonalds?
The Typhoon yes, the Jupiter no. If I had my choice with the Jupiter layout I would move the engines to paired mounts on either side and the engineering section back a bit giving the ship a longer lower profile.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
I support the Typhoon and Jupiter classes as targets for practice. Does that count?
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
I don't know if it came up already, but in another thread a fellow user suggested the Typhoon to be an alternative skin for the Oddy. I think that this is a good way to deal with it since there is no room for another large cruiser in STOs line-up and the Oddyssey (which didn't exist back in the day the Typhoon was in the game as the most powerful Starfleet vessel) has taken up the "flagship" / "deadnaught" status of the fleet.
While the Oddyssey is a 25th design, the Typhoon could be the late 24th century skin for it.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I don't know if it came up already, but in another thread a fellow user suggested the Typhoon to be an alternative skin for the Oddy. I think that this is a good way to deal with it since there is no room for another large cruiser in STOs line-up and the Oddyssey (which didn't exist back in the day the Typhoon was in the game as the most powerful Starfleet vessel) has taken up the "flagship" / "deadnaught" status of the fleet.
While the Oddyssey is a 25th design, the Typhoon could be the late 24th century skin for it.
The Odyssey is not a ship made for combat it is a long range exploration vessel you can check the STO wiki if you like
"The Odyssey is designed as an extreme long-range vessel, and can operate for long periods of time away from support."
It's NPC rank is a dreadnought but that it is because it is referring to the difficulty level of the NPC the ship it's self was not designed to wage war however the Typhoon is a Battleship it was created for tactical purposes the Typhoon and the Odyssey do not fill the same roles so it would not make any sense to have it as a skin for the Odyssey it doesn't even look similar to the Typhoon so making it just a costume for the Odyssey is a terrible idea.
The Odyssey is not a ship made for combat it is a long range exploration vessel you can check the STO wiki if you like
"The Odyssey is designed as an extreme long-range vessel, and can operate for long periods of time away from support."
It's NPC rank is a dreadnought but that it is because it is referring to the difficulty level of the NPC the ship it's self was not designed to wage war however the Typhoon is a Battleship it was created for tactical purposes the Typhoon and the Odyssey do not fill the same roles so it would not make any sense to have it as a skin for the Odyssey it doesn't even look similar to the Typhoon so making it just a costume for the Odyssey is a terrible idea.
I don't need to read the article, I know that. But canonically, the "build for war" argument doesn't make sense. The Oddyssey is lore-wise the most powerful ship in Starfleet, a organization which does use Explorers to fight.
The thing with the Typhoon is that it is already outdated considering the ships that are already in-game. I know that fans of a ship want it to be the bestest ship in game which means it needs 4 or 5 tac slots, lots of weapons and universal commander boffs or something like that, but it would make sense in my opinion.
The Typhoon is either that or a Sovy-kitbash and a alternate skin for the assault cruiser family but I don't see it being a new class or anything, just like I don't see the Cosntellation for example be it's own class.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I don't need to read the article, I know that. But canonically, the "build for war" argument doesn't make sense. The Oddyssey is lore-wise the most powerful ship in Starfleet, a organization which does use Explorers to fight.
The thing with the Typhoon is that it is already outdated considering the ships that are already in-game. I know that fans of a ship want it to be the bestest ship in game which means it needs 4 or 5 tac slots, lots of weapons and universal commander boffs or something like that, but it would make sense in my opinion.
The Typhoon is either that or a Sovy-kitbash and a alternate skin for the assault cruiser family but I don't see it being a new class or anything, just like I don't see the Cosntellation for example be it's own class.
I think just the opposite is the Case. The Federation indeed lacks a really heavy Battleship (Looks at Bortasqu').
Also in the current state of the Federation with all their ongoing wars it makes a lot of sense to have pure combat Ships.
The Typhoon is the better looking of the 2. I would take it over the floating tub. All they would need to do is to dress it up some. To make it look better. Then add some customizing parts like nacelle options, saucer, etc. There is a role for that ship. They just need to get it playable.
With them giving us extra ship slots, I can easily make room for it.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I don't need to read the article, I know that. But canonically, the "build for war" argument doesn't make sense. The Oddyssey is lore-wise the most powerful ship in Starfleet, a organization which does use Explorers to fight.
The thing with the Typhoon is that it is already outdated considering the ships that are already in-game. I know that fans of a ship want it to be the bestest ship in game which means it needs 4 or 5 tac slots, lots of weapons and universal commander boffs or something like that, but it would make sense in my opinion.
The Typhoon is either that or a Sovy-kitbash and a alternate skin for the assault cruiser family but I don't see it being a new class or anything, just like I don't see the Cosntellation for example be it's own class.
The Odyssey is the the most advanced vessel yes but not the most "tactically" advanced The Typhoon and the Odyssey are two different types of ships that are made to suit different roles and as for the Assault Cruiser it's just that it's an "Assault cruiser" not a "Battleship" you can't mix classes of ship made for different roles and if the Typhoon is outdated then so is the Defiant, Sovereign, Galaxy, Intrepid, Akira and every other ship designed before the Typhoon.
And in a stats sense the Odyssey is certainly not the most powerful ship in Starfleet if anything it's outdated it is easily outperformed by the Avenger if anything it's the Odyssey that is outdated.
The Typhoon, as a skin for that over-hyped, over-designed Luxury Liner?
Sod off.
The Typhoon is physically larger then the Assault Cruiser and the Odyssey...not to mention it just looks mean and nasty, like it's made for battle, rather then made as a shiny show piece, built for it's aesthetics rather then it's performance, as if Starfleet was rolling it out to please the brass and the supposedly non-existent taxpayers
The Typhoon, on the other hand, is not supposed to be aesthetically pleasing, it's supposed to fight a war.
As other fellow posters said, the Typhoon is far too different from the Odyssey to be a alternate skin option, all new skin options for the Oddy should at least have the dual-neck design. What I'd like to see is a Fed version of the Bortas with 5 tactical consoles.
(My Opinion)
TYPHOON AND JUPITER, 2014!!
I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
Seriously, asking for a Typhoon to be a skin of the Assault Cruiser or the Odyssey is like asking for the Jupiter to be a skin for the Heavy Cruiser. It doesn't work.
The Typhoon is a standalone Battleship. Oh, and here's my idea for the Typhoon
Typhoon-class, with alternate Hurricane and Cyclone skins...or Tsunami, Monsoon, whatever your preferred name for a storm of that ilk.
Designation - Battleship (No, NOT Cruiser, not a Dreadnought Cruiser, not a Battle Cruiser, not a Combat Cruiser, NO...just Battleship, and Fleet Battleship)
Innate - +100% Beam Weapon Damage (Which would be 50% for MMO math, like how some ships have innate cloaking, and the GX has the innate Lance)
Special Console - None. If needed, Dedicated Tractor Beam Array. Allows for use of Tractor Beam or Tractor Beam Repulsors on a console cooldown (3min)
Special Weapon - 4x Heavy Phaser Beam Arrays. -12 Weapon Drain, 2x Acc 2x Dmg mods, Battleship Only, may only have 4 total equipped. Make sure their damage is over that of regular Arrays
Seriously, asking for a Typhoon to be a skin of the Assault Cruiser or the Odyssey is like asking for the Jupiter to be a skin for the Heavy Cruiser. It doesn't work.
The Typhoon is a standalone Battleship. Oh, and here's my idea for the Typhoon
Typhoon-class, with alternate Hurricane and Cyclone skins...or Tsunami, Monsoon, whatever your preferred name for a storm of that ilk.
Designation - Battleship (No, NOT Cruiser, not a Dreadnought Cruiser, not a Battle Cruiser, not a Combat Cruiser, NO...just Battleship, and Fleet Battleship)
Innate - +100% Beam Weapon Damage (Which would be 50% for MMO math, like how some ships have innate cloaking, and the GX has the innate Lance)
Special Console - None. If needed, Dedicated Tractor Beam Array. Allows for use of Tractor Beam or Tractor Beam Repulsors on a console cooldown (3min)
Special Weapon - 4x Heavy Phaser Beam Arrays. -12 Weapon Drain, 2x Acc 2x Dmg mods, Battleship Only, may only have 4 total equipped. Make sure their damage is over that of regular Arrays
As other fellow posters said, the Typhoon is far too different from the Odyssey to be a alternate skin option, all new skin options for the Oddy should at least have the dual-neck design. What I'd like to see is a Fed version of the Bortas with 5 tactical consoles.
The Typhoon, as a skin for that over-hyped, over-designed Luxury Liner?
Sod off.
The Typhoon is physically larger then the Assault Cruiser and the Odyssey...not to mention it just looks mean and nasty, like it's made for battle, rather then made as a shiny show piece, built for it's aesthetics rather then it's performance, as if Starfleet was rolling it out to please the brass and the supposedly non-existent taxpayers
The Typhoon, on the other hand, is not supposed to be aesthetically pleasing, it's supposed to fight a war.
I'm merely arguing from a in-universe perspective. Star Trek isn't Star Wars or Warhammer 40k. Starfleet does not build ships "for war" because they don't need to. Starfleet fought countless wars, their enemies always used ships "built for war" and they always prevailed. This is merely a struggle over terminology that's not "cool" enough, I guess.
(...)
And in a stats sense the Odyssey is certainly not the most powerful ship in Starfleet if anything it's outdated it is easily outperformed by the Avenger if anything it's the Odyssey that is outdated.
That's because STO stats make no sense to begin with. The smallest vessels will always have the biggest firepower, the Typhoon would as well be a ENG cruiser with a LTC tac and a tac/eng layout, those ships exist already. But I suppose this thread is about wanting a new power creep ship with tons of unique gizmos, I can't argue with that
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I'm merely arguing from a in-universe perspective. Star Trek isn't Star Wars or Warhammer 40k. Starfleet does not build ships "for war" because they don't need to. Starfleet fought countless wars, their enemies always used ships "built for war" and they always prevailed. This is merely a struggle over terminology that's not "cool" enough, I guess.
That's because STO stats make no sense to begin with. The smallest vessels will always have the biggest firepower, the Typhoon would as well be a ENG cruiser with a LTC tac and a tac/eng layout, those ships exist already. But I suppose this thread is about wanting a new power creep ship with tons of unique gizmos, I can't argue with that
I'm merely arguing from a in-universe perspective. Star Trek isn't Star Wars or Warhammer 40k. Starfleet does not build ships "for war" because they don't need to. Starfleet fought countless wars, their enemies always used ships "built for war" and they always prevailed. This is merely a struggle over terminology that's not "cool" enough, I guess.
That's because STO stats make no sense to begin with. The smallest vessels will always have the biggest firepower, the Typhoon would as well be a ENG cruiser with a LTC tac and a tac/eng layout, those ships exist already. But I suppose this thread is about wanting a new power creep ship with tons of unique gizmos, I can't argue with that
Starfleet often uses euphemisms for it's combat craft.
In TOS, the Constitution-class was considered a "Heavy Cruiser" by Starfleet, but the Klingons outright stated it was a Battle Cruiser
Just like the Defiant. It's an oversized set of guns strapped to an engine with the sole purpose of making things go boom, and it's classed as an "Escort"
The Galaxy-class is an "Explorer" for Starfleet, but in alternate timelines where Starfleet is more militarized, such as "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "All Good Things" she is referred to as a Battleship. The alien from "Conundrum" even believed the Galaxy to be a Battleship, just based on her specifications.
And sometimes, they do not. The "dreadnought Entente" is mentioned in communications chatter in the Epsilon IX scene of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. This would seem to be a reference to the USS Entente NCC-2120, a Federation-class ship listed in the Star Fleet Technical Manual.
Regardless if it is a reference to the tech manual or not, it's specifically stated as a Dreadnought, on screen. Dreadnoughts are build for a single purpose. War.
Keep believing the spiel that "Starfleet doesn't build Warships" all you want, the proof that they do has been there since TOS.
Starfleet often uses euphemisms for it's combat craft.
In TOS, the Constitution-class was considered a "Heavy Cruiser" by Starfleet, but the Klingons outright stated it was a Battle Cruiser
Just like the Defiant. It's an oversized set of guns strapped to an engine with the sole purpose of making things go boom, and it's classed as an "Escort"
The Galaxy-class is an "Explorer" for Starfleet, but in alternate timelines where Starfleet is more militarized, such as "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "All Good Things" she is referred to as a Battleship. The alien from "Conundrum" even believed the Galaxy to be a Battleship, just based on her specifications.
And sometimes, they do not. The "dreadnought Entente" is mentioned in communications chatter in the Epsilon IX scene of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. This would seem to be a reference to the USS Entente NCC-2120, a Federation-class ship listed in the Star Fleet Technical Manual.
Regardless if it is a reference to the tech manual or not, it's specifically stated as a Dreadnought, on screen. Dreadnoughts are build for a single purpose. War.
Keep believing the spiel that "Starfleet doesn't build Warships" all you want, the proof that they do has been there since TOS.
Except for Defiant Starfleet has never made a PURE warship. Even Federation class has peaceful purposes.
as for Typhoon. She is wanted in. Note if she does become playable it is said she would be redesigned. But even based off current design she can easily be an alternate skin model for Oddyessy, she is only slightly shorter than the Oddy and well within costume range for the thing and it makes sense. I like the idea of avenger but i HATE it's model design. i want an alternate skin for her. same can easily be applied to Oddy and Typhoon is an option.
Starfleet often uses euphemisms for it's combat craft.
In TOS, the Constitution-class was considered a "Heavy Cruiser" by Starfleet, but the Klingons outright stated it was a Battle Cruiser
Just like the Defiant. It's an oversized set of guns strapped to an engine with the sole purpose of making things go boom, and it's classed as an "Escort"
The Galaxy-class is an "Explorer" for Starfleet, but in alternate timelines where Starfleet is more militarized, such as "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "All Good Things" she is referred to as a Battleship. The alien from "Conundrum" even believed the Galaxy to be a Battleship, just based on her specifications.
And sometimes, they do not. The "dreadnought Entente" is mentioned in communications chatter in the Epsilon IX scene of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. This would seem to be a reference to the USS Entente NCC-2120, a Federation-class ship listed in the Star Fleet Technical Manual.
Regardless if it is a reference to the tech manual or not, it's specifically stated as a Dreadnought, on screen. Dreadnoughts are build for a single purpose. War.
Keep believing the spiel that "Starfleet doesn't build Warships" all you want, the proof that they do has been there since TOS.
Now, gentlemen. Where's my Battleship?
The only combat craft in-canon that made it into production was the Defiant, and it's specifications were very limited. All the other ships have and will always be multi-mission cruisers. Just because something is called not-battleship doesn't mean it's weak, you hould really decouple your ego from terminology
Starfleet's ship designations are not euphemisms. The mindset behind Starfleet is a very different one from what you want it to be - keep in mind I'm only talking from canon and since it derails the thread I'll cut it out now (and I discussed the topic a bazillion times already XD), but all those calls for "better warfighting" make no sense. Then again, STO doesn't follow canon anyway and they can make up what they want.
Bottom line (in the spirit of the OP): Yes tot he Typhoon, as a skin/console bundle option based on the Oddyssey, Jupiter... no It's just visible that those models are mere mock-ups and we got other ships that have filled their gap. Every new fed ship that is added to the game right now will merely advance the power creep (see the new escort).
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Excuse me? Where do you get off claiming that the on-screen, canon evidence I've presented is "wrong" while you're spouting "from canon" as correct?
Starfleet uses actual Earth naval designations when referring to it's ships.
Do yourself a favor and look up what a Naval Dreadnought is. Go ahead.
Yes, I'm sure the U.S.S. Entente, which was called a Dreadnought, ON SCREEN, IN CANON, wasn't build for combat.
I mean, a Dreadnought in Starfleet means "Scientific Craft responsible for ferrying Botanists to alien worlds to study indigenous flora" doesn't it?
I have no doubts that a Klingon...you know, those guys that are at a state of near-perpetual warfare, and who are probably experts in combat craft, would call a ship a "Battle Cruiser" for no particular reason.
Just like I'm sure the alien from Conundrum couldn't have possibly looked at the Capital Ship sized weapons arrays and highly advanced torpedo launchers on the Galaxy class, and thought "By jove! This ship is for surveying solar flares and collecting gaseous samples!"
In short, you're an idiot. And you're even more of an idiot claiming that "(in the spirit of the OP): Yes tot he Typhoon, as a skin/console bundle option based on the Oddyssey" and you're still an idiot for ignoring the proof, figuratively sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "LALALALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING"
You, fail. And you fail so hard, there are not a hundred-thousand Picard facepalms to demonstrate your extreme levels of failure.
I'm not saying you are wrong with the things you presented, but I believe that you are misinterpreting what has been stated.
The fact that other, more warlike people interpret Starfleet vessels as warships shows that all of their vessels are equipped with state-of-the-art weaponry. After all, sending ships to explore the unknown undergunned might come back to bite your tail later on. And it further shows that there is no need for more "battleships" since we already seem to have plenty of them, by your logic
Starfleet's mission always incorporated defense, yet the organization as a whole is not build around fighting. This is stated throughout every incarnation of the show and certainly trumps your interpretation of one spoken line of background dialogue about a ship we never saw on-screen.
I could comment on the rest you wrote, but I figure you're just grouchy and need to take a nap or something. I just wanted to repost my initial statement to not derail the thread any further and go back to the topic at hand. You should really relax a bit
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Starfleet has always been gear to exploration and defense. thus why there ships are designed with a dual nature. a peace role and a combat role. Defiant is the ONLY example when they decide to go pure warship.
Starfleet has always been gear to exploration and defense. thus why there ships are designed with a dual nature. a peace role and a combat role. Defiant is the ONLY example when they decide to go pure warship.
No, they haven't. In the 23rd Century, Starfleet was more "militarized". It's vessels had military designations, with ship/class names derived from warships of Earth's naval past. Many of the same naval (military) traditions were continued on in Starfleet.
At least, until Roddenberry went full-on moonbat by the time TNG came about, and decided to thumb his nose up at Paramount and Harve Bennett.
The events of Star Trek VI were meant to reconcile the two eras.
No, they haven't. In the 23rd Century, Starfleet was more "militarized". It's vessels had military designations, with ship/class names derived from warships of Earth's naval past. Many of the same naval (military) traditions were continued on in Starfleet.
At least, until Roddenberry went full-on moonbat by the time TNG came about, and decided to thumb his nose up at Paramount and Harve Bennett.
The events of Star Trek VI were meant to reconcile the two eras.
The degree of militarization is open for debate, but what never changed was that Starfleet's purpose first and foremost was to "seek out new life and new civilizations", even in TOS. The designations the ships carried are not designations earth naval vessels had. Star Trek is not our present day earth, no matter if we use ranks or designations that sound similiar, and Starfleet is not the bucking US Navy. In Trek terms, a "cruiser" is the term to describe a multi-mission starship. The Connie was a Heavy Cruiser in it's time, other people referred to it as a battle cruiser, yet Starfleet didn't (I think, if they did I'm wrong on that one, but I think it was always aliens referrig to battle cruisers and the on-screen display identifies the ship as a "Class I Heavy Cruiser").
Even the script for Star Trek VI said that Starfleet is and always was under civil control (the scene was actually not shown, but then again a lot of stuff was cut from the release).
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Comments
I support the Star Trek Battles channel.
I don't know what you intend to accomplish by protesting on this thread that the Federation does not need anymore ships. If you intend to persuade us to close the thread and stop campaigning for the release of the Typhoon and Jupiter then might I suggest you find a better use of your time, because I assure you we're not going to stop supporting the release of the Typhoon, and you if you think you can get us to do otherwise then you're more naive then I had originally thought.
I'm not one for calling someone out because of their age I understand there are many young people who are mature and if you can give to me sensible reason of why the Typhoon and Jupiter should not be released at this time that is not followed by the word "lol" then I'll be happy to listen.
hit thenailon the head
and wth happened? i leave for a while and my thread has a heart attack? hmm? who fed it mcdonalds?
Support the Typhoon and Jupiter class starships!
Absolutely... (I'm in btw).
Of course you can use them as practice targets.
We call them NPCs ...
While the Oddyssey is a 25th design, the Typhoon could be the late 24th century skin for it.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"The Odyssey is designed as an extreme long-range vessel, and can operate for long periods of time away from support."
It's NPC rank is a dreadnought but that it is because it is referring to the difficulty level of the NPC the ship it's self was not designed to wage war however the Typhoon is a Battleship it was created for tactical purposes the Typhoon and the Odyssey do not fill the same roles so it would not make any sense to have it as a skin for the Odyssey it doesn't even look similar to the Typhoon so making it just a costume for the Odyssey is a terrible idea.
I don't need to read the article, I know that. But canonically, the "build for war" argument doesn't make sense. The Oddyssey is lore-wise the most powerful ship in Starfleet, a organization which does use Explorers to fight.
The thing with the Typhoon is that it is already outdated considering the ships that are already in-game. I know that fans of a ship want it to be the bestest ship in game which means it needs 4 or 5 tac slots, lots of weapons and universal commander boffs or something like that, but it would make sense in my opinion.
The Typhoon is either that or a Sovy-kitbash and a alternate skin for the assault cruiser family but I don't see it being a new class or anything, just like I don't see the Cosntellation for example be it's own class.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I think just the opposite is the Case. The Federation indeed lacks a really heavy Battleship (Looks at Bortasqu').
Also in the current state of the Federation with all their ongoing wars it makes a lot of sense to have pure combat Ships.
With them giving us extra ship slots, I can easily make room for it.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
And in a stats sense the Odyssey is certainly not the most powerful ship in Starfleet if anything it's outdated it is easily outperformed by the Avenger if anything it's the Odyssey that is outdated.
Sod off.
The Typhoon is physically larger then the Assault Cruiser and the Odyssey...not to mention it just looks mean and nasty, like it's made for battle, rather then made as a shiny show piece, built for it's aesthetics rather then it's performance, as if Starfleet was rolling it out to please the brass and the supposedly non-existent taxpayers
The Typhoon, on the other hand, is not supposed to be aesthetically pleasing, it's supposed to fight a war.
(My Opinion)
TYPHOON AND JUPITER, 2014!!
I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
The Typhoon is a standalone Battleship. Oh, and here's my idea for the Typhoon
Typhoon-class, with alternate Hurricane and Cyclone skins...or Tsunami, Monsoon, whatever your preferred name for a storm of that ilk.
Designation - Battleship (No, NOT Cruiser, not a Dreadnought Cruiser, not a Battle Cruiser, not a Combat Cruiser, NO...just Battleship, and Fleet Battleship)
Innate - +100% Beam Weapon Damage (Which would be 50% for MMO math, like how some ships have innate cloaking, and the GX has the innate Lance)
Special Console - None. If needed, Dedicated Tractor Beam Array. Allows for use of Tractor Beam or Tractor Beam Repulsors on a console cooldown (3min)
Special Weapon - 4x Heavy Phaser Beam Arrays. -12 Weapon Drain, 2x Acc 2x Dmg mods, Battleship Only, may only have 4 total equipped. Make sure their damage is over that of regular Arrays
Hull Strength - 50,000 (+10% for Fleet)
Shield Mod - 1.15 (+10% for Fleet)
Turn - 5.5
Bonus Power - +10 Weapons, +10 Shields
Console Layout - 4 Engi, 1 Sci, 4 Tac (+1 Engi for Fleet)
BOff layout - Cmd Engi, LTC Tac, Lt Tac, Ens Sci, Lt Engi (Lt Uni for Fleet)
Cruiser Commands - Weapon System Efficiency, Shield Frequency Modulation, Attract Fire. (Currently a unique combination in the game)
Looks like these guys get it.
I rest my case. :rolleyes:
I'm merely arguing from a in-universe perspective. Star Trek isn't Star Wars or Warhammer 40k. Starfleet does not build ships "for war" because they don't need to. Starfleet fought countless wars, their enemies always used ships "built for war" and they always prevailed. This is merely a struggle over terminology that's not "cool" enough, I guess.
That's because STO stats make no sense to begin with. The smallest vessels will always have the biggest firepower, the Typhoon would as well be a ENG cruiser with a LTC tac and a tac/eng layout, those ships exist already. But I suppose this thread is about wanting a new power creep ship with tons of unique gizmos, I can't argue with that
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The Typhoon is not going to be a costume.
End of story
Just one word: Defiant.
In TOS, the Constitution-class was considered a "Heavy Cruiser" by Starfleet, but the Klingons outright stated it was a Battle Cruiser
Just like the Defiant. It's an oversized set of guns strapped to an engine with the sole purpose of making things go boom, and it's classed as an "Escort"
The Galaxy-class is an "Explorer" for Starfleet, but in alternate timelines where Starfleet is more militarized, such as "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "All Good Things" she is referred to as a Battleship. The alien from "Conundrum" even believed the Galaxy to be a Battleship, just based on her specifications.
And sometimes, they do not. The "dreadnought Entente" is mentioned in communications chatter in the Epsilon IX scene of Star Trek: The Motion Picture. This would seem to be a reference to the USS Entente NCC-2120, a Federation-class ship listed in the Star Fleet Technical Manual.
Regardless if it is a reference to the tech manual or not, it's specifically stated as a Dreadnought, on screen. Dreadnoughts are build for a single purpose. War.
Keep believing the spiel that "Starfleet doesn't build Warships" all you want, the proof that they do has been there since TOS.
Now, gentlemen. Where's my Battleship?
Might I say well said my good sir. :rolleyes:
as for Typhoon. She is wanted in. Note if she does become playable it is said she would be redesigned. But even based off current design she can easily be an alternate skin model for Oddyessy, she is only slightly shorter than the Oddy and well within costume range for the thing and it makes sense. I like the idea of avenger but i HATE it's model design. i want an alternate skin for her. same can easily be applied to Oddy and Typhoon is an option.
Support the Typhoon and Jupiter class starships!
The only combat craft in-canon that made it into production was the Defiant, and it's specifications were very limited. All the other ships have and will always be multi-mission cruisers. Just because something is called not-battleship doesn't mean it's weak, you hould really decouple your ego from terminology
Starfleet's ship designations are not euphemisms. The mindset behind Starfleet is a very different one from what you want it to be - keep in mind I'm only talking from canon and since it derails the thread I'll cut it out now (and I discussed the topic a bazillion times already XD), but all those calls for "better warfighting" make no sense. Then again, STO doesn't follow canon anyway and they can make up what they want.
Bottom line (in the spirit of the OP): Yes tot he Typhoon, as a skin/console bundle option based on the Oddyssey, Jupiter... no
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Excuse me? Where do you get off claiming that the on-screen, canon evidence I've presented is "wrong" while you're spouting "from canon" as correct?
Starfleet uses actual Earth naval designations when referring to it's ships.
Do yourself a favor and look up what a Naval Dreadnought is. Go ahead.
Yes, I'm sure the U.S.S. Entente, which was called a Dreadnought, ON SCREEN, IN CANON, wasn't build for combat.
I mean, a Dreadnought in Starfleet means "Scientific Craft responsible for ferrying Botanists to alien worlds to study indigenous flora" doesn't it?
I have no doubts that a Klingon...you know, those guys that are at a state of near-perpetual warfare, and who are probably experts in combat craft, would call a ship a "Battle Cruiser" for no particular reason.
Just like I'm sure the alien from Conundrum couldn't have possibly looked at the Capital Ship sized weapons arrays and highly advanced torpedo launchers on the Galaxy class, and thought "By jove! This ship is for surveying solar flares and collecting gaseous samples!"
In short, you're an idiot. And you're even more of an idiot claiming that "(in the spirit of the OP): Yes tot he Typhoon, as a skin/console bundle option based on the Oddyssey" and you're still an idiot for ignoring the proof, figuratively sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "LALALALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING"
You, fail. And you fail so hard, there are not a hundred-thousand Picard facepalms to demonstrate your extreme levels of failure.
The fact that other, more warlike people interpret Starfleet vessels as warships shows that all of their vessels are equipped with state-of-the-art weaponry. After all, sending ships to explore the unknown undergunned might come back to bite your tail later on. And it further shows that there is no need for more "battleships" since we already seem to have plenty of them, by your logic
Starfleet's mission always incorporated defense, yet the organization as a whole is not build around fighting. This is stated throughout every incarnation of the show and certainly trumps your interpretation of one spoken line of background dialogue about a ship we never saw on-screen.
I could comment on the rest you wrote, but I figure you're just grouchy and need to take a nap or something. I just wanted to repost my initial statement to not derail the thread any further and go back to the topic at hand. You should really relax a bit
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
No, they haven't. In the 23rd Century, Starfleet was more "militarized". It's vessels had military designations, with ship/class names derived from warships of Earth's naval past. Many of the same naval (military) traditions were continued on in Starfleet.
At least, until Roddenberry went full-on moonbat by the time TNG came about, and decided to thumb his nose up at Paramount and Harve Bennett.
The events of Star Trek VI were meant to reconcile the two eras.
The degree of militarization is open for debate, but what never changed was that Starfleet's purpose first and foremost was to "seek out new life and new civilizations", even in TOS. The designations the ships carried are not designations earth naval vessels had. Star Trek is not our present day earth, no matter if we use ranks or designations that sound similiar, and Starfleet is not the bucking US Navy. In Trek terms, a "cruiser" is the term to describe a multi-mission starship. The Connie was a Heavy Cruiser in it's time, other people referred to it as a battle cruiser, yet Starfleet didn't (I think, if they did I'm wrong on that one, but I think it was always aliens referrig to battle cruisers and the on-screen display identifies the ship as a "Class I Heavy Cruiser").
Even the script for Star Trek VI said that Starfleet is and always was under civil control (the scene was actually not shown, but then again a lot of stuff was cut from the release).
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!