cryptic dont want us playing bad guys so that means no Star Empire no Tal Shiar
That poll about what the next faction should be, must erroneously have included Romulans then. For surely they would never have included something we weren't allowed to play in the first place, listed with fully acceptable and sanctioned alternatives.
That poll about what the next faction should be, must erroneously have included Romulans then. For surely they would never have included something we weren't allowed to play in the first place, listed with fully acceptable and sanctioned alternatives.
---
No, because the Romulans are not bad guys, contrary to the presentation of the military hawks like Tomalak and the fascist thugs of the Tal'Shiar in TNG and later series. Even in those series, as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are other Romulans who are more representative of the Romulan people as a whole, who are anything but villains.
No, because the Romulans are not bad guys, contrary to the presentation of the military hawks like Tomalak and the fascist thugs of the Tal'Shiar in TNG and later series. Even in those series, as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are other Romulans who are more representative of the Romulan people as a whole, who are anything but villains.
This Romulan representation was separated at birth. We will have to ask the parent entities where we stand, if and when we are allowed to meet.
No, because the Romulans are not bad guys, contrary to the presentation of the military hawks like Tomalak and the fascist thugs of the Tal'Shiar in TNG and later series. Even in those series, as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are other Romulans who are more representative of the Romulan people as a whole, who are anything but villains.
Pray tell how you know these nicer Romulans are "More representative"? They are clearly in the minority if we want to talk about ratios in regards to good/bad Romulan portrayals.
We have already talked about some of these 'good' Romulans before, and IMO it's not as simple as pointing to someone like Toreth and saying 'look! she hates the Tal Shiar, she must be a good guy!' and ignore things like her apparent glee in having 'Rakel' tortured to death.
There's also the Romulan Admiral, whose ideals-if truly representative of the 'silent majority' of the RSE military probably wouldn't have had such an elaborate loyalty test put on him.
Pray tell how you know these nicer Romulans are "More representative"? They are clearly in the minority if we want to talk about ratios in regards to good/bad Romulan portrayals.
We have already talked about some of these 'good' Romulans before, and IMO it's not as simple as pointing to someone like Toreth and saying 'look! she hates the Tal Shiar, she must be a good guy!' and ignore things like her apparent glee in having 'Rakel' tortured to death.
There's also the Romulan Admiral, whose ideals-if truly representative of the 'silent majority' of the RSE military probably wouldn't have had such an elaborate loyalty test put on him.
Clearly in the minority only if you think that members of the Secret Police and the top brass of the Military are representative of the majority of any nation's people. :rolleyes:
And how exactly are they not? You seem perfectly confidant about using the likes of Jarok as representative of the entirety of the Romulan people despite him being an admiral. Most Romulans in all the series have been military. Most of the Romulans in the series have been sneaky nasty types. Somehow you seem to be under the impression that the Romulans that constitute the vast majority Romulan appearances are not representative. It's ridiculous-like saying that Klingon warriors are not representative of Klingon culture because they are military and not civilian.
And how exactly are they not? You seem perfectly confidant about using the likes of Jarok as representative of the entirety of the Romulan people despite him being an admiral. Most Romulans in all the series have been military. Most of the Romulans in the series have been sneaky nasty types. Somehow you seem to be under the impression that the Romulans that constitute the vast majority Romulan appearances are not representative. It's ridiculous-like saying that Klingon warriors are not representative of Klingon culture because they are military and not civilian.
What is ridiculous is your continuing effort to hamper our desire for full faction status by agitating for a Tal'Shiar or RSE faction with all of these wholly fallacious claims you make.
Surely the TS as it is shown here is not very appealing, but I highly sceptic that is the whole picture, that first. Hakeev and the few of his followers are a bit few to characterise a organization of tens or hundred of thousands...
The TS in the original Star Trek was "bad guys" but not brainwashed. A organization which runs dozen of ships, space stations and controll entire plantes via (I guess) boots on the ground could not be made completely out of madmen (beside in stupid, on-sided stories) - it would never work.
Second, if I look into other online RPG - well, you could play a Sith in Old Republic (and several do so, so there is of course significant interrest in such people), and I could not see how a TS should be worse than a hard-core Sith
The Sith are a good example, since how the individual Sith acts is much up to him/ her - the Imperium of Old Republic might be shown more or less as "bad", but that mean not that anyone working for it must be sadistic etc.
What is ridiculous is your continuing effort to hamper our desire for full faction status by agitating for a Tal'Shiar or RSE faction with all of these wholly fallacious claims you make.
How is arguing for inclusion of more Romulan content limiting Romulan content? I am not arguing for another Romulan faction Only that the existing Romulan faction have more representatives of the TNG-style Romulans. Your response literally has nothing to do with the post you quoted, or my stance on the issue at all.
Well I had thought during my way from the start to the end of the official career about the question if it would not be nice if the player could choose between a perhaps not so "god" Republic and a not so "bad" Tal Shiar at some point in the story. I do not say this MUST be, and some changes in the Republic would from my opinion be enough to satisfy many players who would like to play a more Next-Generation Romulan.
But I still think it is a little bit unfair to "bash" or at least mock about those who want a playable TS, as some people seem to do. After all, as other players had said in other threads, KDF-Romulans (and Klingons) are not really SO much better (assassinate, kidnapp, trade prisoners as slaves, build bio-weapons, bomb, pillage and burn...).
Not that I am complaining about these assignments...:D
I don't know why people make such a fuss with Romulan ridges, when Klingons went through a similar process. And it wasn't until Enterprise we had an explanation. An explanation we had to wait until STO (which is not technically speaking canon, if CBS make a show, they may retcon everything STO have done) to complete.
At least there is a more or less official explanation for the Romulan : not all of them have ridges. It's luck if we didn't saw any Romulan with ridges before TNG
I'll give you my reasons for making a fuss about the forehead ridges on Romulans:
1. Romulans and Vulcans are the same species; we have never see a Vulcan with ridges, nor has there ever been any mention of Vulcans with ridges.
2. The ancestors of the Romulans left Vulcan about 2000 years before 2409; this is insufficient time for diet or environment to cause a change so dramatic, speaking from an evolutionary perspective.
3. Forehead ridges make Romulans look like they have either devolved, been subjected to some sort of trauma, or have brain damage. They look ... mentally stunted with forehead ridges. This is not the case with the Klingon forehead ridges; they do not convey this sense of something being wrong with the Klingons the way Romulan forehead ridges convey a sense that something is wrong with the Romulans who have them.
4. I find Romulan forehead ridges extremely aesthetically displeasing, with rare exceptions (Donatra is the only example I can think of off the top of my head). If that's not plain enough, then I'll put it this way: Most Romulans with forehead ridges are frikkin ugly (and might not be ugly without the forehead ridges).
5. Even the people who were involved in making TNG and promoted the ridges at first later decided they were a mistake and should never have been added. You may want a source for this. It's on Memory Alpha somewhere (probably in the article on Romulans).
I have this theory about the Romulans visiting Mintaka III and picking up some passangers on the way from Vulcan to Romulas. That would explain the Forehead Ridges. when I first seen the TNG Romulans I thought they looked ugly and wanted the old Romulans back but after a few years they grew on me and Im glad we get both Romulans with and without the Ridge.Personaly I think Sela is the best looking Romulan with the ridge.
For crying out loud, which idiot at PWE decided it was a good idea to completely break the "Report Post" button?
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Comments
That poll about what the next faction should be, must erroneously have included Romulans then. For surely they would never have included something we weren't allowed to play in the first place, listed with fully acceptable and sanctioned alternatives.
---
No, because the Romulans are not bad guys, contrary to the presentation of the military hawks like Tomalak and the fascist thugs of the Tal'Shiar in TNG and later series. Even in those series, as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are other Romulans who are more representative of the Romulan people as a whole, who are anything but villains.
This Romulan representation was separated at birth. We will have to ask the parent entities where we stand, if and when we are allowed to meet.
---
Pray tell how you know these nicer Romulans are "More representative"? They are clearly in the minority if we want to talk about ratios in regards to good/bad Romulan portrayals.
We have already talked about some of these 'good' Romulans before, and IMO it's not as simple as pointing to someone like Toreth and saying 'look! she hates the Tal Shiar, she must be a good guy!' and ignore things like her apparent glee in having 'Rakel' tortured to death.
There's also the Romulan Admiral, whose ideals-if truly representative of the 'silent majority' of the RSE military probably wouldn't have had such an elaborate loyalty test put on him.
Clearly in the minority only if you think that members of the Secret Police and the top brass of the Military are representative of the majority of any nation's people. :rolleyes:
What is ridiculous is your continuing effort to hamper our desire for full faction status by agitating for a Tal'Shiar or RSE faction with all of these wholly fallacious claims you make.
The TS in the original Star Trek was "bad guys" but not brainwashed. A organization which runs dozen of ships, space stations and controll entire plantes via (I guess) boots on the ground could not be made completely out of madmen (beside in stupid, on-sided stories) - it would never work.
Second, if I look into other online RPG - well, you could play a Sith in Old Republic (and several do so, so there is of course significant interrest in such people), and I could not see how a TS should be worse than a hard-core Sith
The Sith are a good example, since how the individual Sith acts is much up to him/ her - the Imperium of Old Republic might be shown more or less as "bad", but that mean not that anyone working for it must be sadistic etc.
But I still think it is a little bit unfair to "bash" or at least mock about those who want a playable TS, as some people seem to do. After all, as other players had said in other threads, KDF-Romulans (and Klingons) are not really SO much better (assassinate, kidnapp, trade prisoners as slaves, build bio-weapons, bomb, pillage and burn...).
Not that I am complaining about these assignments...:D
I have this theory about the Romulans visiting Mintaka III and picking up some passangers on the way from Vulcan to Romulas. That would explain the Forehead Ridges. when I first seen the TNG Romulans I thought they looked ugly and wanted the old Romulans back but after a few years they grew on me and Im glad we get both Romulans with and without the Ridge.Personaly I think Sela is the best looking Romulan with the ridge.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/