test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Star Trek Online General Discussion

Did the devs ever consider using Voyager-A?

mhall85mhall85 Member Posts: 2,852 Arc User1
edited August 2014 in Star Trek Online General Discussion
Curious if anyone has heard a comment on this, or if a dev wants to jump in and mention it?

I just was thinking that Voyager is 39 years-old, in-game by 2410... why not bump it to Voyager-A and use one of the updated Intrepid skins?
d87926bd02aaa4eb12e2bb0fbc1f7061.jpg
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • captsolcaptsol Member Posts: 921 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    Curious if anyone has heard a comment on this, or if a dev wants to jump in and mention it?

    I just was thinking that Voyager is 39 years-old, in-game by 2410... why not bump it to Voyager-A and use one of the updated Intrepid skins?

    It wouldn't be iconic if they did.
  • drogyn1701drogyn1701 Member Posts: 3,606 Media Corps
    edited August 2014
    If it is from the novels, and I'm assuming that it is based on a quick google search, they can't use it without jumping through all kinds of legal hoops.
    The Foundry Roundtable live Saturdays at 7:30PM EST/4:30PM PST on twitch.tv/thefoundryroundtable
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,016 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    In canon, only the Enterprise gets to use a letter suffix. Voyager did absolutely nothing to deserve the "A" :P :D

    They could however use the Bellerophon Refit skin. They'd lose the TV visuals (which is why this won't happen), but a refit of the ship would be believable.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
    #TASforSTO
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    Curious if anyone has heard a comment on this, or if a dev wants to jump in and mention it?

    I just was thinking that Voyager is 39 years-old, in-game by 2410... why not bump it to Voyager-A and use one of the updated Intrepid skins?

    Because some ships have a long service life. Galaxy classes were built with 50-100 year service lives. So having a ship that is 39 years old with how long Star Fleet is building their ships to last, is not unheard of.

    Hell the original enterprise built 2245, destroyed 2285. 40 years she served. So not surprising.
    afMSv4g.jpg
    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
  • binebanebinebane Member Posts: 557 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    Curious if anyone has heard a comment on this, or if a dev wants to jump in and mention it?

    I just was thinking that Voyager is 39 years-old, in-game by 2410... why not bump it to Voyager-A and use one of the updated Intrepid skins?
    that would be completley new class of ship. voyager its just a name. you can use it in game if you wish:Dmake your own story. with some t6 science ship.:cool:
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    Curious if anyone has heard a comment on this, or if a dev wants to jump in and mention it?

    I just was thinking that Voyager is 39 years-old, in-game by 2410... why not bump it to Voyager-A and use one of the updated Intrepid skins?

    You know that starships in Star Trek have lives exceeding 100 years, right? And Voyager never was destroyed. (Well the Voyager that make it to Earth. :P )
  • wilbor2wilbor2 Member Posts: 1,691 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    When legacy of romulus came out there used the TOS and TNG warbirds on there ads they need a recognisable ship for the posters so they have gone with voyager this time. If they changed its look even a bit it would not have such a big impact.
    gs9kwcxytstg.jpg
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    I thought Voyager-A would be a DSD.

    Honestly I'm kinda glad it's not now.
    U.S.S.%20Mastermind%20Signature_zpsgsyjxxz1.jpg~original
    Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
  • aegon1iceaegon1ice Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    In canon, only the Enterprise gets to use a letter suffix. Voyager did absolutely nothing to deserve the "A" :P :D

    Kidding right?
    Voyager perhaps did more than various known starships in Starfleet history.
    The exploration of huge areas of the Delta Quadrant are only because of Voyager. If it had not explored the Quadrant Starfleet would have known almost nothing for decades to come....not to speak about the severe duty it did by giving the Borg Collective a devastating blow and perhaps stopping an invasion (I am talking about canon...not STO semi-canon here of course).


    Voyager is in pretty much good shape and has improved tech on board which makes it "old but bold". The Ablative Armour tech alone should offer Voyager enough reason to stay on duty for several years, so there is no need to have a new Voyager (-A).
  • mhall85mhall85 Member Posts: 2,852 Arc User1
    edited August 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    In canon, only the Enterprise gets to use a letter suffix. Voyager did absolutely nothing to deserve the "A" :P :D

    Heh. :D

    And, the second Defiant in the final few episodes of DS9 was fully intended to be the Defiant-A (according to Ron Moore, I think), and the only reason why it wasn't was because they didn't want to pay for making new ship visuals.

    So, technically, KURLAND HERE should be flying the Defiant-A. :)
    d87926bd02aaa4eb12e2bb0fbc1f7061.jpg
  • ashrod63ashrod63 Member Posts: 384 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    Heh. :D

    And, the second Defiant in the final few episodes of DS9 was fully intended to be the Defiant-A (according to Ron Moore, I think), and the only reason why it wasn't was because they didn't want to pay for making new ship visuals.

    So, technically, KURLAND HERE should be flying the Defiant-A. :)

    I thought he said he's flying the Defiant-C. Might have been cut at some point, but I've definitely got that in my head from somewhere.
  • hartzillahartzilla Member Posts: 1,177 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    drogyn1701 wrote: »
    If it is from the novels, and I'm assuming that it is based on a quick google search, they can't use it without jumping through all kinds of legal hoops.

    No, its not from the novels.

    All they did there was give her a refit with the new design currently being worked on by Mark Rademaker.

    Which we will likely never, ever, ever get along with the Merian-class, or its Akula looking variant, or its Constellation looking variant as Cryptic has decided we should fly wierd looking tron ships instead :(
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    mhall85 wrote: »
    and the only reason why it wasn't was because they didn't want to pay for making new ship visuals.

    I find this statement hard to believe.

    Because they would've redone the registry number to accommodate the A like they did with the 1701 / 1701-A and even the 1701-E on the Galaxy model for Generations.
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    azurianstar wrote: »
    I find this statement hard to believe.

    Because they would've redone the registry number to accommodate the A like they did with the 1701 / 1701-A and even the 1701-E on the Galaxy model for Generations.

    It's absolutely true. DS9 was still using physical models for their ships, and to save money they used a LOT of stock footage. They would have had to go through and find every instance in that footage that showed the name on the ship, and re-shoot it. Plus, by the time they got to shooting the Defiant-A episodes the grapevine about not being renewed was likely going full speed, so they weren't going to waste money on re-shooting stock footage they would never use.
  • mhall85mhall85 Member Posts: 2,852 Arc User1
    edited August 2014
    azurianstar wrote: »
    I find this statement hard to believe.

    Because they would've redone the registry number to accommodate the A like they did with the 1701 / 1701-A and even the 1701-E on the Galaxy model for Generations.

    From Memory Alpha:
    There was a conflict as to what the new Defiant's registry number really was. The dedication plaque on the bridge gave the registry as NCC-75633, but the plaque also contained the original name Sao Paulo. External CGI images seen in "The Dogs of War" and "What You Leave Behind" repeated the old registry of NX-74205 as a result of the extensive use of stock footage from earlier episodes, including "The Search, Part I", "Sacrifice of Angels" and "Tears of the Prophets". The new footage in "What You Leave Behind" continued to use NX-74205 for consistency. In the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion, Ron Moore stated that he intended for the ship to be designated the "Defiant-A" but it wasn't shown on screen because it would have been prohibitive to repaint and reshoot the model for one episode. Memory Alpha uses the commissioning year to differentiate this ship from its predecessor.
    d87926bd02aaa4eb12e2bb0fbc1f7061.jpg
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Not to mention the fact that there was a Constitution-class Defiant, so if there were any internal consistency within Trek, the Defiant-class Defiant could have/should have been NCC-1764-A.

    But to the matter at hand...yeah, Voyager ain't that old, and hasn't been destroyed.
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • cbrjwrrcbrjwrr Member Posts: 2,782 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    ashrod63 wrote: »
    I thought he said he's flying the Defiant-C. Might have been cut at some point, but I've definitely got that in my head from somewhere.

    Depends, but it should at least be the Defiant-A.

    USS Defiant NCC-1764 = missing in action Prime, unknown fate Mirror.
    USS Defiant NX-74205 = Killed in action.
    USS Defiant NX-74205 = the STO current one.

    So, technically, it should be the USS Defiant-A NX-74205, backed up by the fact it would have been the -A were it not for budgetary reasons.
  • kestrelliuskestrellius Member Posts: 462 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Nah, he's right. Voyager should be a Bellerephon. 24th-century designs have no business being in service at this point, if only because the aesthetic is so different. (And also so ugly.)
  • szimszim Member Posts: 2,503 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Hmm now that I think of it. Has there ever been a ship with an A/B/C... as part of their registry besides Enterprise? I don't recall any of them... :confused:
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    kestrellius wrote: »
    Nah, he's right. Voyager should be a Bellerephon. 24th-century designs have no business being in service at this point, if only because the aesthetic is so different. (And also so ugly.)

    Starfleet: "This class of ship no longer matches our current aesthetic! Mothball the fleet!" :rolleyes:
    szim wrote: »
    Hmm now that I think of it. Has there ever been a ship with an A/B/C... as part of their registry besides Enterprise? I don't recall any of them... :confused:

    Nope, not in the TV series or films. There have been a couple of reused names besides Defiant, but none of them got the letter suffix.
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    jaturnley wrote: »
    It's absolutely true. DS9 was still using physical models for their ships, and to save money they used a LOT of stock footage. They would have had to go through and find every instance in that footage that showed the name on the ship, and re-shoot it. Plus, by the time they got to shooting the Defiant-A episodes the grapevine about not being renewed was likely going full speed, so they weren't going to waste money on re-shooting stock footage they would never use.

    You know the Consitution and the Galaxy were physical models too and changing the name was literally replacing a sticker.

    mhall85 wrote: »
    From Memory Alpha:

    I stand corrected. Just found it funny they blamed it was too expensive when they were using CGI and could've easily corrected, just like how they did on the remastery for cheap.
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    azurianstar wrote: »
    You know the Consitution and the Galaxy were physical models too and changing the name was literally replacing a sticker.

    Yeah, as he said, it may have been easy to make the change for new footage, but it would have precluded them from using stock footage.
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • cbrjwrrcbrjwrr Member Posts: 2,782 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    szim wrote: »
    Hmm now that I think of it. Has there ever been a ship with an A/B/C... as part of their registry besides Enterprise? I don't recall any of them... :confused:

    No, as that would mean editing the copy and paste reusable parts - something Generations didn't need to worry about being a film, not a TV show anymore.
  • seriousxenoseriousxeno Member Posts: 473 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    szim wrote: »
    Hmm now that I think of it. Has there ever been a ship with an A/B/C... as part of their registry besides Enterprise? I don't recall any of them... :confused:

    There have been, but its a very rare occurance:

    USS Yamato NCC-1305-E

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Yamato

    USS Sherlock Holmes NCC-221-B

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Sherlock_Holmes

    The Yamatos registry is debatable as the ship has been seen with 2 different ones, I guess it changed for some reason.
    latest?cb=20090525051807&path-prefix=en
    "Let them eat static!"
  • hartzillahartzilla Member Posts: 1,177 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    szim wrote: »
    Hmm now that I think of it. Has there ever been a ship with an A/B/C... as part of their registry besides Enterprise? I don't recall any of them... :confused:

    The USS Yamato, until they changed their minds about it.

    Edit: Darn beaten to the punch.
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    USS Yamato:
    The Yamato's registry was identified by dialog in "Where Silence Has Lease" by Riker who visually identified it from the hull of Nagilum's reproduction and stated it to be "NCC-1305-E". When the Yamato was listed on a Starship Deploy Status in "The Measure Of A Man", the starship had the registry "NCC-24383". However, with its later appearance in "Contagion", several computer screens, schematics and captain's logs identified the registry as "NCC-71807". In the exploding saucer section model from "Contagion" the registry was "NCC-71806" instead of "NCC-71807". While "NCC-71806" and "NCC-24383" can be clearly seen in the remastered high-definition versions of the episodes, they are not as prominent as the registries mentioned in dialog and the computer screen graphics from "Contagion".

    According to Star Trek Encyclopedia (3ed. p.569), the initial NCC-1305-E registry number was a production mistake. It was given to the Yamato by the episode writer Jack B. Sowards who was unaware of the registry numbering scheme developed for Star Trek: The Next Generation. Michael Okuda had intended to correct the number, as he had already finished the decals for the saucer section of the model for "Contagion", but as the scene was removed from an intermediate draft, he dropped the issue, only to find out the scene had been re-added later on to the final draft, which Okuda realized after the episode had aired.

    USS Sherlock Holmes:
    The USS Sherlock Holmes (NCC-221B) was a Federation starship operated by Starfleet...The ship might have been named after the famed fictional detective, Sherlock Holmes. The registry was an in-joke as it was the house number of Holmes' residence on 221B Baker Street.

    I'm not sure either of these should "count" - the Yamato was a production error, and the Holmes was a joke (and is missing a hyphen to properly fit the registry scheme, anyway).
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Apparently the Relativity's registry is NCV-474439-G.

    And the decoy Dauntless had the ridiculous registry of NX-01-A, which...in retrospect, the Voyager crew are even dumber than I thought. :rolleyes:
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • captsolcaptsol Member Posts: 921 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    jeffel82 wrote: »
    Not to mention the fact that there was a Constitution-class Defiant, so if there were any internal consistency within Trek, the Defiant-class Defiant could have/should have been NCC-1764-A.

    But to the matter at hand...yeah, Voyager ain't that old, and hasn't been destroyed.

    You could say the same about the Prometheus being used for a Nebula class and the Prometheus class Prometheus. :)
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    captsol wrote: »
    You could say the same about the Prometheus being used for a Nebula class and the Prometheus class Prometheus. :)

    It's true. I think there are several other examples out there, as well.
    You're right. The work here is very important.
    tacofangs wrote: »
    ...talking to players is like being a mall Santa. Everyone immediately wants to tell you all of the things they want, and you are absolutely powerless to deliver 99% of them.
  • jon59650jon59650 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    jeffel82 wrote: »
    Apparently the Relativity's registry is NCV-474439-G.

    And the decoy Dauntless had the ridiculous registry of NX-01-A, which...in retrospect, the Voyager crew are even dumber than I thought. :rolleyes:

    Regarding the Dauntless, it could be interpreted that NX-01 can be used for ships that usher in major advances in propulsion.

    Enterprise NX-01 for Warp 5 engine
    Dauntless NX-01-A for Quantum Slipstream
    then the NX-01-B for an even more faster method of propulsion

    That is one way to interpret it, but the real reason was that the Enterprise series hadn't been conceived yet.
    sto-afk-list.tumblr.com/
Sign In or Register to comment.