test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Federation Tier 6 ship design.

123578

Comments

  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    davideight wrote: »
    its called an INTEL ESCORT, while the OTHER is the cruiser o0 of course i suggest or conclude its SMALL(er than the cruiser)

    o0 its not that my conclusions are totally of the line. yours are, or the design intention is.



    a) its derived from defiant. defiant is 170m
    b) its called escort (esc are smaller usually than cruisers)
    c) theres a cruiser in that list, that IS a cruiser and MUSt be bigger, cause otherwise wed talk about its deck amount.
    d) even if this ship is "bigger": given the fact it is SO SLEEK and thin (thin is meaning lengh-broad-depth relation), it must be 800mx600metres just to be "thick enough to have 5-6 decks.

    thats basically the core of my critique. a ship with 4 decks was to small to even carry most necessary things, but a flat ship that has 5 decks suddenly has all the neat things in it?

    sry i dont buy that.
    Seriously, this might be the issue right there, and I don't mean this in the hater way :/

    The problem is either with them, or the design intention... no attempt or thought that you might be in the wrong
    The problem is not with new designs, the problems came when the iconic and canon designs (that MANY loves) are render useless due to the new ships been a lot better.
    But many of the iconic and canon designs can be upgraded to Tier 5-U, and I've read from Bort that the new Intel debuffs can still be cleared conventionally... overall, the differences look to be minimal to all but the ones who want the best-of-the-best imo
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • cerritourugcerritourug Member Posts: 1,376 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The problem is not with new designs, the problems came when the iconic and canon designs (that MANY loves) are render useless due to the new ships been a lot better.
    __________________________________________________

    Division Hispana
    www.divisionhispana.com
  • talgeezetalgeeze Member Posts: 196 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I wonder wich materials they'll have access to ?
    Woiuld not be surprising if Fed Tier 6 ships would get their 'intelligence' material, plus Type 1 to 5, plus Veteran ?
  • zeuxidemus001zeuxidemus001 Member Posts: 3,357 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    It's bigger than the tiny Defiant. Confirmed.

    actually I want something smaller than the tiny defiant maybe an ablative armored fighter with 10 forward weapons and 20 tactical consoles.
  • druhindruhin Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Reminds me of how a 21st Century F-35 fighter jet differs in appearance from a 20th Century F-15.

    Your analogy fails on one critical point: While the F-35 and the F-15 look different (especially in regards to the metal used for the "hull"), they both look distinctly "US Military". The same cannot be said about these new Intel ships in comparison to the likes of the Odyssey. And no, it's not just the hull material. Even slapping the Odyssey hull material onto one of these Intel ships, will not make it look properly Fed. But it would certainly help. Compared to the sleekness of the regular Federation ships, the Intel ships look both blocky, thin and far too angular.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    joshglass wrote: »

    When you look at a Modern US Naval Battle Group, with Carriers and picket ships, it looks pretty uniform, and you recognize, without having to be a citizen of that countries group, that they are together, and not a hodge podge fleet put together from whatever was laying around.

    Look up US Navy Stealth Ship and see if it looks like the others.
    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.
  • walshicuswalshicus Member Posts: 1,314 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Honest question: is any of this discussion going to actually change anything?

    I mean it's all well and good us giving our opinion or saying that Starfleet ships should look like Starfleet ships... but is this just an exercise for the artists/designers to get their side across on something that won't be changed? Or else will our feedback actually result in something tangible?
    http://mmo-economics.com - analysing the economic interactions in MMOs.
  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    walshicus wrote: »
    Honest question: is any of this discussion going to actually change anything?

    I mean it's all well and good us giving our opinion or saying that Starfleet ships should look like Starfleet ships... but is this just an exercise for the artists/designers to get their side across on something that won't be changed? Or else will our feedback actually result in something tangible?

    Honestly? It could go either way. It wouldn't be a matter of overwhelming the devs with numbers; we would actually have to persuade them that something could be/should be changed.

    I wouldn't expect any major changes, but a couple of tweaks here and there? Maybe.
    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.
  • crypticquackcrypticquack Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    walshicus wrote: »
    Honest question: is any of this discussion going to actually change anything?

    I mean it's all well and good us giving our opinion or saying that Starfleet ships should look like Starfleet ships... but is this just an exercise for the artists/designers to get their side across on something that won't be changed? Or else will our feedback actually result in something tangible?

    These ships are complete from the art side.

    These discussions could only influence future decisions.

    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our visual design intent regardless of the outcome of the discussions that surround it.
    Nick "Crypticquack" Quackenbush
    33.33% of the STO Ship Art team.
    100% of the new guys on the STO Ship Art team.
  • captainoblivouscaptainoblivous Member Posts: 2,284 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    walshicus wrote: »
    Or else will our feedback actually result in something tangible?

    Who knows? There is always hope and prayer.
    I need a beer.

  • captainoblivouscaptainoblivous Member Posts: 2,284 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    These ships are complete.

    These discussions could only influence future decisions.

    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our design intent regardless of the outcome.

    A shame that we won't see changes to the fed boats, but I think it's awesome that you want to be more vocal :)
    I need a beer.

  • jeffel82jeffel82 Member Posts: 2,075 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our visual design intent regardless of the outcome of the discussions that surround it.

    Vitriol aside, it's fun to talk about ship design.

    I remember Drexler's discussion of the design process of the NX class. I was never a big fan of the ship, but I was very impressed by the thought and care he had put into it.
    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.
  • druhindruhin Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our visual design intent regardless of the outcome.

    Which is why I asked if there would be any more "traditional" looking ships for launch, besides the Guardian Class. More than a "Can't say more than what's been announced". A simple "Possibly" would suffice, if it were the case. "Can't say", can easily be construed as a definitive negative, while "Possibly" leaves it open for the potential of more ships.

    Mr D'Angelo announced 6 to 9 new ships for launch, and there are 8 in the blog. So I guess that kinda says it all really. Which means, for launch, i'll stick with my Tier 5 ships, and upgrade my lockbox for free. And remain sub-par (performance wise) at Level 60 in my Tier 5-Upgrade.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    walshicus wrote: »
    Honest question: is any of this discussion going to actually change anything?

    I mean it's all well and good us giving our opinion or saying that Starfleet ships should look like Starfleet ships... but is this just an exercise for the artists/designers to get their side across on something that won't be changed? Or else will our feedback actually result in something tangible?

    Here's my take..Star Trek ships are like battle ships...every ship has had the same designs...Voyager might be a destroyer but she still looks like a little battleship.

    these new designs come along for subs...and people don't like them because the subs don't look like battleships or even destroyers...they show none of the design aspects of battleships...they don't even have the same color.

    these intelligence ships are Starfleet subs...or at least that's the way I plan on playing mine
    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.
  • mightybobcncmightybobcnc Member Posts: 3,354 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Yea, these are purely coincidental.

    What? Really? Well that's actually kinda disappointing (that it isn't an homage to the old Perpetual concept art). It's the first thing that came to mind when I saw that saucer shape.

    Joined January 2009
    Finger wrote:
    Nitpicking is a time-honored tradition of science fiction. Asking your readers not to worry about the "little things" is like asking a dog not to sniff at people's crotches. If there's something that appears to violate natural laws, then you can expect someone's going to point it out. That's just the way things are.
  • capnmanxcapnmanx Member Posts: 1,452 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I suppose part of the problem for some folks is that we are launching straight into a batch of themed ships. I mean, we are going from a very large and very diverse selection of T5 ships, to a very small selection of T6 ships; most of which have been designed with a certain look in mind.

    I'm wondering now if these ships might have been better received if they'd come a bit later; after a selection of... I guess, more conventional designs?

    Sure, people who don't like them probably still wouldn't like them; but it might not have upset them as much if there were alternatives (actual T6 alternatives I mean, since T5-U seems to be annoying people too).
  • davideightdavideight Member Posts: 460 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    i think ill just go with the guardian in the hope it will have at least a ltcom intel officer or two lt intel ones.

    the intel ships are not for me then. maybe with material 6 i could get along with a tramped down defiant ^^.

    but maybe renaming would help. if the phantom is so much bigger than i expected (shame on me) maybe it shouldnt be named "escort". donno if its only me but escort and intel suggests sth smaller than a cruiser (yet big enough to bear tech in it of course ^^).

    i think material6 as a choice would help a lot. while im a very vocal and passionate one in discussions im yet not the only one "having strongly mixed feelings" about the intel ships of the federation.
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Very classy to step in and indulge the conversation, CrypticQuack. I appreciated the read.

    I'm of a less polarized opinion: I'm generally happy with what I've seen.

    The ship in the operations pack that I like the last is the Fed Scryer-class, and even so, I think it's a nifty. It being a holdover of Perpetual concept art has me go "Whoohoo!" and it's a nice science-y design in itself, but it doesn't have the kind of cool lines that make me earlier to fly it (though that judgment is raised on seeing it only from one angle).
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I want to see more of them but I am thinking that my Fed Tac will be in the Phantom, my Fed Eng will be in the Eclipse...My Fed Sci may stay in his Vesta...i'll have to see more of the Scryer to decide.

    my Rom...I don't know as both ships look awesome

    My KDF...is in the same boat...both ships look awesome
    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.
  • strorusstrorus Member Posts: 328 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    davideight wrote: »
    its called an INTEL ESCORT, while the OTHER is the cruiser o0 of course i suggest or conclude its SMALL(er than the cruiser)

    o0 its not that my conclusions are totally of the line. yours are, or the design intention is.



    a) its derived from defiant. defiant is 170m
    b) its called escort (esc are smaller usually than cruisers)
    c) theres a cruiser in that list, that IS a cruiser and MUSt be bigger, cause otherwise wed talk about its deck amount.
    d) even if this ship is "bigger": given the fact it is SO SLEEK and thin (thin is meaning lengh-broad-depth relation), it must be 800mx600metres just to be "thick enough to have 5-6 decks.

    thats basically the core of my critique. a ship with 4 decks was to small to even carry most necessary things, but a flat ship that has 5 decks suddenly has all the neat things in it?

    sry i dont buy that.

    You are taking this this far to seriously... Watch the DR trailer, the Phantom Escort is shown at 23 secs.

    That gives a good reference, although not perfect.

    And another thing, so what it my be the equivalent of 4- desks tall... it is bigger then the Defiant and we are 40+ years in the future from when the Defiant was first developed.

    Take a chill pill.
  • edited September 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • canis36canis36 Member Posts: 737 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    joshglass wrote: »
    Continuity helps a story grow beyond itself by inclusion of a broader universe.

    As a child of the 80's I grew up with Original series Re-runs, and the beginning of the Next Generation. I can remember disliking the "New" Enterprise, the Galaxy, because of how far it departed from what I loved.

    As a kid, and even as an adult I can recognize that one of the things I loved most about Star Trek was when another Federation ship was involved. It showed there was more than just the Enterprise. In the Doomsday Machine when they have the other Connie, all battered and broken. When the Reliant first came on screen in Wrath of Khan. Seriously some of my favorite stuff. It really showed that the fleet had it together with similar designs, and that there was a Federation outside of the Captain and his Iconic crew.

    When you look at a Modern US Naval Battle Group, with Carriers and picket ships, it looks pretty uniform, and you recognize, without having to be a citizen of that countries group, that they are together, and not a hodge podge fleet put together from whatever was laying around.

    The Modern Marvel Films are all set in a contiguous universe where each ties into the other and we would be happily surprised if Thor made a guest appearance in an Iron Man film.

    The new ship designs are a departure from a departure. Perhaps there is a story element I'm not familiar with. Is it simply that they have finally adopted Tech from the Caitians and have applied a superior hull to their new ships? Going by the stories, the modern versions of Phasers were adapted and advanced from the superior Andorian versions, and shields from Vulcans in the early days of the Federation.

    Complaining of the departure in design to me is a null point though in these days when the Starfleet of the Federation of Planets has Captains flying ships they've purchased from Ferenghi or won racing surfboards on Risa, while wearing whatever clothes they feel like instead of the Starfleet Uniform that used to be required...

    There is a common element and a reason for why the ships would look different and it's encapsulated in part of their name "Intel."

    These are not line ships. They are not regular ships that the average citizen would see. These are SPY ships. They're meant to sneak past enemy lines and gather information, sabotage enemy operations, etc.

    You used the US Navy and it's carrier groups, but if you also look at the various stealth craft - even those that never made it off paper - you'll noticed that they tend to have very radical departures from the established as part of their design. We're seeing the same with the new Intel ships. If you go look at the "Delta Pack" page you can find pictures of the other, non-intel, T6 ships and they are very much of similar design paradigms as the classic ships of their factions.

    I'd also go so far as to say that the reason the Romulan and KDF ships don't look like such radical departures from established design paradigms is that both polities have been using cloaking technologies for over a century and their ships have been designed to maximize the utility of those stealth systems while the Federation hasn't.
  • zeuxidemus001zeuxidemus001 Member Posts: 3,357 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    These ships are complete from the art side.

    These discussions could only influence future decisions.

    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our visual design intent regardless of the outcome of the discussions that surround it.

    The problem with all of that is if players/customers of yours that may not be interested in how its being handled as well as a result of pretty much no communication until we get this ultimatum. So the costs of doing that kind of business just lead to further the chance of what people refer to as the game failing to the point of doom.

    So what happens after this when the results come back in what your higher ups usually do is blame the player base because they did no wrong lol.
  • kelshandokelshando Member Posts: 887 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The problem with all of that is if players/customers of yours that may not be interested in how its being handled as well as a result of pretty much no communication until we get this ultimatum. So the costs of doing that kind of business just lead to further the chance of what people refer to as the game failing to the point of doom.

    So what happens after this when the results come back in what your higher ups usually do is blame the player base because they did no wrong lol.

    Or its just a noisy minority whining... people who like what they see tend to be playing the game not whining on the forums.

    Every time there is a change you get the screamers of the "GAME IS DOOMED!!!" and yet 4 years later still going strong.....

    No matter what Cryptic does there going to be some yahoo crying abouy it on the forums.
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 937 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    These ships are complete from the art side.

    These discussions could only influence future decisions.

    With that said, I want to be more vocal with you players as to our visual design intent regardless of the outcome of the discussions that surround it.

    I just want to thank you again for jumping into the shark infested waters to swim around with us.

    I can totally see where these ships have evolved from canon fed tech and other elements in the game. The phantom obviously looks like an evolution from the defiant, the scryer, from the angle I've gotten to see it from is reminiscent of the recon science vessels, with the pod on top reminding me of the premonition from star trek armada. And the eclipse looks like a natural progression of the prometheus and the vanguard/emissary/sentinel star cruisers.

    I think what really throws people most is the blue hull, and the lack of a redish-orangish bussard collector. If the blue glowing strip on the front of the eclipse had been orange/red to be a bussard collector, that probably would have been remarkably effective in making the ship less shocking to the senses. And if the hull had been more of a stealth grey/black, that probably would have helped too. In fact, with the exception of the hull color and lack of bussard orange/red, that ship looks remarkably like one I dreamed up shortly after seeing the prometheus on voyager.

    But all in all, I can see the parallels/evolution of canon fed tech, and I am certain that the more I see of them, the less shocking they will be... not to mention the possible variants and alternate skins.

    And speaking to personal preference, while davideight seems to think himself the worlds greatest expert on what is feasible tech and engineering for a fictional universe with fictional tech and fictional engineering... and also the foremost expert on what is an acceptable look for trek ships. I find that pretty much every "better than these designs" fan concepts he's linked have been buggly with the exception of the probert ambassador which is what the ambassador class was originally intended to be anyway, so I view it as a proper trek ship, and the onimaru from the ships of the line calendar. So that makes... what? Two out of twenty that I think look good and proper. And what if I declare MYself grand-pubah of what is good and proper in star trek and star trek online? Uhoh, davideight, you've lost your title. Your opinions are now invalid, my opinions are now fact, let my reign begin! :P ;)

    But seriously, crypticquack, thanks again for diving in. Also... what are the chances of us getting that gorgeous probert ambassador in some shape or form? It was on the enterprise D's golden history wall, so is it not available IP? Could make it a c-store support cruiser refit similar to the assault crusier refit, or perhaps a separate probert class entirely in homage... and to not TRIBBLE with the established ambassador/fleet ambassador situation. (whichever way makes it available to me :P ) And what are the chances we could get some of those really awesome fan concepts into the game? Not the ones davideight likes... the ones I like. Could you hold a contest to make some of them available if the artist submits them? Speaking of contests... are the rejected submissions for the enterprise F contest fair game for you to turn into game ships? There were some awesome ones in that lineup. For example, I really liked:

    This:

    http://dangerousdac.deviantart.com/art/Dac-s-Enterprise-F-FINAL-196419477

    And this:

    http://colourbrand.deviantart.com/art/Enterprise-F-Forward-Concept-270029294

    http://colourbrand.deviantart.com/art/Enterprise-F-My-Version-314876347

    http://www.deviantart.com/art/Enterprise-F-Quantum-Class-445548098

    (Front is gorgeous, other angles need work)

    Pretty please with a cherry on top? :3
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    People tend to forget that there was a lot of whinning about the Ent D when TNG first came out.
    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.
  • jarfarujarfaru Member Posts: 572 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Not sure if serious or sarcastic :confused:

    Someone posted this theory on reddit and now everyone is running with it like its fact. Even though the dev team has said nothing of this section 31 idea.
  • mvp333mvp333 Member Posts: 509 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Oh, these are Federation ships alright. Starfleet? No. But definitely Federation:

    ...They're CAITIAN for goodness' sakes. That's why they have cloaks, too - Built by pussies, for pussies. XD


    ...Jokes aside, I don't like these ships, not because they look bad or don't make sense, but because it's adding yet another ship in that doesn't fit with the rest of the proper Starfleet/canon other Fed lineup. When I see a Starfleet battlegroup warp in, I want to see shiny, white, rounded Starfleet ships, plus the occasional Andorian, Vulcan, or maybe even some other Fed member ship or the occasional Ferengi or Cardassian "hero ship." But not Undine or Elachi or (heaven forbid) Tholian... or stuff like this. This is silly. Don't call it Starfleet if it doesn't even have Starfleet nacelles.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    jarfaru wrote: »
    Someone posted this theory on reddit and now everyone is running with it like its fact. Even though the dev team has said nothing of this section 31 idea.

    I am only going off what I see...the ships have a stealth quality to the and they are called intelligence ships.
    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.
  • wrathofachilleswrathofachilles Member Posts: 937 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    mvp333 wrote: »
    Oh, these are Federation ships alright. Starfleet? No. But definitely Federation:

    ...They're CAITIAN for goodness' sakes. That's why they have cloaks, too - Built by pussies, for pussies. XD


    ...Jokes aside, I don't like these ships, not because they look bad or don't make sense, but because it's adding yet another ship in that doesn't fit with the rest of the proper Starfleet/canon other Fed lineup. When I see a Starfleet battlegroup warp in, I want to see shiny, white, rounded Starfleet ships, plus the occasional Andorian, Vulcan, or maybe even some other Fed member ship or the occasional Ferengi or Cardassian "hero ship." But not Undine or Elachi or (heaven forbid) Tholian... or stuff like this. This is silly. Don't call it Starfleet if it doesn't even have Starfleet nacelles.

    Now that you mention it, caitians can be the perfect explanation for why these ship's stealth hull is blue and how they got cloaks... it very well could be an evolution of catian technology getting incorporated into the fleet. Good job, you. You've effectively justified the appearance of these ships... I actually find them ten times more appealing having received this insight into their design.
Sign In or Register to comment.