test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Why the T6 Intelligence Ships look like how they do (from the concept artist!)

1235

Comments

  • mandarsmashmandarsmash Member Posts: 78 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I have before hand. Tobias Richter, Moonraker, DJ Curtis, Maxeloaf all could make better designs than this. My fleet saw the first glimpse of the Eclipse and all of us hated it.

    One thing one of us suggest was that STo should allow us to totally kitbash our ships. You get the basic hull that has the consoles, BO slots, and general stats. THen you can put ANY hull peice you want on it and make a truly unique ship from it. The biggest issue now a days with their ships is lack of custumization. THe Ktinga has 3 model skins but you can kitbash them for some odd reason. Oddy and Avenger, and Ambassador have no real alt model skins. Now they bring this junk out which only has ONE ship that looks fed. They clearly don't know whaty they our doing. Again this is a STAR TREK GAME, thus we want to fly ships that look like STAR TREK SHIPS.

    The temporal ships (timeships) are canon as per appearing in Voyager, and yet are perhaps the least canon-looking ships ever--I'd say even more so than the intelligence ships, where you can clearly see, Defiant, Prometheus/Cheyenne, and Luna class influences (respectively).

    Ultimately, what you want to say is that you simply don't like the designs, but any argument that they are un-canon or "not Star Trek ships" is flawed.

    Personally, I don't like the hull material, and am hoping to see a few variant pieces we can change out, especially the nacelles and saucer on the Eclipse, so that they will conform to my liking. Both different hull materials and alternate parts have all but been confirmed (see: that thread with the ship designer reddit AMA)

    Everything you say up to that last sentence, I agree with. Since there hasn't been an official show since Enterprise, there has to be some kind of lore expansion. This is it, unless CBS wants to start a new series.

    Also:

    non-canon looking: see anything Dyson related
    ugly: Avenger

    And yet, people have grown accustomed to them.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    One of the most un-canon looking ships in Star Trek history may have been the Defiant. No saucer, no nacelles seperated from the main body. Designed as a Starfleet warship. Much smaller than any of the preceeding Starfleet ships, and yet one of ships packing the most punch. Going against any previous design ethos of ships, against the concept of "better ships are bigger".

    Except, of course... it's canon.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The temporal ships (timeships) are canon as per appearing in Voyager, and yet are perhaps the least canon-looking ships ever--I'd say even more so than the intelligence ships, where you can clearly see, Defiant, Prometheus/Cheyenne, and Luna class influences (respectively).

    Ultimately, what you want to say is that you simply don't like the designs, but any argument that they are un-canon or "not Star Trek ships" is flawed.

    Personally, I don't like the hull material, and am hoping to see a few variant pieces we can change out, especially the nacelles and saucer on the Eclipse, so that they will conform to my liking. Both different hull materials and alternate parts have all but been confirmed (see: that thread with the ship designer reddit AMA)

    Everything you say up to that last sentence, I agree with. Since there hasn't been an official show since Enterprise, there has to be some kind of lore expansion. This is it, unless CBS wants to start a new series.

    Also:

    non-canon looking: see anything Dyson related
    ugly: Avenger

    And yet, people have grown accustomed to them.

    Well's is 29 th century so it gets a pass there. since we haven't seen their evolution to that point. Unlike the T6's where we know their evolution and these don't match.
  • talonxvtalonxv Member Posts: 4,257 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The temporal ships (timeships) are canon as per appearing in Voyager, and yet are perhaps the least canon-looking ships ever--I'd say even more so than the intelligence ships, where you can clearly see, Defiant, Prometheus/Cheyenne, and Luna class influences (respectively).

    Ultimately, what you want to say is that you simply don't like the designs, but any argument that they are un-canon or "not Star Trek ships" is flawed.

    Personally, I don't like the hull material, and am hoping to see a few variant pieces we can change out, especially the nacelles and saucer on the Eclipse, so that they will conform to my liking. Both different hull materials and alternate parts have all but been confirmed (see: that thread with the ship designer reddit AMA)

    Everything you say up to that last sentence, I agree with. Since there hasn't been an official show since Enterprise, there has to be some kind of lore expansion. This is it, unless CBS wants to start a new series.

    Also:

    non-canon looking: see anything Dyson related
    ugly: Avenger

    And yet, people have grown accustomed to them.

    The avenger while slightly ugly has one thing going for it. It looks like a federation ship.
    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
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    talonxv wrote: »
    The avenger while slightly ugly has one thing going for it. It looks like a federation ship.

    ifthe avenger was less blocky she be fine. andyet the designers went from Avenger to those T6 ships. yuck again no logic.
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ifthe avenger was less blocky she be fine. andyet the designers went from Avenger to those T6 ships. yuck again no logic.
    The logic is that they're made for a stealth purpose - which isn't the normal Federation approach, so they're trying something different for aesthetics.

    But much like the Defiant's debut, still hasn't replaced the normal aesthetic; just leading the purpose they're designed for
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    trek21 wrote: »
    The logic is that they're made for a stealth purpose - which isn't the normal Federation approach, so they're trying something different for aesthetics.

    But much like the Defiant's debut, still hasn't replaced the normal aesthetic; just leading the purpose they're designed for

    stealth that in the ST timeframe that mean squat
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    stealth that in the ST timeframe that mean squat
    maybe so, but that isn't the point; they're simply trying their best in a field they're not used to
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    trek21 wrote: »
    maybe so, but that isn't the point; they're simply trying their best in a field they're not used to

    dude stop defending this. Crytpic has guys who can't design starfleet ships. It's that simple. Regent didn't go over well. Avenger even less. The dyson ships are completely made fun of and now these ships. Nope No they clearly can't do the job for this game. Any other space game go ahead but here nope.
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dude stop defending this. Crytpic has guys who can't design starfleet ships. It's that simple. Regent didn't go over well. Avenger even less. The dyson ships are completely made fun of and now these ships. Nope No they clearly can't do the job for this game. Any other space game go ahead but here nope.
    That's how you see it; I don't obviously, and it's not a fact that the other ships are universally hated, or a fact that they 'can't design' (because those are opinions)

    But let's not turn this into me-vs-you. Please
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    It's almost as if the devs are speaking a different language...and people aren't understanding.

    Dev: We designed these ships to be different. They aren't supposed to be evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Boards: I don't like them because they don't look evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Dev: That's the purpose. They aren't supposed to be.
    Boards: Well I don't like them because they're not evolved from the Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    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.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,236 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    khan5000 wrote: »
    It's almost as if the devs are speaking a different language...and people aren't understanding.

    Dev: We designed these ships to be different. They aren't supposed to be evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Boards: I don't like them because they don't look evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Dev: That's the purpose. They aren't supposed to be.
    Boards: Well I don't like them because they're not evolved from the Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Yeah it reminds me of the feigned outrage over how 'hideous' the DSDs are. :P
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • saekiithsaekiith Member Posts: 534 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    khan5000 wrote: »
    It's almost as if the devs are speaking a different language...and people aren't understanding.

    Dev: We designed these ships to be different. They aren't supposed to be evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Boards: I don't like them because they don't look evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.
    Dev: That's the purpose. They aren't supposed to be.
    Boards: Well I don't like them because they're not evolved from the Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns.

    Not being evolved from Galaxies, Connies and Sovereigns is completely Okay and I welcome it (Wells Class, Enterprise J Class)

    Looking like GTVA Cruisers is, however, not.
    Selor Andaram Ephelion Kiith
  • drazziidrazzii Member Posts: 104 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I think trying to compare the Defiant to these new ships is not really a great example. Sure, the Defiant was one of the few ships (NOT the first) to show up that didn't quite look the normal, but when it did de-cloak for the first time on the show there was no doubt in anyone's mind that it was a Federation ship.

    The Defiant although lacked the normal nacelles, saucer and hull look had many other attributes that defined it and made it look like a Federation ship including hull material, a round-sh sauce-hull shape, and a believable reason to its design. We didn't need a huge back story--just that they were originally made to combat the Borg.

    These new Intel ships don't seem to carry any of those traits right off the bat. They are hardly passable as "Federation" starships.

    Just my opinion.
    aV2IRVJ.png
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dude stop defending this. Crytpic has guys who can't design starfleet ships. It's that simple. Regent didn't go over well. Avenger even less. The dyson ships are completely made fun of and now these ships. Nope No they clearly can't do the job for this game. Any other space game go ahead but here nope.

    Are they?

    I only really dislike the Federation ship. I get what it's supposed to be, but I don't have to like to it for that.
    But the Romulan Dyson ship is great looking.

    And I didn't know the Regent ship was disliked. I thought it looked pretty good. Or did you mean another ship? I think some of the old Galaxy variants are really terrible, however.

    And let's not forget what kind of horrors the real Startrek designers gave us. Kitbashes like the Yaeger. And the Stargazer cannot be called a beauty either. Heck, it might actually be the first ship to break the 2-nacelle rule. Of course, that was when Gene Roddenberry was around and suddenly it was the "even number of nacelle" run. But then came the Galaxy-X, and suddenly was it "Oh, yeah, we meant even number of warp coils, and most modern nacelles have multiple coils".


    And people that claim "but this stealth material and colors can have no possible effect compared to cloaking devices"
    We're talking about a franchise that had shields for its ships primary protection and a ship without shields seems unprotected. Energy fields is where it's at it terms of defence.
    And yet, the Defiant comes along and carries Ablative Armour, allowing it to withstand heavy enemy fire even without shields.
    The Voyager gets 25th century tech and instead of using more advanced shields, it deploys "Ablative Armour" to withstand Borg attacks.

    It's okay to dislike the ships. You can even call them ugly.
    But don't claim they could not possibly be Star Trek ships, and don't claim the designers are incompetent just because you dislike the ship's look.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    drazzii wrote: »
    I think trying to compare the Defiant to these new ships is not really a great example. Sure, the Defiant was one of the few ships (NOT the first) to show up that didn't quite look the normal, but when it did de-cloak for the first time on the show there was no doubt in anyone's mind that it was a Federation ship.

    The Defiant although lacked the normal nacelles, saucer and hull look had many other attributes that defined it and made it look like a Federation ship including hull material, a round-sh sauce-hull shape, and a believable reason to its design. We didn't need a huge back story--just that they were originally made to combat the Borg.

    These new Intel ships don't seem to carry any of those traits right off the bat. They are hardly passable as "Federation" starships.

    Just my opinion.
    The Defiant did look like a Federation ship because of the materials, I think. The colors just looked like we knew from other Starfleet vessels.

    The new ships look like Startrek and Starfleet because they follow the base concepts of other ships, but diverge in hull materials and colors.
    Saucer + Nacelles for the Cruiser and the Science Vessel
    Defiant shape for the Escort.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • dareaudareau Member Posts: 2,390 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    One of the most un-canon looking ships in Star Trek history may have been the Defiant. No saucer, no nacelles seperated from the main body. Designed as a Starfleet warship. Much smaller than any of the preceeding Starfleet ships, and yet one of ships packing the most punch. Going against any previous design ethos of ships, against the concept of "better ships are bigger".

    Except, of course... it's canon.

    This on a show which "stars" a starbase, and for the first few seasons used "runabouts" to get planetside for that "touch of exploration" feeling...

    One could argue that the Defiant is more an "overgrown runabout" and, therefore, keeping in aesthetic with the show in general...

    Fact that it was painted much like a runabout, which was painted like every other TNG ship, only adds icing to the cake...
    Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...

    To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
  • daedalus304daedalus304 Member Posts: 1,049 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    anyone else think the materials and shape of the hull are for in case there are races capable of seeing through cloaks?

    Sensors aren't magical uber devices that just use nothing to find things, they project some form of energy to detect things similar to sonar or radar but with far more detail.
  • mandarsmashmandarsmash Member Posts: 78 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The Defiant did look like a Federation ship because of the materials, I think. The colors just looked like we knew from other Starfleet vessels.

    The new ships look like Startrek and Starfleet because they follow the base concepts of other ships, but diverge in hull materials and colors.
    Saucer + Nacelles for the Cruiser and the Science Vessel
    Defiant shape for the Escort.

    It's a fair argument, at least for now. Once people start bringing these intelligence ships into the game, I'm betting a whole lot of them are going to change the materials, myself included.

    At that point, with materials looking Starfleet-ish, do we really have an argument that these intelligence ships don't look Star Trek-ish? Especially if there are also alternate pieces.

    Speaking of materials, there are already some pretty un-Trek-ish materials in-game. I'm pretty sure I've seen a number of them used in-game by players, and nobody gives a (fig).

    Overall, I just think the whole rancor regarding the intelligence ships is just generally a whole lot of...well, what Internet forums do best.

    I think sensible folk will just take a look and try things out in open beta, or see what other people are doing when it hits Holodeck. They probably won't look nearly as bad as some already existing designs, in my opinion.

    Of course, it's all about one's opinion. I just hate hearing people cramming opinion down others' throats like it was fact.

    (Note: none of that was directed at the quoted poster, except for the part about hull materials)
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    anyone else think the materials and shape of the hull are for in case there are races capable of seeing through cloaks?

    Sensors aren't magical uber devices that just use nothing to find things, they project some form of energy to detect things similar to sonar or radar but with far more detail.

    In the Alpha Quadrant, everyone pretty much knows what the other races are capable of. In the Delta Quadrant, Voyager only encountered a small fraction of the races in the Delta Quadrant and only spent a few days getting to know what a race is capable of. Passive stealth is a way to deal with certain races that are capable of detecting cloaked ships.

    There are two different types of sensors, active and passive. Active sensors are similar to sonar or radar while passive sensors are like telescopes where the sensor detects the emissions from a starship.
  • catoblepasbetacatoblepasbeta Member Posts: 1,532 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    starkaos wrote: »
    In the Alpha Quadrant, everyone pretty much knows what the other races are capable of. In the Delta Quadrant, Voyager only encountered a small fraction of the races in the Delta Quadrant and only spent a few days getting to know what a race is capable of. Passive stealth is a way to deal with certain races that are capable of detecting cloaked ships.

    There are two different types of sensors, active and passive. Active sensors are similar to sonar or radar while passive sensors are like telescopes where the sensor detects the emissions from a starship.
    Actually, both radar and sonar come in active and passive varieties.

    IMO if something can see through cloaks, there's no reason to think that conventional stealth technology would in any way help.
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Actually, both radar and sonar come in active and passive varieties.

    IMO if something can see through cloaks, there's no reason to think that conventional stealth technology would in any way help.
    That's probably where the purpose comes in; everyone in the Alpha Quadrant knows about cloaks, and have many if not all of the tricks to find them out.

    But the Delta Quadrant? Where we'll primarily be using these new stealth ships? Some of the races still have yet to learn how to properly dispose of warp drive waste, and one has the 'honor' of being one of the known races the Borg denied to assimilate.

    Something tells me it'd be at least partly effective, given the difference in general tech levels. Borg and Undine obviously wouldn't have any issues, but they're not the only ones we're dealing with
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • caldannachcaldannach Member Posts: 485 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Some of these posts are ridiculous.

    Whining about stuff you haven't even seen in game yet. Just demonstrates to me some of the people who play this game and constantly berate things in the game have nothing better to do.

    I have seen lots of ships i didn't like the look of in pictures, that i then appreciated later when they were visible to me in game. As well as vice versa i have seen ships that looked cool at first but i didn't like after seeing more closely.

    I will wait until i see things in game before i start talking like some people here. Speaking as if they have owned and flown these ships for weeks and are experts on them, when in actual fact all we have seen is a couple of zoomed out pictures of the exact same angles.

    Some typical star trek nerds that think the universe and its ideas can't change. They need new ships and designs, even Starfleet ones. There are only so many ways you can match up a saucer, pylons and some nacelles before they all start to look the same.

    And someone said they have been told these ships will only be good for pvp? Lol what? Who told them that the Fairy Godmother? Sounds like someone who cant afford to buy them simply justifying in their own mind why they don't need to buy them anyway. Nice try.

    Less BS, more wait and see. Never seen sci-fi fans with such closed minds before. Ironic.
    " Experience is a hard mistress, she gives the tests first, and the lessons after... "
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Cloaking devices have been known to release certain radiation that could be detected by certain races. Certain Delta Quadrant races could easily detect cloaking devices so it would explain why there needs to be passive stealth used. Also Cloaking Devices use up a lot of energy so passive stealth could mean the difference between being found when the cloak is no longer operational and fighting another day.
  • stomperx99stomperx99 Member Posts: 863 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I like the Intel Torn battlestar of DOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!! because, I guess I'm getting bored flying iconic ships... :p
    ZomboDroid10122015042230.jpg

    I'm sorry to people who I, in the past, insulted, annoyed, etc.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    The "Active Sensor Arrays" are apperently not simply something like active sensors, but actually a probe you deploy.

    That seems interesting. It's weird that you can't use cloak while using the probe, but it means you need your stealth hull so your ship itself remains difficult to find while the probe is shouting out its position with an active sensor scan.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • jjumetleyjjumetley Member Posts: 281 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Their plating hints of some alien tech exchange. It has always been strange to me that somehow tech doesn’t seem to cross over species in ST
    Claasic Starfleet ships already are a mixture of different species' technology. Secondly - why aren't Klingon and Romulan Intel ships so radically different from the rest of the fleet?
    Design wise the blue “Tron lines” were done to “draw” the ship against the darkness of space.
    First you make a ship low energy signature and then you make it visible against the blackness of space using neons. Where's the logic?
    Also, if you want your IP to continue to survive new things have to be done for a new generation of users. That’s why J.J movies are so successful regardless of what classic Trek fans say.
    Wait a minute. You try to tell me J.J. movies are so popular because of the starship design? Don't know your opinion but to me the J.J.-prise isn't a such a radical departure from TMP Enterprise (apart from size that is). Don't you think that TNG era ships hold up really good even today?
  • erei1erei1 Member Posts: 4,081 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    jjumetley wrote: »
    First you make a ship low energy signature and then you make it visible against the blackness of space using neons. Where's the logic?
    Believe it or not, but visual identification is mostly useless in space. On today's earth, radar and whatnot are much more used than a guy looking at the sky. Modern stealth fighters are not invisible to our eyes, but they are to radar, that's the whole point.
    Windows are useless in a spaceship, except if you want to see the stars and think it's beautiful.

    They added the blue neon so the player can see the ship, and not complain because they can't see it.
    Even if the ships was a giant neon itself, it would still be invisible to most scanner or whatever they use in spaceship, meaning it would still be invisible to the crew.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • jjumetleyjjumetley Member Posts: 281 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    erei1 wrote: »
    Believe it or not, but visual identification is mostly useless in space. On today's earth, radar and whatnot are much more used than a guy looking at the sky.
    Can't agree on that. When you build a ship dedicated for intelligence you want to minimize the risk of being detected. Including the risk of being spotted visually. There is a cloaking device in Star Trek after all, right? People behind New Battlestar Galactica understood it and made the stealth Viper black. Cryptic also understands this aspect by making new ships dark.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    jjumetley wrote: »
    Claasic Starfleet ships already are a mixture of different species' technology. Secondly - why aren't Klingon and Romulan Intel ships so radically different from the rest of the fleet?
    [/QUOT€]
    Maybe because they aren't based on a mixture of different species' technology? Starfleet Intelligence ships are, quite possibly because the whole stealth-focused aspect is completely new aspect for Starfleet vessels.

    First you make a ship low energy signature and then you make it visible against the blackness of space using neons. Where's the logic?
    Just turn off the lights then.
    But in show-off mode, the lights are on.
    Wait a minute. You try to tell me J.J. movies are so popular because of the starship design? Don't know your opinion but to me the J.J.-prise isn't a such a radical departure from TMP Enterprise (apart from size that is). Don't you think that TNG era ships hold up really good even today?
    No, he's just saying they are popular.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Sign In or Register to comment.