test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The Qib and where it came from
drowrulesupreme
Member Posts: 692 Arc User
I have had a niggling little feeling since seeing the Qib in the Operations Pack. That feeling was that I'd seen it before.
Here is the image from the site http://images-cdn.perfectworld.com/arc/f8/d7/f8d7bdd6eb302d53cea73b21297717241409352572.png. I know it's small but you can see it in enough detail for a comparison, I think.
After some searching I found this http://www.gods-inc.de/ae/montage2.jpg. The colour is different but I couldn't help but feel this ship - the QIb'etlh - was the basis from which the Qib is drawn.
...then I saw a post by a player and his sig has a much better view of the QIb'etlh and my mind was made up.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=19065871&postcount=10
What do you guys think? Am I just seeing things (you know, all Klink ships look alike) or is the Cryptic Qib an evolution of the QIb'etlh?
Here is the image from the site http://images-cdn.perfectworld.com/arc/f8/d7/f8d7bdd6eb302d53cea73b21297717241409352572.png. I know it's small but you can see it in enough detail for a comparison, I think.
After some searching I found this http://www.gods-inc.de/ae/montage2.jpg. The colour is different but I couldn't help but feel this ship - the QIb'etlh - was the basis from which the Qib is drawn.
...then I saw a post by a player and his sig has a much better view of the QIb'etlh and my mind was made up.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=19065871&postcount=10
What do you guys think? Am I just seeing things (you know, all Klink ships look alike) or is the Cryptic Qib an evolution of the QIb'etlh?
"...we are far more united and have far more in common with each other than the things that divide us.”
Jo Cox 22.6.1974 - 16.6.2016
Jo Cox 22.6.1974 - 16.6.2016
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Smiling whilst you twist the knife, eh?
Fair enough though, I just wish we had better images of the Qib to compare. I also admit I think the sig image is the better one for comparison... mainly as an original concept design that got fleshed out by Cryptic.
Perhaps it's just my old, Welsh eyes...
Jo Cox 22.6.1974 - 16.6.2016
While we can't know for certain if the Qib was inspired by the Qib'elth or this is all just some freakish coincidence, one thing's for sure - the both ships strongly resemble each other in the design as well as the name of the class.
Personally, I wellcome the Qib. She has that greyish hull that reminds me of the Klingon TOS hulls and the design reminds me of the old-school Klingon design, so once DR hits holodeck I'll probably switch my main to this ship.
Seriously though, I was dismissive of the T6 ships originally as ugly as sin. The more I looked (and the more the image niggled) the more I was convinced that the Qib might just be worth a purchase. It'll save me upgrading my Moghs to fleet Moghs and then to T5FU Moghs and probably cost about the same.
Jo Cox 22.6.1974 - 16.6.2016
See, I'm just not seeing that in the least...hrmmm, I mean literally - they're like night and day different.
Romulan influenced wings/pylons/hull vs. KDF wings/pylons/hull - check out the wings/pylons of the K'Tanco.
Federation nacelles vs. Romulan nacelles.
Sleek Bortasqu' saucer vs. sleek/double Vor'Kang saucer.
A Negh'Var influenced neck vs. the pair of straws.
It's like night and day...as was said earlier...
Awww....I wouldn't say night and day.
It maybe cause it's getting late here, but I honestly don't understand what you're saying here. Are you making a day/night comparison with these examples? Because if so, it seems a bit hyperbollic to me - I mean, I'm not saying they're exaclty the same ship but they do have similarities in the basic design, at least to me.
The fact that it's a battlecruiser that can battlecloak makes it a worthwhile purchase, especially when the design is good.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=4216413&postcount=1
The original poster even suggested it would be designed by Klingon Intelligence and now we have the similarly named Qib Intelligence Battlecruiser.
And VD, not saying they are identical... I'm suggesting the Qib is an evolution of the QIb'etlh design. Concepts are fiddled with all the time and I see an growth from one to the other. But this is all just opinion.
Jo Cox 22.6.1974 - 16.6.2016
Almost all KDF battle cruisers do though..so it's a case of going beyond the obvious things shared by almost all of them, and then it becomes night/day sort of thing.
From the D7/K't'inga to the Vor'cha/Vor'Kang...the basic design pattern is there - grab a Negh'Var and it's still there - even with the Mogh - hop over to the Bortasqu' - etc, etc, etc...they're KDF battle cruisers, they all share a fundamental likeness.
So in saying the Qib looks like it was based on the QIb'etlh...well, that's the same as saying it looks like it was based on a K'tanco - cause the Qib looks like a KDF battle cruiser. Even the Tor'Kaht just looks like a stubby version of the KDF battle cruiser.
Hell, one could go beyond the KDF battle cruiser angle and simply say it looks like a KDF ship - comparing it also to Raiders, the Vo'Quv, Raptors, etc, etc, etc.
Heh, it's like some of the Feds complaining...that the KDF actually got ships that look like KDF ships while they got their StarTRON ships.
Qib means galaxy.
QIb 'etlh means shadow sword.
I think them naming the ship Qib has more to do with them trolling the Galaxy folks out there, like they so enjoy doing, than it does with the Shadow Sword.
The KDF Galaxy is going to be stealthy and agile...a Battle Cloaking Battle Cruiser.
While the Fed Galaxy is...is...is...Cryptic's favorite way to troll?
edit: My apologies, mind you, if I'm coming off like a douche in this thread - I'm trying to avoid replying to other threads and some of that may be bleeding over into my replies here.
Sure hope Cryptic brought the rights... (here we go again)
Your Ramming Speed III deals 242658 (243540) Kinetic Damage (Critical) to you.
>:[ I decided to google "Qib battlecruiser" and was shocked to see it's a modified playermade ship!
Same hammer head bow, wing armaments, tail wings,... same name! Dude, I concur that you are not seeing things. Only real differences are the split hull, and the position of the outermost wing armaments.
Same hammer head saucer? Like the Vor'Kang, Qu'Daj, and Bortasqu'...?
Wing attachments? Like the Mogh, Pujyaq, and SuQob...?
Mission pod? Like...oh Hell, where even to begin?
Qib means galaxy.
Qib 'ethl means shadow sword.
And an uglier texture
Still same ship, unsettlingly.
Sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you here.
To me it looks much more like the Qib is based on Azurian's Qoj'Chu class.
http://starwolfx.deviantart.com/art/Qoj-Chu-class-Battlecruiser-214835787
http://starwolfx.deviantart.com/art/QoJ-Chu-MKII-244595001
So the Klingons get a Galaxy class... how original of them.
The Qib looks like a normal progression of Cryptic's battlecruiser design to me. Take the Vor'kang, make it angular, boom.
The Qib and the Qib 'ethl are the same ship...like a Spark and a Corvette are the same car.
http://www.redshirtarmy.com/bortas.jpg
More like the EX-122 vrs the Corvette... they're clearly derivative imho, and the name is a dead giveaway.
ALL HOLDINGS FINISHED! - Starbase 5-5-5-5 || Embassy 3-3-3 || Mine 3-3-3 || Spire 3-3-3
A laid back KDF fleet welcoming independent, casual, & part-time players and groups. Roms & alts welcome.
Send in-game mail to Wampaq@Jnoh, visit our recruitment thread and FB page for more info.
The F-5 class was slightly smaller and less capable ship then the Federations destroyers of the era, but more then compensated with phenominal nimbleness and agility. Later carients of the ship class added additional weapons systems and power bringing it on par with light cruisers of the period, though less then that of war time emergency cronstruction (the D-5 series of was cruisers). Though the F-5 hull family were high endurance ships capable of remaining on station for several years at a time if needed. The F-5 hull was used extensivly along with the smaller E-4 series refitted for specialized roles as dedicated escorts for carrier and battle groups, ultra long range bombardments ships, scouts, and electronic warfare platforms. The Klingon tended to keep Battlecruisers as Battlecruisers with specialist varients built on the aging and less capable D-6 series of ships during the General War which produced a great many varients including drone cruisers, carriers, exploration science ships, diplomatic cruisers, mauler cruisers and more.
(Non Canon: The General War would have been the result of a slight change at the end to the 4 years war "Battle of Axanar" ending without a clear cut federation victory. The General War would have started while the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 would have been at about year 4 of its 5 year mission. The SFB history is also called from time to time the "Franze Joseph" universe as thats where its original licenceing for STar Fleet Battles/Star Fleet Command came from long before CBS et al realized how much money they could possibly make off of this IP: Yes, it could be said that someone screwed up! That CBS/Viacom, Paramount were all able to manage to get together and allow Starfleet Battles to become the computer game Starfleet Command, licenced from ADB and produced/created by Sieera/Dynamix Taldren Studio's has always amazed me.)
The hammerhead, the downswept wings, the quad nacelles, THE NAME???
Anyone who "doesn't see it" is just plain lying.
In the TOS, sections 5.2 - 5.3, regarding "derivative works", basically it says that anything you post on the forums that can reasonably be described as "derivative" of their work can be used without notification or compensation. Even if it could be argued the QIb'etlh isn't derivative, the indemnity clause (section 27.) means he couldnt sue even if he wanted to.
In any case, I love the design, and I'm glad to see it in the game - I suspect the user who's name has been lost to the archive feels the same;
Both ships were designed with a similar goal in mind (stealth/intelligence KDF battlecruiser), but the executions are extremely different once you get past the common KDF design lineage: the QIb'etlh has an almost skeletal appearance, with long, slender wings that would be as much at home on a Mogai-style Warbird as on a Vor'cha derivative, and the hammerhead is similarly short front-to-back but wide and thin, like the Vor'Kang's. The Qib has a more blended "delta wing" frame, blending the neck with the wings, and the head is not itself exactly like any other KDF ship's, though it's similar to the upper portion of the D7 and Kamarag heads.
Damn! I'd forgotten about that! Thank you for sharing that.
As such I'm naming mine the Bilskirnir. Or maybe the Duj'Thor (Thor's Chariot)
Support 90 degree arc limitation on BFaW! Save our ships from looking like flying disco balls of dumb!