Excelsior Auto Destruct in 3, 2, 1. This ship has been refit to many times. A redesign of the Excelsior is more like it. A new sleek look, yet keeping some of that classical Trek look would be awesome.
That's the closest i could come to a modernized look of the Excel in STO. I think that fits your description more or less.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
That's the closest i could come to a modernized look of the Excel in STO. I think that fits your description more or less.
I would love to hide the second set of nacelles, and also use a more traditional set of nacelle pylons, but yeah, its pretty close. Now if they would offer movie era bridge sets
I would love to hide the second set of nacelles, and also use a more traditional set of nacelle pylons, but yeah, its pretty close. Now if they would offer movie era bridge sets
Yeah that would be nice.
If they would only make the nacelles be parallel instead of that stupid looking offset some combinations have, they would look way better.
Cryptics designers always tend to build in some ugly element (like the nacelles offset in this case) in every ship that prevents making them look really glorious imo. (sorry bad english today)
Maybe they just wanted to recreate the Typhoons twin nacelles here, but they should have offered a single nacelles per pylon solution too imo.
Btw, they should have included a wide saucer, too imo.
Sorry for being off topic.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Yeah that would be nice.
If they would only make the nacelles be parallel instead of that stupid looking offset some combinations have, they would look way better.
Cryptics designers always tend to build in some ugly element (like the nacelles offset in this case) in every ship that prevents making them look really glorious imo. (sorry bad english today)
Maybe they just wanted to recreate the Typhoons twin nacelles here, but they should have offered a single nacelles per pylon solution too imo.
Btw, they should have included a wide saucer, too imo.
Sorry for being off topic.
The pylons scream Oberth, which is the most polar opposite one can get to "battlecruiser".
As far as a wide saucer goes, I am not sure that the secondary hull would compliment a wide saucer, the secondary hull is way too busy to work well. Wide saucers that we have seen tend to have secondary hulls that are too detailed. At least, thats my opinion.
The pylons scream Oberth, which is the most polar opposite one can get to "battlecruiser".
As far as a wide saucer goes, I am not sure that the secondary hull would compliment a wide saucer, the secondary hull is way too busy to work well. Wide saucers that we have seen tend to have secondary hulls that are too detailed. At least, thats my opinion.
Yeah the pylons look oberth-ish somehow, but they also remind me on one Enterprise -F entry some ppl. loved (somekind of Excel-Oberth thing, i never liked that design though)
Yeah, i think a wide saucer would fit to the "Presidio Command Battlecruiser" much more than this narrow and pointy saucer it has got. Its pylons make the already very wide, but the narrow saucer looks somehow misplaced. A wide saucer would have made the ship look more like a big mighty battlecruiser, instead of a jetfighter imo. But that's all just personal preference.
OT:
For me, the Fed command Battlecruisers are already 25th century Excelsiors.
(not function, just their design)
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
Yeah the pylons look oberth-ish somehow, but they also remind me on one Enterprise -F entry some ppl. loved (somekind of Excel-Oberth thing, i never liked that design though)
Yeah, i think a wide saucer would fit to the "Presidio Command Battlecruiser" much more than this narrow and pointy saucer it has got. Its pylons make the already very wide, but the narrow saucer looks somehow misplaced. A wide saucer would have made the ship look more like a big mighty battlecruiser, instead of a jetfighter imo. But that's all just personal preference.
OT:
For me, the Fed command Battlecruisers are already 25th century Excelsiors.
(not function, just their design)
I use the circular saucer (forget the name of the variant) and it works fine for me, I dont think a wider saucer (oval/oblong) would help it, but as I said, thats my opinion.
Same console layout it as the current version. That's my guess anyway. I expect they'll make the en eng a lt uni/cmd. Only other station I could see them messing with is the lt eng. Maybe making that one a ltcmd eng/cmd station and leaving that useless en eng station.
It doesn't look to me as if any of the canon vessels willl get a commander specialization ability.
A Lt.Cmdr/Command might be reasonable for the Excelsior. But maybe it will be Pilot or Command...
Having multiple specs seems unlikely.
Regarding Cruisers vs Escort:
Before BFAW and Aux2Bat* got the buff it recieved, Cruisers were not that popular. The damage was done via cannons and that works best on maneuverable ships with Cmdr Tac slots - aka Escorts.
*) which is now no longer really relevant, but was for a while.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
The Ensign station is not useless, for shame! If anything it balances the ship against other ships in it's tier and class. Removing that LtC Eng weakens the ship.
Frankly, I don't care what the BOff layout will be because I think it is perfect as-is. Yet, I do think Command is more appropriate than other specializations from a canon POV. Where it goes would not matter to me one iota.
I still think "universal" stations should be truly that: not only for career but also for specialization. You know ... universal.
Note: I have to retcon my promise to buy a Lifetime Sub for a T6 ... no money
The Ensign station is not useless, for shame! If anything it balances the ship against other ships in it's tier and class. Removing that LtC Eng weakens the ship.
Frankly, I don't care what the BOff layout will be because I think it is perfect as-is. Yet, I do think Command is more appropriate than other specializations from a canon POV. Where it goes would not matter to me one iota.
I still think "universal" stations should be truly that: not only for career but also for specialization. You know ... universal.
Note: I have to retcon my promise to buy a Lifetime Sub for a T6 ... no money
There are not many good engineering abilities at ensign level, most good ship builders agree that the ensign engineering station on the excel is not very desirable.
Also the excel doesn't have a ltcmd eng station fyi. It has en, lt, and cmd. My mention of ltcmd was where I thought they might expand the boff layout.
I don't see then giving out a universal specialization station. The excel will probably get access to command abilities if anything.
There are not many good engineering abilities at ensign level, most good ship builders agree that the ensign engineering station on the excel is not very desirable.
I think your info is out of date, since the team skill change the ensign eng is great, the only problem with it before was that you had an ET you couldn't use because it put TT on cooldown, now that that is no longer the case the setup is ideal for most that know cruisers well. You have the perfect number of ensign level abilities without saturation at high levels.
To be honest I have mixed feelings about a potential Lt uni, even if it does have cmd tacked onto it, it'll turn 90% of T6 Excels into FAW boats. I suppose I could port my current build to that layout, or even try an A2D Faw build which would certainly suffer over my current setup without that ET... Great opportunity to look at a few cmd abilities though...
As for Command, meh - it's expected but not needed. Not all Command abilities are great, yet not all are bad. I'd use Suppression Barrage and keep the rest Eng.
If anything, what it does is give players more options - and that's a good thing.
Comments
That's the closest i could come to a modernized look of the Excel in STO. I think that fits your description more or less.
I would love to hide the second set of nacelles, and also use a more traditional set of nacelle pylons, but yeah, its pretty close. Now if they would offer movie era bridge sets
I can support the programmers porting over some of the components of the Command Cruisers over to the Excelsior.
Yeah that would be nice.
If they would only make the nacelles be parallel instead of that stupid looking offset some combinations have, they would look way better.
Cryptics designers always tend to build in some ugly element (like the nacelles offset in this case) in every ship that prevents making them look really glorious imo. (sorry bad english today)
Maybe they just wanted to recreate the Typhoons twin nacelles here, but they should have offered a single nacelles per pylon solution too imo.
Btw, they should have included a wide saucer, too imo.
Sorry for being off topic.
The pylons scream Oberth, which is the most polar opposite one can get to "battlecruiser".
As far as a wide saucer goes, I am not sure that the secondary hull would compliment a wide saucer, the secondary hull is way too busy to work well. Wide saucers that we have seen tend to have secondary hulls that are too detailed. At least, thats my opinion.
Yeah, i think a wide saucer would fit to the "Presidio Command Battlecruiser" much more than this narrow and pointy saucer it has got. Its pylons make the already very wide, but the narrow saucer looks somehow misplaced. A wide saucer would have made the ship look more like a big mighty battlecruiser, instead of a jetfighter imo. But that's all just personal preference.
OT:
For me, the Fed command Battlecruisers are already 25th century Excelsiors.
(not function, just their design)
Please give me a T6 Exceslior.
I use the circular saucer (forget the name of the variant) and it works fine for me, I dont think a wider saucer (oval/oblong) would help it, but as I said, thats my opinion.
^This
/10Char
Lt uni/cmd
Cmd eng
Lt eng
Lt sci
Same console layout it as the current version. That's my guess anyway. I expect they'll make the en eng a lt uni/cmd. Only other station I could see them messing with is the lt eng. Maybe making that one a ltcmd eng/cmd station and leaving that useless en eng station.
A Lt.Cmdr/Command might be reasonable for the Excelsior. But maybe it will be Pilot or Command...
Having multiple specs seems unlikely.
Regarding Cruisers vs Escort:
Before BFAW and Aux2Bat* got the buff it recieved, Cruisers were not that popular. The damage was done via cannons and that works best on maneuverable ships with Cmdr Tac slots - aka Escorts.
*) which is now no longer really relevant, but was for a while.
Frankly, I don't care what the BOff layout will be because I think it is perfect as-is. Yet, I do think Command is more appropriate than other specializations from a canon POV. Where it goes would not matter to me one iota.
I still think "universal" stations should be truly that: not only for career but also for specialization. You know ... universal.
Note: I have to retcon my promise to buy a Lifetime Sub for a T6 ... no money
There are not many good engineering abilities at ensign level, most good ship builders agree that the ensign engineering station on the excel is not very desirable.
Also the excel doesn't have a ltcmd eng station fyi. It has en, lt, and cmd. My mention of ltcmd was where I thought they might expand the boff layout.
I don't see then giving out a universal specialization station. The excel will probably get access to command abilities if anything.
I didn't say I wanted command, I said it's what I expect to see. I'd much rather Intel. Oss ftw!
I think your info is out of date, since the team skill change the ensign eng is great, the only problem with it before was that you had an ET you couldn't use because it put TT on cooldown, now that that is no longer the case the setup is ideal for most that know cruisers well. You have the perfect number of ensign level abilities without saturation at high levels.
To be honest I have mixed feelings about a potential Lt uni, even if it does have cmd tacked onto it, it'll turn 90% of T6 Excels into FAW boats. I suppose I could port my current build to that layout, or even try an A2D Faw build which would certainly suffer over my current setup without that ET... Great opportunity to look at a few cmd abilities though...
As for Command, meh - it's expected but not needed. Not all Command abilities are great, yet not all are bad. I'd use Suppression Barrage and keep the rest Eng.
If anything, what it does is give players more options - and that's a good thing.