Prior to the forums extension I had a site for them, but luckily the forum extension has all of them under the smiley-dropdown (default).
^ 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
Prior to the forums extension I had a site for them, but luckily the forum extension has all of them under the smiley-dropdown (default).
Cool.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
I believe they are escape pods from "window type 5" in ship customization. Only thing here... they are stuck on strange places on the hull and distorted.
Those are not the escape pods from type 5 windows. Those are actually part of the type 7 hull material. Hence why it looks distorted like that. It's something that I'm not fond of with type 7 since on some ships it tends to get cut off in certain areas, or distorted like on the pilot ships.
I believe they are escape pods from "window type 5" in ship customization. Only thing here... they are stuck on strange places on the hull and distorted.
But whatever they are, they sholdn't look like this.
If you look at your large pictures, you can clearly see that they are not escape pods... There are two rows of escape pods, same type as the ones on the Sov in entirely different locations than the ones you are pointing out...
To be blunt, that means that you don't know WHY those look like that.
Those are Access Panels, NOT Escape Pods, so their shape only has to conform to the area they are in.
(they could also possibly be Transporter Nodes)
Also note that they have tiny little red lettering around them, most likely indicating "OPEN HERE" or "ACCESS PANEL".
Kinda like here...
The Escape Pods are TRIANGULAR, as clearly seen in a couple of pics that have been posted.
I agree with complaining about sloppy work, but at least start with a valid premise.
Post edited by daveyny on
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Those are not the escape pods from type 5 windows. Those are actually part of the type 7 hull material. Hence why it looks distorted like that. It's something that I'm not fond of with type 7 since on some ships it tends to get cut off in certain areas, or distorted like on the pilot ships.
I do wonder if you as well hold the facts to support your claims. If you don't, does that make you steaming pile of that and that other thing?
If you're referring to the question of the reliability of Steam numbers, then there is a small indication about this, which we may call - for the purposes of this discussion - "the very first point mentioned in the FAQ on the forums" (which is called "FCT" here).
Yes, this is a publisher statement, so it's always to be taken with a grain of salt, but there are three points which support that this particular statement (Steam is only a minor contributor to the player base):
1) Arc has repeatedly offered incentives to move away from Steam. While this may indicate that there are "too many" Steamers, it also lead to players actually switching, so the Steam number is probably dwindling
2) (more importantly) IF the Steam numbers were an even somewhat important part of the playerbase, simple maths would show that the game would have long been discontinued, since 5k players would only be sufficient if there was some outwhaling each other competition.
3) If you are sometimes changing instances, you will notice that a significant fraction of this number can be online at the same time in a single zone (most notably on event maps during events). Which would mean that at least half of the players are on in the 30 minutes I am there at the same time.
So why we cannot know whether this statement is right, we at least have a believable official statement for this.
But none of this should matter, since the claim was "population is dwindling", and you should first offer evidence supporting this theory before asking for proof of status quo.
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
Know as in "absolutely mathematically proven" - certainly not.
But, and this is a minor issue here but unfortunately also prevalent in discussions about topics way more important, not being 100% sure either way is not the same as "it's one or the other, it's 50-50, so it's a matter of opinion". I don't know whether an earthquake will strike this area tomorrow or not, but the odds are not 50-50 but instead very, very, very low.
And when I am confronted with a statement by the devs, who, while maybe not being completely truthful all the time about all the things, do have access to the facts on the issue and whose statement is entirely consistant with observable facts on the one hand, and some random statement without any facts backing it up, by somebody who does not have access to information vital to the question at hand - I know where I see the odds being higher than one in two.
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
Comments
Prior to the forums extension I had a site for them, but luckily the forum extension has all of them under the smiley-dropdown (default).
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Cool.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Those are not the escape pods from type 5 windows. Those are actually part of the type 7 hull material. Hence why it looks distorted like that. It's something that I'm not fond of with type 7 since on some ships it tends to get cut off in certain areas, or distorted like on the pilot ships.
Those are Access Panels, NOT Escape Pods, so their shape only has to conform to the area they are in.
(they could also possibly be Transporter Nodes)
Also note that they have tiny little red lettering around them, most likely indicating "OPEN HERE" or "ACCESS PANEL".
Kinda like here...
The Escape Pods are TRIANGULAR, as clearly seen in a couple of pics that have been posted.
I agree with complaining about sloppy work, but at least start with a valid premise.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
You are correct, I was wrong. I apologize. But my initial point and screenshot still stands.
If you're referring to the question of the reliability of Steam numbers, then there is a small indication about this, which we may call - for the purposes of this discussion - "the very first point mentioned in the FAQ on the forums" (which is called "FCT" here).
Yes, this is a publisher statement, so it's always to be taken with a grain of salt, but there are three points which support that this particular statement (Steam is only a minor contributor to the player base):
1) Arc has repeatedly offered incentives to move away from Steam. While this may indicate that there are "too many" Steamers, it also lead to players actually switching, so the Steam number is probably dwindling
2) (more importantly) IF the Steam numbers were an even somewhat important part of the playerbase, simple maths would show that the game would have long been discontinued, since 5k players would only be sufficient if there was some outwhaling each other competition.
3) If you are sometimes changing instances, you will notice that a significant fraction of this number can be online at the same time in a single zone (most notably on event maps during events). Which would mean that at least half of the players are on in the 30 minutes I am there at the same time.
So why we cannot know whether this statement is right, we at least have a believable official statement for this.
But none of this should matter, since the claim was "population is dwindling", and you should first offer evidence supporting this theory before asking for proof of status quo.
But, and this is a minor issue here but unfortunately also prevalent in discussions about topics way more important, not being 100% sure either way is not the same as "it's one or the other, it's 50-50, so it's a matter of opinion". I don't know whether an earthquake will strike this area tomorrow or not, but the odds are not 50-50 but instead very, very, very low.
And when I am confronted with a statement by the devs, who, while maybe not being completely truthful all the time about all the things, do have access to the facts on the issue and whose statement is entirely consistant with observable facts on the one hand, and some random statement without any facts backing it up, by somebody who does not have access to information vital to the question at hand - I know where I see the odds being higher than one in two.
"Get your tin foil hats, come get your tin foil hats."
via Imgflip Meme Generator