Another thing that Cryptic considers is role and niche. What would a T6 Exeter do?
Me personally, I think she looks nimble, so I'm thinking a pilot cruiser what do you think?
I don't know, but i wouldn't make her a Pilot Cruiser thingy TBH.
The overall configuration of Saucer/ Engineering Hull/ Nacelles and the spaces in between them (namely her thin neck and pylons) don't say "nimble" to me, at least not as nimble as a Arbiter least of all like a defiant. I think it's rather made to move exalted and slow instead of moving like a Tie Fighter like a escort for example.
Let's assume Cryptic would release the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter as a original T6 cruiser.
Wouldn't it look somehow weird for such a tiny ship be on par with monsters like a command Battlecruiser for example?
Yeah, i know it's a constituion on that images, but the sizes are the same.
(BTW. Crpytics leaning towards huge and monstrous sized ships has become really rediculus imo.)
My point is, in order to make the Excalibur model work as a cruiser, i think she would need to be scaled up at least 2x.
This would also distinguish her from the Constitution and underline that she's only inspired by the Constitution, but every other aspect of her is a modern 25th century starship.
Nice screen shots the Command ship looks really majestic.
Slow and Exalted? What you think she looks like a crane instead of a sparrow?
Put her next to a Voth Fortress ship and I assure you she looks plenty agile, it's a matter of scale and perspective.
As far as Cryptic continuing to make bigger and bigger ships, I assume it's because they are on a foolish manifest destiny to have their ships be precursors to the Enterprise J which is two miles long.
Another thing that Cryptic considers is role and niche. What would a T6 Exeter do?
Me personally, I think she looks nimble, so I'm thinking a pilot cruiser what do you think?
I don't know, but i wouldn't make her a Pilot Cruiser thingy TBH.
The overall configuration of Saucer/ Engineering Hull/ Nacelles and the spaces in between them (namely her thin neck and pylons) don't say "nimble" to me, at least not as nimble as a Arbiter least of all like a defiant. I think it's rather made to move exalted and slow instead of moving like a Tie Fighter like a escort for example.
Let's assume Cryptic would release the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter as a original T6 cruiser.
Wouldn't it look somehow weird for such a tiny ship be on par with monsters like a command Battlecruiser for example?
Yeah, i know it's a constituion on that images, but the sizes are the same.
(BTW. Crpytics leaning towards huge and monstrous sized ships has become really rediculus imo.)
My point is, in order to make the Excalibur model work as a cruiser, i think she would need to be scaled up at least 2x.
This would also distinguish her from the Constitution and underline that she's only inspired by the Constitution, but every other aspect of her is a modern 25th century starship.
I was thinking more a 1.5x and give her a 'light cruiser' designation, which would slot intel or pilot nicely. As to the size, irrelevant, escorts pack just as much heat as those behemoths in game. Similarly I disagree about nimble or not.
p.s.
Nice screenies!
Keep in mind that light cruiser is the designation for the starter ships the Miranda, Shir'kahr and Centaur.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
Avenger? Adding it as a variant to the Excelsior seems more likely.
But I am afraid ultimately, the Excaliber, Vesper and Exeter's fate will be forever tied to that of the Constitution. It's most likely not even worth bringing back a low tier model that never got a Tier 5 C-Store variant without also including a canon ship in the mix. But I think it's also likely that the fundamental design will always be deemed too similar to the Connie that these variants are even contractually linked to its fate. Who knows.
For a potential Tier 6 role... It's really difficult. It should be a Cruiser, but it seems to make no sense that at its size it would compete with any other Cruiser, and it is definitely not a Battlecruiser either. Maybe it could become some kind of "Mission Specialist" ship that comes with something like an all-Universal bridge officer seating, 4/3 weapon and a moderately low turn rate (something like the Excelsior). No DHC capability. That would make it very flexible, but a full Cruiser or Escort might seem more potent. The lore behind it saying that it's designed to be modular enough to fulfill multiple mission profiles, but the mix of size and modularity restricts its maximum potential.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
But I think it's also likely that the fundamental design will always be deemed too similar to the Connie that these variants are even contractually linked to its fate.
And if CBS has said that, that's fine. But no dev has ever told us CBS said they cannot make an end game Excalibur, so until we find out otherwise, that's what I'm going to be asking for.
Keep in mind that light cruiser is the designation for the starter ships the Miranda, Shir'kahr and Centaur.
Well aware, however, there is no reason it cannot be used for higher tier vessels. In fact its an area sorely lacking in the STO Fed arsenal. They have nimble zippys(escort), wallowing wales(cruisers), and wizards(sci). Something 1/2 way between zippy and whale but with a Eng/Tac focus instead of Sci would be cool imo. If it gets pilot seats, even better. Maybe say Lt Universal/Pilot, Lt and LtCmdr Eng, LtCmdr Tac, Ens Sci? (or even Lt Sci)
As far as Cryptic continuing to make bigger and bigger ships, I assume it's because they are on a foolish manifest destiny to have their ships be precursors to the Enterprise J which is two miles long.
There's no canon evidence for that. The only evidence of the J we have at all is the corner of one corridor and a blurry picture on a wall. Though, even if scaled to two kilometres it would still only be twice as long as the Odyssey. Which, considering the presence of bigger ships playable ingame, is not an insurmountable problem.
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
Yh tbh adding them to the avanger would be my fav idea. She could use some new skins. Any1 got a size comparison between them?
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
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
Yh tbh adding them to the avanger would be my fav idea. She could use some new skins. Any1 got a size comparison between them?
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
While I agree they don't really look alike, I think you are going to such an extreme that makes you more wrong than right. The 'similarity' some people see is that they share the same basic(though not exact) saucer/lower hull/nacelle positioning as the connie. Off hand, I can't really think of any other ships that have that same basic(though not exact) positioning of those 3 main elements. So no, they definitely aren't twins. But yes, they do have the same basic(though not exact) positioning of the core elements of the ship.
Yh tbh adding them to the avanger would be my fav idea. She could use some new skins. Any1 got a size comparison between them?
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
While I agree they don't really look alike, I think you are going to such an extreme that makes you more wrong than right. The 'similarity' some people see is that they share the same basic(though not exact) saucer/lower hull/nacelle positioning as the connie. Off hand, I can't really think of any other ships that have that same basic(though not exact) positioning of those 3 main elements. So no, they definitely aren't twins. But yes, they do have the same basic(though not exact) positioning of the core elements of the ship.
But they don't share any of that. You posted the image yourself below. The only thing they have in common is the fact they have a saucer, pylons, nacelles, and a hull, as with all but about 5 Starfleet ships. Your Andromeda/Galaxy comparison is flawed as the former was specifically designed as a evaluation of the latter where the differences are limited to a wider neck and pylons at a different angle.
Now, other than the size, the Constitution shares a very similar silhouette with the Ambassador and a more tenuous one with the Galaxy.
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
Once again, I am talking about the general *positioning* of the 3 core elements of the ship; the saucer, lower hull, and nacelles. Contrast that with the Intrepid or Galaxy whose nacelles are both below the saucer of the ship altogether. Even the Ambassador's nacelles are just below the saucer, rather than actually being above it like the connie/avenger positioning.
So, again: I'm *not* saying the connie and Avenger are twins by any means, but I *am* saying the 3 core elements of the ships share the same basic positioning. If you disagree, that's fine.
Keep in mind that light cruiser is the designation for the starter ships the Miranda, Shir'kahr and Centaur.
Well aware, however, there is no reason it cannot be used for higher tier vessels. In fact its an area sorely lacking in the STO Fed arsenal. They have nimble zippys(escort), wallowing wales(cruisers), and wizards(sci). Something 1/2 way between zippy and whale but with a Eng/Tac focus instead of Sci would be cool imo. If it gets pilot seats, even better. Maybe say Lt Universal/Pilot, Lt and LtCmdr Eng, LtCmdr Tac, Ens Sci? (or even Lt Sci)
As far as Cryptic continuing to make bigger and bigger ships, I assume it's because they are on a foolish manifest destiny to have their ships be precursors to the Enterprise J which is two miles long.
There's no canon evidence for that. The only evidence of the J we have at all is the corner of one corridor and a blurry picture on a wall. Though, even if scaled to two kilometres it would still only be twice as long as the Odyssey. Which, considering the presence of bigger ships playable ingame, is not an insurmountable problem.
Canon evidence is irrelevant. We only got a glimpse of it. Doug Drexler who designed the starship said it was two miles.
"Doug Drexler had estimated the length of this vessel as being about two miles. "I don't think it's that large [in the scheme of things], really. I run into this a lot on the internet, where people freak out. They say, 'Two miles?! That's absurd!' But if you are a reader of science fiction and you don't just watch science fiction on television," Drexler said, with a laugh, "you'll know that huge, enormous ships is not a strange thing; I mean, there are ships that are many times bigger than that. And even in the Star Trek universe, we've seen alien races that can build machines like a Dyson Sphere, for instance. Two miles seems like a lot in Star Trek terms, but the whole idea is that the J is supposed to be, you know, [from] a far flung future date, so that means you've gotta stretch things to the point where people are going, 'That's ridiculous!' because that's what makes it futuristic, is it's hard to believe.""
Bereft of any specifics within the canon, I default to the guy who built the thing.
Yh tbh adding them to the avanger would be my fav idea. She could use some new skins. Any1 got a size comparison between them?
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
Yh tbh adding them to the avanger would be my fav idea. She could use some new skins. Any1 got a size comparison between them?
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
While I agree they don't really look alike, I think you are going to such an extreme that makes you more wrong than right. The 'similarity' some people see is that they share the same basic(though not exact) saucer/lower hull/nacelle positioning as the connie. Off hand, I can't really think of any other ships that have that same basic(though not exact) positioning of those 3 main elements. So no, they definitely aren't twins. But yes, they do have the same basic(though not exact) positioning of the core elements of the ship.
I see nothing beyond sharing the standard Starfleet three piece layout.
Once again, I am talking about the general *positioning* of the 3 core elements of the ship; the saucer, lower hull, and nacelles. Contrast that with the Intrepid or Galaxy whose nacelles are both below the saucer of the ship altogether. Even the Ambassador's nacelles are just below the saucer, rather than actually being above it like the connie/avenger positioning.
So, again: I'm *not* saying the connie and Avenger are twins by any means, but I *am* saying the 3 core elements of the ships share the same basic positioning. If you disagree, that's fine.
Honestly the Excalibur is closer to the Sovereign if that's what you're going by. The Excelsior was the first to have the standard three and with the nacelles below the line of the saucer. With the Intrepid it started moving back above the saucer as a by product of removing the necks. I think they should go that route, a shorter neck There's a lot they could do with the Excalibur, but there's no need to attach it to the Avenger. It doesn't strike me as a battle cruiser anyway.
Post edited by captaind3 on
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
All i ment was the positioning of the nacels ect is close to the excalibers. No they arnt twins. This is one of my fav ideas. If they can take the akira, streamrunner and norway. Put them togeather then they cud do that with the excaliber / avanger
All i ment was the positioning of the nacels ect is close to the excalibers. No they arnt twins. This is one of my fav ideas. If they can take the akira, streamrunner and norway. Put them togeather then they cud do that with the excaliber / avanger
Can you actually swap parts between the Steamrunner and Akira? If so that's a horrifically stupid idea. The Akira is carrier and torpedo boat. Is the Norway in game? And the Oslo? Just butt ugly.
And no, that is not a precedent. At least those three appeared in the era in the same movie. There has to be a limit to kitbashing.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
I have the Steamrunner-class. With two versions which are 4 tiers apart. One version at Tier 1. A larger scaled version of the same model at Tier 5. It didn't break game immersion. No reason to not treat a T6 Exeter in similar fashion. Though I'd want more than a mathematical scaling up of the same model. At least give it a quality pass? Rework some windows to indicate a larger vessel from the previous tier version. So that it presents well next to the current standard for models.
(/\) Exploring Star Trek Online Since July 2008 (/\)
But I think it's also likely that the fundamental design will always be deemed too similar to the Connie that these variants are even contractually linked to its fate.
And if CBS has said that, that's fine. But no dev has ever told us CBS said they cannot make an end game Excalibur, so until we find out otherwise, that's what I'm going to be asking for.
Why don't you quiz them about their daily log in number and their exact monthly income while you're at it? I mean, every MMO everywhere is just falling over themselves trying to share internal business information with the public, right?
Really, people, IS IT SO HARD? Is 5+ years of silence not enough to tell you that in all likelihood the Cryptic employee who said anything about it at all probably overstepped themselves and got dressed down to the tune of "Talk about Paramount/CBS division of the assets out loud again and we pull your license on the spot"? Because that kind of flawlessly holding a line aside from a single slip says PRIVATE MATTER in big bold letters to me. Information control about essential company business is routine in this industry. Its something you need to get used to when dealing with the corporate world and multi-million dollar ventures, which the larger Star Trek brand most definitely is... Even if we're just puttering around in a relative backwater.
Normally i wouldent push for an answer / clarfication. But when another game (aka Startrek Timlines) has a TOS constitution (even tho its a mirror variant) at its top tier it begins to make me wonder if things have changed. We are only asking for the excaliber to keep in with the games lore.
The only resons i can c for timelines being allowed this are
A) CBS gave them special permission to use her but its generally not allowed
its the 50th annie and they want to promote TOS
C) there are no restrictions on varients of the TOS connie
A) CBS gave them special permission to use her but its generally not allowed
One of the other things we've been told was the Connie has no business being in this game AT ALL, and the only reason it IS here is because Cryptic screwed up and made private promises to the head of Gamestop that a Constitution class would be in game. When they realized "no, you're not supposed to do that" they had to go and get special dispensation to include it or Gamestop was threatening to not stock the game on its shelves.
Special dispensation likely coming from Paramount, not CBS, and that CBS had to go ask a favor on Cryptic's behalf to keep the launch from being sunk because of Cryptic's error is about 6 times as much reason as you need to file the whole thing under "we shall never speak of this again" in business circles.
Just been in timelines. Havent see any JJtrek ships or characters : s and we are asking for the excaliber. The constitution class varient that appears on the box art. Pritty cool ship. In a very prominet place
Just been in timelines. Havent see any JJtrek ships or characters : s and we are asking for the excaliber. The constitution class varient that appears on the box art. Pritty cool ship. In a very prominet place
The box also advertises the "Exploration mechanic" as one of the main selling points of the game. They also got rid of that, so...
^ 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
Really, people, IS IT SO HARD? Is 5+ years of silence not enough to tell you that in all likelihood the Cryptic employee who said anything about it at all probably overstepped themselves and got dressed down to the tune of "Talk about Paramount/CBS division of the assets out loud again and we pull your license on the spot"? Because that kind of flawlessly holding a line aside from a single slip says PRIVATE MATTER in big bold letters to me. Information control about essential company business is routine in this industry. Its something you need to get used to when dealing with the corporate world and multi-million dollar ventures, which the larger Star Trek brand most definitely is... Even if we're just puttering around in a relative backwater.
Is it really so hard to just not reply? I mean you don't HAVE to rant and vent and rail and howl about something you don't like... but here you are....
Also, to your point, sure they don't have to give an answer ever, we also have the right to ask even if we never get the answer. The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked.
The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked.
That's what people with no appreciation of context tell themselves.
Shrewder individuals know there are plenty of occasions that asking a question can be a terrible idea.
The question here is likely harmless, because it'll be ignored just like it has been for the last half-decade. But people act like its such a mystery when perfectly reasonable explanations for all observable behavior abound.
The devs can continue to pass over the question if they choose. Thats ok. We may never get an answer. Thats ok to. Never fear an answer just running out of questions.
Comments
Slow and Exalted? What you think she looks like a crane instead of a sparrow?
Put her next to a Voth Fortress ship and I assure you she looks plenty agile, it's a matter of scale and perspective.
As far as Cryptic continuing to make bigger and bigger ships, I assume it's because they are on a foolish manifest destiny to have their ships be precursors to the Enterprise J which is two miles long.
Keep in mind that light cruiser is the designation for the starter ships the Miranda, Shir'kahr and Centaur.
But I am afraid ultimately, the Excaliber, Vesper and Exeter's fate will be forever tied to that of the Constitution. It's most likely not even worth bringing back a low tier model that never got a Tier 5 C-Store variant without also including a canon ship in the mix. But I think it's also likely that the fundamental design will always be deemed too similar to the Connie that these variants are even contractually linked to its fate. Who knows.
For a potential Tier 6 role... It's really difficult. It should be a Cruiser, but it seems to make no sense that at its size it would compete with any other Cruiser, and it is definitely not a Battlecruiser either. Maybe it could become some kind of "Mission Specialist" ship that comes with something like an all-Universal bridge officer seating, 4/3 weapon and a moderately low turn rate (something like the Excelsior). No DHC capability. That would make it very flexible, but a full Cruiser or Escort might seem more potent. The lore behind it saying that it's designed to be modular enough to fulfill multiple mission profiles, but the mix of size and modularity restricts its maximum potential.
And if CBS has said that, that's fine. But no dev has ever told us CBS said they cannot make an end game Excalibur, so until we find out otherwise, that's what I'm going to be asking for.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
There's no canon evidence for that. The only evidence of the J we have at all is the corner of one corridor and a blurry picture on a wall. Though, even if scaled to two kilometres it would still only be twice as long as the Odyssey. Which, considering the presence of bigger ships playable ingame, is not an insurmountable problem.
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!
No image on hand but the Avenger is around 350m and the Exeter around 300m.
Of course the size is not the main problem, the main problem is, they look nothing alike! There is not a single iota of similarity between any single component of the Avenger/Arbiter and the Exeter/Vespa/Excalibur that would justify interchangeable parts. None. Nothing.
You may as well have the parts as skins for the Excelsior for all the sense it'd make.
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!
While I agree they don't really look alike, I think you are going to such an extreme that makes you more wrong than right. The 'similarity' some people see is that they share the same basic(though not exact) saucer/lower hull/nacelle positioning as the connie. Off hand, I can't really think of any other ships that have that same basic(though not exact) positioning of those 3 main elements. So no, they definitely aren't twins. But yes, they do have the same basic(though not exact) positioning of the core elements of the ship.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
But they don't share any of that. You posted the image yourself below. The only thing they have in common is the fact they have a saucer, pylons, nacelles, and a hull, as with all but about 5 Starfleet ships. Your Andromeda/Galaxy comparison is flawed as the former was specifically designed as a evaluation of the latter where the differences are limited to a wider neck and pylons at a different angle.
Now, other than the size, the Constitution shares a very similar silhouette with the Ambassador and a more tenuous one with the Galaxy.
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!
Once again, I am talking about the general *positioning* of the 3 core elements of the ship; the saucer, lower hull, and nacelles. Contrast that with the Intrepid or Galaxy whose nacelles are both below the saucer of the ship altogether. Even the Ambassador's nacelles are just below the saucer, rather than actually being above it like the connie/avenger positioning.
So, again: I'm *not* saying the connie and Avenger are twins by any means, but I *am* saying the 3 core elements of the ships share the same basic positioning. If you disagree, that's fine.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I like it.
Canon evidence is irrelevant. We only got a glimpse of it. Doug Drexler who designed the starship said it was two miles.
"Doug Drexler had estimated the length of this vessel as being about two miles. "I don't think it's that large [in the scheme of things], really. I run into this a lot on the internet, where people freak out. They say, 'Two miles?! That's absurd!' But if you are a reader of science fiction and you don't just watch science fiction on television," Drexler said, with a laugh, "you'll know that huge, enormous ships is not a strange thing; I mean, there are ships that are many times bigger than that. And even in the Star Trek universe, we've seen alien races that can build machines like a Dyson Sphere, for instance. Two miles seems like a lot in Star Trek terms, but the whole idea is that the J is supposed to be, you know, [from] a far flung future date, so that means you've gotta stretch things to the point where people are going, 'That's ridiculous!' because that's what makes it futuristic, is it's hard to believe.""
Bereft of any specifics within the canon, I default to the guy who built the thing.
I must concur.
I see nothing beyond sharing the standard Starfleet three piece layout.
Honestly the Excalibur is closer to the Sovereign if that's what you're going by. The Excelsior was the first to have the standard three and with the nacelles below the line of the saucer. With the Intrepid it started moving back above the saucer as a by product of removing the necks. I think they should go that route, a shorter neck There's a lot they could do with the Excalibur, but there's no need to attach it to the Avenger. It doesn't strike me as a battle cruiser anyway.
And I'm not asking for it to be attached to the Avenger. If they did that, I'd take it. But I'm actually asking for a new T6 ship.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I'd be cool with that like I said. A new tier 6 version is perfectly fine.
Can you actually swap parts between the Steamrunner and Akira? If so that's a horrifically stupid idea. The Akira is carrier and torpedo boat. Is the Norway in game? And the Oslo? Just butt ugly.
And no, that is not a precedent. At least those three appeared in the era in the same movie. There has to be a limit to kitbashing.
Why don't you quiz them about their daily log in number and their exact monthly income while you're at it? I mean, every MMO everywhere is just falling over themselves trying to share internal business information with the public, right?
Really, people, IS IT SO HARD? Is 5+ years of silence not enough to tell you that in all likelihood the Cryptic employee who said anything about it at all probably overstepped themselves and got dressed down to the tune of "Talk about Paramount/CBS division of the assets out loud again and we pull your license on the spot"? Because that kind of flawlessly holding a line aside from a single slip says PRIVATE MATTER in big bold letters to me. Information control about essential company business is routine in this industry. Its something you need to get used to when dealing with the corporate world and multi-million dollar ventures, which the larger Star Trek brand most definitely is... Even if we're just puttering around in a relative backwater.
The only resons i can c for timelines being allowed this are
A) CBS gave them special permission to use her but its generally not allowed
C) there are no restrictions on varients of the TOS connie
One of the other things we've been told was the Connie has no business being in this game AT ALL, and the only reason it IS here is because Cryptic screwed up and made private promises to the head of Gamestop that a Constitution class would be in game. When they realized "no, you're not supposed to do that" they had to go and get special dispensation to include it or Gamestop was threatening to not stock the game on its shelves.
Special dispensation likely coming from Paramount, not CBS, and that CBS had to go ask a favor on Cryptic's behalf to keep the launch from being sunk because of Cryptic's error is about 6 times as much reason as you need to file the whole thing under "we shall never speak of this again" in business circles.
The box also advertises the "Exploration mechanic" as one of the main selling points of the game. They also got rid of that, so...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Is it really so hard to just not reply? I mean you don't HAVE to rant and vent and rail and howl about something you don't like... but here you are....
Also, to your point, sure they don't have to give an answer ever, we also have the right to ask even if we never get the answer. The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked.
Are you sure about that?... If so;
That's what people with no appreciation of context tell themselves.
Shrewder individuals know there are plenty of occasions that asking a question can be a terrible idea.
The question here is likely harmless, because it'll be ignored just like it has been for the last half-decade. But people act like its such a mystery when perfectly reasonable explanations for all observable behavior abound.