That is a Nebula class docked at DS9. It's a DS9 era ship as well.
TNG, VOY, and DS9 are all the same time period. DS9 comes after TNG in timeline, due to Worf transferring, etc. Where as VOY comes in at the end of DS9 somewhere. Not talking shows so much as time period. Here's some over-lap pics from the shows.
You're overthinking it. The design eras used commonly by fans are simply the era in which the ship and related designs are most often seen. The Galaxy is most often seen in TNG so it's a TNG era ship as are the ships that share components with it (Nebula, Springfield, Olympic, Ambassador etc.)
The Miranda appeared in TWoK and is based on the Constitution refit from TMP, thus that ship and similar (Excelsior, Constellation etc) are TMP era ships. It's just how it is.
It's not over thinking to say "if a ship was used in an era, it's a ship of that era. That's all that matters."
Fans may use a different set of criteria to invent mutually exclusive ship categories but the logic behind that is not consistent. The Excelsior class for example was most commonly seen in DS9 (count them across all battle/fleet shots.) To call it then a TMP era ship would require contradicting the logic you've specified to include the Galaxy with TNG (which contradicts the logic you've specified in trying to set the Nebula apart from DS9.)
This is just to point out "it's okay to call a Nebula class a ship of the DS9 era." I'm following through with the logic specified to reach the point where it stops working. Adding more complexity to the definition just sets that point a bit further back. It still breaks down. The point: these specified eras do not work. One has to simplify, ditch the idea of mutually exclusive categories (that's the core problem, these eras aren't mutually exclusive) and just look at "what's active in what series?" That may have more than one answer (a ship may be a part of multiple series, those only chronicle TV productions) but that's perfectly fine.
Then, you can apply that to the question which started this part of discussion: c-store ships demonstrating the point that Cryptic is not fixated on the TOS era. They've released other content too, including ships that harken back to the first mentions of the T'zenkethi.
If the ship appears in DS9, then it's a ship that appeared in DS9 (the Nebula in this case), but it's a TNG era design, is that clearer?
Yes, we're all aware that the the eras don't line up and the Ambassador pre-dates TNG and that the Excelsior was seen in DS9 far more than it was in the TOS films and that DS9 and TNG are technically the same period. It's just how it is. DS9 ships have a common definition and that refers specifically to ships built after the Defiant, not to ships seen on that show.
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
The piece the ship was first seen in designates it as a "TRIBBLE-era" ship. Easy enough.
^ 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
You're overthinking it. The design eras used commonly by fans are simply the era in which the ship and related designs are most often seen. The Galaxy is most often seen in TNG so it's a TNG era ship as are the ships that share components with it (Nebula, Springfield, Olympic, Ambassador etc.)
The Miranda appeared in TWoK and is based on the Constitution refit from TMP, thus that ship and similar (Excelsior, Constellation etc) are TMP era ships. It's just how it is.
It's not over thinking to say "if a ship was used in an era, it's a ship of that era. That's all that matters."
Fans may use a different set of criteria to invent mutually exclusive ship eras but the logic behind that is not consistent. The Excelsior class for example was most commonly seen in DS9 (count them across all battle/fleet shots.) To call it then a TMP era ship would require contradicting the logic you've specified to include the Galaxy with TNG (which contradicts the logic you've specified in trying to set the Nebula apart from DS9.)
This is just to point out "it's okay to call a Nebula class a ship of the DS9 era." I'm following through with the logic specified to reach the point where it stops working. Adding more complexity to the definition just sets that point a bit further back. It still breaks down. The point: these specified eras do not work. One has to simplify, ditch the idea of mutually exclusive categories (that's the core problem, these eras aren't mutually exclusive) and just look at "what's active in what series?" That may have more than one answer (a ship may be a part of multiple series, those only chronicle TV productions) but that's perfectly fine.
Then, you can apply that to the question which started this part of discussion: c-store ships demonstrating the point that Cryptic is not fixated on the TOS era. They've released other content too, including ships that harken back to the first mentions of the T'zenkethi. That's to say: it's okay that the Undiscovered lock box didn't share a direct theme, other stuff is available for those that want to try building a theme of their own.
Let's try thinking of this a little differently. You go out to eat somewhere and see a '57 Chevy in the parking lot. It's being used today, so that must make it a car from this decade, right? Because that's basically what you are saying. You see it on the road today, it's a car from this time. That's simply not true. The car was made in '57, it's from the 50's. That's just how it is. Just because those ships were still in service and being used in DS9, they are still old ships from the past, they just happen to still be in service.
If the ship appears in DS9, then it's a ship that appeared in DS9 (the Nebula in this case), but it's a TNG era design, is that clearer?
It's perfectly clear, I just don't agree with it one bit. What I'm saying is that adding "design" distinctions don't help because starship design does not track with ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY. Those are haphazardly arranged TV productions, not continuous chapters that all you to consistently split starship production/design. So, if you talk about ships of any production, its most consistent to refer only to what was included.
Let's try thinking of this a little differently. You go out to eat somewhere and see a '57 Chevy in the parking lot. It's being used today, so that must make it a car from this decade, right? Because that's basically what you are saying. You see it on the road today, it's a car from this time. That's simply not true. The car was made in '57, it's from the 50's. That's just how it is.
That's definitely not an appropriate analogy. Years are mutually exclusive and they include all possible events. Everything that happens has a year associated with it. Neither can be said for Star Trek TV series which can overlap and leave large gaps and, in general, leave you without a complete time series (or a consistent way of classifying starships).
An appropriate analogy to what's being argued is classifying cars according to the airing of Star Trek series. What's the difference between a TNG-era Chevy and a DS9-era Chevy? That may happen to line up with changes in production, but just as easily it might not. Why? It's irrelevant. You can't split cars (effectively) according to where their production falls in relation to a TV show. Ditto for Star Trek itself, there's an in-universe calendar which is more useful to split design eras (ex. 23c, 24c)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
If the ship appears in DS9, then it's a ship that appeared in DS9 (the Nebula in this case), but it's a TNG era design, is that clearer?
What I'm saying is that adding "design" distinctions don't help one bit because starship design does not track with ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY. Those are haphazardly arranged TV productions, not continuous chronicles of starship design.
No they don't track, especially as there is no VOY eras and other eras like the Kelvin one or Wells one aren't attached to shows at all. It is just what it is.
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
If the ship appears in DS9, then it's a ship that appeared in DS9 (the Nebula in this case), but it's a TNG era design, is that clearer?
What I'm saying is that adding "design" distinctions don't help one bit because starship design does not track with ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY. Those are haphazardly arranged TV productions, not continuous chronicles of starship design.
Let's try thinking of this a little differently. You go out to eat somewhere and see a '57 Chevy in the parking lot. It's being used today, so that must make it a car from this decade, right? Because that's basically what you are saying. You see it on the road today, it's a car from this time. That's simply not true. The car was made in '57, it's from the 50's. That's just how it is.
That's not an appropriate analogy. Years are mutually exclusive and they include all possible events. Neither can be said for Star Trek TV series (which can overlap, leave large gaps, and . An appropriate analogy to what's being argued is classifying cars according to the airing of Star Trek series. What's the difference between a TNG-era Chevy and a DS9-era Chevy? That may happen to line up with changes in production, but just as easily it might not. Why? It's an irrelevant classification to what was going on in those series.
Ok, think of it like this then. TNG covered the time period from 2364-2370. DS9 covered 2369-2375. The Defiant did not enter the show until the third season, 2371. So ships designed, built and used during TNG are from a different decade than the ships built and put in to service after the Defiant. So ships put in to commission prior to 2370 are from TNG time, ships put in to service after 2370 are from the DS9 time. It's really that simple.
Ok, think of it like this then. TNG covered the time period from 2364-2370. DS9 covered 2369-2375. The Defiant did not enter the show until the third season, 2371. So ships designed, built and used during TNG are from a different decade than the ships built and put in to service after the Defiant. So ships put in to commission prior to 2370 are from TNG time, ships put in to service after 2370 are from the DS9 time. It's really that simple.
1. TNG and DS9 times overlap
2. Individual ship commissioning dates don't always correspond to the dates of their class's original design.
3. Taken objectively, the year 2370 doesn't mean anything to Star Trek ship production. Or more accurately, 2372 is the first year where you can separate TNG and DS9 (Generations was set in 2371), which is after the Defiant entered service. Anyway, it's an arbitrary line in the sand which barely maintains the idea that there is a separate TNG/DS9 (though not by the actual run time of DS9 itself, since those first few years don't count.) Now let's move onto DS9/VOY, which began in 2371...or rather, let's not because this should be enough to say "a wholly separate and distinct DS9 era is not a helpful concept. It's just the time in which DS9 took place, which may include other eras as well."
I do have to ask, why are you guys fighting so hard to maintain this idea that DS9 era means anything more than that? It's over complicating and non-informative to ship use, at least as far as it relates to this thread. I'm just saying "the DS9 era is when DS9 took place in universe. If you really want to roll with the Tzenkethi theme, the Nebula is a valid choice since it was also a part of the series that first mentioned the species (IIRC). Don't despair that the latest lock box gave us more 23c vessels. Cryptic has been making other stuff too." (let's not forget where this discussion actually started.)
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Well, the Yesterday's War Arc is a very good place to park any onesies Episodes that hail from ENT, DSC, TOS, TNG, etc. eras.
We also have not run into Gary Seven's time manipulating, 1,000 Light Year transporting species either.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Yeah goodly Alaskan Huskies, this thread has gone so far off the rails the train is currently lying in the cutting beside it.
I think it best if we leave the debates about ships for another thread.
It should be pointed out, in the interest of facts, that AOY also added 26th and 29th century episodes and 31st century timeships. It dealt specifically with the Temporal Cold War, the furthest forward event in ST canon that we know.
Where is this expectation coming from (besides personal preference)?
Just basic trend analysis, the most recent movies have all been retcons of the TOS era.
Add an upcoming pre-TOS era show and well, the writing is already on the wall.
Plus, did we ever get DS9 or Voyager feature length movies?
I myself am highly dubious as to the AOY specific characters actually being Temporal Agents.
Sure, they say they are, but they certainly don't look the part, judging from the few I've encountered in the various social zones.
They carry TOS Era Tricorders and when they beam out, they use the TOS transporter effect.
Shouldn't they at least be using the Temporal Agent Tricorders and the Temporal transporter effect?
In the TNG era, using these technologies is like anachronistic, someone would say: "That technology is 1 century out of date, hey, you're a timespy! Arrest them!"
And I can usually spot these characters fairly easily by just looking at their uniforms, they've got the TOS costumes.
I am uncertain if an AOY character can use the TNG Era tailor templates.
That's why I think AOY was just used as a way to sneak TOS nostalgia into the TNG era, that it wasn't truly about the Temporal Agents and the Temporal War era at all.
Post edited by tilarta on
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Ok, think of it like this then. TNG covered the time period from 2364-2370. DS9 covered 2369-2375. The Defiant did not enter the show until the third season, 2371. So ships designed, built and used during TNG are from a different decade than the ships built and put in to service after the Defiant. So ships put in to commission prior to 2370 are from TNG time, ships put in to service after 2370 are from the DS9 time. It's really that simple.
1. TNG and DS9 times overlap
2. Individual ship commissioning dates don't always correspond to the dates of their class's original design.
3. Taken objectively, the year 2370 doesn't mean anything to Star Trek ship production. Or more accurately, 2372 is the first year where you can separate TNG and DS9 (Generations was set in 2371), which is after the Defiant entered service. Anyway, it's an arbitrary line in the sand which barely maintains the idea that there is a separate TNG/DS9 (though not by the actual run time of DS9 itself, since those first few years don't count.) Now let's move onto DS9/VOY, which began in 2371...or rather, let's not because this should be enough to say "a wholly separate and distinct DS9 era is not a helpful concept. It's just the time in which DS9 took place, which may include other eras as well."
It is indeed rather useless to suggest they are separate eras at all. They all take place in the same 15 year time period.
Ok, think of it like this then. TNG covered the time period from 2364-2370. DS9 covered 2369-2375. The Defiant did not enter the show until the third season, 2371. So ships designed, built and used during TNG are from a different decade than the ships built and put in to service after the Defiant. So ships put in to commission prior to 2370 are from TNG time, ships put in to service after 2370 are from the DS9 time. It's really that simple.
1. TNG and DS9 times overlap
2. Individual ship commissioning dates don't always correspond to the dates of their class's original design.
3. Taken objectively, the year 2370 doesn't mean anything to Star Trek ship production. Or more accurately, 2372 is the first year where you can separate TNG and DS9 (Generations was set in 2371), which is after the Defiant entered service. Anyway, it's an arbitrary line in the sand which barely maintains the idea that there is a separate TNG/DS9 (though not by the actual run time of DS9 itself, since those first few years don't count.) Now let's move onto DS9/VOY, which began in 2371...or rather, let's not because this should be enough to say "a wholly separate and distinct DS9 era is not a helpful concept. It's just the time in which DS9 took place, which may include other eras as well."
It is indeed rather useless to suggest they are separate eras at all. They all take place in the same 15 year time period.
So a 15 year old computer is the same thing as a computer from today? They were made in the same 15 year time period, right? Really, they only overlap for 2 years. Stuff that happened in the 2 years that they do overlap can be considered from TNG as it was out at the time. The Defiance, and ships that came after it, did not come out while TNG was on the air though. The Defiance came out in Season 3, after the overlap ended. All other ships that came out after that can not be said to have come out during TNG as they did not. They came out in the other 5 years that DS9 was on the air and there was no TNG.
So a 15 year old computer is the same thing as a computer from today? They were made in the same 15 year time period, right? Really, they only overlap for 2 years. Stuff that happened in the 2 years that they do overlap can be considered from TNG as it was out at the time. The Defiance, and ships that came after it, did not come out while TNG was on the air though. The Defiance came out in Season 3, after the overlap ended. All other ships that came out after that can not be said to have come out during TNG as they did not. They came out in the other 5 years that DS9 was on the air and there was no TNG.
bad example... Warships and by extension Starships take a lot longer to develop and construct. The Nimitz class carrier entered service in 1975. We're still building new ones. Sure the hardware on board is newer, but also sees a much longer duty life than your desktop. They aren't upgraded every 2yrs.
I did look more into the AOY character and these characters are definitely not from the Temporal War era.
They're from the TOS era and just integrated into the TNG era.
So from my perspective, it looks like they just used them to get TOS effects/equipment into the game when it shouldn't be there.
Oddly, during some of the cutscenes I saw, the AOY character uses a TW tricorder and a TW phaser instead of their own TOS gear.
Post edited by tilarta on
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
[In any case, I still think it wasn't smart to stop at just one DQ playable species.
They either should have made more or made none.
To be honest, I don't really care about how much sense it does or doesn't make, I just want my DQ captains.
And since the precedent has been established, from my point of view, not continuing the project to it's eventual endpoint is illogical.
Well, honestly, how special can Data be if every starship captain has their own android crewmember?
There must be a factory mass producing them somewhere to meet those kinds of quotas!
And take a look at K-13 Fleet holding sometime, there's your second Android BOFF.
Technically second and third, you have a choice of two (I assume you can only take one).
I did look more into the AOY character and these characters are definitely not from the Temporal War era.
They're from the TOS era and just integrated into the TNG era.
So from my perspective, it looks like they just used them to get TOS effects/equipment into the game when it shouldn't be there.
Oddly, during some of the cutscenes I saw, the AOY character uses a TW tricorder and a TW phaser instead of their own TOS gear.
Other than Talaxians and that multi-generational Ocampan ship, what DQ races are so enamored with Federation (or Klingon/Romulan) ways that they'd be willing to abandon the Delta Quadrant for them?
You say you want at least one, specific, DQ race to be made playable. Who? Why? What Logic would integrate them into the Campaign as it is now?
"Data Series", or Soong Type Androids, are 700 day veteran unlocks. Massive subscription or lifetime sub purchase required to get one. The Korby Type androids (K-13) and the Kelvin Type androids (aren't they from a temporal pack?) are more readily available but not quite on a par with Soong Types...
And finally, if one really wants to start arguing things, STO should have their own special Transporter Effects, Tricorders, phaser designs (well, this one they do have) - because of the "technological advancements" attained in the 40 years between "Picard Era" (TNG / DS9 / VOY) and 2409. Especially since while Technology didn't advance "as fast" in the 20 or so years depicted in the "Picard Era's" depiction of Starfleet (see aforementioned series), one can use the technological leaps that occurred in Kirk's lifespan (TOS to TMP, a 20 year jump) to justify some changes in a 40 year jump.
But alas, STO is a sandbox. Designed to accommodate as many eras and looks as possible, to attract and retain as many Star Trek Fans as possible, despite what they may think of a given series/era/timeframe...
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]
Blame Star Wars and their prequels! It became the 'cool' thing to do for profit! But seriously, I agree, we need to move the timeline forward. Other than a few glimpses w/ VOY, DS9 was the last show to really move the timeline forward.
Which is why Talaxians were kept as a lifetime sub bonus only, and not part of the typical game.
Play Delta Rising, they explain how Linnea got there (multigeneral Ocampan ships sent out to explore the galaxy)
Cryptic and CBS seem to disagree.
The only precedent that has been established is that its OK to do one off special non-canon race unlocks very rarely.
Android Boffs are only available as a 700 day vet award, which relatively few have.
The Temporal War took place all across time from the 1400s, to WW2, to the ENT era, to the far future, there is no such thing as any one "Temporal War era"
Ocampans sending multigenerational ships specifically to the Alpha Quadrant without use of the gate network means they did indeed establish themselves as a AQ presence long before this happens ingame.
My second choice, the Hirogen, they have also migrated to the Alpha Quadrant, established ingame as well.
So therefore, there is no story based reason why these playable species should not be immediately available upon campaign start/character creation.
It's certainly more plausible then the Talaxians who are "just there" without explanation.
What it's starting to look like from my perspective is that the Talaxians were chosen specifically because of their unpopularity with the fanbase, that they knew in advance very few players would be motivated to create one, so it would be a non-issue.
I myself have only ever seen one playable Talaxian.
The comments I saw during the release of DQ seem to affirm that, as the comments in chat were all "stupid Talaxians, waste of a playable race" and then expanding to how much they hated Neelix getting his cameo.
If the above theory was not the case, then they just picked a DQ species at random and I lost simply due to the "bad luck of the draw".
I did play Delta Rising, but if they mentioned the Ocampans, it must have been very short indeed.
Because most of what I remember is the Vaardwaur going to open war with the Delta Quadrant, targeting the Talaxians first and the Kobali second, with the Krenim as a side plot and eventually shifting to a complete focus on the Vaardwaur as puppets of the Iconians.
700 days is just under 2 years, I'm fairly certain most of the playerbase have accounts that qualify.
Mostly because if they were in the game before free access was available, you had to be paying or you weren't playing!
Feburary 2010-January 2012, there's your 2 years already achieved.
And if a lifetime account is purchased, all the veterans rewards are instantly unlocked regardless of time played.
So unless they were spending the last 5 years as a free2play account, there's no reason why their accounts shouldn't have this unlock.
The Temporal War did range across multiple eras, but it looks like the primary department involved in correcting temporal incursions is based in the year 2900.
So their agents should be using technology far in advance of the present day era and do apparently.
Also, now that I am thinking about it, the final mission of the AOY arc doesn't make sense.
Daniels says your ship was destroyed, all he could do was save the playable Captain and their BOFFs.
So when they arrive in the TNG era, they should have nothing aside from what they were carrying with them. A phaser, a tricorder and a communicator.
Those three items would most likely be replaced as soon as the captain visits Requisitions anyway.
So technically, you should arrive without a ship and the first mission you get should immediately be to go and requisition a Miranda class replacement. Yet, your ship is still there, despite being destroyed.
And I'm fairly certain the TOS era transporters break all the current safety regulations, so nobody would be allowed to use them!
Want to end up split into two separate people or beamed into your starship with some of your internal anatomy missing?
I don't know if there are any other examples of TOS transporter dangers, but those are the two I remember.
Maybe the advancements we see are in the technology only, that they haven't redesigned the actual system completely to change the visual appearance yet.
Like more stable annular confinement beams or whatever.
But more likely, it's just to maintain visual continuity, so it feels like we are playing an TNG era game.
Not just Star Wars, I'm still trying to understand the X-Men reboot movies, which also went into prequel mode.
But they're so messed up in retconning, I don't they should be cited as an example of anything other then the director just messing around with the story for "rule of visual cool".
For that matter, the Star Wars fans (well, the ones I asked) are sad that the expanded universe was pretty much retconned out of existence.
Thrawn, Mara Jade, whatever else came out of those novels.
I guess everyone is so preoccupied with nostalgia they just don't want to move forward with their storytelling.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Definitely looking forward. We're looking forward to the 29th Century Ships of the Wells and Mobius classes to be updated to the 2410 T6 level.
Figure that one out.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Star Trek is always going forward because they still can't find reverse.
There is a TAS episode where a ship comes into our universe from the reverse mirror universe. They fly, talk, and live in reverse. So, yeah, they found it - a whole alternate reality's worth.
And since the precedent has been established, from my point of view, not continuing the project to it's eventual endpoint is illogical.
No, it's not. There are gazillions of good reasons why you start a project and do not finish it at all. There are gazillions of good reasons to do only a part. To have "all or nothing" as a no exeption guiding principle would every so often cause enough troubles and thus would be highly illogical.
(Note: I am not commenting on this special issue here, but on the logic)
What it's starting to look like from my perspective is that the Talaxians were chosen specifically because of their unpopularity with the fanbase, that they knew in advance very few players would be motivated to create one, so it would be a non-issue.
I myself have only ever seen one playable Talaxian.
The comments I saw during the release of DQ seem to affirm that, as the comments in chat were all "stupid Talaxians, waste of a playable race" and then expanding to how much they hated Neelix getting his cameo.
My guess would be that it was something about Neelix, not the Talaxians being that unpopular. And I remember loads of Talaxians during the first weeks of their availability. Yes, they mostly seem to have disappeared. But putting in work to create a playable species and using it to incentivize massive spending (aka LTS) in the knowledge of "nobody will buy it anyway", now that would be illogical.
Comments
TNG, VOY, and DS9 are all the same time period. DS9 comes after TNG in timeline, due to Worf transferring, etc. Where as VOY comes in at the end of DS9 somewhere. Not talking shows so much as time period. Here's some over-lap pics from the shows.
If the ship appears in DS9, then it's a ship that appeared in DS9 (the Nebula in this case), but it's a TNG era design, is that clearer?
Yes, we're all aware that the the eras don't line up and the Ambassador pre-dates TNG and that the Excelsior was seen in DS9 far more than it was in the TOS films and that DS9 and TNG are technically the same period. It's just how it is. DS9 ships have a common definition and that refers specifically to ships built after the Defiant, not to ships seen on that show.
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!
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Let's try thinking of this a little differently. You go out to eat somewhere and see a '57 Chevy in the parking lot. It's being used today, so that must make it a car from this decade, right? Because that's basically what you are saying. You see it on the road today, it's a car from this time. That's simply not true. The car was made in '57, it's from the 50's. That's just how it is. Just because those ships were still in service and being used in DS9, they are still old ships from the past, they just happen to still be in service.
It's perfectly clear, I just don't agree with it one bit. What I'm saying is that adding "design" distinctions don't help because starship design does not track with ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY. Those are haphazardly arranged TV productions, not continuous chapters that all you to consistently split starship production/design. So, if you talk about ships of any production, its most consistent to refer only to what was included.
That's definitely not an appropriate analogy. Years are mutually exclusive and they include all possible events. Everything that happens has a year associated with it. Neither can be said for Star Trek TV series which can overlap and leave large gaps and, in general, leave you without a complete time series (or a consistent way of classifying starships).
An appropriate analogy to what's being argued is classifying cars according to the airing of Star Trek series. What's the difference between a TNG-era Chevy and a DS9-era Chevy? That may happen to line up with changes in production, but just as easily it might not. Why? It's irrelevant. You can't split cars (effectively) according to where their production falls in relation to a TV show. Ditto for Star Trek itself, there's an in-universe calendar which is more useful to split design eras (ex. 23c, 24c)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
No they don't track, especially as there is no VOY eras and other eras like the Kelvin one or Wells one aren't attached to shows at all. It is just what it is.
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!
Ok, think of it like this then. TNG covered the time period from 2364-2370. DS9 covered 2369-2375. The Defiant did not enter the show until the third season, 2371. So ships designed, built and used during TNG are from a different decade than the ships built and put in to service after the Defiant. So ships put in to commission prior to 2370 are from TNG time, ships put in to service after 2370 are from the DS9 time. It's really that simple.
2. Individual ship commissioning dates don't always correspond to the dates of their class's original design.
3. Taken objectively, the year 2370 doesn't mean anything to Star Trek ship production. Or more accurately, 2372 is the first year where you can separate TNG and DS9 (Generations was set in 2371), which is after the Defiant entered service. Anyway, it's an arbitrary line in the sand which barely maintains the idea that there is a separate TNG/DS9 (though not by the actual run time of DS9 itself, since those first few years don't count.) Now let's move onto DS9/VOY, which began in 2371...or rather, let's not because this should be enough to say "a wholly separate and distinct DS9 era is not a helpful concept. It's just the time in which DS9 took place, which may include other eras as well."
I do have to ask, why are you guys fighting so hard to maintain this idea that DS9 era means anything more than that? It's over complicating and non-informative to ship use, at least as far as it relates to this thread. I'm just saying "the DS9 era is when DS9 took place in universe. If you really want to roll with the Tzenkethi theme, the Nebula is a valid choice since it was also a part of the series that first mentioned the species (IIRC). Don't despair that the latest lock box gave us more 23c vessels. Cryptic has been making other stuff too." (let's not forget where this discussion actually started.)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
We should probably just remove the STO forums if players (or topics) are getting lost in the threads.
We also have not run into Gary Seven's time manipulating, 1,000 Light Year transporting species either.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
I think it best if we leave the debates about ships for another thread.
Just basic trend analysis, the most recent movies have all been retcons of the TOS era.
Add an upcoming pre-TOS era show and well, the writing is already on the wall.
Plus, did we ever get DS9 or Voyager feature length movies?
I myself am highly dubious as to the AOY specific characters actually being Temporal Agents.
Sure, they say they are, but they certainly don't look the part, judging from the few I've encountered in the various social zones.
They carry TOS Era Tricorders and when they beam out, they use the TOS transporter effect.
Shouldn't they at least be using the Temporal Agent Tricorders and the Temporal transporter effect?
In the TNG era, using these technologies is like anachronistic, someone would say: "That technology is 1 century out of date, hey, you're a timespy! Arrest them!"
And I can usually spot these characters fairly easily by just looking at their uniforms, they've got the TOS costumes.
I am uncertain if an AOY character can use the TNG Era tailor templates.
That's why I think AOY was just used as a way to sneak TOS nostalgia into the TNG era, that it wasn't truly about the Temporal Agents and the Temporal War era at all.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
So a 15 year old computer is the same thing as a computer from today? They were made in the same 15 year time period, right? Really, they only overlap for 2 years. Stuff that happened in the 2 years that they do overlap can be considered from TNG as it was out at the time. The Defiance, and ships that came after it, did not come out while TNG was on the air though. The Defiance came out in Season 3, after the overlap ended. All other ships that came out after that can not be said to have come out during TNG as they did not. They came out in the other 5 years that DS9 was on the air and there was no TNG.
bad example... Warships and by extension Starships take a lot longer to develop and construct. The Nimitz class carrier entered service in 1975. We're still building new ones. Sure the hardware on board is newer, but also sees a much longer duty life than your desktop. They aren't upgraded every 2yrs.
They're from the TOS era and just integrated into the TNG era.
So from my perspective, it looks like they just used them to get TOS effects/equipment into the game when it shouldn't be there.
Oddly, during some of the cutscenes I saw, the AOY character uses a TW tricorder and a TW phaser instead of their own TOS gear.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Because someone was introduced to Star Trek during a certain series they claimed that to be the best and compare all others to it.
Other than Talaxians and that multi-generational Ocampan ship, what DQ races are so enamored with Federation (or Klingon/Romulan) ways that they'd be willing to abandon the Delta Quadrant for them?
You say you want at least one, specific, DQ race to be made playable. Who? Why? What Logic would integrate them into the Campaign as it is now?
"Data Series", or Soong Type Androids, are 700 day veteran unlocks. Massive subscription or lifetime sub purchase required to get one. The Korby Type androids (K-13) and the Kelvin Type androids (aren't they from a temporal pack?) are more readily available but not quite on a par with Soong Types...
And finally, if one really wants to start arguing things, STO should have their own special Transporter Effects, Tricorders, phaser designs (well, this one they do have) - because of the "technological advancements" attained in the 40 years between "Picard Era" (TNG / DS9 / VOY) and 2409. Especially since while Technology didn't advance "as fast" in the 20 or so years depicted in the "Picard Era's" depiction of Starfleet (see aforementioned series), one can use the technological leaps that occurred in Kirk's lifespan (TOS to TMP, a 20 year jump) to justify some changes in a 40 year jump.
But alas, STO is a sandbox. Designed to accommodate as many eras and looks as possible, to attract and retain as many Star Trek Fans as possible, despite what they may think of a given series/era/timeframe...
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]
Ocampans sending multigenerational ships specifically to the Alpha Quadrant without use of the gate network means they did indeed establish themselves as a AQ presence long before this happens ingame.
My second choice, the Hirogen, they have also migrated to the Alpha Quadrant, established ingame as well.
So therefore, there is no story based reason why these playable species should not be immediately available upon campaign start/character creation.
It's certainly more plausible then the Talaxians who are "just there" without explanation.
What it's starting to look like from my perspective is that the Talaxians were chosen specifically because of their unpopularity with the fanbase, that they knew in advance very few players would be motivated to create one, so it would be a non-issue.
I myself have only ever seen one playable Talaxian.
The comments I saw during the release of DQ seem to affirm that, as the comments in chat were all "stupid Talaxians, waste of a playable race" and then expanding to how much they hated Neelix getting his cameo.
If the above theory was not the case, then they just picked a DQ species at random and I lost simply due to the "bad luck of the draw".
I did play Delta Rising, but if they mentioned the Ocampans, it must have been very short indeed.
Because most of what I remember is the Vaardwaur going to open war with the Delta Quadrant, targeting the Talaxians first and the Kobali second, with the Krenim as a side plot and eventually shifting to a complete focus on the Vaardwaur as puppets of the Iconians.
700 days is just under 2 years, I'm fairly certain most of the playerbase have accounts that qualify.
Mostly because if they were in the game before free access was available, you had to be paying or you weren't playing!
Feburary 2010-January 2012, there's your 2 years already achieved.
And if a lifetime account is purchased, all the veterans rewards are instantly unlocked regardless of time played.
So unless they were spending the last 5 years as a free2play account, there's no reason why their accounts shouldn't have this unlock.
The Temporal War did range across multiple eras, but it looks like the primary department involved in correcting temporal incursions is based in the year 2900.
So their agents should be using technology far in advance of the present day era and do apparently.
Also, now that I am thinking about it, the final mission of the AOY arc doesn't make sense.
Daniels says your ship was destroyed, all he could do was save the playable Captain and their BOFFs.
So when they arrive in the TNG era, they should have nothing aside from what they were carrying with them.
A phaser, a tricorder and a communicator.
Those three items would most likely be replaced as soon as the captain visits Requisitions anyway.
So technically, you should arrive without a ship and the first mission you get should immediately be to go and requisition a Miranda class replacement.
Yet, your ship is still there, despite being destroyed.
And I'm fairly certain the TOS era transporters break all the current safety regulations, so nobody would be allowed to use them!
Want to end up split into two separate people or beamed into your starship with some of your internal anatomy missing?
I don't know if there are any other examples of TOS transporter dangers, but those are the two I remember.
Maybe the advancements we see are in the technology only, that they haven't redesigned the actual system completely to change the visual appearance yet.
Like more stable annular confinement beams or whatever.
But more likely, it's just to maintain visual continuity, so it feels like we are playing an TNG era game.
Not just Star Wars, I'm still trying to understand the X-Men reboot movies, which also went into prequel mode.
But they're so messed up in retconning, I don't they should be cited as an example of anything other then the director just messing around with the story for "rule of visual cool".
For that matter, the Star Wars fans (well, the ones I asked) are sad that the expanded universe was pretty much retconned out of existence.
Thrawn, Mara Jade, whatever else came out of those novels.
I guess everyone is so preoccupied with nostalgia they just don't want to move forward with their storytelling.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Figure that one out.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Star Trek is always going forward because they still can't find reverse.
There is a TAS episode where a ship comes into our universe from the reverse mirror universe. They fly, talk, and live in reverse. So, yeah, they found it - a whole alternate reality's worth.
No, it's not. There are gazillions of good reasons why you start a project and do not finish it at all. There are gazillions of good reasons to do only a part. To have "all or nothing" as a no exeption guiding principle would every so often cause enough troubles and thus would be highly illogical.
(Note: I am not commenting on this special issue here, but on the logic)
My guess would be that it was something about Neelix, not the Talaxians being that unpopular. And I remember loads of Talaxians during the first weeks of their availability. Yes, they mostly seem to have disappeared. But putting in work to create a playable species and using it to incentivize massive spending (aka LTS) in the knowledge of "nobody will buy it anyway", now that would be illogical.
Small addendum: it was one of the first bundle of patrols that were put in as "a mission" and were needed to unlock the patrols.