Getting upset over an acronym just because it's similar to another acronym is just silly.
Also the fact that the shirts on the show say Disco on them just seems unprofessional and makes no sense since Disco is not a shortened version of the word Discovery, there's no such thing as a shortened version of that word. There's clearly no reason why they can't say Discovery in full on the shirts.
It's probably not wise to preface your post that making an issue of abbreviation is silly to then launch into a tangent about the shortening of language somehow violating, what, your immersion? The future of Trek/Discovery isn't joyless.
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!
Probably because there are even fewer Klingon players than there are TRIBBLE fans. Finding a Klingon playing TRIBBLE fan would be even harder. If you thought the Bortas'que had abysmal sales, how bad do you think some barely seen TRIBBLE Klingon pinecone-ship would sell?
Well, riddle me this: How expensive is the Sarcophagus ship? That should tell you everything you need to know about how profitable KDF Discovery stuff actually is.
hence, why military aircraft have positive controls instead of touchscreens for primary systems-because you don't want to be trying to fly the damn thing and have it glitch over to your telephone, or netflix account in the middle of a mission!
On the flip side, that explanation is exactly why you wouldn't have an actual "fire torpedoes" button. I mean let's face it, people fall on computer consoles constantly in Star Trek. Physical hardwired controls have this annoying tendency to activate any time the button gets pushed. even if it's because a dead guy fell on it.
First(and last) post in a long time, so first things first: I hope everyone is well
I'm not interested in getting into a debate, or even a conversation, I just want to put my thoughts on the topic down for catharsis, then get back on with my life. So, feel free to read, feel free to ignore. Feel free to respond, but don't expect a reply to your response. So if you feel the need to 'offer rebuttal' to my point, please save yourself the time in replying, because I'm not here for a game of chess or ping-pong.
I'm here to tell you a story.
Am I looking forward to Age of Discovery?
Yes.
Do I have concerns about Age of Discovery?
Yes.
Thinking back to my childhood, has helped me to understand why I have concerns about Age of Discovery.
And that's why I have a story to tell.
When I was about 5-6, my friends and I all loved He-Man, and between us, had pretty much all the range of toys of the characters. I think, I was the only one who actually had Teela in their collection (probably a foreshadowing of why my Main is female, rather than male: At the most fundamental level, I 'like playing with dolls and making them pretty' (ironic that I have a near-phobia of mannequins and hate porcelain dolls) although in our game playing, my character was actually always Man at Arms.
One of my friends, Adrian, his character was He-Man. One day, another kid wanted to play with Adrian's toy: He didn't want to join in with the rest of us, he just wanted the toy. Adrian didn't want him to play with his toy.
So this kid pushed Adrian over, took He-Man, ripped his head off, threw it up on the school roof and then threw the decapitated body down so hard that it got all chipped up.
Adrian cried a lot.
No, I'm not Adrian. Nor the bully. But that encounter, is one of my most vivid childhood memories.
So imagine that you're a child and you have a favorite toy. A He-Man, an Action Man, a Barbie, a My Little Pony, or whatever.
Suppose someone rips the head off your He-Man, or takes a Sharpie to Action Man's face. Suppose someone cuts off one half of Barbie's hair, or puts a knife through the body of your My Little Pony: Imagine someone damages your Favorite Toy in some unrecoverable way.
Are you going to be happy about it?
Are you still going to want to play with it?
Would you want a replacent?
Or would a replacement always feel like an imitation, because you can never forget, that it's not the original, because someone ripped the original's head off and threw it up on the school roof. And playing with the replacement, always brings that memory to the surface?
You may be thinking 'This isn't group therapy; What has this got to do with Age of Discovery?'
Well, it touches upon (and this memory explains to me) my concerns with Age of Discovery.
Not the content this will bring to the game, but the application of said content.
Over a year ago, Tacofangs said quite openly, that there are aspects of the game's Legacy Code, which they don't fully understand, and which is why we get glitches and bugs: Introduced ideas, don't always work exactly as intended, due to unforeseen code interractions. That's fair enough.
The introduction of ViL significantly changed the appearance of the Cardassian tailor on Earth Spacedock.
I have no doubt at all, that this was because of the introduction of playable Cardassians and Cardassian boffs eg Different artifacts in the game code, means different representations being visible in the in-game environment.
Makes absolutely perfect sense.
So it's equally absolutely possible, that when Discovery Klingons are coded in, that that change has the potential to 'ripple through' into our existing Klingon characters and boffs, in the exact same way the tailor changed...
Many of us have Klingon characters of some description.
So. The introduction of the Discovery Klingons, as with the introduction of the Cardassians, has the potential to affect the appearance of other in-game Klingons.
Suppose someone rips the head off your He-Man, or takes a Sharpie to Action Man's face. Suppose someone cuts off half of Barbie's hair, or puts a knife through the body of your My Little Pony: Imagine someone damages your Favorite Toy in some unrecoverable way.
Are you going to be happy about it?
Are you still going to want to play with it?
*Mic Drop*
I do, however, have a mental preparation for such an eventuality... (and Devs/Writers, feel free to use this as a plot idea should it become necessary, as with the Cardassian Tailor)
Like the Augment Virus, and Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome, the TurroQ'sa Syndrome, causes Klingons afflicted, to experience the activation of latent genes, thus undergoing a sometimes radical transformation of appearance.
So, while I'm most definitely curious as to what content Age of Discovery will bring to the table, and really excited abut the new gear, ships, modules, etc, that doesn't mean I'm without concern (And thanks to some introspection and reliving that memory, I now understand why: On a fundamental level, I'm scared of someone 'breaking my toys')
Be seeing you
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
I think we all should just accept that AoD is not going to be everyone cup of tea. If you like ST:D great enjoy AoD. If you hated or disliked ST:D and don't think it is Trek. You are not being forced to play AoD. PWE are not forcing player to play any aspect of STO. You play what you want to play. But I can guarantee one thing. I know that ALL the devs would have put a lot of sweat and love into creating AoD. So out of respect try it.
FOr would a replacement always feel like an imitation, because you can never forget, that it's not the original, because someone ripped the original's head off and threw it up on the school roof. And playing with the replacement, always brings that memory to the surface?
They stated explicitly during the livestream on this and other occasions that when DSC Klingons are added to the game (as well as any other DSC iteration of an old Trek species) they won't replace existing assets (like a QoL art update to Cardassians which, you'll note, didn't touch the alien-gen cardassian parts. Folks just have more to play with in making more authentic Cardassians according to a base interpretation for what a Cardassian is.) We'll get them as new options, just as with Kelvin and 23c parts. The development issues are not comparable.
YIKES! Then there is the whole photonic mast deal. Yes fewer hull penatrations but sea water has a way of shorting things out so loose the optical head you are blind while an old school periscope works when there is no power every time. I qualed on an all Analog Boat complex hell yes but reliable hell yes! So glad I am out...
True, but you're comparing the reliability of a technology with over a hundred years of refinement with a technology that's new. Of course the old one is more reliable... now. Was it equally reliable when new? I would hazard to guess... no.
Hmmmm.....Interesting point.
If one looks at the F22-Raptor controls one can see what you're talking about quite clearly.
That fighter is the most advanced in the world right now, and it isn't a stretch to think that "hard" controls will remain standard on military, science, and industrial vehicles and craft for some time into the future. Civilian and luxury craft will have touch-screen (some already do).
That's an example of the OPPOSITE! there are SIX video screens, and yes, four of them are touch screens. while there are lots of buttons and TRIBBLE... a lot of them are either for trivial stuff like adjusting AC, or manual backups that only get used if the computer goes down.
Also: If most impactful consumer tech comes with touch screens, and that is often the easiest to grasp (no pun intended) visual signifier of its progressive technology, what do you think the impact will be for a TV show to throw flash-Gordon style buttons across the bridge to say "THIS IS YOUR SHIP OF TOMORROW!"
Real-world, touch interfaces are popular because it lets you remap the controls as-needed. And as we seen many times in Star Trek, Federation computer systems are extremely versatile. A static keyboard would NEED hundreds of keys if you bound them to specific OS functions.
Probably because there are even fewer Klingon players than there are TRIBBLE fans. Finding a Klingon playing TRIBBLE fan would be even harder. If you thought the Bortas'que had abysmal sales, how bad do you think some barely seen TRIBBLE Klingon pinecone-ship would sell?
Well, riddle me this: How expensive is the Sarcophagus ship? That should tell you everything you need to know about how profitable KDF Discovery stuff actually is.
Not everyone listens to the livestream (I know I don't)
But thanks for the clarification, that's certainly reassuring to know
#TrueAnalogy
#GetOffYourHighHorse
Dang, lost the original to the update bug. Oh well, it's here. Anyway, you posted a wall of text that could be restated as "I'm worried that updates to the Klingons, Saurians, and other species will bleed over to existing characters and NPC's."
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!
Biggest question: is this more going to be more of a subfaction under the Feds (a la, AOY), or is this completely replacing the Feds starting missions? What I mean is, is this more of a mini-expansion, or is it revamp of sorts?
Biggest question: is this more going to be more of a subfaction under the Feds (a la, AOY), or is this completely replacing the Feds starting missions? What I mean is, is this more of a mini-expansion, or is it revamp of sorts?
More like AoY, the original stuff will still be there if you wanna start in the 25th Century.
"As of this moment, we are all dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives.
This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
Well, riddle me this: How expensive is the Sarcophagus ship? That should tell you everything you need to know about how profitable KDF Discovery stuff actually is.
It's expensive because it's rare. It's rare because few people open the TRIBBLE prize box on the Klingon side.... because few people actually PLAY Klingon characters.
Some things are not expensive because they are in high demand. Some things are expensive because of limited supply. If you put TRIBBLE Klingon stuff in the C-store, it will not sell well. TRIBBLE treated the Klingons poorly. It's not going to attract that many purchases, unless it is overpowered. Even then, players are wary of "too good to be true" cash shop items because they all get "rebalanced" just before new cash shop items come out.
The way I see it is STO is a game for ALL kinds of Star Trek fans, not everybody likes every show but every show gets represented in game.
If you don't like a mission (or are unwilling to give a mission a try) then skip it, it's as simple as that.
Saying the game is only allowed to cater to the shows YOU like is childish at best, it's "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" not "Infinite Diversity but only the bits I like".
The way I see it is STO is a game for ALL kinds of Star Trek fans, not everybody likes every show but every show gets represented in game.
If you don't like a mission (or are unwilling to give a mission a try) then skip it, it's as simple as that.
Saying the game is only allowed to cater to the shows YOU like is childish at best, it's "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" not "Infinite Diversity but only the bits I like".
Hence why I skipped the entire temporal arc and the back half of the Iconian arc after "House Pegh": I couldn't believe that the protagonists could take that many stupid pills and still remember to breathe.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Not sure how you pulled that off since the Temporal Arc is still completely unskippable.
Easy, I waited for event missions to turn up that weren't time travel nonsense, and played them.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
I may be in minority, but I hope that Cryptic would make an expansion to the AoY expansion dealing with the Klingon and Romulan side of events, being guided by the Envoy (as opposed to Daniels) at least until the big reveal.....
But that's never going to happen.
It just seems more can be done for those who's pro-Klingon besides some costume unlocks.
I don't see the Envoy helping out honestly.
The point of the Envoy traveling to the past with the Na'kuhl was to destroy the Federation. Which is why they teamed up with, however shortly with the Romulans and the Klingons, and tried to esculate tensions towards war between the Federation and the Gorn. So it would be the Envoy who would make first contact with the Klingon officer to use him/her as a counter-Temporal Agent in his attempts to destroy the Federation in the past, and failing that into the present time.
Of course, Daniels would rather have the character on their side, so he sends in a Klingon temporal agent to provide a different perspective. After all, the character will have to be able to merge into the events of the AoY characters, which is to become Temporal Alliance's Agents (the less content that has to be made, the better financially as well as reduced time in development).
> @starswordc said:
> avoozuul wrote: »
>
> Paying for merchandise is not the same thing as paying to watch a show, and furthermore the shows used to not be free to watch.
>
>
>
>
> They were never free to watch. You paid for it by putting your eyeballs on the advertising that came with it.
>
> "If you aren't paying money, you are the product."
That was why TOS was cancelled by CBS back in the day......the audience it attracted was too resistant to the ads.
CBS DID NOT OWN OR AIR STAR TREK NBC DID. Plus the reasons for it being killed had nothing to do with ads.
That is correct, if you ever get to see the full length TOS shows on YouTube from back in the day, the NBC Peacock is shown.
Ads were a big thing for ages, it was also known as washroom breaks.
Here's a question for all you saying "it's canon because CBS says so!"...
Say you bought a box of chocolate chip cookies. It says chocolate chip cookies on the box, but when you open it the box is full of vanilla wafer cookies. You contact the company, but they insist that what they sold you are in fact chocolate chip cookies, they're just the "new and improved" version.
Are they chocolate chip cookies because the company that made them says so? Or are you convinced by the evidence in front of you that they cannot possibly be chocolate chip cookies, and that the company must be either incompetent or disingenuous in claiming they are?
Think it through.
Interesting point of view!!
Wrong analogy. It's more like getting chocolate chip where the chocolate is 80% cacao dark chocolate instead of the milk chocolate you decided it would would contain without having had any input into the bakery's purchasing decisions. It's still chocolate chip, but it tastes different.
I can't stand ENT and VOY most days, and I have serious beefs with DSC, but they're all Star Trek. Deal with it.
With respect, my first comment in this thread has shown respect towards those who like Discovery. I even acknowledged it has a following and recommended to those who do not like AoD to not quit, but instead play the existing content.
I'm dealing with it very well apparently unless you have a post of mine that indicates otherwise.
Here's a question for all you saying "it's canon because CBS says so!"...
Say you bought a box of chocolate chip cookies. It says chocolate chip cookies on the box, but when you open it the box is full of vanilla wafer cookies. You contact the company, but they insist that what they sold you are in fact chocolate chip cookies, they're just the "new and improved" version.
Are they chocolate chip cookies because the company that made them says so? Or are you convinced by the evidence in front of you that they cannot possibly be chocolate chip cookies, and that the company must be either incompetent or disingenuous in claiming they are?
Think it through.
Interesting point of view!!
Wrong analogy. It's more like getting chocolate chip where the chocolate is 80% cacao dark chocolate instead of the milk chocolate you decided it would would contain without having had any input into the bakery's purchasing decisions. It's still chocolate chip, but it tastes different.
I can't stand ENT and VOY most days, and I have serious beefs with DSC, but they're all Star Trek. Deal with it.
With respect, my first comment in this thread has shown respect towards those who like Discovery. I even acknowledged it has a following and recommended to those who do not like AoD to not quit, but instead play the existing content.
I'm dealing with it very well apparently unless you have a post of mine that indicates otherwise.
Sorry @moggiecanada, my comment was directed at darthmeow.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Here's a question for all you saying "it's canon because CBS says so!"...
Say you bought a box of chocolate chip cookies. It says chocolate chip cookies on the box, but when you open it the box is full of vanilla wafer cookies. You contact the company, but they insist that what they sold you are in fact chocolate chip cookies, they're just the "new and improved" version.
Are they chocolate chip cookies because the company that made them says so? Or are you convinced by the evidence in front of you that they cannot possibly be chocolate chip cookies, and that the company must be either incompetent or disingenuous in claiming they are?
Think it through.
Interesting point of view!!
Wrong analogy. It's more like getting chocolate chip where the chocolate is 80% cacao dark chocolate instead of the milk chocolate you decided it would would contain without having had any input into the bakery's purchasing decisions. It's still chocolate chip, but it tastes different.
I can't stand ENT and VOY most days, and I have serious beefs with DSC, but they're all Star Trek. Deal with it.
With respect, my first comment in this thread has shown respect towards those who like Discovery. I even acknowledged it has a following and recommended to those who do not like AoD to not quit, but instead play the existing content.
I'm dealing with it very well apparently unless you have a post of mine that indicates otherwise.
Sorry @moggiecanada, my comment was directed at darthmeow.
Aside from being forced to go through the slog of making ANOTHER character for ANOTHER faction, I don't know how excited I am to once again play 'Federation but with less species and grainy sound and visual effects'. The last time it happened I was pretty uninterested in the character because of those aforementioned reasons. I just don't want to make another character when I already have more than enough to play until the end of time.
It's probably not wise to preface your post that making an issue of abbreviation is silly to then launch into a tangent about the shortening of language somehow violating, what, your immersion? The future of Trek/Discovery isn't joyless.
What I am trying to say is disco clearly doesn't mean the same thing as discovery, it makes no sense to substitute one word with another of an entirely different meaning.
For a movie of the 60s decade, 2001: A Space Odyssey put to shame the analog controls of Star Trek within months of it going off the air. Budget and imagination are all it takes.
'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.'
LMAO Ok fine but here is a situation for your Federation Bridge crew. Ship takes a hit gravity goes down. With me so far? Bridge crew grabs whatever they can to keep from floating away from control sation where they need to be to save the ship. Touchscreen is on all surfaces... Oopps hands swipe across said screen system reads that as an order and decompress's the bridge.
First, this doesn't seem possible from what we have seen on screen. If anything, TOS showed us the wrong button(s) can be pressed by accident.
Second, the chance of someone tripping and pressing the wrong button or switch or having it catch it on their sleeve is also a possibility, so don't make it sound like its 100% fool proof.
Well it all comes down to switch design. There are many switches in use that negate the clothing catching on them. A pure toggle switch absolutley which is why when they are used they are gated. Apollo CSM panel and well from my own personal use the BCP panel on my Sub as an example. Again a gated switch negates alot of those concerns. I will put dollars to doghnuts the reason they weren't gated in TOS was production budget.
That's an example of the OPPOSITE! there are SIX video screens, and yes, four of them are touch screens. while there are lots of buttons and ****... a lot of them are either for trivial stuff like adjusting AC, or manual backups that only get used if the computer goes down.
You have that backwards. The touchscreens are trivial (meaning they don't control the fighter), while the hard controls are integral. The reason for the touchscreens is so that the pilot can change computer screens for different missions. The actual controls on the other hand are toggle switches, control sticks, etc.
And which button is the cruise control? You have a very narrow definition of "control". The reason it has multiple panels is to show info the pilot can't get by looking out the window. information that he needs to be effective in combat. If the computer displays go offline or malfunction the pilot can't get the job done regardless of whether they're directly used to control he craft. Also... pretty sure the control inputs get routed through the computer anyways.
Now, would there be as many hardened controls as in ST:TOS? Probably not, the 1960s Star Trek had too many in my opinion, but for the actual decade the show was made, it was perfectly acceptable. On the other hand, would there be as many touch controls as we see in TRIBBLE? No, it is the other extreme and challenges ones suspension of disbelief if one has military experience (as I do).
Is it a big deal?
No, it is just one more thing that one can nit-pick about TRIBBLE.
SBY: 2199 does future SF controls very well in my humble opinion. It is a combination of SF-mcguffins and real world tech.
Good mix of hardened controls, digital displays, and touch-screen tech in my opinion (and yes I am bias about it. )
form follows function. Part of the challenge for sci-fi is figuring out WHAT the instrument panel actually does. A lot of the time they NEVER do not even after 7 seasons of staring at it. Thus the space ship's controls are designed to look cool first and maybe do something... maybe.
Well, riddle me this: How expensive is the Sarcophagus ship? That should tell you everything you need to know about how profitable KDF Discovery stuff actually is.
It's expensive because it's rare. It's rare because few people open the TRIBBLE prize box on the Klingon side.... because few people actually PLAY Klingon characters.
Some things are not expensive because they are in high demand. Some things are expensive because of limited supply. If you put TRIBBLE Klingon stuff in the C-store, it will not sell well. TRIBBLE treated the Klingons poorly. It's not going to attract that many purchases, unless it is overpowered. Even then, players are wary of "too good to be true" cash shop items because they all get "rebalanced" just before new cash shop items come out.
The supply in this case is intrinsically related to demand. The way it works is like this:
People sell ships on the exchange for the highest price others are willing to pay.
People can and will be selective about what faction they open boxes on simply because they know one is more expensive.
currently there is ONE Sarcophagus on the exchange for 545M. Sure, having only one on exchange indicates supply is low, but it also indicates demand is higher than supply.
YIKES! Then there is the whole photonic mast deal. Yes fewer hull penatrations but sea water has a way of shorting things out so loose the optical head you are blind while an old school periscope works when there is no power every time. I qualed on an all Analog Boat complex hell yes but reliable hell yes! So glad I am out...
True, but you're comparing the reliability of a technology with over a hundred years of refinement with a technology that's new. Of course the old one is more reliable... now. Was it equally reliable when new? I would hazard to guess... no.
Hmmmm.....Interesting point.
If one looks at the F22-Raptor controls one can see what you're talking about quite clearly.
That fighter is the most advanced in the world right now, and it isn't a stretch to think that "hard" controls will remain standard on military, science, and industrial vehicles and craft for some time into the future. Civilian and luxury craft will have touch-screen (some already do).
That's an example of the OPPOSITE! there are SIX video screens, and yes, four of them are touch screens. while there are lots of buttons and ****... a lot of them are either for trivial stuff like adjusting AC, or manual backups that only get used if the computer goes down.
Also: If most impactful consumer tech comes with touch screens, and that is often the easiest to grasp (no pun intended) visual signifier of its progressive technology, what do you think the impact will be for a TV show to throw flash-Gordon style buttons across the bridge to say "THIS IS YOUR SHIP OF TOMORROW!"
Real-world, touch interfaces are popular because it lets you remap the controls as-needed. And as we seen many times in Star Trek, Federation computer systems are extremely versatile. A static keyboard would NEED hundreds of keys if you bound them to specific OS functions.
Probably because there are even fewer Klingon players than there are TRIBBLE fans. Finding a Klingon playing TRIBBLE fan would be even harder. If you thought the Bortas'que had abysmal sales, how bad do you think some barely seen TRIBBLE Klingon pinecone-ship would sell?
Well, riddle me this: How expensive is the Sarcophagus ship? That should tell you everything you need to know about how profitable KDF Discovery stuff actually is.
No they are not for trival things. You do know all those little squares around the display screens are the function mode switches right? Those displays by the way are not to control systems but replace endless small gauges with graphics for system mangement by the pilot. Weapon selection, sensor modes, thrust vectoring mode, is all done via the HOTAS buttons so the pilot never takes his or her hands off the controls not the display screens.
Periscopes were utterly reliable from day one. Basic scopes are simple things really two mirrors reflecting an image down a tube. The only issues with them was the packing glands around the scope barrel and thats was a matter of maintence nothing else or the scope itself being damaged by a hit or collison with something which is also an issue with the photonic masts. Any reliabilty issues came as technology was added on such as IDFF, and other electronics but at the heart the optical part of the scope was utterly reliable. No circuits to short or imagers to get shaken loose from the connector pins. The move to a Photonic mast was driven by design factors to keep the sail small and reduce hull openings and freeing up some space inside the pressure hull Scopeand mast wells took a bit of room. Not a big deal on LA's and Permits as pretty much each one were customized to specfic requirements while the Virginas are a multitool able to do a lot of things so a lot of stuff is crammed in where in the past of you needed a spook boat one would be tailored just for that mission examples of that are the Jimmy Carter and the Parche. All the follow on SSBN's after the Washington class which was built off a Skipjack hull little things really space for all those mast wells wasn't an issue. My boat had nearly a dozen masts that had penatrations into the pressure hull while the Virginas have reduce that to only a cable junction. Is it better? Time will tell. But optical scopes are well over 100 years in service around the world and the tech to replace them existed 40 years ago but the were not until now.
Periscopes were utterly reliable from day one. Basic scopes are simple things really two mirrors reflecting an image down a tube. The only issues with them was the packing glands around the scope barrel and thats was a matter of maintence nothing else or the scope itself being damaged by a hit or collison with something which is also an issue with the photonic masts. Any reliabilty issues came as technology was added on such as IDFF, and other electronics but at the heart the optical part of the scope was utterly reliable. No circuits to short or imagers to get shaken loose from the connector pins.
Not what I heard.... The main barrier to it being fully reliable was staying sealed. A little water vapor in the scope and maybe the optics are now too foggy to see anything. Sure, the lenses and mirrors are fully reliable... the mast assembly itself? Maybe not. And again, we're talking about the version invented in the 40s, not the version that's been improved for 70+ years.
Fun fact: the Gimli Glider actually had power. That model of aircraft was equipped with a backup air-turbine for generating emergency power in the case of engine failure. It needed it because it had hydraulic ailerons and would be uncontrollable in the event of flame out otherwise.
Comments
It's probably not wise to preface your post that making an issue of abbreviation is silly to then launch into a tangent about the shortening of language somehow violating, what, your immersion? The future of Trek/Discovery isn't joyless.
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!
My character Tsin'xing
I'm not interested in getting into a debate, or even a conversation, I just want to put my thoughts on the topic down for catharsis, then get back on with my life. So, feel free to read, feel free to ignore. Feel free to respond, but don't expect a reply to your response. So if you feel the need to 'offer rebuttal' to my point, please save yourself the time in replying, because I'm not here for a game of chess or ping-pong.
I'm here to tell you a story.
Am I looking forward to Age of Discovery?
Yes.
Do I have concerns about Age of Discovery?
Yes.
Thinking back to my childhood, has helped me to understand why I have concerns about Age of Discovery.
And that's why I have a story to tell.
When I was about 5-6, my friends and I all loved He-Man, and between us, had pretty much all the range of toys of the characters. I think, I was the only one who actually had Teela in their collection (probably a foreshadowing of why my Main is female, rather than male: At the most fundamental level, I 'like playing with dolls and making them pretty' (ironic that I have a near-phobia of mannequins and hate porcelain dolls) although in our game playing, my character was actually always Man at Arms.
One of my friends, Adrian, his character was He-Man. One day, another kid wanted to play with Adrian's toy: He didn't want to join in with the rest of us, he just wanted the toy. Adrian didn't want him to play with his toy.
So this kid pushed Adrian over, took He-Man, ripped his head off, threw it up on the school roof and then threw the decapitated body down so hard that it got all chipped up.
Adrian cried a lot.
No, I'm not Adrian. Nor the bully. But that encounter, is one of my most vivid childhood memories.
So imagine that you're a child and you have a favorite toy. A He-Man, an Action Man, a Barbie, a My Little Pony, or whatever.
Suppose someone rips the head off your He-Man, or takes a Sharpie to Action Man's face. Suppose someone cuts off one half of Barbie's hair, or puts a knife through the body of your My Little Pony: Imagine someone damages your Favorite Toy in some unrecoverable way.
Are you going to be happy about it?
Are you still going to want to play with it?
Would you want a replacent?
Or would a replacement always feel like an imitation, because you can never forget, that it's not the original, because someone ripped the original's head off and threw it up on the school roof. And playing with the replacement, always brings that memory to the surface?
You may be thinking 'This isn't group therapy; What has this got to do with Age of Discovery?'
Well, it touches upon (and this memory explains to me) my concerns with Age of Discovery.
Not the content this will bring to the game, but the application of said content.
Over a year ago, Tacofangs said quite openly, that there are aspects of the game's Legacy Code, which they don't fully understand, and which is why we get glitches and bugs: Introduced ideas, don't always work exactly as intended, due to unforeseen code interractions. That's fair enough.
The introduction of ViL significantly changed the appearance of the Cardassian tailor on Earth Spacedock.
I have no doubt at all, that this was because of the introduction of playable Cardassians and Cardassian boffs eg Different artifacts in the game code, means different representations being visible in the in-game environment.
Makes absolutely perfect sense.
So it's equally absolutely possible, that when Discovery Klingons are coded in, that that change has the potential to 'ripple through' into our existing Klingon characters and boffs, in the exact same way the tailor changed...
Many of us have Klingon characters of some description.
So. The introduction of the Discovery Klingons, as with the introduction of the Cardassians, has the potential to affect the appearance of other in-game Klingons.
Suppose someone rips the head off your He-Man, or takes a Sharpie to Action Man's face. Suppose someone cuts off half of Barbie's hair, or puts a knife through the body of your My Little Pony: Imagine someone damages your Favorite Toy in some unrecoverable way.
Are you going to be happy about it?
Are you still going to want to play with it?
*Mic Drop*
I do, however, have a mental preparation for such an eventuality... (and Devs/Writers, feel free to use this as a plot idea should it become necessary, as with the Cardassian Tailor)
Like the Augment Virus, and Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome, the TurroQ'sa Syndrome, causes Klingons afflicted, to experience the activation of latent genes, thus undergoing a sometimes radical transformation of appearance.
So, while I'm most definitely curious as to what content Age of Discovery will bring to the table, and really excited abut the new gear, ships, modules, etc, that doesn't mean I'm without concern (And thanks to some introspection and reliving that memory, I now understand why: On a fundamental level, I'm scared of someone 'breaking my toys')
Be seeing you
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
But thanks for the clarification, that's certainly reassuring to know
#TrueAnalogy
#GetOffYourHighHorse
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My character Tsin'xing
Dang, lost the original to the update bug. Oh well, it's here. Anyway, you posted a wall of text that could be restated as "I'm worried that updates to the Klingons, Saurians, and other species will bleed over to existing characters and NPC's."
#YoureGoingtoGetFlackForThat
#FocusAndEditYourselfDownNextTime
#ItsSimplyConsiderateToOthers
#ThoughDontEditAfterPosting
#ThatWasMyMistake
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!
More like AoY, the original stuff will still be there if you wanna start in the 25th Century.
This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
Some things are not expensive because they are in high demand. Some things are expensive because of limited supply. If you put TRIBBLE Klingon stuff in the C-store, it will not sell well. TRIBBLE treated the Klingons poorly. It's not going to attract that many purchases, unless it is overpowered. Even then, players are wary of "too good to be true" cash shop items because they all get "rebalanced" just before new cash shop items come out.
Awesome post.
This is exactly how it is.
Hence why I skipped the entire temporal arc and the back half of the Iconian arc after "House Pegh": I couldn't believe that the protagonists could take that many stupid pills and still remember to breathe.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Easy, I waited for event missions to turn up that weren't time travel nonsense, and played them.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
The point of the Envoy traveling to the past with the Na'kuhl was to destroy the Federation. Which is why they teamed up with, however shortly with the Romulans and the Klingons, and tried to esculate tensions towards war between the Federation and the Gorn. So it would be the Envoy who would make first contact with the Klingon officer to use him/her as a counter-Temporal Agent in his attempts to destroy the Federation in the past, and failing that into the present time.
Of course, Daniels would rather have the character on their side, so he sends in a Klingon temporal agent to provide a different perspective. After all, the character will have to be able to merge into the events of the AoY characters, which is to become Temporal Alliance's Agents (the less content that has to be made, the better financially as well as reduced time in development).
That is correct, if you ever get to see the full length TOS shows on YouTube from back in the day, the NBC Peacock is shown.
Ads were a big thing for ages, it was also known as washroom breaks.
With respect, my first comment in this thread has shown respect towards those who like Discovery. I even acknowledged it has a following and recommended to those who do not like AoD to not quit, but instead play the existing content.
I'm dealing with it very well apparently unless you have a post of mine that indicates otherwise.
Sorry @moggiecanada, my comment was directed at darthmeow.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
No harm done.
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.'
Well it all comes down to switch design. There are many switches in use that negate the clothing catching on them. A pure toggle switch absolutley which is why when they are used they are gated. Apollo CSM panel and well from my own personal use the BCP panel on my Sub as an example. Again a gated switch negates alot of those concerns. I will put dollars to doghnuts the reason they weren't gated in TOS was production budget.
form follows function. Part of the challenge for sci-fi is figuring out WHAT the instrument panel actually does. A lot of the time they NEVER do not even after 7 seasons of staring at it. Thus the space ship's controls are designed to look cool first and maybe do something... maybe. The supply in this case is intrinsically related to demand. The way it works is like this:
People sell ships on the exchange for the highest price others are willing to pay.
People can and will be selective about what faction they open boxes on simply because they know one is more expensive.
currently there is ONE Sarcophagus on the exchange for 545M. Sure, having only one on exchange indicates supply is low, but it also indicates demand is higher than supply.
My character Tsin'xing
No they are not for trival things. You do know all those little squares around the display screens are the function mode switches right? Those displays by the way are not to control systems but replace endless small gauges with graphics for system mangement by the pilot. Weapon selection, sensor modes, thrust vectoring mode, is all done via the HOTAS buttons so the pilot never takes his or her hands off the controls not the display screens.
Periscopes were utterly reliable from day one. Basic scopes are simple things really two mirrors reflecting an image down a tube. The only issues with them was the packing glands around the scope barrel and thats was a matter of maintence nothing else or the scope itself being damaged by a hit or collison with something which is also an issue with the photonic masts. Any reliabilty issues came as technology was added on such as IDFF, and other electronics but at the heart the optical part of the scope was utterly reliable. No circuits to short or imagers to get shaken loose from the connector pins. The move to a Photonic mast was driven by design factors to keep the sail small and reduce hull openings and freeing up some space inside the pressure hull Scopeand mast wells took a bit of room. Not a big deal on LA's and Permits as pretty much each one were customized to specfic requirements while the Virginas are a multitool able to do a lot of things so a lot of stuff is crammed in where in the past of you needed a spook boat one would be tailored just for that mission examples of that are the Jimmy Carter and the Parche. All the follow on SSBN's after the Washington class which was built off a Skipjack hull little things really space for all those mast wells wasn't an issue. My boat had nearly a dozen masts that had penatrations into the pressure hull while the Virginas have reduce that to only a cable junction. Is it better? Time will tell. But optical scopes are well over 100 years in service around the world and the tech to replace them existed 40 years ago but the were not until now.
My character Tsin'xing
My character Tsin'xing