test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

My Primary concern with Ships in Star Trek

navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
As time goes on, ships have gotten larger and larger and larger.... there seems to be no end to it. Older ships get refit to update appearances and stats, but they remain the same size. For me, this tends to leave iconic ships inadequate when sitting next to some of the newer ships.

For an example, the D7 Klingon ship. At one time that ship was just awe inspiring, a giant among mortals. Now, when sitting in space, it seems every ship that comes within range dwarfs the D7 in comparison which leaves you feeling like you are sitting in a shuttle instead of a giant warship. The same can be said for the ship shown in my avatar, the Star Cruiser. When that ship first came out, you would be hard pressed to find another ship that size, it was a massive starship. Now, I feel small on a grander scale when parked outside Earth Space Dock.

I think what we are seeing with the ships in this game is that they just keep getting larger and larger as time goes on, this is a good comparison to power creep in games as they relate to ship size. Your favorite ships no longer have that feeling of being massive, even though they are massive, because they feel like micro-machines trying to compete with Tonka Toys.

Just my opinion from my perspective.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
«1

Comments

  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,504 Arc User
    edited April 2021
    That is because the DSC and Kelvin universe ships tend to be huge inefficient generic things that draw more on Star Wars ideas than Star Trek ones. They need a lot of extra room in those ships for nonsensical shafts to have characters dangle from bridges over them for the action hero gags and turn turbolifts into Harry Potter mine car rides though vast empty caverns for the eyecandy.
  • livinlifejb90#4082 livinlifejb90 Member Posts: 218 Arc User
    I agree with you. But I don't think they should be smaller, I think they should be bigger. Ships in Star Trek ARE massive. Some of them city sized or bigger. Remember in Generations when the saucer of the ENT D crashed? Remember how small the pine trees were in comparison? Or in the JJ film where the Vengeance actually DID crash into a city and the sky scrapers were like toothpicks? I mean hell, the Support Carriers should be casting massive shadows on ESD, given how big they realistically should be. I mean if the Jupiter (the smallest one) crashed into the Earth it could potentially trigger an extinction level event, its that massive, or should be.

    These ships are supposed to be massive. If anything, they are way too small.
    gQytlm7.jpg
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,504 Arc User
    edited April 2021
    I agree with you. But I don't think they should be smaller, I think they should be bigger. Ships in Star Trek ARE massive. Some of them city sized or bigger. Remember in Generations when the saucer of the ENT D crashed? Remember how small the pine trees were in comparison? Or in the JJ film where the Vengeance actually DID crash into a city and the sky scrapers were like toothpicks? I mean hell, the Support Carriers should be casting massive shadows on ESD, given how big they realistically should be. I mean if the Jupiter (the smallest one) crashed into the Earth it could potentially trigger an extinction level event, its that massive, or should be.

    These ships are supposed to be massive. If anything, they are way too small.

    Why would they need to be bigger? The TOS Enterprise sometimes looked tiny even compared to some of bigger ships in the game before the Kelvin and DSC size inflation but it was the size of a realworld aircraft carrier with only a little over four hundred people rattling around in it. And in the original concept for TNG the saucer WAS essentially a small city of four to five thousand inhabitants with the cobra-headed secondary hull as its protector.

    It is a case of something like the Ant Man movies, from his point of view he does not shrink, everything else just gets bigger. When you are in a ship other ships look bigger or smaller in comparison to yours and the same "other" ship can look massive or tiny depending on what you are flying.

    Scaling up the older ships would not do anything except put them out of scale with their show equivalents, it is the idiotic "bigger is better" idea that Kurtzman's bunch have that causes the problem.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    I agree with you. But I don't think they should be smaller, I think they should be bigger. Ships in Star Trek ARE massive. Some of them city sized or bigger. Remember in Generations when the saucer of the ENT D crashed? Remember how small the pine trees were in comparison? Or in the JJ film where the Vengeance actually DID crash into a city and the sky scrapers were like toothpicks? I mean hell, the Support Carriers should be casting massive shadows on ESD, given how big they realistically should be. I mean if the Jupiter (the smallest one) crashed into the Earth it could potentially trigger an extinction level event, its that massive, or should be.

    These ships are supposed to be massive. If anything, they are way too small.

    ...it is the idiotic "bigger is better" idea that Kurtzman's bunch have that causes the problem.

    I couldn't have said it better myself. Although a longer ship, the Ent E is in line with the Ent D. I guess they believed that ships shouldn't be much larger than the Ent D since that ship was already just completely massive. Unless a ship is going to carry families, there really is no need for a ship to be so massive. But look out, here comes JJ Binks....
  • hyperionx09hyperionx09 Member Posts: 1,709 Arc User
    Eh, you can stop blaming JJ for titanic sizes when the Universe-class exists, and that thing was supposed to be almost the same width of ESD (~3.3km or a little over 2mi) but is shrunk down for gameplay purposes. Drexler himself was a fan of ever larger starships and thought it would have become the norm for a star-faring race, having vessels basically serving as generation ships and mobile starbases, in addition to exploration.

    Kelvin sizes were the result of originally going with a smaller model, but realizing it wouldn't fit the large, multi-deck shuttlebay they wanted and some other details, so they just upscaled it, resulting in the slightly weird window scaling.

    Granted, like cars of today vs the cars of yesteryear, Trek ships have gotten larger over time, as more features are crammed into each one and the scaling goes up. Nowadays, the Fed ships have shifted from a mostly benign, peaceful design to ones armed to the teeth, some with advanced and experimental tech, while still able to perform their peaceful exploration, while KDF ships have shifted to an increasingly militaristic design. The Romulans, well, their ships have mostly stayed consistent with the bird motif.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,015 Community Moderator
    Kelvin sizes were the result of originally going with a smaller model, but realizing it wouldn't fit the large, multi-deck shuttlebay they wanted and some other details, so they just upscaled it, resulting in the slightly weird window scaling.

    The funny thing is... literally everything BUT that one shuttlebay scene says smaller ship. Ignoring the shuttlebay scene, the Kelvin Connie actually measures about 366 Meters. While bigger than the accepted 295 of the TOS and 305 of the Refit, its still reasonable. Not only that, the shuttlebay scene is immediately countered when Pike leaves the Enterprise... IN THE SAME CLASS OF SHUTTLE that was coming in two at a time... AND BARELY FITTING THROUGH COMING OUT ON ITS OWN!

    Star Trek is no stranger to the magic size changing starship. Two main offenders is Voyager and Defiant. Voyager, or more specifically the Delta Flyer, is a major culprit because inside the shuttlebay seems pretty big. But then when the Delta Flyer comes out... she's a bit bigger than expected. And Defiant tends to change size compared to DS9 when she flies through the pylons.
    The most well known though is probably the Klingon BoP, with the B'Rel and the much larger K'vort.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,007 Arc User
    Yes let’s blame JJ and Discovery. It’s not like the Enterprises have gotten bigger with each new iteration. Constitution to Excelsior to Ambassador to Galaxy all show ship getting bigger and while the Sovereign is roughly the same size as the Galaxy the same can’t be said for the Odyssey. What ever forms the G, H and the I take we can rest assure they will be bigger because we know the J is humongous.
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,280 Arc User
    And whatever letter Enterprise they've reached in the 32nd century is probably the size of the Spear of Adun from Starcraft - and that thing is around 70 kilometers.​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,007 Arc User
    > @reyan01 said:
    > That remains to be seen. The ship classes we've seen to-date were certainly of a size that enabled them to dock at Starfleet command. The Veridian seems to be the largest 32nd century ship we've seen so far and that was, obviously, not a Starfleet ship.

    The Galaxy the burn took place in... was actually the Enterprise N
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • diocletian#7546 diocletian Member Posts: 131 Arc User
    My main is a TOS character who flies in a Gemini temporal cruiser. A bigger size 23c ship with a bit of bulk and looking to be bordering on battleship size in that era.

    I always get a laugh in TFO’s when the Gemini is so small compared to other ships. Especially Discovery ships which are supposed to be a decade or two earlier in operational service.

    Also K-13 is rather small in size too. Many ships dwarf it, even though it is a space station.

    No matter. If people really want MASSIVE ships, that is fine with me. I am very happy patrolling along in tiny Gemini. I guess you can call it by that old naval term a “pocket battleship” in the tradition of the great Graf Spee.
  • hyperionx09hyperionx09 Member Posts: 1,709 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »

    The funny thing is... literally everything BUT that one shuttlebay scene says smaller ship. Ignoring the shuttlebay scene, the Kelvin Connie actually measures about 366 Meters. While bigger than the accepted 295 of the TOS and 305 of the Refit, its still reasonable. Not only that, the shuttlebay scene is immediately countered when Pike leaves the Enterprise... IN THE SAME CLASS OF SHUTTLE that was coming in two at a time... AND BARELY FITTING THROUGH COMING OUT ON ITS OWN!

    Star Trek is no stranger to the magic size changing starship. Two main offenders is Voyager and Defiant. Voyager, or more specifically the Delta Flyer, is a major culprit because inside the shuttlebay seems pretty big. But then when the Delta Flyer comes out... she's a bit bigger than expected. And Defiant tends to change size compared to DS9 when she flies through the pylons.
    The most well known though is probably the Klingon BoP, with the B'Rel and the much larger K'vort.

    You have a point. It's just hilarious that younger viewers blame JJ Trek for scaling issues, when it's long been a thing across the original/Prime Timeline series. I believe the Scimitar is also weirdly scaled (considering its size proportional to the Sovereign in the respective movie), along with a few other ships due to reuse of some old models that weren't to scale with each other.
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 4,786 Arc User
    Personally I don't really care how big my ship is compared to others. I'll mostly be focussed on my own ship anyway.

    What I - therefore - do find annoying is that some ships look totally different compared to others when flying them. When zooming in on a Sovereign, for example, you can clearly see a lot of details and still see the stuff around you clearly too. Which works less wel with, say, a Defiant or a Vesta.
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    Eh, you can stop blaming JJ for titanic sizes when the Universe-class exists

    Two things. The Universe Class was not part of the Ent D and E erra. That was designed long after those went off the air. I wasn't a big fan of that either. Mainly though, that ship comes from a far far distant future, so then there is that.
    rattler2 wrote: »

    The funny thing is... literally everything BUT that one shuttlebay scene says smaller ship. Ignoring the shuttlebay scene, the Kelvin Connie actually measures about 366 Meters. While bigger than the accepted 295 of the TOS and 305 of the Refit, its still reasonable. Not only that, the shuttlebay scene is immediately countered when Pike leaves the Enterprise... IN THE SAME CLASS OF SHUTTLE that was coming in two at a time... AND BARELY FITTING THROUGH COMING OUT ON ITS OWN!

    Star Trek is no stranger to the magic size changing starship. Two main offenders is Voyager and Defiant. Voyager, or more specifically the Delta Flyer, is a major culprit because inside the shuttlebay seems pretty big. But then when the Delta Flyer comes out... she's a bit bigger than expected. And Defiant tends to change size compared to DS9 when she flies through the pylons.
    The most well known though is probably the Klingon BoP, with the B'Rel and the much larger K'vort.

    You have a point. It's just hilarious that younger viewers blame JJ Trek for scaling issues, when it's long been a thing across the original/Prime Timeline series. I believe the Scimitar is also weirdly scaled (considering its size proportional to the Sovereign in the respective movie), along with a few other ships due to reuse of some old models that weren't to scale with each other.

    I am far from young. You may disagree but my opinion stands and I am not the only person with this opinion. For clarity, I am 46 years old and counting.

    The justifications I am seeing here just don't make any sense at all to me. With Enterprise D, which was one of the largest ships until they came out with the Enterprise J (For the record, I didn't like that hideous thing either and thought the size and design of that thing was just goofy) which was just grotesque.

    With the Enterprise D, it made sense because that ship not only complimented the crew, but their families as well. The size of that ship was justified and made complete sense. From the beginning, ships of Star Trek gradually got larger a wee bit at a time...they did not suddenly explode in to unrealistic sizes out of the blue with no explanation like they did with Enterprise J and that God awful thing in the JJ Binks movies. We are talking about the times of the Enterprise 1701, and suddenly we have a ship that literally dwarfs the Enterprise D and it wasn't even holding families? What was that ships compliment, 20 or less?

    At least with Voyager, they scaled back down the size of the ship to a reasonable size since it was not designed to carry people's families. It made sense. Once Enterprise came out and they introduced the Enterprise J, it got completely silly from there. That is my logic and my reasoning behind my dislike of these ridiculously large ships. Has nothing to do with age.

    Now, everyone is entitled to their opinions and I won't be bashing anyone for their opinions. I would appreciate if everyone would do the same instead of attacking my age.
  • gaevsmangaevsman Member Posts: 3,190 Arc User
    It's not the size, it's how you use it!!.. what where we talking about??.. ohh, yeah, ships, ships size!
    The forces of darkness are upon us!
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 4,786 Arc User
    edited April 2021
    We don't really know anything about the Enterprise J though.

    Maybe it has a very large number of crew.
    Maybe it needed to be able to build entire starbases or outposts (in space, so that it could be easily left behind while being strategically located, as opposed to planets) in defence against the Sphere Builders and their expanse.
    Maybe it was build to be able to quickly evacuate entire planets as the Delphic expanse ... expanded.
    Maybe Starfleet realised that it was losing far too many ships unnecessarily so it decided to build bigger ones.
    Maybe the Universe class replaced entire war fleets - have a few very tough ships that can in most cases even win a battle by avoiding it - so that more of the smaller ships could be spared to defend outposts, planets and so on (both in STO as well as in the series, it happens quite often that an installation is entirely defenceless after all...)


    You can't really say that the Ent J is 'too' big if you don't know what it was built for. We literally don't know anything about its purpose, mission or crew complement. We also know very little about the time in which it was - or even during what time exactly it was - active. Klingons were part of the Federation, the Delphic expanse threatened the Federation. That's it. Who knows what other things happened that resulted in SF building the Universe class.
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    We don't really know anything about the Enterprise J though.

    Maybe it has a very large number of crew.
    Maybe it needed to be able to build entire starbases or outposts (in space, so that it could be easily left behind while being strategically located, as opposed to planets) in defence against the Sphere Builders and their expanse.
    Maybe it was build to be able to quickly evacuate entire planets as the Delphic expanse ... expanded.
    Maybe Starfleet realised that it was losing far too many ships unnecessarily so it decided to build bigger ones.
    Maybe the Universe class replaced entire war fleets - have a few very tough ships that can in most cases even win a battle by avoiding it - so that more of the smaller ships could be spared to defend outposts, planets and so on (both in STO as well as in the series, it happens quite often that an installation is entirely defenceless after all...)


    You can't really say that the Ent J is 'too' big if you don't know what it was built for. We literally don't know anything about its purpose, mission or crew complement. We also know very little about the time in which it was - or even during what time exactly it was - active. Klingons were part of the Federation, the Delphic expanse threatened the Federation. That's it. Who knows what other things happened that resulted in SF building the Universe class.

    I also try to keep in mind that the Enterprise J as we saw it, no longer exists in the timeline we seen it. It could very well look much different than it did in that timeline.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    navar#3536 wrote: »
    With the Enterprise D, it made sense because that ship not only complimented the crew, but their families as well. The size of that ship was justified and made complete sense. From the beginning, ships of Star Trek gradually got larger a wee bit at a time...they did not suddenly explode in to unrealistic sizes out of the blue with no explanation like they did with Enterprise J and that God awful thing in the JJ Binks movies. We are talking about the times of the Enterprise 1701, and suddenly we have a ship that literally dwarfs the Enterprise D and it wasn't even holding families? What was that ships compliment, 20 or less?

    At least with Voyager, they scaled back down the size of the ship to a reasonable size since it was not designed to carry people's families. It made sense. Once Enterprise came out and they introduced the Enterprise J, it got completely silly from there. That is my logic and my reasoning behind my dislike of these ridiculously large ships. Has nothing to do with age.

    I'm sorry...but the Enterprise D made no sense at all. Even including the families, you could fit something like 20x the number of people on that ship...well on that ship. Wasting all that space to have a hotel in space when it is there to explore new worlds is dumb. To do it when you are sent on what is basically battle missions is MORONIC. Idiotic ship design is not something that happened in just the JJ stuff or nu-Trek. And while the Galaxy class is the most egregious of bad ship design, the other ships in the other series did have their share of issues. Be it being inconsistent in size (like gaining extra decks all of a sudden or being anywhere for 50m to 170m on screen) or just bad designs that makes no sense (hey the defiant is a warship...you know what a warship doesn't need? A good medical bay...because people NEVER get injured in a war).

    God, I am so glad there is at least one other person that realizes how ridiculous and stupid the Enterprise D was. It's dimensions and staffing made absolutely no sense for it's role.

    But you're right, these problems and inconsistencies are commonplace in absolutely all Trek old and new.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    navar#3536 wrote: »
    With the Enterprise D, it made sense because that ship not only complimented the crew, but their families as well. The size of that ship was justified and made complete sense. From the beginning, ships of Star Trek gradually got larger a wee bit at a time...they did not suddenly explode in to unrealistic sizes out of the blue with no explanation like they did with Enterprise J and that God awful thing in the JJ Binks movies. We are talking about the times of the Enterprise 1701, and suddenly we have a ship that literally dwarfs the Enterprise D and it wasn't even holding families? What was that ships compliment, 20 or less?

    At least with Voyager, they scaled back down the size of the ship to a reasonable size since it was not designed to carry people's families. It made sense. Once Enterprise came out and they introduced the Enterprise J, it got completely silly from there. That is my logic and my reasoning behind my dislike of these ridiculously large ships. Has nothing to do with age.

    I'm sorry...but the Enterprise D made no sense at all. Even including the families, you could fit something like 20x the number of people on that ship...well on that ship. Wasting all that space to have a hotel in space when it is there to explore new worlds is dumb. To do it when you are sent on what is basically battle missions is MORONIC. Idiotic ship design is not something that happened in just the JJ stuff or nu-Trek. And while the Galaxy class is the most egregious of bad ship design, the other ships in the other series did have their share of issues. Be it being inconsistent in size (like gaining extra decks all of a sudden or being anywhere for 50m to 170m on screen) or just bad designs that makes no sense (hey the defiant is a warship...you know what a warship doesn't need? A good medical bay...because people NEVER get injured in a war).

    God, I am so glad there is at least one other person that realizes how ridiculous and stupid the Enterprise D was. It's dimensions and staffing made absolutely no sense for it's role.

    But you're right, these problems and inconsistencies are commonplace in absolutely all Trek old and new.

    Many people feel that after Voyager, the Star Treks that came out after that felt...off from all the others before them. There is a reason for it, I don't think it is just in peoples heads. The ship designs are equally frowned upon. It's an endless debate that has no end, you either like the new Star Trek (if they really must call it that) or you hate it. There seems to be very few people who are indifferent. Ship design not withstanding.
  • captaincelestialcaptaincelestial Member Posts: 1,925 Arc User
    I could fly a larger ship, but then again, maybe I'd be overcompensating for something if I did.... ;)
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,280 Arc User
    edited April 2021
    To put things into a bit of perspective...
    As of June 2020, the largest cruise ship, Symphony of the Seas, has a gross tonnage of 228,081, is 361 metres (1,184 ft) long, 65.7 metres (216 ft) wide, and holds up to 6,680 passengers.

    Now, even factoring in that a decent portion of space on a Galaxy will be taken up by the weapons and shuttlebays, both things cruise ships don't have, a Galaxy should STILL be able to host a far larger crew and passenger capacity than official stats list because it's twice the size of the aforementioned cruise ship.

    Also...the quarters could also be bigger than we've seen - Scotty was impressed by the quarters he was given? He would've been even more impressed by how big they COULD have been.​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • livinlifejb90#4082 livinlifejb90 Member Posts: 218 Arc User
    People do realize that even the "small" ships are actually also massive vessels?
    I have to say, I do agree... the scale of some ships in the game now are really a bit much. It doesn't really bother me per se, except that they take up so much of the screen, when you get a chance to see through the nonstop visual spam, your view is blocked by a gigantic saucer, or some such.

    you know you can zoom out, right? The ship sizes are fine as they are. They're not even to scale, if they were they'd all be bigger, not smaller.
    gQytlm7.jpg
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    Compared to Star Wars, BSG, 40k and many other franchises I don’t think Star Trek ships stand out as exceptionally big at all.
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
  • spiritbornspiritborn Member Posts: 4,263 Arc User
    edited April 2021
    Compared to Star Wars, BSG, 40k and many other franchises I don’t think Star Trek ships stand out as exceptionally big at all.

    Yeah the Oddy is one of largest "modern" Trek ships and it's just around 1 km long, for the GFFA biggest ship is a size of a small moon (aka Death Stars which are actually really large ships not stations and that's ignoring the Starkiller Base) and in Warhammer multi kilometre ships are typical.

    EDIT:Largest "normal" ships in GFFA (aka Star Wars) are around the 20 km mark.
    Post edited by spiritborn on
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    Yeah this isn't just a NuTrek issue. OldTrek has plenty of scale issues itself. I do think that NuTrek has done some of the stupidest things, like the automated Vengeance dwarfing the already inflated size of the Kelvin Connie, and lets not forget Discovery's nonsensical turbolift caverns, as well as the pointlessly spacious bridges. However there is no question that something like the Galaxy or Ent J are pretty ridiculous themselves.

    Star Trek just isn't good with scaling, that is the one thing they have been consistent about.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »

    That visual scale is completely wrong. Look at the scene in Star Trek Generations where they are standing on top of the saucer section after the crash landing. Looks nothing like this being shown in the video.

    But let's say speaking strictly scale; that even further proves my point when they make a ship that only carries 20 people or less, being almost twice the size as the Galaxy Class Starship.

  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 198 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    navar#3536 wrote: »
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    navar#3536 wrote: »
    With the Enterprise D, it made sense because that ship not only complimented the crew, but their families as well. The size of that ship was justified and made complete sense. From the beginning, ships of Star Trek gradually got larger a wee bit at a time...they did not suddenly explode in to unrealistic sizes out of the blue with no explanation like they did with Enterprise J and that God awful thing in the JJ Binks movies. We are talking about the times of the Enterprise 1701, and suddenly we have a ship that literally dwarfs the Enterprise D and it wasn't even holding families? What was that ships compliment, 20 or less?

    At least with Voyager, they scaled back down the size of the ship to a reasonable size since it was not designed to carry people's families. It made sense. Once Enterprise came out and they introduced the Enterprise J, it got completely silly from there. That is my logic and my reasoning behind my dislike of these ridiculously large ships. Has nothing to do with age.

    I'm sorry...but the Enterprise D made no sense at all. Even including the families, you could fit something like 20x the number of people on that ship...well on that ship. Wasting all that space to have a hotel in space when it is there to explore new worlds is dumb. To do it when you are sent on what is basically battle missions is MORONIC. Idiotic ship design is not something that happened in just the JJ stuff or nu-Trek. And while the Galaxy class is the most egregious of bad ship design, the other ships in the other series did have their share of issues. Be it being inconsistent in size (like gaining extra decks all of a sudden or being anywhere for 50m to 170m on screen) or just bad designs that makes no sense (hey the defiant is a warship...you know what a warship doesn't need? A good medical bay...because people NEVER get injured in a war).

    God, I am so glad there is at least one other person that realizes how ridiculous and stupid the Enterprise D was. It's dimensions and staffing made absolutely no sense for it's role.

    But you're right, these problems and inconsistencies are commonplace in absolutely all Trek old and new.

    Many people feel that after Voyager, the Star Treks that came out after that felt...off from all the others before them. There is a reason for it, I don't think it is just in peoples heads. The ship designs are equally frowned upon. It's an endless debate that has no end, you either like the new Star Trek (if they really must call it that) or you hate it. There seems to be very few people who are indifferent. Ship design not withstanding.

    Many people thought TNG was off from ToS. Many people thought DS 9 was off from what was before as well. Voyager was probably the ONLY series to not really have that happen to it. Enterprise...oh the hate that one generated. So people doing this to the nu-Trek is NOTHING NEW to the IP. And yes, it is all in your bloody head because it is all BLOODY OPINION...which is by definition in your head. Going that is bad because I feel something is off and a bunch of other people on the internet says so too is not proof of anything other than subjective projection. You want to say nu-Trek is bad...show something objectively bad. Like the kling-orc makeup being WAY to thick and bulky. Something FX reality shows CONSTANTLY says is a BAD thing as it makes the actors completely unable to emote. Or even MOVE in the case of the Michael Burnham show. Or how close the second half of Picard got to plagiarism of Mass Effect. Or if you wanna get really nit picky, you can even do things like pointing out how the FX team seems to be using video game assets for some FX in a scene that shows up for half a second and in like 2 inches of the screen on a 75 inch TV. But going I think it feel off...so that is true is nonsense. That just makes it true for YOU as YOUR OPINION. Not an objective truth you seem to want to make it out to be.

    And after the first season of both, they eventually settled in to those. The people who hate the new Star Trek are not settling in to those...and it's been years later.
This discussion has been closed.