That is false because they are allowed to make the Ambassador class but it still isnt in game yet.
But they never told us CBS said no to the Ambassador now did they? The answer to the Ambassador has been consistent in that its coming when the schedule allows. The T5 Connie was on the engineering report for a long time, and got pulled, when asked why they told us about CBS nixing it. The T5 Connie has been a consistent no from every source since then.
But they never told us CBS said no to the Ambassador now did they? The answer to the Ambassador has been consistent in that its coming when the schedule allows. The T5 Connie was on the engineering report for a long time, and got pulled, when asked why they told us about CBS nixing it. The T5 Connie has been a consistent no from every source since then.
Yeah, and now what does that have to do with the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? Why is Cryptic unable to tell us anything about why they are not using their own original designs?
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Yeah, and now what does that have to do with the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? Why is Cryptic unable to tell us anything about why they are not using their own original designs?
Don't know as my post had nothing to do with those, and only to do with someone complaining about a Connie.
Just stumbled upon an artwork from 2009. http://images.idgentertainment.de/images/idgwpgsgp/bdb/2111799/617x.jpg When did they stop being proud of that design? I have to admit I didn't like it too much when it was previewed on the website, but so far all of my T2 cruisers had at least two Excalibur parts. The current one is all Excalibur except two Exeter parts.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Just stumbled upon an artwork from 2009. http://images.idgentertainment.de/images/idgwpgsgp/bdb/2111799/617x.jpg When did they stop being proud of that design? I have to admit I didn't like it too much when it was previewed on the website, but so far all of my T2 cruisers had at least two Excalibur parts. The current one is all Excalibur except two Exeter parts.
Just stumbled upon an artwork from 2009. http://images.idgentertainment.de/images/idgwpgsgp/bdb/2111799/617x.jpg When did they stop being proud of that design? I have to admit I didn't like it too much when it was previewed on the website, but so far all of my T2 cruisers had at least two Excalibur parts. The current one is all Excalibur except two Exeter parts.
You guys hit on an important point.
Cryptic made the Excalibur / Vesper their sort of "defacto" flagship.
They could have featured something else. They could have put one of their gaudy Star Cruisers, or the Sovereign or the Galaxy even on the box and in their promotional artwork.
But they didn't. They focused on the Excalibur / Vesper.
Now, it's the only ship in T2 that isn't getting the much desired T5 makeover.
The biggest mistake Cryptic made was tying the Excalibur / Vesper to the Connie Refit. If they hadn't, and instead had offered the Connie Refit as a one-off ship, like they did with the TOS Connie, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I would imagine in the moment the very first T5 Connie flamefest thread hit the boards.
Yes, WE all know the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter are NOT Constitutions. But I don't think Cryptic has wrapped it's head around that concept yet.
Therefore, given their hate for all things T5 Connie (remember the T5 Connie Forum Wars, when threads were getting shutdown left and right?) they just lump the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter into that category and avoid it with a 20 foot pole.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Therefore, given their hate for all things T5 Connie (remember the T5 Connie Forum Wars, when threads were getting shutdown left and right?) they just lump the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter into that category and avoid it with a 20 foot pole.
I seriously doubt its Cryptic hating it, and honestly if it would make money, dev opinion on the matter means next to squat.
Also as a side note, you may have not noticed, but the person shutting down/locking/banning etc is no longer employed by either PWE or Cryptic. While I won't speculate on the reasons for that person to no longer be with the company, its safe to say that person can no longer shut us down left and right.
Look at the emblem in the background from what I can tell the ships are top to bottom: Constitution (no fleet retrofit), Excelsior (no fleet retrofit) and Galaxy.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Look at the emblem in the background from what I can tell the ships are top to bottom: Constitution (no fleet retrofit), Excelsior (no fleet retrofit) and Galaxy.
I thought the job of the community manager was to be a voice between the players and devs. Why is he ignoring this player feedback?
Think of the reaction on fleet ship modules. "They are basically free since you can buy Zen for dilithium." Now try to spin the lack of Excalibur, Excelsior and Sovereign fleet retrofits or the still missing options for veteran androids that way.:D
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Personally, I could care less about a T5 TOS or even TMP Connie. With the Exeter/Excalibur/Vesper variants, there is a viable alternative to Constitution class that gives us the look we want with an updated 2409 design.
I echo what others are saying...a T5 variant of any of those designs would be perfectly acceptable to me.
Why not organize a question deluge about this in all the Ask Cryptic segments until we get a response?
"Can we have a fleet cruiser retrofit that allows for a T5 variant of the Exeter, Excalibur and Vesper classes?"
Just leave the Connie completely out of the question and see if that gets a response. Thoughts?
Personally, I could care less about a T5 TOS or even TMP Connie. With the Exeter/Excalibur/Vesper variants, there is a viable alternative to Constitution class that gives us the look we want with an updated 2409 design.
I echo what others are saying...a T5 variant of any of those designs would be perfectly acceptable to me.
Why not organize a question deluge about this in all the Ask Cryptic segments until we get a response?
"Can we have a fleet cruiser retrofit that allows for a T5 variant of the Exeter, Excalibur and Vesper classes?"
Just leave the Connie completely out of the question and see if that gets a response. Thoughts?
Personally, I could care less about a T5 TOS or even TMP Connie. With the Exeter/Excalibur/Vesper variants, there is a viable alternative to Constitution class that gives us the look we want with an updated 2409 design.
I echo what others are saying...a T5 variant of any of those designs would be perfectly acceptable to me.
Why not organize a question deluge about this in all the Ask Cryptic segments until we get a response?
"Can we have a fleet cruiser retrofit that allows for a T5 variant of the Exeter, Excalibur and Vesper classes?"
Just leave the Connie completely out of the question and see if that gets a response. Thoughts?
It's pretty obvious why it's not there; it would take them too close to somewhere they aren't allowed to go.
Bullocks. They can easily turn off the connie skin if they want to. The issue with CBS is irrelevant to the excalibur.
Yes, they could. But activating an existing costume for a given ship is a far more trivial matter than making the retrofit itself. People will know this. Demands for a T5 Connie would suddenly become far more reasonable; yet Cryptic still wouldn't be able to do it. This would make them look bad; regardless of the fact that it wouldn't be their fault.
Yes, they could. But activating an existing costume for a given ship is a far more trivial matter than making the retrofit itself. People will know this. Demands for a T5 Connie would suddenly become far more reasonable; yet Cryptic still wouldn't be able to do it. This would make them look bad; regardless of the fact that it wouldn't be their fault.
Who needs that kind of trouble?
Look bad? Please; they stopped caring how they looked the day they started dropping lock boxes.
Yes, they could. But activating an existing costume for a given ship is a far more trivial matter than making the retrofit itself. People will know this. Demands for a T5 Connie would suddenly become far more reasonable; yet Cryptic still wouldn't be able to do it. This would make them look bad; regardless of the fact that it wouldn't be their fault.
Who needs that kind of trouble?
Why would they become even more reasonable? They have been reasonable since the D'kyr (100 years older) was made a T5. Lots of contemporaries of the Constitution are T5 too. THAT's what makes the T5 Constitution reasonable. But hey, CBS (allegedly) said no, okay. But adding three 2409-ships wouldn't change anything at all.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Why would they become even more reasonable? They have been reasonable since the D'kyr (100 years older) was made a T5. Lots of contemporaries of the Constitution are T5 too. THAT's what makes the T5 Constitution reasonable. But hey, CBS (allegedly) said no, okay. But adding three 2409-ships wouldn't change anything at all.
Not reasonable in the sense of how it fits into the game or Trek lore; but in the sense that it would simply be a matter of enabling the costume. Easy as pie compared to making the retrofit itself.
Not reasonable in the sense of how it fits into the game or Trek lore; but in the sense that it would simply be a matter of enabling the costume. Easy as pie compared to making the retrofit itself.
Yeah, so? If CBS said no it's unfortunately no. And I would think that with the speed Crpytic can crank out new refits if they want to (there were TWO refits for almost each of the lower-tier ships in season 6) I would say that they have a tool where they simply enter the stats of the ship. The costumes are done.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Yeah, so? If CBS said no it's unfortunately no. And I would think that with the speed Crpytic can crank out new refits if they want to (there were TWO refits for almost each of the lower-tier ships in season 6) I would say that they have a tool where they simply enter the stats of the ship. The costumes are done.
CBS said no quite some time ago; but it has never stopped the requests.
Can you not see how frustrating the people who want a T5 Connie would find having the Cruiser retrofit with no Connie skin? Having their goal so near, yet still out of reach, would be rubbing salt in the wound.
Like I said, I wouldn't do it. Not worth the aggravation.
Comments
But they never told us CBS said no to the Ambassador now did they? The answer to the Ambassador has been consistent in that its coming when the schedule allows. The T5 Connie was on the engineering report for a long time, and got pulled, when asked why they told us about CBS nixing it. The T5 Connie has been a consistent no from every source since then.
Yeah, and now what does that have to do with the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? Why is Cryptic unable to tell us anything about why they are not using their own original designs?
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Don't know as my post had nothing to do with those, and only to do with someone complaining about a Connie.
Post I replied to. It really helps to actually you know, read the thread.
Because they can?
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Its also on the frakking game box:
http://rpgsite.net/images/boxart/230_us_pc.jpg
You guys hit on an important point.
Cryptic made the Excalibur / Vesper their sort of "defacto" flagship.
They could have featured something else. They could have put one of their gaudy Star Cruisers, or the Sovereign or the Galaxy even on the box and in their promotional artwork.
But they didn't. They focused on the Excalibur / Vesper.
Now, it's the only ship in T2 that isn't getting the much desired T5 makeover.
The biggest mistake Cryptic made was tying the Excalibur / Vesper to the Connie Refit. If they hadn't, and instead had offered the Connie Refit as a one-off ship, like they did with the TOS Connie, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I would imagine in the moment the very first T5 Connie flamefest thread hit the boards.
Yes, WE all know the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter are NOT Constitutions. But I don't think Cryptic has wrapped it's head around that concept yet.
Therefore, given their hate for all things T5 Connie (remember the T5 Connie Forum Wars, when threads were getting shutdown left and right?) they just lump the Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter into that category and avoid it with a 20 foot pole.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I disagree. Anyone with a brain can understand that simple fact, and I dont think Cryptic is dumb. It must be something else.
I seriously doubt its Cryptic hating it, and honestly if it would make money, dev opinion on the matter means next to squat.
Also as a side note, you may have not noticed, but the person shutting down/locking/banning etc is no longer employed by either PWE or Cryptic. While I won't speculate on the reasons for that person to no longer be with the company, its safe to say that person can no longer shut us down left and right.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Guess who's back...back again!
I could have sworn there were some posts from the past day or two, which are not here now, including a post from Nagus this morning.
Ninja Moderated? :rolleyes:
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
http://images-cdn.perfectworld.com/www/8d/17/8d178e7c0ad2d8842d0f4c85931c0bcc1342823546.jpg
Look at the emblem in the background from what I can tell the ships are top to bottom: Constitution (no fleet retrofit), Excelsior (no fleet retrofit) and Galaxy.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Nice catch.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Guess who's back...back again!
Sometimes I wonder if no one at Cryptic knows what the others are doing or if they are intentionally aggravating parts of the player base.
Think of the reaction on fleet ship modules. "They are basically free since you can buy Zen for dilithium." Now try to spin the lack of Excalibur, Excelsior and Sovereign fleet retrofits or the still missing options for veteran androids that way.:D
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
I echo what others are saying...a T5 variant of any of those designs would be perfectly acceptable to me.
Why not organize a question deluge about this in all the Ask Cryptic segments until we get a response?
"Can we have a fleet cruiser retrofit that allows for a T5 variant of the Exeter, Excalibur and Vesper classes?"
Just leave the Connie completely out of the question and see if that gets a response. Thoughts?
Count me in.
It's pretty obvious why it's not there; it would take them too close to somewhere they aren't allowed to go.
If I were Cryptic, I wouldn't do it either.
Bullocks. They can easily turn off the connie skin if they want to. The issue with CBS is irrelevant to the excalibur.
Yes, they could. But activating an existing costume for a given ship is a far more trivial matter than making the retrofit itself. People will know this. Demands for a T5 Connie would suddenly become far more reasonable; yet Cryptic still wouldn't be able to do it. This would make them look bad; regardless of the fact that it wouldn't be their fault.
Who needs that kind of trouble?
Look bad? Please; they stopped caring how they looked the day they started dropping lock boxes.
Why would they become even more reasonable? They have been reasonable since the D'kyr (100 years older) was made a T5. Lots of contemporaries of the Constitution are T5 too. THAT's what makes the T5 Constitution reasonable. But hey, CBS (allegedly) said no, okay. But adding three 2409-ships wouldn't change anything at all.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Not reasonable in the sense of how it fits into the game or Trek lore; but in the sense that it would simply be a matter of enabling the costume. Easy as pie compared to making the retrofit itself.
Yeah, so? If CBS said no it's unfortunately no. And I would think that with the speed Crpytic can crank out new refits if they want to (there were TWO refits for almost each of the lower-tier ships in season 6) I would say that they have a tool where they simply enter the stats of the ship. The costumes are done.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
CBS said no quite some time ago; but it has never stopped the requests.
Can you not see how frustrating the people who want a T5 Connie would find having the Cruiser retrofit with no Connie skin? Having their goal so near, yet still out of reach, would be rubbing salt in the wound.
Like I said, I wouldn't do it. Not worth the aggravation.