You people do realize that you can use the T2 Exeter at end game for about 95% of the content, even STFs? Just have to build it right and you can have your end game Connie.
If I want to fly a T5 Nova, I can.
If I want to fly a T5 Saber, I can.
If I want to fly a T5 version of a T2 Cruiser though ...
We know CBS said no, but like determined folk we're just going to keep pestering them until they get absolutely fed up with saying "no" and say "yes" just to get us to shut up :P.
This conversation has gone around many times now... "it shouldn't stand toe to toe with a Sovereign" or "it's too old!" etc etc.
In STO, ship age has no bearing on how well it performs. We have two ships from ENT era (older than TOS for the uninformed) which currently stand at Tier 5 and one of them, the Kumari is one of the hardest hitting escorts in the game if tooled out right. Then we have the Excelsior, a ship from the same era as the Constitution Refit and is widely regarded as better in some ways than the Sovereign i.e. turn rate (not the Reagent, the stock T5 version). Now we also have people flying around in Timeships from 500 years in the future... you see where I'm going?
Then we have the argument that "it breaks my sense of immersion" or "it's not canon!"...
Forgive me, but to quote a forum members signiture (roughly): "STO is about my Federation captain who jumps in his JHAS with his Jem'hadar Tactical officer, Borg science officer, Breen first officer and a Reman officer and kills Borg Cubes in about 5 seconds flat"
So this is cool but having an iconic ship from the series is not? STO is about giving the fans THEIR version of Trek, letting THEM decide how they want to immerse themselves in the Star Trek universe. If you want to play with the modern stuff, that's fine. If you want to make up crazy outfits and make your crew look like Power Rangers... fair enough. If someone wants to recreate something from their fave show whether that be ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9 etc then just LET THEM.
Seriously, I can't see what's complicated about this discussion.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
Some of my favorite sci-fi characters in other franchises are captains who can pull off unexpected feats of flying in outdated ships. STO is no different. A captain who upgrades when he needs to and keeps an eye open for replacement parts can keep his beloved bucket of bolts in the sky for a good long time. However, I have no problem with that fact that Starfleet engineering can only go so far in up-specing older designs, or in specing a ship beyond her intended role. There needs to be a point where you look at your ship, look at the monstrosity your enemy is flying, look at your ship again, and say to yourself "I need to either talk fast or call for backup".
there is no need to polute the timeline anymore then it already has been by the alternate universe eg the destruction of Romulus etc. then the thought of adding a ship from there.
Cryptic already made their "tribute" vessels to the Constitution / Refit.
Excalibur Class
Vesper Class
Exeter Class
All they need to do now is create Fleet T5 version of the T2 Cruiser, with these 3 (and only these 3) ship skins.
They have the Fleet T2 Escort and the Fleet T2 Science ship. Both of those vessels are 40+ years older than the Excalibur & Vesper, both of which (by Cryptic's own canon) were developed in the 2400s, while the Nova and Sabre were built in the 2370s.
This is what Cryptic needs to do, which would put the T5 Connie debate to rest. It would give players who enjoy the aesthetics of the Connie a reasonable modern alternative on par with the other Fleet retrofits of the same tier.
But as for a T5 Connie...no.
T5 Connie Refit...no.
T5 JJprise...no.
T5 JJprise Dreadnought...no.
The abilities and components of the Exeter, Vesper, and Constitution refit are completely the same. There would be no reason for one to reach tier 5 without the other because they are both capable of the same things.
To imply that their potential isn't the same is to say that the new ships were purposely designed to be bad.
bass ackwards.
leaving the constitution skin at t1/2 and replacing it with the exeter in the t5 line up would be more sensible than the sabre which is both t2 and has 2 fleet versions.
The Exeter being an improved T2 as it is, I can see how this can be more logical approach.
bass ackwards.
leaving the constitution skin at t1/2 and replacing it with the exeter in the t5 line up would be more sensible than the sabre which is both t2 and has 2 fleet versions.
The components of the Connie refit and the Exeter are completely compatible. Do you have any evidence whatsoever that they are different in any way other than looks?
I must admit that I miss the Connie as well... In addition to the fact that I have always loved the Original Series, which was much more exploration based and far less warlike then the rest of the series, it is one of the few prior period RP-able bridge views (all the rest are Klingon). Perhaps I wouldn't be as nostalgic if I could set the crews' uniforms but trying to play ST:TNG with everyone but my bridge officers in 'modern' uniforms kind of kills it for me.
P.S., I am aghast at the abject rudeness of some of the posts herein. The OP is simply asking for something reasonable in game. Granted its already been shot down by CBS, but it never hurts to ask (again and again) since that's likely the only way things will change. However, that shouldn't even matter. If he asked for flying unicorns with sprinkles for a contrail and rainbow array beams, its still no excuse for curt or uncivil responses... Let's try to be a little more Starfleet and a little less Klingon.
And... what the heck is up with the Join Dates? I've been playing since beta testing and been on the forums well prior to that!!!
"Starfleet captains are like children. They want everything right now and they want it their way. But the secret is to give them only what they need, not what they want." - Scotty
While I do understand the general idea of 'I want a modern ship that looks just like the Constitution class' I have to say it would be kind of foolish to see the Federation taking weird requests such as that one while engaged in a war in I-already-forgot-how-many fronts and everything else that's going on.
By now I would expect Starfleet to be pretty much throwing officers into whatever piece of scrap they managed to weld an engine and a few turrets to and tell them to go out there and not die too fast. In space suits, because life support is too much of a luxury right now. :P
Now that's a ship that would convince me to go back to the blue side.
While I do understand the general idea of 'I want a modern ship that looks just like the Constitution class' I have to say it would be kind of foolish to see the Federation taking weird requests such as that one while engaged in a war in I-already-forgot-how-many fronts and everything else that's going on.
By now I would expect Starfleet to be pretty much throwing officers into whatever piece of scrap they managed to weld an engine and a few turrets to and tell them to go out there and not die too fast. In space suits, because life support is too much of a luxury right now. :P
Now that's a ship that would convince me to go back to the blue side.
Sort of like this B-17E Flying Fortress known as "Old 666"
they are this way because the game is designed as such.
the exeter is an in game asset to be the modernised fersion of the (in canon) proven design.
all you are doing is begging the question.
Exeter is a skin for the Cruiser Refit. It adds a second aft weapon slot that comes with a MkII photon torpedo, and a second sci console slot that comes equipped with the Ionized Gas Sensor Console. Of course if you really want to, you can always dress up your Cruiser Refit to look like a Movie Era Constitution and upgrade it with any component that falls into your hands as you play. as for myself, I like the Exeter skin. I put Vesper nacelles on mine.
The USS Vengeance isn't a constitution class star ship it was classed as a Dreadnought in the movie and side to side with the Enterprise it dwarf it like a constitution class dwarf's a shuttle. It was one big scary looking ship. If one of these were implemented into the game do it as an event like the delta flier make people that want it work for it, I think it would be an awesome edition to admiral ranks ships.
Unfortunately, they can never use the models for the USS Enterprise or the Vengeance from the new movies because they do not have to rights to do so. Unless they get those, we're stuck with the Constitution class and the Enterprise A refit.
However, I would love to see this ship become tier V someday!
A T2 Constitution would be good, my TOS era Captain has actually made Captain in the Constitution and I'll get to Vice Admiral in it eventually but it would be slightly easier with an extra weapons slot or something. I'm not really bothered about outgunning a Sovereign because, well they don't exist in the 23rd Century.
It is bizarre that I have everything I need to play this game in TOS era (uniform, weapons, shuttle and bridge) but there's a big hoohaa about a slightly better equipped Constitution Class
The Continuing Voyages of Bridge Commander Captain Lee Drake - USS Sovereign Captain Draxon - IKS RanKuf Commander Torenn - IRW Soryak Captain Gregory MacCray - USS Geronimo
Okay... For those not quite paying attention or rage blinded to certain things:
1. I was quite upset after I bought the fleet T'Varo, and, expecting it to be like the Fleet K'Tinga, expecting to put on the T'Liss skin. To me, an old-school ToS fan, there's nothing more fun in the RSE / RSN / RRN / R-whatever-N, then watching Leonard's unnamed Captain's homage ship, complete with Bird of Prey on belly, offload the big red horkin' torpedo of death, doom and desecration onto the Borg E. Tac Cube... Sadly, they locked that option out from me. Therefore, I wonder why the Exceter variant T2 cruiser hasn't been fleeted yet with locked-out TMP parts...
2. On the subject of CBS's fabled "NO",, at one point it was "common forum knowledge" that the reason all non-faction-appropriate ships was consigned to lockbox-lottery was that CBS decreed that "ESD, Q'onos, etc. should never be overran with non-faction appropriate ships.
See Winter Event, 2012 - with resulting "Second Breen Invasion by ESD", as to how effective CBS's "No and never will be" No's can be. Since then, precedent has been set that a CBS NO can be overridden/overturned/we can get our ship...
3. I am a firm believer of "fairness and equality" to all. Currently, all TNG fans have the option to fly their favorite "hero" ship, with one caveat. The ships are "classed" - Defiant is an Escort, Voyager (Intrepid) is a Science ship, and Enterprise-D (Galaxy) is a cruiser. "Old school" fans only have the TMP Excelsior cruiser to call upon as an "end game hero ship".
So, to review: 6 "Hero Ships" from 6 "Shows". 3 "old" shows, 3 "TNG" shows. 3 Classes. TNG ships are spread one to a class. Only one of the 3 "old" shows has it's "hero" ship in end-game...
A - To continue the theme of "one show, one class", and the fact that TMP already exists in the cruiser slot, we begin our quest to slot an NX and Connie for endgame, into Escort and Science. Since the NX is, essentially, a nacelle-inverted Akira with a fancy paintjob, doing exactly that is the "best" we can do for T5 NX. It has to be a homage due to the fact that having a no-shielded ship in T5 would be ridiculous - so the "adapted Akira" works perfectly fine... even if it has close to a cruiser's base hull and the worst shield mod of the game (.5?)
B - That leaves ToS Connie & Science - which "addresses" the age of ship & hull point issue (Sci's have the least hull of the T5 birds), however, the survivabilty comes from Scotty's famous shield repairs... as the typical science 1.1+ shield modifier :P Also, this (obviously, at least to me) means that the Connie cannot "truly tank" like the Sovvy/Oddy can, and it is limited like all other "pure science" vessels to a 3/3 weapons loadout, so it can't even pew-pew like the aforementioned cruisers. "Light" Cruiser from 22nd century "Heavy" like Intrepid is the "light" version of the Sovvy and the Nebula is the "light" version of the Galaxy...
And so, with a "hopefully" rational explanation for including everyone's favorite hero ship at endgame, the only question that remains is "when can we convince CBS to override their current stance to these ships"...
Oh, to address arguments made in this thread - Someone compared HMS Victory with "whatever refits I want" vs. an Arleigh Burke. Here goes:
1. Replace all wood framing with steel, and the wooden hull with steel/aluminum/titanium (titanium preferred).
2. Installation of Tomahawk guided missile launcher in the "TRIBBLE deck". Harpoon or other modern anti-shipping missile launcher in the fore deck area.
3. Installation of Nuclear reactors or high-end diesel engines replacing steam propulsion / sail maneuverability.
4. Radar, Sonar, and all available "sail by wire" systemry common to modern ships.
5. Phalanx anti-missile gun systems on deck.
6. Replacement of all 4 cannon decks potentially with various "modern" explosives - short range rockets, high caliber machine guns, mortars, etc.
Set sail... At missile ranges, it's 50/50, who spots / launches / overcomes close-defense first wins. At closer ranges, it turns into the 1-2 ~6" guns on the AB vs. all the munitions replacing the cannon decks. At this range, I'd bet on the Victory-Refit...
To me, however, an more apt comparison is the B-52 bomber, "modernization" of systemry, refits, partial rebuilds, etc. has kept the B-52 flying for what, 58 years already (unprecedented in aircraft design), and plans call for them to fly till 2040+. If we say somewhere between the original B-52 and today there's a "B-52-A", then the "B-52-B" would be the B-1 "Lancer", and the "B-52-C" would be the B-2 Stealth Bomber... Current plans call for the "next generation bomber, aka B-52-D" to be developed in time for the B-52 to be "retired" in 2040-2050s...
Food for thought... :P
====post above is by dareau===
EDIT: Closed for necroing an old thread. Remember, if a thread has been inactive for 30 days, you should not post to it. Feel free to create a new thread on the subject if you would like to discuss further ~BranFlakes
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Comments
If I want to fly a T5 Nova, I can.
If I want to fly a T5 Saber, I can.
If I want to fly a T5 version of a T2 Cruiser though ...
You seem to have the T'Varo and the T'Liss confused.
The T'Liss is the one from the story. And it's also far far younger a ship than the T'Varo.
The T'Liss is TOS era. From Kirk's Enterprise.
The T'Varo predates that. It's design is from Archer's Enterprise.
This conversation has gone around many times now... "it shouldn't stand toe to toe with a Sovereign" or "it's too old!" etc etc.
In STO, ship age has no bearing on how well it performs. We have two ships from ENT era (older than TOS for the uninformed) which currently stand at Tier 5 and one of them, the Kumari is one of the hardest hitting escorts in the game if tooled out right. Then we have the Excelsior, a ship from the same era as the Constitution Refit and is widely regarded as better in some ways than the Sovereign i.e. turn rate (not the Reagent, the stock T5 version). Now we also have people flying around in Timeships from 500 years in the future... you see where I'm going?
Then we have the argument that "it breaks my sense of immersion" or "it's not canon!"...
Forgive me, but to quote a forum members signiture (roughly): "STO is about my Federation captain who jumps in his JHAS with his Jem'hadar Tactical officer, Borg science officer, Breen first officer and a Reman officer and kills Borg Cubes in about 5 seconds flat"
So this is cool but having an iconic ship from the series is not? STO is about giving the fans THEIR version of Trek, letting THEM decide how they want to immerse themselves in the Star Trek universe. If you want to play with the modern stuff, that's fine. If you want to make up crazy outfits and make your crew look like Power Rangers... fair enough. If someone wants to recreate something from their fave show whether that be ENT/TOS/TNG/DS9 etc then just LET THEM.
Seriously, I can't see what's complicated about this discussion.
Looking for a dedicated Star Trek community? Visit www.ufplanets.com for details.
well T'vaqro was too TNG like anyway and they should have had the Talon instead.
there is no need to polute the timeline anymore then it already has been by the alternate universe eg the destruction of Romulus etc. then the thought of adding a ship from there.
No way no how.
[/SIGPIC]
The abilities and components of the Exeter, Vesper, and Constitution refit are completely the same. There would be no reason for one to reach tier 5 without the other because they are both capable of the same things.
To imply that their potential isn't the same is to say that the new ships were purposely designed to be bad.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
The Exeter being an improved T2 as it is, I can see how this can be more logical approach.
The components of the Connie refit and the Exeter are completely compatible. Do you have any evidence whatsoever that they are different in any way other than looks?
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
And
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
P.S., I am aghast at the abject rudeness of some of the posts herein. The OP is simply asking for something reasonable in game. Granted its already been shot down by CBS, but it never hurts to ask (again and again) since that's likely the only way things will change. However, that shouldn't even matter. If he asked for flying unicorns with sprinkles for a contrail and rainbow array beams, its still no excuse for curt or uncivil responses... Let's try to be a little more Starfleet and a little less Klingon.
And... what the heck is up with the Join Dates? I've been playing since beta testing and been on the forums well prior to that!!!
By now I would expect Starfleet to be pretty much throwing officers into whatever piece of scrap they managed to weld an engine and a few turrets to and tell them to go out there and not die too fast. In space suits, because life support is too much of a luxury right now. :P
Now that's a ship that would convince me to go back to the blue side.
Sort of like this B-17E Flying Fortress known as "Old 666"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_666
Exeter is a skin for the Cruiser Refit. It adds a second aft weapon slot that comes with a MkII photon torpedo, and a second sci console slot that comes equipped with the Ionized Gas Sensor Console. Of course if you really want to, you can always dress up your Cruiser Refit to look like a Movie Era Constitution and upgrade it with any component that falls into your hands as you play. as for myself, I like the Exeter skin. I put Vesper nacelles on mine.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Cruiser_Refit
However, I would love to see this ship become tier V someday!
It is bizarre that I have everything I need to play this game in TOS era (uniform, weapons, shuttle and bridge) but there's a big hoohaa about a slightly better equipped Constitution Class
Captain Lee Drake - USS Sovereign
Captain Draxon - IKS RanKuf
Commander Torenn - IRW Soryak
Captain Gregory MacCray - USS Geronimo
1. I was quite upset after I bought the fleet T'Varo, and, expecting it to be like the Fleet K'Tinga, expecting to put on the T'Liss skin. To me, an old-school ToS fan, there's nothing more fun in the RSE / RSN / RRN / R-whatever-N, then watching Leonard's unnamed Captain's homage ship, complete with Bird of Prey on belly, offload the big red horkin' torpedo of death, doom and desecration onto the Borg E. Tac Cube... Sadly, they locked that option out from me. Therefore, I wonder why the Exceter variant T2 cruiser hasn't been fleeted yet with locked-out TMP parts...
2. On the subject of CBS's fabled "NO",, at one point it was "common forum knowledge" that the reason all non-faction-appropriate ships was consigned to lockbox-lottery was that CBS decreed that "ESD, Q'onos, etc. should never be overran with non-faction appropriate ships.
See Winter Event, 2012 - with resulting "Second Breen Invasion by ESD", as to how effective CBS's "No and never will be" No's can be. Since then, precedent has been set that a CBS NO can be overridden/overturned/we can get our ship...
3. I am a firm believer of "fairness and equality" to all. Currently, all TNG fans have the option to fly their favorite "hero" ship, with one caveat. The ships are "classed" - Defiant is an Escort, Voyager (Intrepid) is a Science ship, and Enterprise-D (Galaxy) is a cruiser. "Old school" fans only have the TMP Excelsior cruiser to call upon as an "end game hero ship".
So, to review: 6 "Hero Ships" from 6 "Shows". 3 "old" shows, 3 "TNG" shows. 3 Classes. TNG ships are spread one to a class. Only one of the 3 "old" shows has it's "hero" ship in end-game...
A - To continue the theme of "one show, one class", and the fact that TMP already exists in the cruiser slot, we begin our quest to slot an NX and Connie for endgame, into Escort and Science. Since the NX is, essentially, a nacelle-inverted Akira with a fancy paintjob, doing exactly that is the "best" we can do for T5 NX. It has to be a homage due to the fact that having a no-shielded ship in T5 would be ridiculous - so the "adapted Akira" works perfectly fine... even if it has close to a cruiser's base hull and the worst shield mod of the game (.5?)
B - That leaves ToS Connie & Science - which "addresses" the age of ship & hull point issue (Sci's have the least hull of the T5 birds), however, the survivabilty comes from Scotty's famous shield repairs... as the typical science 1.1+ shield modifier :P Also, this (obviously, at least to me) means that the Connie cannot "truly tank" like the Sovvy/Oddy can, and it is limited like all other "pure science" vessels to a 3/3 weapons loadout, so it can't even pew-pew like the aforementioned cruisers. "Light" Cruiser from 22nd century "Heavy" like Intrepid is the "light" version of the Sovvy and the Nebula is the "light" version of the Galaxy...
And so, with a "hopefully" rational explanation for including everyone's favorite hero ship at endgame, the only question that remains is "when can we convince CBS to override their current stance to these ships"...
Oh, to address arguments made in this thread - Someone compared HMS Victory with "whatever refits I want" vs. an Arleigh Burke. Here goes:
1. Replace all wood framing with steel, and the wooden hull with steel/aluminum/titanium (titanium preferred).
2. Installation of Tomahawk guided missile launcher in the "TRIBBLE deck". Harpoon or other modern anti-shipping missile launcher in the fore deck area.
3. Installation of Nuclear reactors or high-end diesel engines replacing steam propulsion / sail maneuverability.
4. Radar, Sonar, and all available "sail by wire" systemry common to modern ships.
5. Phalanx anti-missile gun systems on deck.
6. Replacement of all 4 cannon decks potentially with various "modern" explosives - short range rockets, high caliber machine guns, mortars, etc.
Set sail... At missile ranges, it's 50/50, who spots / launches / overcomes close-defense first wins. At closer ranges, it turns into the 1-2 ~6" guns on the AB vs. all the munitions replacing the cannon decks. At this range, I'd bet on the Victory-Refit...
To me, however, an more apt comparison is the B-52 bomber, "modernization" of systemry, refits, partial rebuilds, etc. has kept the B-52 flying for what, 58 years already (unprecedented in aircraft design), and plans call for them to fly till 2040+. If we say somewhere between the original B-52 and today there's a "B-52-A", then the "B-52-B" would be the B-1 "Lancer", and the "B-52-C" would be the B-2 Stealth Bomber... Current plans call for the "next generation bomber, aka B-52-D" to be developed in time for the B-52 to be "retired" in 2040-2050s...
Food for thought... :P
====post above is by dareau===
EDIT: Closed for necroing an old thread. Remember, if a thread has been inactive for 30 days, you should not post to it. Feel free to create a new thread on the subject if you would like to discuss further
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]