If threads like this keep appearing - you can see from this one all the speculation - the easy answer is to put the official position in a FAQ where everyone can see it. It's not hard.
In the same vein as this topic, the question has also been asked as to why there is no endgame B'rel/K'vort when they are everywhere in the TNG era - but there is an endgame D7/K'tinga which are out of service.
If threads like this keep appearing - you can see from this one all the speculation - the easy answer is to put the official position in a FAQ where everyone can see it. It's not hard.
In the same vein as this topic, the question has also been asked as to why there is no endgame B'rel/K'vort when they are everywhere in the TNG era - but there is an endgame D7/K'tinga which are out of service.
The common answer I've known about is that CBS/Cryptic don't want a T5 Constitution because it's an old design that doesn't fit with high-end ships. If that was the general rule for old ships, then I'd accept it, and move on.
However, players are still flying around in older Klingon and Romulan ships (the 22nd Century Romulan Bird of Prey anyone?) ...so yeah, hypocrites. If players are able to fly around in a T5 Excelsior and T5 Ambassador, then the least we should have is a T5 Exeter. I doubt they've actually got a reason, they're just saying no for the sake of saying no.
sometimes i wish moderators would close these T5 connie posts but free speech and all , Its not a viable ship to compete with its successors , because, and bonus internet points if you guess it
It was succeeded for a reason, its successor is a more capable starship thats why they were built, i don't see many people driving Model T Fords, do you?
Deal with it, move on and fly a T5 ship if you want to play endgame, or fly you precioius museum piece and deal with how outdated it is
I guess the D-7, T'Varo, Somraw, and D'kyr were never succeeded by superior ships.
I guess the Venture class didn't improve on the Galaxy class in any way. . . Nor did any of the 2409 versions of any ship. What a shame.
The common answer I've known about is that CBS/Cryptic don't want a T5 Constitution because it's an old design that doesn't fit with high-end ships. If that was the general rule for old ships, then I'd accept it, and move on.
However, players are still flying around in older Klingon and Romulan ships (the 22nd Century Romulan Bird of Prey anyone?) ...so yeah, hypocrites. If players are able to fly around in a T5 Excelsior and T5 Ambassador, then the least we should have is a T5 Exeter. I doubt they've actually got a reason, they're just saying no for the sake of saying no.
In her service life i figure about 30-40 connies built.
actually, it was stated in the Series, there Were ONLY 12 ever made.... considering how many we saw go boom during the series alone, i would bet that once the miranda class started seeing action, there werent that many constitutions left, they likely didnt bother making any more until the 1701-A solved or lessened many of the design flaws.... and even then there were not that many Refit's made.
30 i believe would be stretching it. 30 built perhaps as others got destroyed, but i wouldn't say 30 ever active at one time.
I guess the D-7, T'Varo, Somraw, and D'kyr were never succeeded by superior ships.
I guess the Venture class didn't improve on the Galaxy class in any way. . . Nor did any of the 2409 versions of any ship. What a shame.
I never claimed they were right to have those as end tier ships did I? I'm simply saying that they are right to have no high level Connie, Which is the same argument i'd use on the Examples you'ved used there to be lower tier than they are, i certainly don't like the Excelsior class being equal to my Soverign/Regent class vessel but it is and I deal with it in a mature fashion ( although throw the KDF a bone they don't get many new ships as it is with just the 2 Ship artists having been working on the game until recently )
I personally take offense that the highest hulled federation ship is a fleet Ambassador class, but you don't see me making forum threads about it, I fly My Regent class because it better suits my immersion in game and i'm happy with it , and if i need more hull strenght i buy Jevonite Hardpoints to use
When it comes to the Venture and other similar refits, The in universe explination is building new spaceframes (IMO) whilst bringing the design up to current tech
( the in game explination is that it is a Pay for Version of the free ship to generate revenue, since Crytic is NOT a charity i have no issues with this, with nicer visuals[ personal opinion] slightly tweaked stats and a cool toy to play with. The major differance between a T5 Connie and the Venture vs Galaxy is that the Venture is on the same tier as the galaxy so its NOT a major improvement is it?)
Overall my point would be that anyones personal sentimental attachment to an Aesthetic of one Particular Class of ship has no bearing on its Combat or non-combat Capabilities and thus should have no impact on its Tier level, which should be based on its Canon capabilities and its age
Old Designs are outmoded by new design and constuction techniques, and while they could produce a new hull based on the old incorperating compatible improvements ( Exeter class ) it isn't going to be as capable as a design based on the best methods and technology avalible ( Odyssey , Avenger, Vesta )
Additionally a Ship as old as the Constitution being refitted at this era would essentially be a complete Rebuild ( take HMS Victory as an example, barely any of the original ship remains, what is there has been replaced over time as great cost, preserved purely for Historical Value)
When you get to the point that you are rebuilding the space frame, You might as well build an entirely new Hull, and at this point why build an OLD Replica Constitution when the resources are better spent on a much more versatile and more capable Modern vessel such as an Odyssey or a Vesta ?
Side note here about the NX Replica, which is basically just a bit of Low tier fun
So i shall reiterate ''Deal with it, move on and fly a T5 ship if you want to play endgame, or fly you precioius museum piece and deal with how outdated it is''
These are the Voyages on the STO forum, the final frontier. Our continuing mission: to explore Pretentious Posts, to seek out new Overreactions and Misinformation , to boldly experience Cynicism like no man has before.......
The common answer I've known about is that CBS/Cryptic don't want a T5 Constitution because it's an old design that doesn't fit with high-end ships. If that was the general rule for old ships, then I'd accept it, and move on.
You do realize that a) Cryptic has nothing to do with CBS other then get their permission on anything CBS owns the license and trademark to, which includes the Connie and that b) Cryptic would be more then happy to sell you a tier 5 Connie for 5000 zen out of the C-store if they could.
Calling Cryptic a hypocrite in this instance just makes you sound well... whiny.
You do realize that a) Cryptic has nothing to do with CBS other then get their permission on anything CBS owns the license and trademark to, which includes the Connie and that b) Cryptic would be more then happy to sell you a tier 5 Connie for 5000 zen out of the C-store if they could.
That be true, I can think of other examples as to why Cryptic would be hypocrites.
Still in this instance I stand corrected. CBS are the hypocrites as far as the Constitution goes.
1. The prohibition against a Tier 5 Constitution applies to the configuration seen in the Original Series. But everybody seems to make the assumption that CBS is the reason we don't have endgame versions of [insert applicable canon ship here]. And we have no evidence of that. It's supposition at best.
In all likelyhood, the reason we don't have Tier 5 version of the movies era Constitution is the same reason we don't have Tier 5 Exeter, Vesper, and Excalibur class cruisers: Cryptic developers don't want to for whatever reason.
2. There is no evidence in canon that the Constitution "refit" configuration was retired entirely in favor of the Excelsior. However, there is evidence that the Constitution served in some capacity well into the late 24th Century.
3. Canon arguments and age of type has little to no relevance when it comes to the ships Cryptic provides for us to use at endgame.
4. Ultimately, the only thing that really matters in Star Trek Online's 25th Century is game canon. General canon from the shows, movies, and valid source material are only truly relevant in terms of flavor, back story, and "historical" background. And in STO's game canon, the movie-era Constitution is still in service as of 2409. In fact, look at the emblem for the Starfleet Fleet Modernization Program. A silhouette of a Constitution refit is included with the Excelsior and Galaxy .
5. Those that argue vehemently against endgame versions of the Constitution "refit", Miranda, Oberth, etc. need to get over themselves. Here's a protip for all of those special snowflakes: Letting people fly viable versions of their beloved Trek vessels at endgame in no way, shape, or form hurts you or breaks immersion anymore than it already is. No amount of rationalization will change that fact.
6. To add to point number five, a simple rule of thumb that applies to content, also applies to potential endgame versions of certain vessels. If you don't like said content, don't play it. If you are that anal about certain ships being available at endgame, then don't buy or fly them. Fly what makes you happy, and let others do the same. Really, people. What's so damn hard about that simple little solution that would make everybody that much happier in the long run?
1. The prohibition against a Tier 5 Constitution applies to the configuration seen in the Original Series. But everybody seems to make the assumption that CBS is the reason we don't have endgame versions of [insert applicable canon ship here]. And we have no evidence of that. It's supposition at best.
The CBS issue was specifically stated by DStahl and Geko in separate posts/interviews. Geko even went so far as to postulate that they might try and put a Connie in a Lockbox to get around CBS' restriction. That, apparently, didn't fly with CBS either, but it's clear that Cryptic does understand how much money can be made from a T5 Connie. They just can't get permission to use it.
That was 2 years ago and given time things can change - there could be new execs at CBS handling the vetting who don't have an issue with it, or whatever. The needs of any company often change over time.
2. There is no evidence in canon that the Constitution "refit" configuration was retired entirely in favor of the Excelsior. However, there is evidence that the Constitution served in some capacity well into the late 24th Century.
We know the Enterprise A was retired and replaced by the Excelsior, even though it was a new Connie upgrade and still being completed in The Final Frontier. We know the Enterprise B was an Excelsior. The only evidence that see of a Connie existing is a partial ship destroyed at Wolf 359 - and that could have just been a desperation move to get ships there for firepower even if they sucked.
3. Canon arguments and age of type has little to no relevance when it comes to the ships Cryptic provides for us to use at endgame.
This I agree with completely, as I also stated it on the first page. It's a game and any ships can be manufactured with minimal justification -such as the Excelsior and D'Kyr.
5. Those that argue vehemently against endgame versions of the Constitution "refit", Miranda, Oberth, etc. need to get over themselves. Here's a protip for all of those special snowflakes: Letting people fly viable versions of their beloved Trek vessels at endgame in no way, shape, or form hurts you or breaks immersion anymore than it already is. No amount of rationalization will change that fact.
I'm reasonably certain that insulting people who disagree with you is not a good way to get your opinion validated.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
You know i'm not all that bothered if some guy rocks up in a T5 Connie
We have T5 Novas
What is irritating is people harping on about it when you have been told NO
These are the Voyages on the STO forum, the final frontier. Our continuing mission: to explore Pretentious Posts, to seek out new Overreactions and Misinformation , to boldly experience Cynicism like no man has before.......
You know i'm not all that bothered if some guy rocks up in a T5 Connie
We have T5 Novas
What is irritating is people harping on about it when you have been told NO
Do you know how many things in this game were at one time a "NO" but are now in the game?
The hopeful will always be hopeful.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
That be true, I can think of other examples as to why Cryptic would be hypocrites.
Still in this instance I stand corrected. CBS are the hypocrites as far as the Constitution goes.
I agree with that.
The "official" reason why we had lockbox ship was because CBS didn't want easy access to "alien" ships. Yet, as of today, even if it's maybe difficult to have a certain alien ship, it's quite easy to have at least 1 alien ship. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of active lvl50 have at least 1 of them. And ESD is cluttered by them every now and then.
But we all know the real and unofficial reason. Lockbox makes money, having a unique and emblematic ship as prize (like the bugship) attract even more gamblers.
And now, we have dinos with lasers beams. And CBS is ok with that.
And I'm not even mentioning the T'varo refit and ship like that, that are as old as the Constitution.
But no connie ? That would certainly break canon !
I don't care about a t5 Connie. But the reasons given are obvious lies.
1. The prohibition against a Tier 5 Constitution applies to the configuration seen in the Original Series. But everybody seems to make the assumption that CBS is the reason we don't have endgame versions of [insert applicable canon ship here]. And we have no evidence of that. It's supposition at best.
In all likelyhood, the reason we don't have Tier 5 version of the movies era Constitution is the same reason we don't have Tier 5 Exeter, Vesper, and Excalibur class cruisers: Cryptic developers don't want to for whatever reason.
2. There is no evidence in canon that the Constitution "refit" configuration was retired entirely in favor of the Excelsior. However, there is evidence that the Constitution served in some capacity well into the late 24th Century.
3. Canon arguments and age of type has little to no relevance when it comes to the ships Cryptic provides for us to use at endgame.
4. Ultimately, the only thing that really matters in Star Trek Online's 25th Century is game canon. General canon from the shows, movies, and valid source material are only truly relevant in terms of flavor, back story, and "historical" background. And in STO's game canon, the movie-era Constitution is still in service as of 2409. In fact, look at the emblem for the Starfleet Fleet Modernization Program. A silhouette of a Constitution refit is included with the Excelsior and Galaxy .
5. Those that argue vehemently against endgame versions of the Constitution "refit", Miranda, Oberth, etc. need to get over themselves. Here's a protip for all of those special snowflakes: Letting people fly viable versions of their beloved Trek vessels at endgame in no way, shape, or form hurts you or breaks immersion anymore than it already is. No amount of rationalization will change that fact.
6. To add to point number five, a simple rule of thumb that applies to content, also applies to potential endgame versions of certain vessels. If you don't like said content, don't play it. If you are that anal about certain ships being available at endgame, then don't buy or fly them. Fly what makes you happy, and let others do the same. Really, people. What's so damn hard about that simple little solution that would make everybody that much happier in the long run?
Connie did NOT see service after 2300 for Excel can do everything she could but more and at that point enough of them are built they didn't need the last of the connies. They only likely connie in use is the Republic and see doesn't leave the solar system. Stargazer was originally going to be a connie but was changed to Constellation. Connie's ONLY role now is as a reserve ship. Should the fleet get a major loss of ships the connies can be reactivated as placeholder ship till more new ones can be built.
I dont know why CBS decided against a T5 Connie, but its not that hard to guess:
Both sides of the 'argument' seem to agree that starships are like cars. That they are build as one big mashine and that, just like with cars, the manufacturers have model years, product lines and regularely come up with new looks for the ships they build to say: "Looky! My ship is newer and fancier than yours! I just bought it yesterday! You have to get yourself one of those new shiny looking ships too! Look how old-fashioned your ship looks!"
Those who are opposed to a T5 Connie say that you cant have an 'old ship' fly around in endgame.
Those who are in favour of a T5 Connie say that the 'old ship' may have been refitted, retrofitted, modernized.... whatever.
All seem to agree, that a Connie must be an old ship and so does CBS.
The irony of it all is..... who the heck said that this or that ship is this or that old?
All those Mirandas we saw in DS9 might have been build just the day before the episode takes place.
Starships are NOT cars!
So, there you have it. Its us fanboys and our hobby of jumping to conclusions that killed a T5-Connie. Just look at this thread here! There are people who throw around numbers about how many Connies must have been build! How the heck can one seriously make such estimations? On what dialog is that estimation based?
All those Mirandas we saw in DS9 might have been build just the day before the episode takes place.
Starships are NOT cars!
And they still fell by the hundreds in the first 5 seconds of any battle...
And if the Miranda, a newer Ship, is getting absolutely massacred how should the Connie survive just looking at the enemy?
I dont know why CBS decided against a T5 Connie, but its not that hard to guess:
Both sides of the 'argument' seem to agree that starships are like cars. That they are build as one big mashine and that, just like with cars, the manufacturers have model years, product lines and regularely come up with new looks for the ships they build to say: "Looky! My ship is newer and fancier than yours! I just bought it yesterday! You have to get yourself one of those new shiny looking ships too! Look how old-fashioned your ship looks!"
Those who are opposed to a T5 Connie say that you cant have an 'old ship' fly around in endgame.
Those who are in favour of a T5 Connie say that the 'old ship' may have been refitted, retrofitted, modernized.... whatever.
All seem to agree, that a Connie must be an old ship and so does CBS.
The irony of it all is..... who the heck said that this or that ship is this or that old?
All those Mirandas we saw in DS9 might have been build just the day before the episode takes place.
Starships are NOT cars!
So, there you have it. Its us fanboys and our hobby of jumping to conclusions that killed a T5-Connie. Just look at this thread here! There are people who throw around numbers about how many Connies must have been build! How the heck can one seriously make such estimations? On what dialog is that estimation based?
Um, kirk during TOS said there was tweleve built at that time. And until Excel was out of prototype phase was being built. Many different sites have about 30-50 ships under the connie class. From Voyager episode it appears that Excel was still being made when Voyager was launched. at that point about a 70-80 year old design. so that's ALOT of years to make her as well as mirnada. Numbers is the key. Again in TNG era it is likely 60% of the fleet is Excel, Mirnada, and Oberth. My Sto time oberth is replaced by Nova and with war with the klingons it be stupid to retired the Miranda and Excel at this point. the ONLY reason the Connie would be active again is if the fleet had a MAJOR loss of ships.
Um, kirk during TOS said there was tweleve built at that time. And until Excel was out of prototype phase was being built. Many different sites have about 30-50 ships under the connie class. From Voyager episode it appears that Excel was still being made when Voyager was launched. at that point about a 70-80 year old design. so that's ALOT of years to make her as well as mirnada. Numbers is the key. Again in TNG era it is likely 60% of the fleet is Excel, Mirnada, and Oberth. My Sto time oberth is replaced by Nova and with war with the klingons it be stupid to retired the Miranda and Excel at this point. the ONLY reason the Connie would be active again is if the fleet had a MAJOR loss of ships.
Yeah, Kirk said something about 12 Connies. A year later it might have been 1200 Connies.... or still 12 Connies.... or any arbitrary number you want to pick.
Yeah, in Search for Spock it was said, that the Enterprise will be decomissioned since she was more than 20 years old. It was not said, that never again will ships be build that look like Connies or how many.
Yeah, Excelsior was said to be the pioneer of a new age. What was not said is that Connies would not be being build anymore.
Yeah, we never saw a Connie in TNG, that doesnt mean anything.
Yeah, Enterprise-A was riding into the sunset in ST VI. Nowhere did it say Connies will never be build again.
Again, there is nothing in Star Trek that ever said anything about the look of a Connie being a look that is not being build anymore.
Its us fanboys that come up with this stuff and treat it as fact.
So, I think given these circumstances, CBS was wise to say no to a T5 Connie.
And they still fell by the hundreds in the first 5 seconds of any battle...
And if the Miranda, a newer Ship, is getting absolutely massacred how should the Connie survive just looking at the enemy?
Again you treat starships like cars. You assume that if it looks like Kirks ship it must have simmillar capabilities.
Look, I know the discussion in and out. This discussion was allready going on when STO was still in the hands of Perpetual Entertainment. I dont even remember how many years ago that was.
And the discussion allways goes the same way: Both sides claim they can tell numbers just by looking at a ships shape and outward appearance. They can tell how old the ship is, how many of them where build, from when till when, and what the ship is capable of and how it would compete against an different looking ship and that simmilar looking ships must have simmillar capabilities and so on.....
Its quite funny actually.
Point being, fanboys treat starships this way and so does CBS.
It was succeeded for a reason, its successor is a more capable starship thats why they were built, i don't see many people driving Model T Fords, do you?
By this logic 95% of the Starfleet ships in game would need to be removed from the fleet. That includes Defiant which was later succeeded by the Prometheus. No Galaxy or Excelsior. No Sabre, Nebula, Nova, Intrepid, Steamrunner, Akira, and on and on. The Conny wasn't a Model T, that designation goes to the NX class. Even then the Model T had a lifespan of almost 20 years and over 15 million units were produced which was incredible for the time.
Again you treat starships like cars. You assume that if it looks like Kirks ship it must have simmillar capabilities.
Look, I know the discussion in and out. This discussion was allready going on when STO was still in the hands of Perpetual Entertainment. I dont even remember how many years ago that was.
I was answering to your comment about how the Miranda could have been build just one day before the Dominion War...
Yes it could have been build literally 1 Hour before Operation Return... it could have been outfitted within its capacities with the latest tech (Most are in error and proclaim something can receive a refit or a retrofit indefinitely which is just complete BS) and yet they still were massacred!
And still my stance it that all those "old" ships should have been phased out or are nearing that stage and be replaced by Ships like the Freedom Class or the Springfield Class for example...
Its funny how many people try so hard to hide that they just plain don't like what the Constitution looks like and just don't want to admit it.
I admit freely I don't like the look of the Constitution.
The refit Connie looks fine to me. Of course, I grew up with the Ent-D as my Star Trek. The original Constitution has "It's the 60's and FX is still in its infancy" written all over it. Which, granted is why some people want it so bad.
Just an observation, but a number of people are using the argument "the Constitution was replaced by the Excelsior, so we don't need a Constitution anymore." Last I checked, the Excelsior was replaced by the Ambassador, and the Ambassador was replaced by the Galaxy (etc etc).
By this logic, the only cruisers we should see in game are the Assault Cruisers and Star Cruisers; all the others would have been replaced. :rolleyes:
Yes it could have been build literally 1 Hour before Operation Return... it could have been outfitted within its capacities with the latest tech (Most are in error and proclaim something can receive a refit or a retrofit indefinitely which is just complete BS) and yet they still were massacred!
Its a shape, a form, a look! How does the look impose limitations on the technology inside?
I know, I know.... hardpoints, heat radiators, 'warp field dynamics'....
Here is the thing though: We do not know the hardpoints of a hull that looks like the U.S.S. Reliant from TWOK! We do not know anything about warp field dynamics and what shape is better in what regards and why. We do not know how big heat radiators have to be for what Power Output, how efficient the systems are. We have no numbers, nothing to base any estimates of guesstimates on.
Heck! We do not even know wether the Saratoga was a Miranda Class or not. It sure looked like the Reliant, and Spock categorized Reliant as a Miranda Class. Doesnt mean every ship that looks like Reliant is of the same class.
Considering your remarks about retrofitting somethin indefinetly: What are you talking about? Why does a ship that looks like the Reliant from the outside have to be a retrofit of anything Reliant used?
Maybe its a totally new ship? Totally new from scratch, just wrapped in a form that is traditional.
However, all of this is of no interest to me. Since the only point I wanted to add to the debate is this:
The decision of CBS to not allow a T5 Connie is based on all the very same assumptions that those who keep asking for a T5 Connie are making too. Everybody looks at a ships shape and look and assumes to know all sorts of things about that ship.
Last I checked, the Excelsior was replaced by the Ambassador, and the Ambassador was replaced by the Galaxy (etc etc).
Nowhere in Star Trek did it ever say that the Excelsior Class replaced the Constitution Class. Nowhere does it say that the Galaxy Class replaced the Ambassador or the Excelsior Class.
We only have one mention in all of Star Trek that one class replaced another (Nova-Oberth).
Just an observation, but a number of people are using the argument "the Constitution was replaced by the Excelsior, so we don't need a Constitution anymore." Last I checked, the Excelsior was replaced by the Ambassador, and the Ambassador was replaced by the Galaxy (etc etc).
By this logic, the only cruisers we should see in game are the Assault Cruisers and Star Cruisers; all the others would have been replaced. :rolleyes:
Said Logic FAILS.
Thanks!
No one is saying that on Monday they just stopped using all Connies in the Fleet and built 50 Excelsiors instead. It's just that as more Excels came out of the shipyards they were transitioned into frontier ships. The Connies would have been pulled back and used as transports and planetary support rather then still going on 5-year mission into deep space to make first contact. And eventually the same for subsequent Classes as time progressed.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
The ingame Date is around the year 2409. This means that the Constitution Class launched more than 160 years ago. This class is outdated. Period. Technical progress can't be stopped.
I hope strongly that Cryptic keeps its opinion about a T5 Constitution class ship.
But if not, I massively demand a T5 Space Shuttle as a kickazz retrofit Escort ship, since it is also canon and the argumentation chain of the T5 Constitution likers works here also.
Nowhere in Star Trek did it ever say that the Excelsior Class replaced the Constitution Class. Nowhere does it say that the Galaxy Class replaced the Ambassador or the Excelsior Class.
It's just that as more Excels came out of the shipyards they were transitioned into frontier ships. The Connies would have been pulled back and used as transports and planetary support rather then still going on 5-year mission into deep space to make first contact. And eventually the same for subsequent Classes as time progressed.
Even with that argument, by now the Excelsior and Ambassador wouldn't be frontier starships, and would be doing the same runs that the Constitution were doing when the Excelsior came out.
Yet we have Fleet Versions of them both. :rolleyes:
The ingame Date is around the year 2409. This means that the Constitution Class launched more than 160 years ago. This class is outdated. Period. Technical progress can't be stopped.
I hope strongly that Cryptic keeps its opinion about a T5 Constitution class ship.
But if not, I massively demand a T5 Space Shuttle as a kickazz retrofit Escort ship, since it is also canon and the argumentation chain of the T5 Constitution likers works here also.
I understand your point. I really do. But let me just counter with the fact that the Excelsior is 124 years old in this timeline, and is still considered on of the best T5 tac cruisers in the game. If technical progress can't be stopped then why is the Excelsior the exception to the rule - let alone the D'kyr, K't'nga, B'rel, and so on?
Ultimately each ship is as good as it is because the Devs want it to be, not because of tech or age limits.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Even with that argument, by now the Excelsior and Ambassador wouldn't be frontier starships, and would be doing the same runs that the Constitution were doing when the Excelsior came out.
Yet we have Fleet Versions of them both. :rolleyes:
As I just said to someone else above, that's Cryptic's decision. It has nothing to do with canon. Cryptic gets to decide how awesome or crappy each ship is in the game.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Comments
In the same vein as this topic, the question has also been asked as to why there is no endgame B'rel/K'vort when they are everywhere in the TNG era - but there is an endgame D7/K'tinga which are out of service.
k'tingas were very much in service through ds9
The common answer I've known about is that CBS/Cryptic don't want a T5 Constitution because it's an old design that doesn't fit with high-end ships. If that was the general rule for old ships, then I'd accept it, and move on.
However, players are still flying around in older Klingon and Romulan ships (the 22nd Century Romulan Bird of Prey anyone?) ...so yeah, hypocrites. If players are able to fly around in a T5 Excelsior and T5 Ambassador, then the least we should have is a T5 Exeter. I doubt they've actually got a reason, they're just saying no for the sake of saying no.
I guess the D-7, T'Varo, Somraw, and D'kyr were never succeeded by superior ships.
I guess the Venture class didn't improve on the Galaxy class in any way. . . Nor did any of the 2409 versions of any ship. What a shame.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
Well said.
actually, it was stated in the Series, there Were ONLY 12 ever made.... considering how many we saw go boom during the series alone, i would bet that once the miranda class started seeing action, there werent that many constitutions left, they likely didnt bother making any more until the 1701-A solved or lessened many of the design flaws.... and even then there were not that many Refit's made.
30 i believe would be stretching it. 30 built perhaps as others got destroyed, but i wouldn't say 30 ever active at one time.
I never claimed they were right to have those as end tier ships did I? I'm simply saying that they are right to have no high level Connie, Which is the same argument i'd use on the Examples you'ved used there to be lower tier than they are, i certainly don't like the Excelsior class being equal to my Soverign/Regent class vessel but it is and I deal with it in a mature fashion ( although throw the KDF a bone they don't get many new ships as it is with just the 2 Ship artists having been working on the game until recently )
I personally take offense that the highest hulled federation ship is a fleet Ambassador class, but you don't see me making forum threads about it, I fly My Regent class because it better suits my immersion in game and i'm happy with it , and if i need more hull strenght i buy Jevonite Hardpoints to use
When it comes to the Venture and other similar refits, The in universe explination is building new spaceframes (IMO) whilst bringing the design up to current tech
( the in game explination is that it is a Pay for Version of the free ship to generate revenue, since Crytic is NOT a charity i have no issues with this, with nicer visuals[ personal opinion] slightly tweaked stats and a cool toy to play with.
The major differance between a T5 Connie and the Venture vs Galaxy is that the Venture is on the same tier as the galaxy so its NOT a major improvement is it?)
Overall my point would be that anyones personal sentimental attachment to an Aesthetic of one Particular Class of ship has no bearing on its Combat or non-combat Capabilities and thus should have no impact on its Tier level, which should be based on its Canon capabilities and its age
Old Designs are outmoded by new design and constuction techniques, and while they could produce a new hull based on the old incorperating compatible improvements ( Exeter class ) it isn't going to be as capable as a design based on the best methods and technology avalible ( Odyssey , Avenger, Vesta )
Additionally a Ship as old as the Constitution being refitted at this era would essentially be a complete Rebuild ( take HMS Victory as an example, barely any of the original ship remains, what is there has been replaced over time as great cost, preserved purely for Historical Value)
When you get to the point that you are rebuilding the space frame, You might as well build an entirely new Hull, and at this point why build an OLD Replica Constitution when the resources are better spent on a much more versatile and more capable Modern vessel such as an Odyssey or a Vesta ?
Side note here about the NX Replica, which is basically just a bit of Low tier fun
So i shall reiterate ''Deal with it, move on and fly a T5 ship if you want to play endgame, or fly you precioius museum piece and deal with how outdated it is''
You do realize that a) Cryptic has nothing to do with CBS other then get their permission on anything CBS owns the license and trademark to, which includes the Connie and that b) Cryptic would be more then happy to sell you a tier 5 Connie for 5000 zen out of the C-store if they could.
Calling Cryptic a hypocrite in this instance just makes you sound well... whiny.
Still in this instance I stand corrected. CBS are the hypocrites as far as the Constitution goes.
In all likelyhood, the reason we don't have Tier 5 version of the movies era Constitution is the same reason we don't have Tier 5 Exeter, Vesper, and Excalibur class cruisers: Cryptic developers don't want to for whatever reason.
2. There is no evidence in canon that the Constitution "refit" configuration was retired entirely in favor of the Excelsior. However, there is evidence that the Constitution served in some capacity well into the late 24th Century.
3. Canon arguments and age of type has little to no relevance when it comes to the ships Cryptic provides for us to use at endgame.
4. Ultimately, the only thing that really matters in Star Trek Online's 25th Century is game canon. General canon from the shows, movies, and valid source material are only truly relevant in terms of flavor, back story, and "historical" background. And in STO's game canon, the movie-era Constitution is still in service as of 2409. In fact, look at the emblem for the Starfleet Fleet Modernization Program. A silhouette of a Constitution refit is included with the Excelsior and Galaxy .
5. Those that argue vehemently against endgame versions of the Constitution "refit", Miranda, Oberth, etc. need to get over themselves. Here's a protip for all of those special snowflakes: Letting people fly viable versions of their beloved Trek vessels at endgame in no way, shape, or form hurts you or breaks immersion anymore than it already is. No amount of rationalization will change that fact.
6. To add to point number five, a simple rule of thumb that applies to content, also applies to potential endgame versions of certain vessels. If you don't like said content, don't play it. If you are that anal about certain ships being available at endgame, then don't buy or fly them. Fly what makes you happy, and let others do the same. Really, people. What's so damn hard about that simple little solution that would make everybody that much happier in the long run?
That was 2 years ago and given time things can change - there could be new execs at CBS handling the vetting who don't have an issue with it, or whatever. The needs of any company often change over time.
We know the Enterprise A was retired and replaced by the Excelsior, even though it was a new Connie upgrade and still being completed in The Final Frontier. We know the Enterprise B was an Excelsior. The only evidence that see of a Connie existing is a partial ship destroyed at Wolf 359 - and that could have just been a desperation move to get ships there for firepower even if they sucked.
This I agree with completely, as I also stated it on the first page. It's a game and any ships can be manufactured with minimal justification -such as the Excelsior and D'Kyr.
I'm reasonably certain that insulting people who disagree with you is not a good way to get your opinion validated.
We have T5 Novas
What is irritating is people harping on about it when you have been told NO
The hopeful will always be hopeful.
The "official" reason why we had lockbox ship was because CBS didn't want easy access to "alien" ships. Yet, as of today, even if it's maybe difficult to have a certain alien ship, it's quite easy to have at least 1 alien ship. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of active lvl50 have at least 1 of them. And ESD is cluttered by them every now and then.
But we all know the real and unofficial reason. Lockbox makes money, having a unique and emblematic ship as prize (like the bugship) attract even more gamblers.
And now, we have dinos with lasers beams. And CBS is ok with that.
And I'm not even mentioning the T'varo refit and ship like that, that are as old as the Constitution.
But no connie ? That would certainly break canon !
I don't care about a t5 Connie. But the reasons given are obvious lies.
Connie did NOT see service after 2300 for Excel can do everything she could but more and at that point enough of them are built they didn't need the last of the connies. They only likely connie in use is the Republic and see doesn't leave the solar system. Stargazer was originally going to be a connie but was changed to Constellation. Connie's ONLY role now is as a reserve ship. Should the fleet get a major loss of ships the connies can be reactivated as placeholder ship till more new ones can be built.
Both sides of the 'argument' seem to agree that starships are like cars. That they are build as one big mashine and that, just like with cars, the manufacturers have model years, product lines and regularely come up with new looks for the ships they build to say: "Looky! My ship is newer and fancier than yours! I just bought it yesterday! You have to get yourself one of those new shiny looking ships too! Look how old-fashioned your ship looks!"
Those who are opposed to a T5 Connie say that you cant have an 'old ship' fly around in endgame.
Those who are in favour of a T5 Connie say that the 'old ship' may have been refitted, retrofitted, modernized.... whatever.
All seem to agree, that a Connie must be an old ship and so does CBS.
The irony of it all is..... who the heck said that this or that ship is this or that old?
All those Mirandas we saw in DS9 might have been build just the day before the episode takes place.
Starships are NOT cars!
So, there you have it. Its us fanboys and our hobby of jumping to conclusions that killed a T5-Connie. Just look at this thread here! There are people who throw around numbers about how many Connies must have been build! How the heck can one seriously make such estimations? On what dialog is that estimation based?
And they still fell by the hundreds in the first 5 seconds of any battle...
And if the Miranda, a newer Ship, is getting absolutely massacred how should the Connie survive just looking at the enemy?
Um, kirk during TOS said there was tweleve built at that time. And until Excel was out of prototype phase was being built. Many different sites have about 30-50 ships under the connie class. From Voyager episode it appears that Excel was still being made when Voyager was launched. at that point about a 70-80 year old design. so that's ALOT of years to make her as well as mirnada. Numbers is the key. Again in TNG era it is likely 60% of the fleet is Excel, Mirnada, and Oberth. My Sto time oberth is replaced by Nova and with war with the klingons it be stupid to retired the Miranda and Excel at this point. the ONLY reason the Connie would be active again is if the fleet had a MAJOR loss of ships.
Yeah, Kirk said something about 12 Connies. A year later it might have been 1200 Connies.... or still 12 Connies.... or any arbitrary number you want to pick.
Yeah, in Search for Spock it was said, that the Enterprise will be decomissioned since she was more than 20 years old. It was not said, that never again will ships be build that look like Connies or how many.
Yeah, Excelsior was said to be the pioneer of a new age. What was not said is that Connies would not be being build anymore.
Yeah, we never saw a Connie in TNG, that doesnt mean anything.
Yeah, Enterprise-A was riding into the sunset in ST VI. Nowhere did it say Connies will never be build again.
Again, there is nothing in Star Trek that ever said anything about the look of a Connie being a look that is not being build anymore.
Its us fanboys that come up with this stuff and treat it as fact.
So, I think given these circumstances, CBS was wise to say no to a T5 Connie.
Again you treat starships like cars. You assume that if it looks like Kirks ship it must have simmillar capabilities.
Look, I know the discussion in and out. This discussion was allready going on when STO was still in the hands of Perpetual Entertainment. I dont even remember how many years ago that was.
And the discussion allways goes the same way: Both sides claim they can tell numbers just by looking at a ships shape and outward appearance. They can tell how old the ship is, how many of them where build, from when till when, and what the ship is capable of and how it would compete against an different looking ship and that simmilar looking ships must have simmillar capabilities and so on.....
Its quite funny actually.
Point being, fanboys treat starships this way and so does CBS.
By this logic 95% of the Starfleet ships in game would need to be removed from the fleet. That includes Defiant which was later succeeded by the Prometheus. No Galaxy or Excelsior. No Sabre, Nebula, Nova, Intrepid, Steamrunner, Akira, and on and on. The Conny wasn't a Model T, that designation goes to the NX class. Even then the Model T had a lifespan of almost 20 years and over 15 million units were produced which was incredible for the time.
I was answering to your comment about how the Miranda could have been build just one day before the Dominion War...
Yes it could have been build literally 1 Hour before Operation Return... it could have been outfitted within its capacities with the latest tech (Most are in error and proclaim something can receive a refit or a retrofit indefinitely which is just complete BS) and yet they still were massacred!
And still my stance it that all those "old" ships should have been phased out or are nearing that stage and be replaced by Ships like the Freedom Class or the Springfield Class for example...
I admit freely I don't like the look of the Constitution.
The refit Connie looks fine to me. Of course, I grew up with the Ent-D as my Star Trek. The original Constitution has "It's the 60's and FX is still in its infancy" written all over it. Which, granted is why some people want it so bad.
By this logic, the only cruisers we should see in game are the Assault Cruisers and Star Cruisers; all the others would have been replaced. :rolleyes:
Said Logic FAILS.
Thanks!
Its a shape, a form, a look! How does the look impose limitations on the technology inside?
I know, I know.... hardpoints, heat radiators, 'warp field dynamics'....
Here is the thing though: We do not know the hardpoints of a hull that looks like the U.S.S. Reliant from TWOK! We do not know anything about warp field dynamics and what shape is better in what regards and why. We do not know how big heat radiators have to be for what Power Output, how efficient the systems are. We have no numbers, nothing to base any estimates of guesstimates on.
Heck! We do not even know wether the Saratoga was a Miranda Class or not. It sure looked like the Reliant, and Spock categorized Reliant as a Miranda Class. Doesnt mean every ship that looks like Reliant is of the same class.
Considering your remarks about retrofitting somethin indefinetly: What are you talking about? Why does a ship that looks like the Reliant from the outside have to be a retrofit of anything Reliant used?
Maybe its a totally new ship? Totally new from scratch, just wrapped in a form that is traditional.
However, all of this is of no interest to me. Since the only point I wanted to add to the debate is this:
The decision of CBS to not allow a T5 Connie is based on all the very same assumptions that those who keep asking for a T5 Connie are making too. Everybody looks at a ships shape and look and assumes to know all sorts of things about that ship.
CBS didnt kill the T5 Connie! Fannon did!
Nowhere in Star Trek did it ever say that the Excelsior Class replaced the Constitution Class. Nowhere does it say that the Galaxy Class replaced the Ambassador or the Excelsior Class.
We only have one mention in all of Star Trek that one class replaced another (Nova-Oberth).
Thats all we know.
I hope strongly that Cryptic keeps its opinion about a T5 Constitution class ship.
But if not, I massively demand a T5 Space Shuttle as a kickazz retrofit Escort ship, since it is also canon and the argumentation chain of the T5 Constitution likers works here also.
Original join date: Jul 2008
Yet we have Fleet Versions of them both. :rolleyes:
Ultimately each ship is as good as it is because the Devs want it to be, not because of tech or age limits.