test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Pet Peeve on STO Starships
intrinsical
Member Posts: 208 Arc User
I have a pet peeve on Cryptic's recent starship designs: They don't follow Gene Roddenberry's small set of rules on warp nacelle placement. (See the section "Roddenberry's Design Rules" at http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/design.htm)
For example, the Fleet Avenger's nacelle placement violates rule #2.
For example, the Fleet Avenger's nacelle placement violates rule #2.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
That's your ONLY pet peeve?
Nothing from the 12 Mistakes To Avoid section?
First major example is the Klingon Bird of Prey from Star Trek III. It didn't have the separate warp nacelles. The D-7 / K'T'Inga followed the rules.
And it only got worse from that time onwards, most esp. by later TNG and DS9.
Gal-X, Defiant broke it big tiime.
Yet a lot of newer stuff did follow the rules. Galaxy, Akira, etc. The Sovereign class was close to breaking it, but nacelles are exposed just enough.
Many of these examples are quite old, and we're not even going to get into examples like the BoP, the Ferrengi Marauder, and the Galor, as these are alien ships that aren't required to follow the rules.
Many "alien" warp ships did not have two warp nacelles, , borg cube or the Bird of Pray where the ram scoop and warp engine are not visible.. just to list a couple.
Also that was for the TNG era.. we are no longer in that era.. STO is a generation of ships ahead of that.
Just want to point out the Marauder doesn't break the rules. Its warp nacelles can see each other as you can see from this picture http://www.st-files.de/stgalaxis/ferengi/images/14-02-2.jpg and the 1st time you see a Galor is after gene died if I recall.
From what I understand the 3rd nacelles of the federation ships were not used to create the warp field but to power weapon and shield systems.. though that could just be something they said after the screwed up there own lore with Federation ships.
Over all the rule has been broken many times.. so to have issue where the warp nacelles a generation after TNG is kinda being overly picky as there is no startrek tech reason they have to see each other given the amount of ships that do not follow that rule.
Those were the 60s and 70s for god's sake. They didn't have mobile phones or PCs or Tabletts or whatever. Science and Engineering evolved, old rules were changed to fit current times and researchings. Our minds are much more open than they used before.
Nowadays children are already able to do Homepages or Apps, something that now one could have thought of 10 years ago.
If Mr. Roddenberry would still be alive, he would have gained much more knowledge and would have changed his own rules. Even his wife adapted and approved how Star Trek changed over the years.
Actually the Defiant doesn't break it. The lower part of the nacelles are visible to each other, and from the front of the ship.
That's what I love about the D'Deridex design. The guy who made it specifically gave it it's distinct dual hull specifically so the two warp engines could see each other.
A Romulan Strike Team, Missing Farmers and an ancient base on a Klingon Border world. But what connects them? Find out in my First Foundary mission: 'The Jeroan Farmer Escapade'
The Defiant didn't break the rules. If you looked at the hull from the bottom, it is concave - a hollow area where nothing blocks the two nacelles. The Galaxy Dreadnaught's middle nacelle actually contained two nacelles, so the ship had two pairs of nacelles, thus it did not have an odd number of nacelles.
I am only aware of one TNG-era ship that violated the rules - the Galor class.
My pet peeve is that Craptic designs such crappy ship models. The Avenger and Regent are just ugly. Heck the Battle Cruiser should be New orleans. THwere are many canon ships they have access to they could use before making their own. And when they do make their own PAY attention the Starfleet design. The Avenger should be smoother not blocky
There are a few more.. borg, galor, Maquis attack craft, andorian cruiser/battle cruiser, kazon ships, the undine.. maybe.. hard to tell where there warp engines are.
Fact is that rule no longer applies in STO's time line...
Maybe.. the Mogh looks nice.. the Tempest isn't half bad.. Its the way Star Fleet ships are set up with the suasor and nacelles... there is not a hole lot you can do with them.
"Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull."
What kind of dumb TRIBBLE tactical design is that, nerve center of the ship, the captain and all key crew members exposed to a vulnerable outer surface of the ship, Some ships even have bloody windows on the roof!
Its just an arbitrary design feature that has little logic to it.
Likewise with the other rules, The arbitrary rules of warp technology aren't followed by alien designs, So it stands to reason that warp technology can work even when multiple "rule"s are broken
So it also stand to reason that starfleet could also build a warpdrive system that breaks the rules
The Avenger is basically a nod to the A10 Warthog and the Gau-8 Avenger. She ain't supposed to be pretty, she's supposed to get the job done.
Regent looks lovely, you just have no eye.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
My main pet peeve which I have expressed before regarding ship designs is the fact that most of Cryptic's own designed ships don't fit the Federation building norm. They'd rather cater to their own wishes and views, and those of every other person who plays STO.
For those of you unsure of what the Federation building norm is, that is the creation of a Fed ship with a simple hull; no random hull protrusions, no multi-layered hulls, and no fins. The ships hull materials are basic too. Many of Cryptic's Fed ships look like someone took a cutting tool and lacerated the ships hull, which is unnecessary. For Fed ships, Balance, the hardest thing to get right is key to Federation ships.
The good news is they nailed the Tempest class in regards to these pointers. :eek: (shock, Horror!):)
CLASSIFIED
[/SIGPIC]
Also, apparently, the Nova class.
but again too bulk as much as i hate the Regent she at least stays true to the smooth design style of the feds. Defiant is the sole exception because her complete purpose was to be small and deadly. Avenger just deadly so her being blocky is ugly and not to style. If she was smoother there would be less complaints. ANd an easy way to solve this is adding a New orleans skin to the ship.
Problem not fins, blocky design.
So as long as the fed and all other ships look trek enough that they fit in all is ok.
U.S.S. Helios -Vesta Class / R.R.W. Dark Science - Dyson Surveillance Science Destroyer
U.S.S. Donut - Fleet Advanced Research Vessel Retrofit
TheWiseGuys
Are you sure your not getting confused between fins, and Pylons?
If not, those 'fins' your talking about that are on the nacelles are so tiny and subtle, they probably actually serve some techno babble purpose. With fins I'm talking about these contenders: 1. 2.
I would have to agree, both the Regent and Avenger... Actually, any ships that use the humpback neck are blocky and ugly. In regards to Aesthetic design, the Avenger is an absolute sucker. She does not effectively carry out her purpose. Why do you ask?
Ships designed with some military consideration should be designed to provide the smallest target possible. The Akira, Steamrunner, Sabre and Defiant class are great at this. They feature a narrow cross section to reduce the height of the ship, and while they are wide when viewed from above or below, good tactical positioning should ensure a minimal target is offered to an opponent at all times. Their deflectors aren't as exposed as other ships, and it is much more difficult to directly hit their engineering section.
Regarding this, the patrol escort is the only winner. The Chimera fails, as does the Avenger Battle cruiser and Dyson science destroyers, to name a few.
CLASSIFIED
[/SIGPIC]
Yes, quite sure. The second one doesn't look any worse than the one on the Nova class. The first one isn't a fin problem, it's a design problem in general.
While I dislike both of those fin parts, I will play devils advocate, They are functional to a degree
The nacelle fins are technobable Warp field stabilisers and the Neck of the Imperial class is Spaced Armor plating
Look familiar ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-219-0595-23,_Russland-Mitte-S%C3%BCd,_Panzer_III.jpg
Now if the question is, are these nice features ? I don't think so, I don't use either of those parts, and I have both of those ships and the Imperial skin unlocked , but they have some logical purpose to them at least
Should check em out on the STO ship requisition screen. Quasar has fins on the nacelle pylons. Otherwise, I have to agree, Imperial class is a design fail. The fins on nacelles are actually warp field stabilisers, according to the ST fact files. They have an actual aesthetic use.
Although they shouldn't be as large as Cryptic has them as.
I suppose fins aren't the worst aspect, but rather structural bits that poke out from Fed ship that do nothing and shouldn't be there.
And Fed ships shouldn't have spaced armour plating. Apparently 'spaced armour plating' would become shrapnel if a torp hit it. So no logic in it.
CLASSIFIED
[/SIGPIC]