This is gonna be my first vote for the loser, Theta.
Actually the only FED Carrier I'd like to see is Theta saucer with Beta everything else. Frankly i don't like any of the designs as they are.
TOIVA, Toi Vaxx, Toia Vix, Toveg, T'vritha, To Vrax: Bring in the Allegiance class. Toi'Va, Ti'vath, Toivia, Ty'Vris, Tia Vex, Toi'Virth: Add Tier 6 KDF Carrier and Raider. Tae'Va, T'Vaya, To'Var, Tevra, T'Vira, To'Vrak: Give us Asylums for Romulans.
I agree with most that I'm getting tired of the round saucer or triangular hull designs of the federation. That's why I'm usually flying an alien ship, but that's besides the point. The problem is these are the only choices presented to us. This "event" shouldn't be called "Design Your Ship", but along the lines of "Pick Your Ship"...
The other problem I'm having with this voting process is people have been mainly picking the sleeker, more tactical looking ships than what a carrier would really be. A carrier will be big, fat, and quite possibly ugly, to house all the fighters, spare parts, and maintenance crews needed to maintain them. Instead of voting for the one that matches the new ship's function (carrier), people are picking the ones that are "cooler looking". Typical...
I'm a little torn. Theta's side view looks a little similar to the Guardian's side view. Epsilon's tiny and short nacelles don't look nice on a carrier and it looks too compact. It has too much of an escort feel when I look at it. I guess I'll go with Theta.
Well apparently I have an excellent track record of going against the majority--suspect this vote will be no different.
Time they consider's my IDEA since everyone appears to only want DREADNOUGHTS to reduce weapon's to 3 front & 2 rear with 3 hangers for these slow to turn BEASTS with ENG preference. Then perhaps introduce Lt. Carriers with 2 Hangers that have 3 front/rear weapons but with a Science preference that are far more maneuverable. I want to see some Lt Carriers with 2 hangers with crews of 350-550 crew compliment with ships the size of a RESOLUTE .
Today everything from Heavy Escorts (250 Crew) to Command Cruisers (1000 Crew) have 1 hanger (Tac Command Profile) and while you surely don't require a DREADNOUGHT for 2 hangers its what people want.
Frankly i don't like any of the designs as they are.
Agreed, though I would like to reserve judgement on the Omega design until I see the side view. Not this vote, though. So I'll continue to abstain for now.
Frankly i don't like any of the designs as they are.
Agreed, though I would like to reserve judgement on the Omega design until I see the side view. Not this vote, though. So I'll continue to abstain for now.
The more it hurts to imagine the possible combinations of the offered designs and those designs on the Banner pic of the blog.
TOIVA, Toi Vaxx, Toia Vix, Toveg, T'vritha, To Vrax: Bring in the Allegiance class. Toi'Va, Ti'vath, Toivia, Ty'Vris, Tia Vex, Toi'Virth: Add Tier 6 KDF Carrier and Raider. Tae'Va, T'Vaya, To'Var, Tevra, T'Vira, To'Vrak: Give us Asylums for Romulans.
I check out all angles and aspect of the ship. Side and top view. I said it before if a ship has 5 front weapon slots, five rear has a 50% reduction in weapon energy cost, has a console lay out of 5/5/5 I won't fly it if it looks like a garbage scow.
This was the toughest one so far. I like both equally, but I've always prefered the classic look of a separate dorsal hull.
So I voted accordingly. If teh side view on Epsilon had been slightly different, I may have gone with it instead.
Epsilon is bulky in all the places like I would expect a carrier to be. It has a thick hull for hanger space, quad engines to push it, and an elongated saucer to accommodate the extra crew areas and such. It just needs to be slightly increased in size relative to other ships and it would be an ideal candidate.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Cleverly disguised as myself - Helmsmn2
both look like TRIBBLE to me but theta looks slightly less crappy. hopefully what ever good elements out of all ship design will be integrated into the final product to make it a decent looking ship, because right now I'm not hyped about this at all
Epsilon and Sigma are practically identical with a few minor variations, but they share the EXACT same side view. Heck, all-in-all they would be interchangeable costume pieces for one another.
No one has noticed this???
Open up both images and click back and forth between the two and you'll see for yourself. If the carriers were coming out as a 3 pack then epsilon and sigma would just be variants of the same ship with a different saucer section!
I noticed that epsilon and sigma are practically identical from the side, and also, from the top down, epsilon and omega have almost the same hull, just the nacelles/pylons are drastically different, but then the side view takes them in drastically different directions.
My heart lies with Sigma tho, since idiots decided to vote out the only good design in round 1. #RememberBeta
Yes! Remember beta! Although frankly, alpha's been growing on me after her win. At least from the top down she looks like a federation ship and her profile looks interesting and she's got that mission pod. If it does come down to the prophesied Pseudo-Biblical smack down between alpha and omega, I hope alpha wins. I just can't see a federation ship in omega. In fact it kind of reminds me of the scimitar for some reason just slap some giant wings on that hull/flip the pylons forward and *tada* Theta's nacelle positioning and profile save her from having the same appearance to me I suppose.
team epsilon all the way i want my U.S.S. Typhon and Epsilon is the closest match STO has
Indeed, epsilon/sigma remind me of the typhon/a defiant type philosophy of ship design where things were kept in tight so they aren't all hanging way out there ready to get shot off/collided with.
The Nebula-configured Odyssey needs to be a thing.
People, if we want to think realistically about the design of the ship, we need to consider practicalities. People keep arguing that Epsilon and similar designs look too sleek and escort like and not trek enough, but consider this, a good carrier design is one that is built AROUND the hanger bays. This ship, when it's done, will be BIG! Any ship that big, once its done, won't really look escort like anymore. Consider the size context.
If we stick to the basic star trek style and create a carrier along those line, it will probably look like a giant, ridiculous cruiser and be even bigger than it needs to be (The Guardian and Odyssey cruisers are pushing the limit for me there and I LIKE them! Much bigger than that is too much! I'm not a big fan of the size of the Caitian carrier). To look the part of the carrier, it needs one big combined hull, surrounding the bays. Separating the bays up in two different hulls would just mean the ship would have to be even bigger to accommodate twice as much equipment! Putting both bays in the same hull will mean equipment can be shared between them. And pilots and crew can more easily be housed in decks around the bays, creating more protection for the bays, the most important part of any carrier.
And four nacelles is definitely better than two, because in real life they would be used to generate more power to use for stronger force fields around around the hanger doors, fighter catapults and tractors and more. Please think realistically and vote as such. Don't vote for something that is going to turn this carrier into a giant, ugly, ungainly-looking cruiser with two fighter bays (Think along the lines of a much better looking version of the Jupiter-class, but a slight bit smaller, sleeker and only one hull, that is what I am rooting for, it will make a great carrier).
Which do you want to fly? A realistic carrier-looking starship? Or another giant cruiser with bays that looks a bit more classic star trek-like, but weirder? (Sorry, but there are many of us who this Theta looks like a weird giant cruiser) Beta would have been a better choice by far then Theta for the reasons some of you have posted here (and it looked better too, but lost the vote). I even think it could have been a successful carrier. But Theta would not. Period.
Please vote realistically! Look at the Defiant and other non-standard ships, just because it doesn't have a lower hull and has more than two nacelles doesn't mean it isn't trek! PLEASE!
Been Playing STO as much as I can for 11+ Years!
"Never Surrender! Never give up Hope!"
"Prosperity and Success in everything you do."
"To Boldly go.........well punch it already!"
"To Be or Not To Be"....Alas, the Foundry is Not To Be. We Shall miss Thee, dear Friend!
"Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?"- Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Thank You, Cryptic......even when I don't agree with all your decisions....Thank You for Star Trek Online!
Absolutely! No elonged saucers, aerodinamics do not apply in space, everyone know that a circle is the most efficient 2d geometric figure, and I hate those 4 nacelles
My heart lies with Sigma tho, since idiots decided to vote out the only good design in round 1. #RememberBeta
Yes! Remember beta! Although frankly, alpha's been growing on me after her win. At least from the top down she looks like a federation ship and her profile looks interesting and she's got that mission pod. If it does come down to the prophesied Pseudo-Biblical smack down between alpha and omega, I hope alpha wins. I just can't see a federation ship in omega. In fact it kind of reminds me of the scimitar for some reason just slap some giant wings on that hull and *tada*
Yeah, if it comes to that I'm voting Alpha, since there's absolutely no way I'm just going to sit idly by and let Jupiter Mk II slip into the game after they already excised that grotesque tumor of a ship.
I like the top down of the Theta, and the side profile was too close to call. Ultimately, it was the Epsilon's four nacelles that won me over. Good designs all the way around by the way.
People, if we want to think realistically about the design of the ship, we need to consider practicalities. People keep arguing that Epsilon and similar designs look too sleek and escort like and not trek enough, but consider this, a good carrier design is one that is built AROUND the hanger bays. This ship, when it's done, will be BIG! Any ship that big, once its done, won't really look escort like anymore. Consider the size context.
If we stick to the basic star trek style and create a carrier along those line, it will probably look like a giant, ridiculous cruiser and be even bigger than it needs to be (The Guardian and Odyssey cruisers are pushing the limit for me there and I LIKE them! Much bigger than that is too much! I'm not a big fan of the size of the Caitian carrier). To look the part of the carrier, it needs one big combined hull, surrounding the bays. Separating the bays up in two different hulls would just mean the ship would have to be even bigger to accommodate twice as much equipment! Putting both bays in the same hull will mean equipment can be shared between them. And pilots and crew can more easily be housed in decks around the bays, creating more protection for the bays, the most important part of any carrier.
If I am not mistaken, theta has all her primary hangars in the saucer section and will launch from that little split between the upper and lower half of the saucer. Just because she has a primary and secondary hull separated by a neck doesn't mean she's splitting her bays between the two. She may have a more traditional shuttle bay in the secondary hull, but that may simply be to protect her combat craft. Taking in a foreign diplomat who, for all you know, has equipped their shuttle as a bomb to disable your hangars if they get access? Of course you take them into shuttle bay 1 at the back instead of hangar 1.
And four nacelles is definitely better than two, because in real life they would be used to generate more power to use for stronger force fields around around the hanger doors, fighter catapults and tractors and more. Please think realistically and vote as such. Don't vote for something that is going to turn this carrier into a giant, ugly, ungainly-looking cruiser with two fighter bays (Think along the lines of a much better looking version of the Jupiter-class, but a slight bit smaller, sleeker and only one hull, that is what I am rooting for, it will make a great carrier).
Nacelles do not generate the ship's power. Nacelles generate the ship's warp field. The ship's main power is produced by the matter/antimatter reaction in the warp core. At most, having more than two nacelles simply produces redundancy in case one or more nacelles take damage so the ship remains warp capable despite losing a nacelle or two. They could possibly be used to stay at warp longer/be more energy efficient by using all four nacelles at lower power consumption to produce a more powerful warp field (if warp physics work that way, though technical manuals in the past have stated that it was found two nacelles are most efficient, but that could have changed due to some technological advancements.) or cycling between using pairs to generate the warp field so that neither pair is overtaxed. So while there are potential advantages to having four nacelles, none of those benefits are improved power generation.
Do you want a realistic carrier-looking ship or a misshapen whale that vaguely looks classic star trek like to fly? (Sorry, but there are many of us who this Theta looks this way) Beta would have been a better choice by far then Theta for the reasons some of you have posted here (and it looked better too, but lost the vote). I even think it could have been a successful carrier. But Theta would not. Period.
Please vote realistically! Look at the Defiant and other non-standard ships, just because it doesn't have a lower hull and has more than two nacelles doesn't mean it isn't trek! PLEASE!
Agreed, for a "classic trek look" beta was a much more aesthetically pleasing option to my eye. Though 4 nacelles are also part of trek in the form of the Constellation, Cheyenne, and eventually the Prometheus. Theta is all kinds of oddly shaped/proportioned, though it does seem reminiscent of the oberth or something, though I never particularly cared for that design myself. Epsilon/sigma actually do have a type of "lower hull" from the profile view, as I assume that lower portion would house a deflector. It's just a bit of a "unibody" design similar to the star cruisers and their profiles remind me a bit of a beefy, quad nacelle Intrepid, and I'm totally okay with that.
The Nebula-configured Odyssey needs to be a thing.
Epsilon looks like a suppository. But this vote doesn't matter anyways.
A suppository? with warp nacelles and a crew of hundreds...I dread to imagine what other hygienic needs your fleet has been re-purposed for.
I'm still going to vote for Epsilon though. If I'm going to orbit Uranus and wipe out klingons, I would imagine that the U.S.S. Suppository is the most apt vessel, unless you have the U.S.S. Sanitary Wipes listed in your fleet?
Comments
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I know I am, so I'm going for #TeamEpsilon.
Actually the only FED Carrier I'd like to see is Theta saucer with Beta everything else. Frankly i don't like any of the designs as they are.
Toi'Va, Ti'vath, Toivia, Ty'Vris, Tia Vex, Toi'Virth: Add Tier 6 KDF Carrier and Raider.
Tae'Va, T'Vaya, To'Var, Tevra, T'Vira, To'Vrak: Give us Asylums for Romulans.
Don't make ARC mandatory! Keep it optional only!
The other problem I'm having with this voting process is people have been mainly picking the sleeker, more tactical looking ships than what a carrier would really be. A carrier will be big, fat, and quite possibly ugly, to house all the fighters, spare parts, and maintenance crews needed to maintain them. Instead of voting for the one that matches the new ship's function (carrier), people are picking the ones that are "cooler looking". Typical...
Time they consider's my IDEA since everyone appears to only want DREADNOUGHTS to reduce weapon's to 3 front & 2 rear with 3 hangers for these slow to turn BEASTS with ENG preference. Then perhaps introduce Lt. Carriers with 2 Hangers that have 3 front/rear weapons but with a Science preference that are far more maneuverable. I want to see some Lt Carriers with 2 hangers with crews of 350-550 crew compliment with ships the size of a RESOLUTE .
Today everything from Heavy Escorts (250 Crew) to Command Cruisers (1000 Crew) have 1 hanger (Tac Command Profile) and while you surely don't require a DREADNOUGHT for 2 hangers its what people want.
Agreed, though I would like to reserve judgement on the Omega design until I see the side view. Not this vote, though. So I'll continue to abstain for now.
The more it hurts to imagine the possible combinations of the offered designs and those designs on the Banner pic of the blog.
Toi'Va, Ti'vath, Toivia, Ty'Vris, Tia Vex, Toi'Virth: Add Tier 6 KDF Carrier and Raider.
Tae'Va, T'Vaya, To'Var, Tevra, T'Vira, To'Vrak: Give us Asylums for Romulans.
Don't make ARC mandatory! Keep it optional only!
How is this working again? Do our choices get blended somehow or does a ship designer simply take elements from our choices to produce a final result?
So I voted accordingly. If teh side view on Epsilon had been slightly different, I may have gone with it instead.
Epsilon is bulky in all the places like I would expect a carrier to be. It has a thick hull for hanger space, quad engines to push it, and an elongated saucer to accommodate the extra crew areas and such. It just needs to be slightly increased in size relative to other ships and it would be an ideal candidate.
I noticed that epsilon and sigma are practically identical from the side, and also, from the top down, epsilon and omega have almost the same hull, just the nacelles/pylons are drastically different, but then the side view takes them in drastically different directions.
Yes! Remember beta! Although frankly, alpha's been growing on me after her win. At least from the top down she looks like a federation ship and her profile looks interesting and she's got that mission pod. If it does come down to the prophesied Pseudo-Biblical smack down between alpha and omega, I hope alpha wins. I just can't see a federation ship in omega. In fact it kind of reminds me of the scimitar for some reason just slap some giant wings on that hull/flip the pylons forward and *tada* Theta's nacelle positioning and profile save her from having the same appearance to me I suppose.
Indeed, epsilon/sigma remind me of the typhon/a defiant type philosophy of ship design where things were kept in tight so they aren't all hanging way out there ready to get shot off/collided with.
The Nebula-configured Odyssey needs to be a thing.
If we stick to the basic star trek style and create a carrier along those line, it will probably look like a giant, ridiculous cruiser and be even bigger than it needs to be (The Guardian and Odyssey cruisers are pushing the limit for me there and I LIKE them! Much bigger than that is too much! I'm not a big fan of the size of the Caitian carrier). To look the part of the carrier, it needs one big combined hull, surrounding the bays. Separating the bays up in two different hulls would just mean the ship would have to be even bigger to accommodate twice as much equipment! Putting both bays in the same hull will mean equipment can be shared between them. And pilots and crew can more easily be housed in decks around the bays, creating more protection for the bays, the most important part of any carrier.
And four nacelles is definitely better than two, because in real life they would be used to generate more power to use for stronger force fields around around the hanger doors, fighter catapults and tractors and more. Please think realistically and vote as such. Don't vote for something that is going to turn this carrier into a giant, ugly, ungainly-looking cruiser with two fighter bays (Think along the lines of a much better looking version of the Jupiter-class, but a slight bit smaller, sleeker and only one hull, that is what I am rooting for, it will make a great carrier).
Which do you want to fly? A realistic carrier-looking starship? Or another giant cruiser with bays that looks a bit more classic star trek-like, but weirder? (Sorry, but there are many of us who this Theta looks like a weird giant cruiser) Beta would have been a better choice by far then Theta for the reasons some of you have posted here (and it looked better too, but lost the vote). I even think it could have been a successful carrier. But Theta would not. Period.
Please vote realistically! Look at the Defiant and other non-standard ships, just because it doesn't have a lower hull and has more than two nacelles doesn't mean it isn't trek! PLEASE!
"Never Surrender! Never give up Hope!"
"Prosperity and Success in everything you do."
"To Boldly go.........well punch it already!"
"To Be or Not To Be"....Alas, the Foundry is Not To Be. We Shall miss Thee, dear Friend!
"Does anyone remember when we used to be explorers?"- Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Thank You, Cryptic......even when I don't agree with all your decisions....Thank You for Star Trek Online!
Absolutely! No elonged saucers, aerodinamics do not apply in space, everyone know that a circle is the most efficient 2d geometric figure, and I hate those 4 nacelles
Yeah, if it comes to that I'm voting Alpha, since there's absolutely no way I'm just going to sit idly by and let Jupiter Mk II slip into the game after they already excised that grotesque tumor of a ship.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
If I am not mistaken, theta has all her primary hangars in the saucer section and will launch from that little split between the upper and lower half of the saucer. Just because she has a primary and secondary hull separated by a neck doesn't mean she's splitting her bays between the two. She may have a more traditional shuttle bay in the secondary hull, but that may simply be to protect her combat craft. Taking in a foreign diplomat who, for all you know, has equipped their shuttle as a bomb to disable your hangars if they get access? Of course you take them into shuttle bay 1 at the back instead of hangar 1.
Though theta is ugly as sin, so meh.
Nacelles do not generate the ship's power. Nacelles generate the ship's warp field. The ship's main power is produced by the matter/antimatter reaction in the warp core. At most, having more than two nacelles simply produces redundancy in case one or more nacelles take damage so the ship remains warp capable despite losing a nacelle or two. They could possibly be used to stay at warp longer/be more energy efficient by using all four nacelles at lower power consumption to produce a more powerful warp field (if warp physics work that way, though technical manuals in the past have stated that it was found two nacelles are most efficient, but that could have changed due to some technological advancements.) or cycling between using pairs to generate the warp field so that neither pair is overtaxed. So while there are potential advantages to having four nacelles, none of those benefits are improved power generation.
Agreed, for a "classic trek look" beta was a much more aesthetically pleasing option to my eye. Though 4 nacelles are also part of trek in the form of the Constellation, Cheyenne, and eventually the Prometheus. Theta is all kinds of oddly shaped/proportioned, though it does seem reminiscent of the oberth or something, though I never particularly cared for that design myself. Epsilon/sigma actually do have a type of "lower hull" from the profile view, as I assume that lower portion would house a deflector. It's just a bit of a "unibody" design similar to the star cruisers and their profiles remind me a bit of a beefy, quad nacelle Intrepid, and I'm totally okay with that.
The Nebula-configured Odyssey needs to be a thing.
I'm still going to vote for Epsilon though. If I'm going to orbit Uranus and wipe out klingons, I would imagine that the U.S.S. Suppository is the most apt vessel, unless you have the U.S.S. Sanitary Wipes listed in your fleet?