End Game Constitution Class ship
The answer to the T5 connie ship has been a no for 4 years and that answer comes from CBS. As such, there will not be a T5 constitution class ship in STO. This also means that any version of the ship will not be available as an End game ship. Exert from a Q&A with DStahl & from the livestream by Smirk -
Q: (thmichael) Are you going to implement the Ambassador Class at some point? And would it be possible to implement the Old Constitution Class for higher ranks?
Dstahl: Yes. The Ambassador class is coming in 2013. CBS is still pretty adamant about the Old Connie not being an end game ship, but you never know what can happen as time rolls by.
pwecaptainsmirk wrote: »
A: I personally think it is more of a forum issue right now because there are so many threads that pop up. Not going to come into the game I think ever! The T5 Connie, it was something that used to drive Branflakes insane, he would make me delete those threads, hide them. It doesnt bother me that much. I would love something along the lines of like the Exeter class. I would love to have a traditional Connie with a 1960s kind of bussard collector on the nacelles, something that is really big and powerful, like if you gave the regular constitution class a "grow mushroom" from Mario Bros and it just got big and super OP. I would love that but its not going to happen. There will not be a T5 Connie.
Direct from the F.T.C. Thread at the top of General Discussion. You wanted a source? Head Dev at the time confirmed CBS said no in an interview. That official enough or do you need a personal letter from CBS addressed to you specifically?
End Game Constitution Class ship
The answer to the T5 connie ship has been a no for 4 years and that answer comes from CBS. As such, there will not be a T5 constitution class ship in STO. This also means that any version of the ship will not be available as an End game ship. Exert from a Q&A with DStahl & from the livestream by Smirk -
Q: (thmichael) Are you going to implement the Ambassador Class at some point? And would it be possible to implement the Old Constitution Class for higher ranks?
Dstahl: Yes. The Ambassador class is coming in 2013. CBS is still pretty adamant about the Old Connie not being an end game ship, but you never know what can happen as time rolls by.
pwecaptainsmirk wrote: »
A: I personally think it is more of a forum issue right now because there are so many threads that pop up. Not going to come into the game I think ever! The T5 Connie, it was something that used to drive Branflakes insane, he would make me delete those threads, hide them. It doesnt bother me that much. I would love something along the lines of like the Exeter class. I would love to have a traditional Connie with a 1960s kind of bussard collector on the nacelles, something that is really big and powerful, like if you gave the regular constitution class a "grow mushroom" from Mario Bros and it just got big and super OP. I would love that but its not going to happen. There will not be a T5 Connie.
Direct from the F.T.C. Thread at the top of General Discussion. You wanted a source? Head Dev at the time confirmed CBS said no in an interview. That official enough or do you need a personal letter from CBS addressed to you specifically?
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
Yea... good luck getting a personal letter. The most official we'll get is word from the Devs. In this case, its pretty safe to say the answer hasn't changed.
@rattler2 neither the quote from stahl or smirk(who was never a dev) say anything about CBS denying connie variants. That was what I asked you about. Or did you misread my post? So again, do you have any source that actually talks about the variants?
Yea... good luck getting a personal letter. The most official we'll get is word from the Devs. In this case, its pretty safe to say the answer hasn't changed.
I don't expect a personal letter.
Just a statement from CBS somewhere online would be fine.
But it will never happen. And I will continue to remain skeptical.
I don't need any letter. If a Dev will actually say that CBS said no end game Exaclibur, that's fine with me. But I have honestly never read or heard any Dev actually say anything other than that CBS said no end game connie. And btw, I actually remember that podcast interview with Dan and Smirk. They never said that CBS denied the variant ships. Whoever wrote that intro to their quotes was editorializing.
I don't need any letter. If a Dev will actually say that CBS said no end game Exaclibur, that's fine with me. But I have honestly never read or heard any Dev actually say anything other than that CBS said no end game connie. And btw, I actually remember that podcast interview with Dan and Smirk. They never said that CBS denied the variant ships. Whoever wrote that intro to their quotes was editorializing.
Well if it is okay and possible, it'd be nice to have. I remember using this variant specifically on release. It was tough to pass up on I must say, a very nice design and probably the best design Cryptic ever did.
Retired. I'm now in search for that perfect space anomaly.
Okay, guys? I would love a T6 Connie, but CBS said no. Also a T6 Excelsior, but again CBS said no.
We can't push CBS on this or anything else since they have gone lawsuit-happy. Remember: CBS hates Trekkers, but loves our money.
All we can do is shut up and take what they toss us (and give them money).
We should all just enjoy Star Trek Online, buy stuff to support Cryptic (so they keep making STO), and hope we don't all get sued by CBS if we reference Star Trek in our conversations.
They wouldn't have to name varients by name to exclude them.
An endgame variant Constitution class would not necessarily look like the classic from TOS, and pretty sure an endgame Constitution class variant would be a no-brainer for sales even if it was just for nostalgias sake. Legalese typically covers all the bases about what you are restricted from doing when the authorizing corp allows a seperate company to use their logo.
By stating no endgame Constitution or any variant shall be created or produced in any way, shape, form. That would pretty much make their intentions clear. Whether you call it the Excaliber, the Xcaliber, or Generation Next if it resembles the classic TOS Constitution at heart it would not matter. I'm sure if there was a way around it Cryptic would have found it after 6 years.
Though for some hope will spring eternal so even if there is a 99.999999% chance of it not occurring there will always be that .000001% of the group that says they didn't say that, thats not what they said exactly, but this is a different name than that, etc. Still not gonna happen.
They wouldn't have to name varients by name to exclude them.
And if a dev confirms CBS actually said no variants, then I'll accept that. But again, nothing I have ever read or heard actually said that. Even the dev quotes from the FCT don't say that. Everything I have read has *only* mentioned the actual connie itself. I have seen no quote, nor listened to any podcast interview, which mentioned the variant ships. But if someone has an actual link, please share it.
Whether you call it the Excaliber, the Xcaliber, or Generation Next if it resembles the classic TOS Constitution at heart it would not matter.
The problem with that logic is that the Ambassador looks approximately as similar to the connie as the Excalibur does. The Excalibur doesn't even have a round saucer. So if your above statement were true, then that would have meant no end game Ambassador. Or even Excelsior. Clearly, simply being visually similar is not the deciding factor. It is actually *being* a connie that matters, which neither of those ships are.
On a related note, here is a question I have. Let's imagine that the Excalibur class weren't in game at all(meaning it was never plugged in as a variant of the connie). Now, lets say that in 2016, the devs design the Excalibur class and submit it to CBS for approval. Would CBS say "no, this looks too similar to the connie" and deny it? Honestly, I highly doubt it. Which leads me to believe CBS has not actually denied the Excalibur class itself.
But again, if a dev confirms CBS actually said no to the Exalibur, I'll gladly accept that. I did not post this thread to troll or argue or sneak a T6 connie in the back door. I am asking only about the Excalibur class.
I'd love it. I'd buy it even. We could use a light cruiser at t6 and that ship is pretty. Also, you would think that if Cryptic designed it, they could do whatever they wanted with it. Whatever, my 2 cents anyhow.
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
But that's just me.
You and me both.
I've been saying the exact same thing on that particular topic since forever and I'll keep calling BS on that until I hear/read it from a CBS representative or from an official CBS venue.
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
But that's just me.
You and me both.
I've been saying the exact same thing on that particular topic since forever and I'll keep calling BS on that until I hear/read it from a CBS representative or from an official CBS venue.
That's never going to happen. At least, not unless someone happens to be friends with someone at CBS. But realistically speaking, we have to accept what the devs say. And while I have certainly read/heard them say that CBS said 'no end game connie', I have not read/heard them say what CBS said about the Excalibur or variants. But again, if someone has a link to quote or interview that actually addresses that, please share.
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
But that's just me.
You and me both.
I've been saying the exact same thing on that particular topic since forever and I'll keep calling BS on that until I hear/read it from a CBS representative or from an official CBS venue.
I'd like to call BS on this too, but....it's probably a safe bet that if they did, they'd make very good return in sales for a end game Connie. So why would Cryptic not want to capitalize on that?
Retired. I'm now in search for that perfect space anomaly.
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
But that's just me.
You and me both.
I've been saying the exact same thing on that particular topic since forever and I'll keep calling BS on that until I hear/read it from a CBS representative or from an official CBS venue.
I'd like to call BS on this too, but....it's probably a safe bet that if they did, they'd make very good return in sales for a end game Connie. So why would Cryptic not want to capitalize on that?
Yes, that really is the most important question. And the potential money that could be made really is the best proof there is that CBS really did tell them they couldn't make an end game connie. I don't think anyone is lying or BSing about that. I'm not as sure about the variant ships, as I have not seen any official statement about them.
Why wouldn't Cryptic want to do It? Because they would be afraid it would make a bunch of their other ships moot. Good sales on one and poorer sales on a bunch of other Federation ships.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
I support a T6 excalibur and its non connie variants. They are new designs, just like how the andorian escorts are new design based on old ship, just like the vulcan ship is new design based on old ship etc etc etc. And they said no only to the connie, not a cruiser refit. A vesper isnt a connie, its a cruiser. Just like how a Galaxy-class is an exploration crusier.
The problem with that logic is that the Ambassador looks approximately as similar to the connie as the Excalibur does. The Excalibur doesn't even have a round saucer. So if your above statement were true, then that would have meant no end game Ambassador. Or even Excelsior. Clearly, simply being visually similar is not the deciding factor. It is actually *being* a connie that matters, which neither of those ships are.
Really the Excaliber doesn't look more similar to a TOS connie vs the Ambassador [even though 1 of these is on the T2 Constitution refit page? and is infact a skin for the ship?]
According to Memory Beta wasn't the Excalibur designed as a DUM, DUM, DUM.... Science Ship. Confab it, people ain't gonna cotton to no more of that Sciency stuff. We just got ourselves a whole heap of them last week. True 'mericans need to blow stuff up real good and not blind them with Science don't you know.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Really the Excaliber doesn't look more similar to a TOS connie vs the Ambassador [even though 1 of these is on the T2 Constitution refit page? and is infact a skin for the ship?]
The Excalibur is only a connie variant because Cryptic put it there. They could have done the same thing with the Ambassador if they wanted to, except for the fact that that was already a known ship. But neither the Excalibur or the Ambassador are actually connies, they are both separate classes. And please don't reply inside your quotes, it makes no sense.
I'm hoping that the coming 50th Anniversary of The Original Series, is gonna change the status-quo and we are going to see some form of that iconic ship made into an end-game element.
I know it's not likely, but logic be damned!
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
I always assumed that the point of releasing the Excalibur variant was so we could have a brand new vessel inspired by the Constitution's design. In fact if I recall there was even an article about this variant leading up to the games release. The entire point of this variant was to give players a new generation Constitution.
So while I get that in the past, there have been rules set in place over no high tier Connie, it frankly doesn't make sense within the confines of the universe Cryptic has been creating. I fly around in a T5U Steamrunner on one of my characters, a ship which is normally a tier below the Excalibur variant. I'm sure people can argue technicalities all day long about whether or not this ship should be a higher tier, but it just seems odd how many other ships that are over 30 years old in this setting are still hitting tier 5-6, and are able to easily compete with newer designs such as the Odyssey. Regardless, this is not a discussion I want to get too bogged down in, but I've always found the excuses against this rather weak. It is what it is, but it frankly borders on silly that this is not allowed.
Comments
Direct from the F.T.C. Thread at the top of General Discussion. You wanted a source? Head Dev at the time confirmed CBS said no in an interview. That official enough or do you need a personal letter from CBS addressed to you specifically?
^this, but Id support both or the Excalibur
The devs, in the past, have said a lot of things that turned out to be bullsh*t.
To be honest, I will never buy it unless I see it straight from the horse's mouth. That "horse" would be CBS.
But that's just me.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I don't expect a personal letter.
Just a statement from CBS somewhere online would be fine.
But it will never happen. And I will continue to remain skeptical.
Oh! How'd that picture get there?
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Well if it is okay and possible, it'd be nice to have. I remember using this variant specifically on release. It was tough to pass up on I must say, a very nice design and probably the best design Cryptic ever did.
We can't push CBS on this or anything else since they have gone lawsuit-happy. Remember: CBS hates Trekkers, but loves our money.
All we can do is shut up and take what they toss us (and give them money).
We should all just enjoy Star Trek Online, buy stuff to support Cryptic (so they keep making STO), and hope we don't all get sued by CBS if we reference Star Trek in our conversations.
See, this is why people are so confused. We just GOT a T6 excelsior. Its in game right now.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Except they never said anything about the Excalibur.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
An endgame variant Constitution class would not necessarily look like the classic from TOS, and pretty sure an endgame Constitution class variant would be a no-brainer for sales even if it was just for nostalgias sake. Legalese typically covers all the bases about what you are restricted from doing when the authorizing corp allows a seperate company to use their logo.
By stating no endgame Constitution or any variant shall be created or produced in any way, shape, form. That would pretty much make their intentions clear. Whether you call it the Excaliber, the Xcaliber, or Generation Next if it resembles the classic TOS Constitution at heart it would not matter. I'm sure if there was a way around it Cryptic would have found it after 6 years.
Though for some hope will spring eternal so even if there is a 99.999999% chance of it not occurring there will always be that .000001% of the group that says they didn't say that, thats not what they said exactly, but this is a different name than that, etc. Still not gonna happen.
And if a dev confirms CBS actually said no variants, then I'll accept that. But again, nothing I have ever read or heard actually said that. Even the dev quotes from the FCT don't say that. Everything I have read has *only* mentioned the actual connie itself. I have seen no quote, nor listened to any podcast interview, which mentioned the variant ships. But if someone has an actual link, please share it.
The problem with that logic is that the Ambassador looks approximately as similar to the connie as the Excalibur does. The Excalibur doesn't even have a round saucer. So if your above statement were true, then that would have meant no end game Ambassador. Or even Excelsior. Clearly, simply being visually similar is not the deciding factor. It is actually *being* a connie that matters, which neither of those ships are.
On a related note, here is a question I have. Let's imagine that the Excalibur class weren't in game at all(meaning it was never plugged in as a variant of the connie). Now, lets say that in 2016, the devs design the Excalibur class and submit it to CBS for approval. Would CBS say "no, this looks too similar to the connie" and deny it? Honestly, I highly doubt it. Which leads me to believe CBS has not actually denied the Excalibur class itself.
But again, if a dev confirms CBS actually said no to the Exalibur, I'll gladly accept that. I did not post this thread to troll or argue or sneak a T6 connie in the back door. I am asking only about the Excalibur class.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
You and me both.
I've been saying the exact same thing on that particular topic since forever and I'll keep calling BS on that until I hear/read it from a CBS representative or from an official CBS venue.
That's never going to happen. At least, not unless someone happens to be friends with someone at CBS. But realistically speaking, we have to accept what the devs say. And while I have certainly read/heard them say that CBS said 'no end game connie', I have not read/heard them say what CBS said about the Excalibur or variants. But again, if someone has a link to quote or interview that actually addresses that, please share.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I'd like to call BS on this too, but....it's probably a safe bet that if they did, they'd make very good return in sales for a end game Connie. So why would Cryptic not want to capitalize on that?
Yes, that really is the most important question. And the potential money that could be made really is the best proof there is that CBS really did tell them they couldn't make an end game connie. I don't think anyone is lying or BSing about that. I'm not as sure about the variant ships, as I have not seen any official statement about them.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
The Excalibur is only a connie variant because Cryptic put it there. They could have done the same thing with the Ambassador if they wanted to, except for the fact that that was already a known ship. But neither the Excalibur or the Ambassador are actually connies, they are both separate classes. And please don't reply inside your quotes, it makes no sense.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
A certain combination of the Resolute and Excelsior actually scratches my T6 connie itch pretty well:
http://imgur.com/a/vggDK
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I know it's not likely, but logic be damned!
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
So while I get that in the past, there have been rules set in place over no high tier Connie, it frankly doesn't make sense within the confines of the universe Cryptic has been creating. I fly around in a T5U Steamrunner on one of my characters, a ship which is normally a tier below the Excalibur variant. I'm sure people can argue technicalities all day long about whether or not this ship should be a higher tier, but it just seems odd how many other ships that are over 30 years old in this setting are still hitting tier 5-6, and are able to easily compete with newer designs such as the Odyssey. Regardless, this is not a discussion I want to get too bogged down in, but I've always found the excuses against this rather weak. It is what it is, but it frankly borders on silly that this is not allowed.
I doubt they will intentially forget to lock out the connie part
More like "game bug" that connie parts can suddenly be used.....
and no one willing to report it as a bug... :P