test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The Norway
captainmeow100
Member Posts: 6 Arc User
Just out of curiosity, will there ever be released a Norway class ship available? I know you can get an "updated" version of it as the Oslo skin for the heavy escort, but I think it would be better if there was an actual Norway ship. I mean, there already is akira, saber, and steamrunner.
0
Comments
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
You want this more ...
I might be mistaken but, wasn't the original Norway class model destroyed in an accident?
Oh without a doubt. Typhoon first, then the Norway, Yeager, and then the K'Vort, then the D5, D6, ENT BoP, and the tiny raptor/BoP hybrid thing from the Augment arc.
But, yeah, Typhoon...
And the Norway...
And the Yeag... Yeah... Ships... cool... more...
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The Norway was one of the first completely CGI starships and never had a physical studio model, so you may be thinking of another ship.
Apparently, though, the original CGI models that ILM made have been lost, since no one either knows what happened to them, or haven't been allowed to talk about it.
..... not that that should technically stop anyone from attempting to recreate the ship anew, mind you.
There we go! Yeah, I knew something was lost. I totally agree.
this is probably closer to the real reason
It didn't stop anyone from recreating the Norway. She's in SFC3, I believe in Legacy... not sure about Armada 2, but there are probably mods.
Anyways, the reason we never saw the Norway on screen after First Contact was because the CG model was lost. Would have been too expensive to recreate it so they just used what was already available. Especially since they were working on a TV budget with DS9.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
It wasn't in Armada 2. The other First Contact ships were though.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
I kinda dig the design. I like it more than the Saber-class.
Yeah, I think the drives that held the Norway's CGI models ended up getting corrupted (multiple backups for your files folks!), so the files became unusable. This is about the best picture available of the Norway as originally designed, and even it is pretty low-rez; which makes sense, because it only every appears as a blip on the screen in First Contact, when the Borg Cube is curb stomping every other ship in sight, correct? And honestly every other recreation, either fan-made or for actual ST game products, looks wrong and poor quality by comparison. I have yet to see what I consider to be a good re-rendering of the Norway, and without some decent rez images to base their models on, I'm not sure that ThomasTheCat (@crypticttc ) and the ship guys could make anything reaching the quality of the other recent ship model revamps, at least not without a LOT of artistic license.
Not to say that I wouldn't want to see a proper Norway-class make it's way into the game (maybe as part of some Scandinavian pride event?
The Norway would serve as a light cruiser skin in my opinion, there's not much more she could serve as. Giving her a place in the show/movies evolution of starship designs I would place her in the Miranda's legacy (functionally, not design-wise) so it goes Miranda (used for a long long time) -> Steamrunner (introduced somewhere in between but never fully replaced them) -> Norway.
When we get a T5/T6 light cruiser (just like we have a "light escort") it should come with the Miranda, Centaur, Norway and a 25th century modern type-6 variant preferably using Exeter parts but that's just my personal preference. The Shi'kahr skin should in my opinion be abandoned like the Galaxies odd T4 variants and replaced with something better - but it wouldn't hurt if they keep it, I just don't like it
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I don't know how a light cruiser would fit in the meta. It sounds like it'll be less tanky than a proper cruiser, and less DPSy to escorts or intermediate ship types like destroyers and battlecruisers. What about a science vessel? A few ships classed as science vessels arguably are light cruisers - Intrepids, Lunas, Vestas. Nebulas as well, on the heavier side of 'light' though, but that's represented by its engineering LTC.
A member of the hoarding horde, are we?
Note to self: there's a super-villain name in there somewhere....
The "light" classification inSTO makes little sense I agree, but it is there. Compare the escort and the "light" escort at T5. They are basically identical, only the light escaort exchanges 2000 HP and a weapon slot for more manoeuvreability and two devices (that is probably an oversight though as it makes no sense) and all universal BOFFs aside from one fixed tac, same console layout.
A t5/6 light cruiser would be identical to a comparable cruiser of the same tier (for example http://sto.gamepedia.com/Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit ) but come with one (or two) less weapon slots, two cruiser commands, all universal BOFFs except for the CMD ENG, more turn rate and innertia but ~4k HP less.
I like the science vessel approach as most lighter cruisers are indeed science vessels in STO, but the "rules" are still there - a light cruiser had to be a light cruiser, not a science vessels. We could go with a "light science vessel" though and take a comparable science vessel and give it the "light" treatment - it would just be odd since the Nova is already in-game and it is "lighter" than a Norway, but logic in ship design isn't Cryptic's specialty anyway
Technically the Nebula is a heavy ship by the way, nothing on it is light. It lacks the most part of the secondary hull but is otherwise identical to a Galaxy
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I think people make the comparison due to it being something like the TNG equivalent of the Reliant and Connie we see in TWoK. The Nebula has similar placement of the nacelles to Reliant (down instead of up), same saucer (it actually isn't but I'll get to that in a minute) with the Reliant's torpedo rollbar thing being similar to the torpedo mission pod we see the USS Sutherland fire from. The fanon (and soft canon shmanon) theory being something like the Reliant was 'smaller' and thus a 'light' cruiser to the Constitution's heavy cruiser designation. Except - one, the saucer sections aren't equivalent at all (Reliant's was actually bigger, and potentially made up the lost volume of the Connie's secondary hull - or at least, made up some of it) and two: Reliant was able to fight the Enterprise roughly as equals. In a true naval analogy, that wouldn't be possible. A heavy cruiser would trounce a light cruiser everytime, and yeah you could argue that the Reliant got a good sucker punch in initially which weighed the contest unequally in their favour but that honestly doesn't say much for the Connie's resilience.
But then I remember these are starships, not wet navy warships, and honestly even IRL naval traditions and conventions can be somewhat convoluted and nonsensical to the uninitiated. And using out of date naval terminology isn't even relevant in today's navies, today a missile cruiser and missile destroyer are more similar than they are different IMO.
i don't know what this tangent has to do with the Norway class but i had fun writing it :v
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Yes but that's a cardassian ship.
"He shall be my finest warrior, this generic man who was forced upon me.
Like a badass I shall make him look, and in the furnace of war I shall forge him.
he shall be of iron will and steely sinew.
In great armour I shall clad him and with the mightiest weapons he shall be armed.
He will be untouched by plague or disease; no sickness shall blight him.
He shall have such tactics, strategies and machines that no foe will best him in battle.
He is my answer to cryptic logic, he is the Defender of my Romulan Crew.
He is Tovan Khev... and he shall know no fear."
I had fun reading it and I agree with you
It's simply that, I get the Miranda/Constitution comparison but it doesn't really apply to the Nebula/Galaxy situation. While the Constitution was a "heavy" cruiser and the Miranda might very well be a "light" one, the Galaxy isn't a heavy cruiser any more. It's a "Explorer" which is a whole new weightclass in Starfleet terminology and although the Nebula is "lighter" it is also found in the same "weightclass" in my opinion. It's just two ships that share parts and the Nebula is probably easier or faster to build, those ships were called for during the Cardassian conflict and showed their superiority over Galor class cruisers.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The only real world distinction between Light and Heavy Cruisers was a London Naval Treaty definition assigning Light Cruiser status to ships with guns under 6.1 inches, and Heavy Cruiser status to those with guns over 6.1 inches. Such ships were typically, but not always, built with armor to withstand their own shells at least to some degree, and thus Heavy Cruisers were typically better armored. This was not always the case, and thus armor is not a technical requirement. Only gun size.
The USS Cleveland, for example, was larger than almost every cruiser built before her, but was a Light Cruiser. The Mogami, initially built as a Light Cruiser, was later upgraded by adding larger, (but fewer,) guns. It's Light Cruiser style armor scheme remained unchanged.
Thus, reduced firepower and, to some degree, less armor is exchanged for greater speed and/or range or, in the case of the Atlanta Class Light Cruisers, extremely high rate of fire.
Since STO cannot stop players from putting the most powerful weapons available on any ship, the only way they can restrict firepower is by reducing the number of weapons slots. Since the same goes for armor, reduced hit points would be the only logical adjustment. So your Light Cruiser would have fewer hit points than a Heavy Cruiser of comparable size and fewer weapons slots. I would argue they should receive greater speed and/or maneuverability in exchange. At the very least, Light Cruisers could be restricted from mounting Dual Heavy Cannons.
Oooh! Taking a note from the Atlanta Class, which was built as a Carrier Escort, and thus packed 16 x 5"/38 guns, (the single most effective Anti Aircraft weapon fielded during WW2,) the Norway could be optimized as a BFAW ship! Lower overall weapon power but higher rate of fire would give her a niche as an Anti-Spam ship.
this isnt the first thread i remember reading about the norway and wanting it make an appearance on the game.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
(except with a rounder primary hull)
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
Intrepid Type?
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
The pair of unnamed ships that helped the Enterprise with the Intrepid. Those delta ships were named as the Ganges Class in the Enterprise Relaunch novels. Though I think the Intrepid is much more better looking.
In the STO scheme, the Norway would fit it in as a destroyer with phaser-lance similar forward weapon. A Tier 4 ship with a Tier 6 equivalent called the Stockholm Class.