Does Cryptic have something against Norway?

dderidexwarbird · July 2017

Seriously, been almost 7 years and the Norway Class still has not made it into the game. I do not see why this beautiful, simple little ship has not been added to the game as ALL the other ships from its production line (Akira, Saber, Steamrunner) have ALL made it it into the game with multiple refits and varients added, in both T5 and T6 versions.

So I have to ask, what do you have against the Norway?

The Norway was designed as a functional alternative to sending the Sovereign everywhere. A vessel that could essentially fulfill the role of "Diplomatic Cruiser" and exploration duties while having a smaller size, more agility and better defenses then more traditional Federation Cruisers.

This ship is IDEAL as the next small and agile cruiser. This ship is cannon and it really deserves to be represented within the game. Maybe this ship could be the first Federation cruiser to equip Pulse Phaser Cannons as the Norway Class in Starfleet Command 3 was able to equip these weapons forward facing.

Please find it in your hearts to give a little love to Norway.... Players, please support this thread so we can get this girl into the game, like her big and little sisters alike!

velqua · July 2017

This is another ship I would like to see added to the game. The Norway is an interesting build. My only issue with the design are the thin bridges that connect the nacelles to the main hull. I could see the next generation of Lukari ships take after this design. Again, I would definitely like to see this added. I am guessing this would be an Escort with Pilot abilities.

I do wish custom bridges would come for each of these canon Fed ships. I feel like the interior makes the ship that much more enjoyable. I doubt we will ever get it, but just thought I put it out there.

dderidexwarbird · July 2017

I would like to see this ship as a Light Cruiser personally, I think that Cryptic have already mucked up starship classifications already, with the current designations of ships in the escort catagory and the other ships in the Norway's family.

The Akira and Steamrunner were both not Escorts in canon. The Steamrunner has been a point of debate, with some people saying its a Light Cruiser and others saying its a Heavy Frigate. I think the Akira is the most blatent muck up that Cryptic has done because that ship is out and out a cruiser.

Instead of trying to force ships to fit the holy trinity of MMO's. Cryptic should have had Science Vessels, Crusiers and FRIGATES from the start of this game, instead of Escorts. With the Defiant Class being the only exception to that rule.

So I hope the Norway keeps her canon designation and becomes a Light Cruiser, like the Miranda Class in the game currently.

artan42 · July 2017

Even if it ends up as a hull swap for the Steamrunner (like the 26th and 23rd century ships are) and not its own ship, I still need it.

I mean, look, every other DS9 era ship is ingame (though not all are T6 or with nice, shiny, new models), the Norway is a glaring absence (well, other than the Yeager)

dderidexwarbird wrote: »

The Akira and Steamrunner were both not Escorts in canon. The Steamrunner has been a point of debate, with some people saying its a Light Cruiser and others saying its a Heavy Frigate. I think the Akira is the most blatent muck up that Cryptic has done because that ship is out and out a cruiser.

If I were doing it, I'd make some changes;

Both the Akira and Prometheus should have been cruisers (with Command and Intel specialisations respectively), the Defiant and Sabre are fine as escorts (though I would give them both Pilot specialisations), the Nova and Rhode Island would be Pilot science vessels and the Intrepid and Yeager as Intel science vessels (with the Intrepid being able to do a Dyson and switch between the normal version and the ENG heavy Ablative version, and the Yeager would switch to a TAC heavy version), the Sovereign would be a Battlecruiser with Temporal specialisation.

And the Steamrunner and Norway would be destroyers. Cruiser sized, but escort armed. They're a lot bigger than the Defiant and Sabre, but still off the size of the Akira, Prometheus, or Sovereign.

brian334 · July 2017

While I have nothing against this vessel's inclusion, it is not a ship design which appeals to me. It appeals to others, and I hope it is brought into STO for them.

One point I'd like to make regarding the few remaining canon ships which have not been incorporated into STO is that we should look upon them as opportunities to fill niches.

Cruisers we have, and a lot. What new role could Norway fill as a Cruiser? I'm betting there are half a dozen cruisers already filling that role, and with lots more hull to absorb the damage.

Instead we should find roles not already saturated with ships. An example:

Federation Escorts are popular, but the Federation lacks a Raider and has only one Destroyer. Norway would fit into either of those roles quite well. In fact, as a Destroyer, Norway would fit the OP's description of a small, hard hitting cruiser better than it would fit in as yet another Federation cruiser.

My compromise: call Norway a Destroyer and give it Raider traits.

Unknown · July 2017

This content has been removed.

jonsills · July 2017

Starfleet doesn't like to admit that it's a military organization. They don't call them Destroyers, they call them Escorts (even though they fill exactly the same role as Destroyers). And Raiders are right out - Feddies don't "raid", that's a Klink thing. Do you want to see Jm'pok filing suit in Federation courts for theft of trademark and cultural appropriation?

victornite1976 · July 2017

somtaawkhar wrote: »

dderidexwarbird wrote: »

So I have to ask, what do you have against the Norway?

Nothing, its been stated several times that the original model for the Norway was long many years ago, and, as such, Cryptic has nothing to do on to build it in-game, as such, it isn't in-game.

I always love it when people ask questions that have been answered many times.

Well, some of us haven't been on here that long and might not have known the answer. I'm still not sure why that keeps them from using information available to make it, but if there is a condition that states they need it from CBS or whomever, then I suppose there isn't much that can be done about it. I appreciate the answer btw. I'm one of those who haven't been here long.

Unknown · July 2017

This content has been removed.

brian334 · July 2017

Sisko wasn't involved in a Trojan Horse raid.

The combined arms attack on the shipyards of Torros III was certainly not a raid.

And certainly J. Dax' attack on the Argolis Cluster was not a raid.

While the Federation does not like words which sound belligerent, they do indeed sanction the acts, even if they use other words. (This kind of PC speech is confusing to me. Isn't a Rose by any other name still the girl who found a blue diamond in her pocket?) Calling Norway a Destroyer or a Light Cruiser or Corvette or whatever you like won't inhibit its design and use as a raider.

spiritborn · July 2017

I think it's less about Cryptic hating the Norway-class and more about CBS hating it of the 4 new Starfleet designs introduced in First Contact IIRC Norway is the only not seen outside of that film in any of the TV series or Movies, with the Sovereign being the new "hero" ship and thus being in the 2 movies after first contact, Akira having several apprences in DS9 and VOY and Steamrunner having been used as backround ship in DS9 IIRC.

EDIT:I'm pretty sure all new ships added to the game need to be approved of by CBS or Paramount.

artan42 · July 2017

somtaawkhar wrote: »

dderidexwarbird wrote: »

So I have to ask, what do you have against the Norway?

Nothing, its been stated several times that the original model for the Norway was long many years ago, and, as such, Cryptic has nothing to do on to build it in-game, as such, it isn't in-game.

I always love it when people ask questions that have been answered many times.

Go on, show your source. You can't because that's not Cryptics answer and never has been. They've never said a dicky-bird about the Norway one way or the other. Besides, an official model has been commissioned for the Eagle Moss collection. Also, ships like the Sabre do have an official model that the Cryptic ship looks nothing like, same with most of the launch era ships. Don't say silly things, because even a borderline competent fan modeller could mock up a more detailed version of this.

jonsills wrote: »

Starfleet doesn't like to admit that it's a military organization. They don't call them Destroyers, they call them Escorts (even though they fill exactly the same role as Destroyers). And Raiders are right out - Feddies don't "raid", that's a Klink thing. Do you want to see Jm'pok filing suit in Federation courts for theft of trademark and cultural appropriation?

Well, except for the fact they aren't a military and don't bother disguising what they're doing when they have to undertake militant operations. The reason they only occasionally use terms like 'Frigate' or 'Heavy Cruiser' is because most of their ships are simply multi-role explorers. The only two exceptions are the only two ships confirmed to have been constructed solely for combat, the Warship Defiant and the Dreadnought Vengeance.

victornite1976 wrote: »

Well, some of us haven't been on here that long and might not have known the answer. I'm still not sure why that keeps them from using information available to make it, but if there is a condition that states they need it from CBS or whomever, then I suppose there isn't much that can be done about it. I appreciate the answer btw. I'm one of those who haven't been here long.

Ignore them. The only ship Cryptic has ever made a specific statement about (in relation to CBS) was the TOS Constitution back before it was put into the game for the 50th.

jonsills · July 2017

If the class was introduced in the movie First Contact, that adds another layer of IP difficulty - Paramount owns the IP rights to the movies, not CBS, so Cryptic would need to get both of them to sign off on it.

As for "military" - not going to engage in the prolonged arguments again, just going to say that if it quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, odds are pretty good it's not a quarterhorse, no matter what it says about itself.

szim · July 2017

jonsills wrote: »

If the class was introduced in the movie First Contact, that adds another layer of IP difficulty - Paramount owns the IP rights to the movies, not CBS, so Cryptic would need to get both of them to sign off on it.

As for "military" - not going to engage in the prolonged arguments again, just going to say that if it quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, odds are pretty good it's not a quarterhorse, no matter what it says about itself.

Maybe. But we already got the Souvereign, Steamrunner, Akira and the Sabre class, all ships that were made for First contact. Why would the Norway class pose a problem in that regard? It is a little odd that they would buy the rights to all ships from that movie except one.

silverlobes · July 2017

brian334 wrote: »

While I have nothing against this vessel's inclusion, it is not a ship design which appeals to me. It appeals to others, and I hope it is brought into STO for them.

One point I'd like to make regarding the few remaining canon ships which have not been incorporated into STO is that we should look upon them as opportunities to fill niches.

Cruisers we have, and a lot. What new role could Norway fill as a Cruiser? I'm betting there are half a dozen cruisers already filling that role, and with lots more hull to absorb the damage.

Instead we should find roles not already saturated with ships. An example:

Federation Escorts are popular, but the Federation lacks a Raider and has only one Destroyer. Norway would fit into either of those roles quite well. In fact, as a Destroyer, Norway would fit the OP's description of a small, hard hitting cruiser better than it would fit in as yet another Federation cruiser.

My compromise: call Norway a Destroyer and give it Raider traits.

^^^^ 100% this

arionisa · July 2017

silverlobes#2676 wrote: »

brian334 wrote: »

While I have nothing against this vessel's inclusion, it is not a ship design which appeals to me. It appeals to others, and I hope it is brought into STO for them.

One point I'd like to make regarding the few remaining canon ships which have not been incorporated into STO is that we should look upon them as opportunities to fill niches.

Cruisers we have, and a lot. What new role could Norway fill as a Cruiser? I'm betting there are half a dozen cruisers already filling that role, and with lots more hull to absorb the damage.

Instead we should find roles not already saturated with ships. An example:

Federation Escorts are popular, but the Federation lacks a Raider and has only one Destroyer. Norway would fit into either of those roles quite well. In fact, as a Destroyer, Norway would fit the OP's description of a small, hard hitting cruiser better than it would fit in as yet another Federation cruiser.

My compromise: call Norway a Destroyer and give it Raider traits.

^^^^ 100% this

Sure, the Feds got cloaks, a carrier and assorted and sundry other things that were Faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Obviously they need anything else that is currently faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Fed ships should be able to use singularity cores and powers also. Fed BoFFs should also get a Federation Operative trait that mirrors the Romulan Operative trait while we're at it.

silverlobes · July 2017

arionisa wrote: »

silverlobes#2676 wrote: »

brian334 wrote: »

While I have nothing against this vessel's inclusion, it is not a ship design which appeals to me. It appeals to others, and I hope it is brought into STO for them.

One point I'd like to make regarding the few remaining canon ships which have not been incorporated into STO is that we should look upon them as opportunities to fill niches.

Cruisers we have, and a lot. What new role could Norway fill as a Cruiser? I'm betting there are half a dozen cruisers already filling that role, and with lots more hull to absorb the damage.

Instead we should find roles not already saturated with ships. An example:

Federation Escorts are popular, but the Federation lacks a Raider and has only one Destroyer. Norway would fit into either of those roles quite well. In fact, as a Destroyer, Norway would fit the OP's description of a small, hard hitting cruiser better than it would fit in as yet another Federation cruiser.

My compromise: call Norway a Destroyer and give it Raider traits.

^^^^ 100% this

Sure, the Feds got cloaks, a carrier and assorted and sundry other things that were Faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Obviously they need anything else that is currently faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Fed ships should be able to use singularity cores and powers also. Fed BoFFs should also get a Federation Operative trait that mirrors the Romulan Operative trait while we're at it.

I like it. That would make a great trait for either a Command or Intel specialist boff

brian334 · July 2017

arionisa wrote: »

silverlobes#2676 wrote: »

brian334 wrote: »

While I have nothing against this vessel's inclusion, it is not a ship design which appeals to me. It appeals to others, and I hope it is brought into STO for them.

One point I'd like to make regarding the few remaining canon ships which have not been incorporated into STO is that we should look upon them as opportunities to fill niches.

Cruisers we have, and a lot. What new role could Norway fill as a Cruiser? I'm betting there are half a dozen cruisers already filling that role, and with lots more hull to absorb the damage.

Instead we should find roles not already saturated with ships. An example:

Federation Escorts are popular, but the Federation lacks a Raider and has only one Destroyer. Norway would fit into either of those roles quite well. In fact, as a Destroyer, Norway would fit the OP's description of a small, hard hitting cruiser better than it would fit in as yet another Federation cruiser.

My compromise: call Norway a Destroyer and give it Raider traits.

^^^^ 100% this

Sure, the Feds got cloaks, a carrier and assorted and sundry other things that were Faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Obviously they need anything else that is currently faction specific to either Roms or Klinks. Fed ships should be able to use singularity cores and powers also. Fed BoFFs should also get a Federation Operative trait that mirrors the Romulan Operative trait while we're at it.

I'm a dedicated Klink/BoP player who dabbles in Fed and Rom gameplay from time to time. I'm here to tell you that for many reasons I've seen Klink players leave the game, but I have yet to hear anyone say that the reason they stopped playing Klingon Faction was because Feds also get Klingon stuff. Klingon faction players are a minority, but we tend to be dedicated.

Feds can cloak? So what? Back in the day when the FvK queues were dead because an entire generation of Klinks grew up with no other way to level and Feds got ROFLStomped unless they came with a premade on Teamspeak, the KvK queues taught Klingon players to deal with cloaking foes. I came late to that party, but the players who ran that gauntlet taught me to turn my Recon/torp boat into a cloaking ship's nightmare. (Thanks star*dagger, for the incentive to get good at this.) I even turned out to be a not-horrible BoP driver.

The developers have not supported the faction system very well, and appear bent on rendering factions meaningless other than as background stories and starter quests. Projection based on past observation is that the few faction-specific details of the game will vanish, possibly before I finish typing this reply. Therefore I disregard the argument that current faction-specific things should remain so. At level 60 factions have become meaningless.

While I respect your desire for unique Klingon and Romulan factions, this is not the direction STO is headed. Fighting a rearguard action when the battle has already been lost and there is no retreating unit to cover is not a sound military doctrine.

artan42 · July 2017

jonsills wrote: »

If the class was introduced in the movie First Contact, that adds another layer of IP difficulty - Paramount owns the IP rights to the movies, not CBS, so Cryptic would need to get both of them to sign off on it.

As for "military" - not going to engage in the prolonged arguments again, just going to say that if it quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, odds are pretty good it's not a quarterhorse, no matter what it says about itself.

Cryptic has the rights to the the first 10 films through CBS as well as every other ship from FC.

And if it makes a sound several species of bird make, walks in a way similar to many species of bird, and explicitly refers to itself as not being one particular species of bird then all you can say is it's a bird but not the one it says it's not.

rattler2 · July 2017

jonsills wrote: »

If the class was introduced in the movie First Contact, that adds another layer of IP difficulty - Paramount owns the IP rights to the movies, not CBS, so Cryptic would need to get both of them to sign off on it.

Actually... Paramount owns the rights to the KELVIN TIMELINE movies. Cryptic has free reign on everything from Nemesis back pretty much.

markhawkman · July 2017

szim wrote: »

jonsills wrote: »

If the class was introduced in the movie First Contact, that adds another layer of IP difficulty - Paramount owns the IP rights to the movies, not CBS, so Cryptic would need to get both of them to sign off on it.

As for "military" - not going to engage in the prolonged arguments again, just going to say that if it quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, odds are pretty good it's not a quarterhorse, no matter what it says about itself.

Maybe. But we already got the Souvereign, Steamrunner, Akira and the Sabre class, all ships that were made for First contact. Why would the Norway class pose a problem in that regard? It is a little odd that they would buy the rights to all ships from that movie except one.

Also, we have the Mogai and Scimitar.... so yeah. At least SOME of the movies are included.

shevet · July 2017

I thought the "Oslo" variant of the T3 Heavy Escort was supposed to be the Norway class?

rattler2 · July 2017

shevet wrote: »

I thought the "Oslo" variant of the T3 Heavy Escort was supposed to be the Norway class?

Oslo in game lore is an evolution of the Norway.

mustrumridcully0 · July 2017

There is never any other possible reason than the seething rage of the entire team or influential individuals among the team.

So if a ship hasn't made it into the game yet, it is absolutely because someone at Cryptic hates it, and begging for it or posting threads on it will at best just increase their rage. Worse, sometimes they might deliberately break or nerf unrelated things to punish players that like things Cryptic hates

Sometimes they even cruelly toy with player emotions, like bringing their most wanted ship ever into an expensive promotion RNG prize pack, release an endgame version of a ship and then raise the level cap to immediately yank the prize from the player's hand.

Do you want to end up like the Nova or Constellation fans? Be my guest. But don't tell me you weren't warned.

rattler2 · July 2017

I don't think anyone hates the Norway.

If I remember correctly, the reason the Norway is so rare in Star Trek is because the original CGI model used in First Contact was lost. Everything we have is recreations.

Memory Alpha wrote:

One year later, ILM was requested by Paramount Pictures to hand over their CGI models made for First Contact – the Norway amongst them – to Digital Muse for reprogramming in the LightWave 3D software, in preparation for use in the upcoming Star Trek: Deep Space Nine season six episode "Sacrifice of Angels", but the Norway design was never again featured. One of the apparent factors for the model of the Norway not appearing in later productions following First Contact, was according to DS9 Visual Effects Supervisor David Stipes at the conclusion of Deep Space Nine's sixth season, that "the Norway needs to be resurfaced and modified," further stating that it "may be done on later episodes." [2] This was apparently never completed, and, as rumor had it, the CGI files for the Norway were either lost [3] or corrupted [4], the latter the more likely as it was something Stipes himself hinted at in an earlier blog entry, "I believe we removed the Norway-class for technical reasons". Stipes made that comment on the occasion of the Deep Space Nine season five finale episode "Call to Arms", where Jaeger's other designs made their first reappearance in a live-action production. Unlike his three other ship designs, this made First Contact the only CGI appearance of the Norway design in the live-action franchise.

artan42 · July 2017

shevet wrote: »

I thought the "Oslo" variant of the T3 Heavy Escort was supposed to be the Norway class?

No. It's based on it. Like the Zephyr is based on the Steamrunner, a separate ship.

lianthelia · July 2017

@dderidexwarbird

Since the forum has screwed me yet again and ate my post and since I don't feel like redoing my entire post I'll make it short and sweet.

Cryptic didn't muck up ship classes...they did what they thought is right...incase you haven't noticed...size doesn't equal class.

If that were true than many many ships would be in different classes....Romulans would be bloated with Engineering ships since even many of their tac ships are large enough to be Cruisers. Starfleet would lose several science ships to engineering...

On the Akira and Prometheus...I think they did right...both ships were seen as tactical vessels...back then escorts were actually what they should be...glass cannons....cruisers were what they should be...flying fortresses with tough defense.

markhawkman · July 2017

rattler2 wrote: »

shevet wrote: »

I thought the "Oslo" variant of the T3 Heavy Escort was supposed to be the Norway class?

Oslo in game lore is an evolution of the Norway.

It looks a lot like it. Oslo_class

artan42 · July 2017

markhawkman wrote: »

rattler2 wrote: »

shevet wrote: »

I thought the "Oslo" variant of the T3 Heavy Escort was supposed to be the Norway class?

Oslo in game lore is an evolution of the Norway.

It looks a lot like it. Oslo_class

Only to a blind person in the same way the Constitution resembles the Ambassador.

dderidexwarbird · July 2017

I will say that the reason I ask if Cryptic have anything against the Norway, is because there were reasons originally why the Tier V Excelsior was better in game as a ship then the Tier V Galaxy. That was solely down to the designer at the time having personal bias towards the Excelsior (He mentioned it was his favorite ship on more then one occasion). It was also the same reason he refused to but the New Orleans and other Galaxy Era variants into the game because he personally hated them. So Cryptic have acted out of bias before.

Now, about the Norway. I would prefer it very much if the Norway was kept to its canon representation. It was designed to fit an more scientific and diplomatic role so it would be nice to have a smaller cruiser that leans more towards science. The Norway was basically supposed to pick up some of the workload from the much larger Sovereign Class ships, in the same way that the Intrepid was intended to be a "Galaxy-lite", going places that a Galaxy would simply be unable to operate and much more resource cost effective option for the Federation.

The Norway is reasonably well armed for its typing and size but its main niche was always science and diplomatic operations. So I would like to see this ship as a possible hybrid science vessel/crusier that is smaller and more agile and is far more devoted to supporting its allies in combat and being a possible quick response healing vessel, able to quickly render assistance to larger ships.

Why does everything have to be a DPS monster nowadays, despite its true representation?

I do not want it see it bastardized in the same way that the Akira and Prometheus were.

brian334 · July 2017

What source identifies Norway as a science/ diplomatic cruiser?

Not that I object to that, but STO is chock full of Fed Cfuisers.

Does Cryptic have something against Norway?

Comments