Your entire argument literally boils down
>They could have won faster if they totally went against everything they wanted to accomplished
Which is true of almost every situation imaginable because its far easier to just break things then it is to do anything else.
The whole point of them play politics was to separate the races, and make them more easy to assimilate into the Iconian Whole, beating them via straight war just leave hostile attitudes towards the Iconians in place, and leads to a far more difficult empire to control longer term.
You really don't seem to understand or grasp things beyond basic "KILL EVERYTHING!" motivations.
Excuse me? Iconians are immortal? Hello? Again: with their weight of numbers and the fact they live forever unless killed, they can afford to just throw men and ships at the problem until it dies of exhaustion and people in the Milky Way no longer remember anything but an Iconian boot heel. Use the strategy that best plays to your strengths and your enemy's weaknesses. An immortal with effectively unlimited resources is going to see things at a much different scale than a guy who lives 80 years and commands a ship with a crew of a thousand.
You really don't seem to understand or grasp either military strategy, numbers too big to count on your fingers and toes, distances greater than your commute, or timespans longer than your workweek.
Ah yes, your favorite response: the appeal to emotion fallacy combined with the ad hominem fallacy. You've been repeating this same non-argument ad nauseam since the story arc came out, and I have yet to see you provide a clear, internally consistent, fact-based reason as to why attacking a military target--in this case an invading army, its support infrastructure, and its leaders with force sufficient to accomplish the objective without incurring collateral damage--is a criminal act, or why killing Heralds and Iconians with a Genesis device or sunkiller weapon is less moral than killing them with phasers and torpedoes. Please, argue away; I love a spirited military ethics debate.
Same reason using various weapons IRL to achieve such means is considered a criminal act. Even if you were to use it in such a manner that no civilian got killed, the sheer use of weapons like mustard gas, or napalm, against an enemy nation would be criminal. Your entire argument is based on the logic of some kindergander on a playground who thinks its ok to throw sand in someone's eyes just because they did so to you.
Weapons get labeled illegal by international agreement for being considered either too prone to collateral damage (biological weapons are prone to mutation and can spread far beyond the target area, chemical weapons and fallout from nukes drift with the wind away from their targets), or killing in manners considered too painful (napalm and flamethrowers = death by burning, chemical weapons kill in various horrible and disgusting ways). While we're at it, land mines are illegal because they're hard to clean up and it's easy for some random farmer to step on one decades after the soldiers you were trying to blow up left the country. And yet other weapons that cause horrible pain and suffering, such as plain old non-uranium bullets that can maim limbs or cause slow, lingering deaths by infection, blood loss, and sundry destroyed organs, are legal. (Ever tried breathing when you have a sucking chest wound from a rifle round and your lungs are filling up with blood? Well, neither have I, but I'm guessing it isn't fun.) Ordinary high-explosive shells can do most of the same things as nuclear warheads, albeit taking more of them to achieve the same effect, but they're legal, too. Go with fictional weapons, phasers and disruptors can disintegrate people, which is in all likelihood an incredibly painful death. Or they can cause very bad burns or set things on fire and kill that way... much like napalm.
Seems there's a few contradictions in the thought behind which weapons are considered bad and which ones are considered acceptable.
The simple fact is, even Starfleet, that beacon of civilization, has shown itself repeatedly, in canon, to be willing to take drastic actions under extreme threat. If General Order 24--which Captain Kirk invoked just to save himself and his ship--doesn't exist to deal with an enemy like the Iconians then what bloody well does it exist for?
ETA: Oh, one further addendum. According to the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual, the theoretical yield of a single Galaxy-class photon torpedo matter/antimatter annihilation is 64 megatons. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever tested, the Soviet Union's Tsar Bomba, had a calculated yield of only 50 megatons. Chew on that while you think about permissibility of particular weapons.
Or better yet, how about we talk about the real war crime in the story arc, the one that Cryptic actually wrote: going back in time with the intent to kill people who didn't invade the Milky Way or blow up Romulus without provocation. And you accuse me of wanting to commit war crimes.
You mean the thing the game consistently points out is unethical, and that none of the factions want to do because its unethical, and the moment you do go back in time you drop it because its unethical?
Yes, exactly that thing. It's unethical because the Iconians of 200,000 years ago didn't do a damn thing to anyone (other than being stuck-up isolationist jerks, which wasn't a capital offense the last time I looked*) and the potential collateral damage downtime of the incursion is literally incalculable. The Iconians of 200,000 years ago didn't kill billions of innocent Romulans or invade the galaxy, nor did the various people whose existence will be affected by their absence. But the Iconians of 2410 did blow up Romulus and are invading the galaxy, so killing them is, as far as I'm aware, perfectly ethical according to nearly every generally accepted system of morality I'm aware of. Thank you for proving my point: that murder of civilians is always wrong.
* Although given the Na'Kuhl situation Cryptic apparently has a different opinion on that, so YMMV.
And you can, of course, can cite chapter and verse of Cryptic canon statements as to how and why your argument is the case.
Oh, wait, you can't, because the option was never discussed because of Cryptic's unhealthy obsession with a specific superweapon based on untested (in the prime timeline) technology acquired from an alternate timeline that is known in that timeline to always produce drastic unintended consequences when used.
Can you cite the chapter and verse of Cryptic canon statements as to how and why the argument isn't the case? Ohh wait you can't, because Cryptic never covered it. You should really see how that argument is nonsense and can easily turned back around at you. Also, the fact that no one considered it a viable option in-game would suggest it wouldn't have worked. That is how narratives are written.
No, it just suggests that the writers didn't consider them because of their fixation on the Krenim. Forgotten Phlebotinum is bad writing. Following Niven's Law, "Once a technology or discovery has been introduced into a fictional setting, it must continue to exist in all chronologically later stories in that setting," is good writing.
And the best part? All it takes to solve the problem is a little bit of dialog:
"Yeah, we looked at using a Genesis device on the sphere. It won't work because [technobabble/]. We also thought about a trilithium bomb. That won't work either because [technobabble/]."
"What about that old Romulan project, Sunseed?"
"Plans were lost when Romulus blew up."
Oh, funny, Cryptic did exactly that with the transporters in "Capture the Flag": you can suggest to Gaius Selan that you just beam the bad guy off the ship into vacuum, and he answers that he already tried it. And it doesn't even require any fancy programming tricks!
The real punchline, of course, is that the Best Expansion Ever that the Players Loved had better writing than the entire Iconian War arc put together.
ETA: By the way, what you just did is called "concession by implication". I provided evidence for my assertions and challenged you to provide evidence for yours. You did not, therefore the implication is that you cannot back up your claims.
They can't hide a damn thing anywhere if they're all dead from the first sphere blowing up. You also assume facts not in evidence: that the Iconians can hide an entire Dyson sphere in subspace (a small Elachi space station is a far cry from an object 2 AUs in diameter) and still make use of its systems.
Except they literally did it after the Iconian War with their main Dyson Sphere.
Also, its stupid think a genesis torpedo would ever reach the hull of the sphere with how many ships they have protecting it.
Yeah, it's too bad we don't have a way to shield it from sensors. Oh, wait, we've got that too: "House Pegh" had a cloaking device that worked against the Iconians. Hmmm, more bad writing. How 'bout that?
Does it? And you know this how? Because you work for Cryptic in the systems programming department and have seen the relevant code?
Again, you assume facts not in evidence. I showed an example of Cryptic doing something conceptually similar on a smaller scale. You may attempt to argue against this with evidence showing that Cryptic in fact cannot scale up the technique. That they did not is not in dispute.
Ahh yes the ever infamous "If you don't work there you can' possibly know anything!" argument, which ignores how coding, and game design actually works. The one assuming facts not based on evidence is you, for assuming the devs can do something they have never shown the ability to do, which you compound via false comparison fallacies to try to claim they have shown that they could.
Are you completely incapable of comprehending English? ¿Debería repetir esa declaración en español? Oder würdest du es lieber auf Deutsch sagen? Что, если я скажу это по-русски? Тогда вы поймете это? या यदि आप चाहें तो हिंदी में इसे दोहरा सकते हैं।
Again: I cited an example of Cryptic doing something conceptually similar on a smaller scale. You may attempt to argue against this with evidence showing that Cryptic in fact cannot scale up the technique. By the way: thank you @duncanidaho11 for disproving him and showing that Cryptic in fact can use the technique in ground social zones.
Post edited by starswordc on
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
(I was under the impression Pakleds just had a speech impediment, tho.)
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
(I was under the impression Pakleds just had a speech impediment, tho.)
The Pakleds from that epeisode seemed to be very simple, but cunning enough to outsmart the chuckleheads Picard left running the Enterprise. Except Worf (who voiced legitimate concerns that got ignored like always) and Troi (who was actually useful for once and was promtly ignored).
Your entire argument literally boils down
>They could have won faster if they totally went against everything they wanted to accomplished
Which is true of almost every situation imaginable because its far easier to just break things then it is to do anything else.
The whole point of them play politics was to separate the races, and make them more easy to assimilate into the Iconian Whole, beating them via straight war just leave hostile attitudes towards the Iconians in place, and leads to a far more difficult empire to control longer term.
You really don't seem to understand or grasp things beyond basic "KILL EVERYTHING!" motivations.
Excuse me? Iconians are immortal? Hello? Again: with their weight of numbers and the fact they live forever unless killed, they can afford to just throw men and ships at the problem until it dies of exhaustion and people in the Milky Way no longer remember anything but an Iconian boot heel. Use the strategy that best plays to your strengths and your enemy's weaknesses. An immortal with effectively unlimited resources is going to see things at a much different scale than a guy who lives 80 years and commands a ship with a crew of a thousand.
You really don't seem to understand or grasp either military strategy, numbers too big to count on your fingers and toes, distances greater than your commute, or timespans longer than your workweek.
The iconians suck at any kind of strategy. Their hamfisted attempt to divide and conquer resulted in the creation of the greatest alliance in the history of the galaxy. Then they attempt direct action and fail miserably by holding back their allegedly unlimited numbers and their alleged ability to deploy them anywhere instantly.
They totally should've taken us by surprise with their portals and steamrolled us with superior numbers immediately, everywhere at once. But logically, then they would've won and we'd have had no game.
And you can, of course, can cite chapter and verse of Cryptic canon statements as to how and why your argument is the case.
Oh, wait, you can't, because the option was never discussed because of Cryptic's unhealthy obsession with a specific superweapon based on untested (in the prime timeline) technology acquired from an alternate timeline that is known in that timeline to always produce drastic unintended consequences when used.
Can you cite the chapter and verse of Cryptic canon statements as to how and why the argument isn't the case? Ohh wait you can't, because Cryptic never covered it. You should really see how that argument is nonsense and can easily turned back around at you. Also, the fact that no one considered it a viable option in-game would suggest it wouldn't have worked. That is how narratives are written.
No, it just suggests that the writers didn't consider them because of their fixation on the Krenim. Forgotten Phlebotinum is bad writing. Following Niven's Law, "Once a technology or discovery has been introduced into a fictional setting, it must continue to exist in all chronologically later stories in that setting," is good writing.
And the best part? All it takes to solve the problem is a little bit of dialog:
"Yeah, we looked at using a Genesis device on the sphere. It won't work because [technobabble/]. We also thought about a trilithium bomb. That won't work either because [technobabble/]."
"What about that old Romulan project, Sunseed?"
"Plans were lost when Romulus blew up."
I disagree. Reciting 50 years of technobabble just to remind people it exists is not good writing. Such boringly obvious talks may be assumed to have taken place off-screen, we don't need to listen to it. Or since we're quoting TV Tropes, The Law Of Conservation Of Detail.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,829Community Moderator
The Skipper Missile in Wing Commander was deployed by the Kilrathi, and had the distinct, and rather unique, feature of cloaking and decloaking. In the movie, the Skipper only decloaked to adjust trajectory before recloaking again, which was the basis behind Confed calling it the Skipper. Literally the only thing that could shoot down a Skipper was a starfighter in visual range.
So in theory... it IS possible to make a stealth warhead of some kind. If it can be deployed in Star Trek... THAT is the real question, as I don't know if there is a cloak small enough for a torpedo. Maybe a cruise missile design using a small craft cloak, but a torpedo casing... not sure.
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
Iconians are so stupid, they make everyone else in the room dumber. I'm certain there is a techno-babble device that measures "stupidity" and the Iconians' "aura of dumb" would break it.
(I was under the impression Pakleds just had a speech impediment, tho.)
The thinking of the Pakleds is incredibly simple. Like, human children simple. It's wonder their species did not kill itself off. I wonder if the Borg would assimilate Pakleds, or would they give them the level of disdain they reserve for Kazon?
(I was under the impression Pakleds just had a speech impediment, tho.)
The thinking of the Pakleds is incredibly simple. Like, human children simple. It's wonder their species did not kill itself off. I wonder if the Borg would assimilate Pakleds, or would they give them the level of disdain they reserve for Kazon?
I'd imagine the Pakleds in their debut episode were just the bottom of the barrel, rather than the norm for the species.
None are probably quite at the same level as Humans or Vulcans, but more functional that the idiots that showed how dumb the Enterprise crew can be.
The Skipper Missile in Wing Commander was deployed by the Kilrathi, and had the distinct, and rather unique, feature of cloaking and decloaking. In the movie, the Skipper only decloaked to adjust trajectory before recloaking again, which was the basis behind Confed calling it the Skipper. Literally the only thing that could shoot down a Skipper was a starfighter in visual range.
So in theory... it IS possible to make a stealth warhead of some kind. If it can be deployed in Star Trek... THAT is the real question, as I don't know if there is a cloak small enough for a torpedo. Maybe a cruise missile design using a small craft cloak, but a torpedo casing... not sure.
Given that PERSONAL cloaks exist in Star Trek? Yeah, the tech to make cloaked missiles is definitely there.
The Skipper Missile in Wing Commander was deployed by the Kilrathi, and had the distinct, and rather unique, feature of cloaking and decloaking. In the movie, the Skipper only decloaked to adjust trajectory before recloaking again, which was the basis behind Confed calling it the Skipper. Literally the only thing that could shoot down a Skipper was a starfighter in visual range.
So in theory... it IS possible to make a stealth warhead of some kind. If it can be deployed in Star Trek... THAT is the real question, as I don't know if there is a cloak small enough for a torpedo. Maybe a cruise missile design using a small craft cloak, but a torpedo casing... not sure.
Given that PERSONAL cloaks exist in Star Trek? Yeah, the tech to make cloaked missiles is definitely there.
There was also the DS9 episode where they carry a cloak generator through the station while cloaked. Indicating that the cloak isn't all that heavy, not very big and has low power requirements for smaller objects.
Put that on something like the dreadnaught torpedo from the voyager episode and you'd have a pretty effective weapon.
In the iconian war the writers seemed to try and go with the skin of teeth victories by killing off others. Downside was the folk being killed, apart from emperor careless, were folk you'd only just met and would care very little about because they weren't well written. They also ignored that skin of the teeth moments are much better when you are able to escape in a nearly crippled ship by warping out during combat, something the game forbids most of the time.
In comparison the jem who got sparta'd into the pit during the son'a lockbox promo episode was someone I was sad to see go as they seemed like they may have been able to grow into an interesting character and potentially a lead for gamma content.
>"So on the one hand, Cryptic wrote themselves into a corner with a too-powerful enemy that requires too many implausible developments and too much plot-induced stupidity to give the protagonists a fighting chance. On the other hand, they didn't bother to show the effects of that enemy in the game world. In other words, it's a garbage story"
Really at the base of it, this is and has been Cryptic's basic problem for a long time now. I forgive a LOT about a game, TRIBBLE graphics, poor optimization even, but bad storytelling is an unpardonable failure. There simply isn't an excuse for it from a game developer. Writing talent almost literally drops from trees in America. Go grab a friggin intern from a local writing workshop, but please, Crypic, for the love of Me, stop believing in your ability to write these episodes and hire a capable person to do it for you professionally?
The Iconian War should have and was painted to be something ENTIRELY different than what it really was. These endless failures of continuity were easily avoided and the poor voice acting and dialogue script choices also easily avoidable. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. If there are thousands of qualified people that are willing to donate their time and effort to improve the gambling simulator you turned your game into, you should let them. I'd wager that a great number of them wouldn't even ask for credit of any kind, just let them fix this mess.
The Skipper Missile in Wing Commander was deployed by the Kilrathi, and had the distinct, and rather unique, feature of cloaking and decloaking. In the movie, the Skipper only decloaked to adjust trajectory before recloaking again, which was the basis behind Confed calling it the Skipper. Literally the only thing that could shoot down a Skipper was a starfighter in visual range.
So in theory... it IS possible to make a stealth warhead of some kind. If it can be deployed in Star Trek... THAT is the real question, as I don't know if there is a cloak small enough for a torpedo. Maybe a cruise missile design using a small craft cloak, but a torpedo casing... not sure.
The mines used to blockade the wormhole were smaller than photon torpedoes, and included a cloaking device and an industrial replicator.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,829Community Moderator
I was taking into consideration the propulsion system as well. Mines are pretty easy as they only have little thrusters to position themselves. A person... doesn't need power to walk. lol
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite colored text = mod mode
This thread has gone so far off course that I don't think it's possible to correct. /Thread
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Comments
You really don't seem to understand or grasp either military strategy, numbers too big to count on your fingers and toes, distances greater than your commute, or timespans longer than your workweek.
Weapons get labeled illegal by international agreement for being considered either too prone to collateral damage (biological weapons are prone to mutation and can spread far beyond the target area, chemical weapons and fallout from nukes drift with the wind away from their targets), or killing in manners considered too painful (napalm and flamethrowers = death by burning, chemical weapons kill in various horrible and disgusting ways). While we're at it, land mines are illegal because they're hard to clean up and it's easy for some random farmer to step on one decades after the soldiers you were trying to blow up left the country. And yet other weapons that cause horrible pain and suffering, such as plain old non-uranium bullets that can maim limbs or cause slow, lingering deaths by infection, blood loss, and sundry destroyed organs, are legal. (Ever tried breathing when you have a sucking chest wound from a rifle round and your lungs are filling up with blood? Well, neither have I, but I'm guessing it isn't fun.) Ordinary high-explosive shells can do most of the same things as nuclear warheads, albeit taking more of them to achieve the same effect, but they're legal, too. Go with fictional weapons, phasers and disruptors can disintegrate people, which is in all likelihood an incredibly painful death. Or they can cause very bad burns or set things on fire and kill that way... much like napalm.
Seems there's a few contradictions in the thought behind which weapons are considered bad and which ones are considered acceptable.
The simple fact is, even Starfleet, that beacon of civilization, has shown itself repeatedly, in canon, to be willing to take drastic actions under extreme threat. If General Order 24--which Captain Kirk invoked just to save himself and his ship--doesn't exist to deal with an enemy like the Iconians then what bloody well does it exist for?
ETA: Oh, one further addendum. According to the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual, the theoretical yield of a single Galaxy-class photon torpedo matter/antimatter annihilation is 64 megatons. The most powerful nuclear weapon ever tested, the Soviet Union's Tsar Bomba, had a calculated yield of only 50 megatons. Chew on that while you think about permissibility of particular weapons.
Yes, exactly that thing. It's unethical because the Iconians of 200,000 years ago didn't do a damn thing to anyone (other than being stuck-up isolationist jerks, which wasn't a capital offense the last time I looked*) and the potential collateral damage downtime of the incursion is literally incalculable. The Iconians of 200,000 years ago didn't kill billions of innocent Romulans or invade the galaxy, nor did the various people whose existence will be affected by their absence. But the Iconians of 2410 did blow up Romulus and are invading the galaxy, so killing them is, as far as I'm aware, perfectly ethical according to nearly every generally accepted system of morality I'm aware of. Thank you for proving my point: that murder of civilians is always wrong.
* Although given the Na'Kuhl situation Cryptic apparently has a different opinion on that, so YMMV.
No, it just suggests that the writers didn't consider them because of their fixation on the Krenim. Forgotten Phlebotinum is bad writing. Following Niven's Law, "Once a technology or discovery has been introduced into a fictional setting, it must continue to exist in all chronologically later stories in that setting," is good writing.
And the best part? All it takes to solve the problem is a little bit of dialog:
Oh, funny, Cryptic did exactly that with the transporters in "Capture the Flag": you can suggest to Gaius Selan that you just beam the bad guy off the ship into vacuum, and he answers that he already tried it. And it doesn't even require any fancy programming tricks!
The real punchline, of course, is that the Best Expansion Ever that the Players Loved had better writing than the entire Iconian War arc put together.
ETA: By the way, what you just did is called "concession by implication". I provided evidence for my assertions and challenged you to provide evidence for yours. You did not, therefore the implication is that you cannot back up your claims.
All right, conceded. My mistake.
Yeah, it's too bad we don't have a way to shield it from sensors. Oh, wait, we've got that too: "House Pegh" had a cloaking device that worked against the Iconians. Hmmm, more bad writing. How 'bout that?
Are you completely incapable of comprehending English? ¿Debería repetir esa declaración en español? Oder würdest du es lieber auf Deutsch sagen? Что, если я скажу это по-русски? Тогда вы поймете это? या यदि आप चाहें तो हिंदी में इसे दोहरा सकते हैं।
Again: I cited an example of Cryptic doing something conceptually similar on a smaller scale. You may attempt to argue against this with evidence showing that Cryptic in fact cannot scale up the technique. By the way: thank you @duncanidaho11 for disproving him and showing that Cryptic in fact can use the technique in ground social zones.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
"How can Pakleds and Iconians be so capable, yet both be so breath-takingly stupid?"
Even more eternal question: Why do smart characters always suddenly catch a case of the stupid when an Iconian enters the room?
(I was under the impression Pakleds just had a speech impediment, tho.)
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
The Pakleds from that epeisode seemed to be very simple, but cunning enough to outsmart the chuckleheads Picard left running the Enterprise. Except Worf (who voiced legitimate concerns that got ignored like always) and Troi (who was actually useful for once and was promtly ignored).
They totally should've taken us by surprise with their portals and steamrolled us with superior numbers immediately, everywhere at once. But logically, then they would've won and we'd have had no game.
I disagree. Reciting 50 years of technobabble just to remind people it exists is not good writing. Such boringly obvious talks may be assumed to have taken place off-screen, we don't need to listen to it. Or since we're quoting TV Tropes, The Law Of Conservation Of Detail.
Actually... while it was never seen in Star Trek... the concept of a stealth warhead DOES exist in sci fi.
http://wingcommander.wikia.com/wiki/Skipper_Missile
The Skipper Missile in Wing Commander was deployed by the Kilrathi, and had the distinct, and rather unique, feature of cloaking and decloaking. In the movie, the Skipper only decloaked to adjust trajectory before recloaking again, which was the basis behind Confed calling it the Skipper. Literally the only thing that could shoot down a Skipper was a starfighter in visual range.
So in theory... it IS possible to make a stealth warhead of some kind. If it can be deployed in Star Trek... THAT is the real question, as I don't know if there is a cloak small enough for a torpedo. Maybe a cruise missile design using a small craft cloak, but a torpedo casing... not sure.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
The thinking of the Pakleds is incredibly simple. Like, human children simple. It's wonder their species did not kill itself off. I wonder if the Borg would assimilate Pakleds, or would they give them the level of disdain they reserve for Kazon?
I'd imagine the Pakleds in their debut episode were just the bottom of the barrel, rather than the norm for the species.
None are probably quite at the same level as Humans or Vulcans, but more functional that the idiots that showed how dumb the Enterprise crew can be.
My character Tsin'xing
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/File:Quark's_cloaking_device.jpg
Put that on something like the dreadnaught torpedo from the voyager episode and you'd have a pretty effective weapon.
In the iconian war the writers seemed to try and go with the skin of teeth victories by killing off others. Downside was the folk being killed, apart from emperor careless, were folk you'd only just met and would care very little about because they weren't well written. They also ignored that skin of the teeth moments are much better when you are able to escape in a nearly crippled ship by warping out during combat, something the game forbids most of the time.
In comparison the jem who got sparta'd into the pit during the son'a lockbox promo episode was someone I was sad to see go as they seemed like they may have been able to grow into an interesting character and potentially a lead for gamma content.
>"So on the one hand, Cryptic wrote themselves into a corner with a too-powerful enemy that requires too many implausible developments and too much plot-induced stupidity to give the protagonists a fighting chance. On the other hand, they didn't bother to show the effects of that enemy in the game world. In other words, it's a garbage story"
Really at the base of it, this is and has been Cryptic's basic problem for a long time now. I forgive a LOT about a game, TRIBBLE graphics, poor optimization even, but bad storytelling is an unpardonable failure. There simply isn't an excuse for it from a game developer. Writing talent almost literally drops from trees in America. Go grab a friggin intern from a local writing workshop, but please, Crypic, for the love of Me, stop believing in your ability to write these episodes and hire a capable person to do it for you professionally?
The Iconian War should have and was painted to be something ENTIRELY different than what it really was. These endless failures of continuity were easily avoided and the poor voice acting and dialogue script choices also easily avoidable. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. If there are thousands of qualified people that are willing to donate their time and effort to improve the gambling simulator you turned your game into, you should let them. I'd wager that a great number of them wouldn't even ask for credit of any kind, just let them fix this mess.
The mines used to blockade the wormhole were smaller than photon torpedoes, and included a cloaking device and an industrial replicator.
But yea... the tech is there.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch