And when the nerds analyze the various sets we have seen, to fit everything we "know" to be there within the ship the 300m is even too small. In TNG when you start breaking down how many decks are crammed into the saucer based on windows and the LCARS display we see briefly in scenes, I think the common thought is that it could easily be over the 300m size.
But regardless, it's Cryptic and STO can pretty much do whatever they want. By screen canon, the entirety of a constitution class (T6 Light Cruiser) should be about the size of a Galaxy saucer, and is supposed to be smaller than the Excelsior....and that is not what we have in game. The NX-01 should be the size of a galaxy class warp nacelle, and the Defiant isn't much larger than the saucer deflector array, etc.
Continuity aside, they do what works.
Not really, all the sets and various deck heights would fit in a ship between 300 and 360m long.
And by screen canon the Conni should be much bigger. The Galaxy is 642m and the Conni is canonically 450ish m based on its MSD in ENT which would make it far longer than the Galaxy saucer and the excelsior is about 600m long making it basically the length of the Galaxy minus the nacelles.
The ingame sizes are precisely equal to the non-canon sizes found in various encyclopedias where the Conni is just under 300m and as long as the Excelsiors nacelles and the Excelsior is about as long as the Galaxy saucer and the Oberth is about the size of the Connis secondary hull. They're very careful and accurate about that, which is a shame because using the onscreen sizes rather than the tiny little encyclopedic sizes would mean the canon ships weren't dwarfed by the STO originals.
The Defiant is the exception at its canonical length of 170m and not the encyclopedic length of 120m because it needs to be visible.
A) you said not really, and then agreed with me that it would all fit on a ship between 300-360m....that was my point, "canon" says its 120m, but we see it is in fact larger.
Where are you getting your data from bro? Can't base sizes only off a the MSD, esp actual canon (i.e. printed or onscreen models next to each other) shows 288m for the Connie, the A is 303m. Yes the Galaxy is 642m, but the nacelles are spec'd out between 200m-250m (thus making the Connie per Canon, only slightly larger than the nacelles of the EntD and DEF less than half the length) The Excelsior/EntB is canon at 467m. OFFICIALLY those same sources put the Oberth at 120m....which is the problem. The NX-01 is placed at 225m and has the same crew capacity but less decks overall. And with the Oberth coming out much later, and with the visual references we have seen, the overall length would be more likely safe at the 300m - 360m range based on its appearances in TNG (thus the line of reasoning that later versions with the "technology used in this very ship" were perhaps built larger?
Comparing MSD diagrams is notoriously a bad idea. Canon ship reference is either printed material or what we see for models on screen in comparison to known ships. I.E. In TNG we have clear scaling reference in 3 episodes that put the Oberth at roughly 300m. Excelsiors are always seen on screen as much smaller than the Galaxy, not 42m only. So printed material fits what we see in the models. the MSD is always off, and never even agreed with set canon, often having the wrong number of decks or locations of key spaces compared to what was known to be true. So again, Cryptic took liberties with the sizes of ships as a T6 connie is NOT slightly larger than a galaxy warp nacelle.
Canon is what's onscreen. That's MSDs, spoken dialogue, damaged ships with layouts visable, and comparisons. No printed material counts whatsoever. Not a single figure for size given in any book or magazine means anything. The only figure that ever count are onscreen ones and you do that by taking the most number of sources that agree.
The Conni is over 400m because the MSD shows it to be so. The Excelsior is over 600m because the deck layout in Generations, MSD, comparison with the Galaxy, and ESD all show it to be over 600m.
There is absolutely no onscreen evidence for the tiny Conni seen in fan fiction like the encyclopedias.
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
And when the nerds analyze the various sets we have seen, to fit everything we "know" to be there within the ship the 300m is even too small. In TNG when you start breaking down how many decks are crammed into the saucer based on windows and the LCARS display we see briefly in scenes, I think the common thought is that it could easily be over the 300m size.
But regardless, it's Cryptic and STO can pretty much do whatever they want. By screen canon, the entirety of a constitution class (T6 Light Cruiser) should be about the size of a Galaxy saucer, and is supposed to be smaller than the Excelsior....and that is not what we have in game. The NX-01 should be the size of a galaxy class warp nacelle, and the Defiant isn't much larger than the saucer deflector array, etc.
Continuity aside, they do what works.
Not really, all the sets and various deck heights would fit in a ship between 300 and 360m long.
And by screen canon the Conni should be much bigger. The Galaxy is 642m and the Conni is canonically 450ish m based on its MSD in ENT which would make it far longer than the Galaxy saucer and the excelsior is about 600m long making it basically the length of the Galaxy minus the nacelles.
The ingame sizes are precisely equal to the non-canon sizes found in various encyclopedias where the Conni is just under 300m and as long as the Excelsiors nacelles and the Excelsior is about as long as the Galaxy saucer and the Oberth is about the size of the Connis secondary hull. They're very careful and accurate about that, which is a shame because using the onscreen sizes rather than the tiny little encyclopedic sizes would mean the canon ships weren't dwarfed by the STO originals.
The Defiant is the exception at its canonical length of 170m and not the encyclopedic length of 120m because it needs to be visible.
A) you said not really, and then agreed with me that it would all fit on a ship between 300-360m....that was my point, "canon" says its 120m, but we see it is in fact larger.
Where are you getting your data from bro? Can't base sizes only off a the MSD, esp actual canon (i.e. printed or onscreen models next to each other) shows 288m for the Connie, the A is 303m. Yes the Galaxy is 642m, but the nacelles are spec'd out between 200m-250m (thus making the Connie per Canon, only slightly larger than the nacelles of the EntD and DEF less than half the length) The Excelsior/EntB is canon at 467m. OFFICIALLY those same sources put the Oberth at 120m....which is the problem. The NX-01 is placed at 225m and has the same crew capacity but less decks overall. And with the Oberth coming out much later, and with the visual references we have seen, the overall length would be more likely safe at the 300m - 360m range based on its appearances in TNG (thus the line of reasoning that later versions with the "technology used in this very ship" were perhaps built larger?
Comparing MSD diagrams is notoriously a bad idea. Canon ship reference is either printed material or what we see for models on screen in comparison to known ships. I.E. In TNG we have clear scaling reference in 3 episodes that put the Oberth at roughly 300m. Excelsiors are always seen on screen as much smaller than the Galaxy, not 42m only. So printed material fits what we see in the models. the MSD is always off, and never even agreed with set canon, often having the wrong number of decks or locations of key spaces compared to what was known to be true. So again, Cryptic took liberties with the sizes of ships as a T6 connie is NOT slightly larger than a galaxy warp nacelle.
Canon is what's onscreen. That's MSDs, spoken dialogue, damaged ships with layouts visable, and comparisons. No printed material counts whatsoever. Not a single figure for size given in any book or magazine means anything. The only figure that ever count are onscreen ones and you do that by taking the most number of sources that agree.
The Conni is over 400m because the MSD shows it to be so. The Excelsior is over 600m because the deck layout in Generations, MSD, comparison with the Galaxy, and ESD all show it to be over 600m.
There is absolutely no onscreen evidence for the tiny Conni seen in fan fiction like the encyclopedias.
Canon IS what's in CBS authorized manuals....But regardless. We HAVE seen the Connie (EntA anyway) directly compared to the Excelsior in Search for Spock and it is roughly 2/3 the length and 2/3 the width. Roughly. Again in TNG (with the exception of the pilot "encounter at fairpoint" all other instances of the Excelsior class fit true at appox 2/3 the size of the EntD) So the Connie would be give or take, not quite 1/2 the size of the Galaxy. So models, and the manuals agree.
We CANNOT use MSD as they are proven wrong in EVERY SINGLE EPISODE they are used practically. The MSD from Generations DOES make the EntB appear over 680 meters long, 40m longer than the ENT D in fact! WHAT?! But the hull breach on decks 13-15 according the um what they said, according to the magic MSD is actually decks 20-22....which don't even exist on that ship. Hmmm...So that can't be right?
Also look in TNG on the models of Enterprise on the wall or again in Voyager "In The Flesh"
The Excelsior cannot be longer than 500m, and the connie is barely longer than the nacelle on a galaxy.
Canon is only what is onscreen. That is CBS' position. Not a single word or picture off the screen counts in the slightest. CBS have never changed that, it's not new information.
But regardless. We HAVE seen the Connie (EntA anyway) directly compared to the Excelsior in Search for Spock and it is roughly 2/3 the length and 2/3 the width. Roughly.
Correct, and as we know from their MSDs that makes the Conni about 400m and the Excelsior about 600m.
Again in TNG (with the exception of the pilot "encounter at fairpoint" all other instances of the Excelsior class fit true at appox 2/3 the size of the EntD) So the Connie would be give or take, not quite 1/2 the size of the Galaxy. So models, and the manuals agree.
Except that's not the case. Every instance of the Excelsior in TNG is about the same length as the Galaxy, not shorter. So the MSDs and shots agree.
The reason for this is the replacement from the Ambassador, as the TNG guest ship, to the Excelsior meant the Excelsior couldn't be dwarfed by the Galaxy.
We CANNOT use MSD as they are proven wrong in EVERY SINGLE EPISODE they are used practically. The MSD from Generations DOES make the EntB appear over 680 meters long, 40m longer than the ENT D in fact! WHAT?! But the hull breach on decks 13-15 according the um what they said, according to the magic MSD is actually decks 20-22....which don't even exist on that ship. Hmmm...So that can't be right?
Because deck numbers don't line up with numbers of decks. You know that so why act as though they do? Unless you think the Coni refit has 78 decks. You couldn't fit those on the 440m ship either.
Also look in TNG on the models of Enterprise on the wall or again in Voyager "In The Flesh"
The Excelsior cannot be longer than 500m, and the connie is barely longer than the nacelle on a galaxy.
And going by TNGs ship wall the aircraft carrier is the size of an Excelsior as well. Those are not representations of the ships relative to each other, only representations of the ships themselves.
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
So ignoring the people that believe the MSD determines ship size, even though mutliple MSDs have been used for each ship depending on the episode....and returning to the topic of this thread. WE NEED A T6 OBERTH!
I would love to see the Oberth brought in as a Miracle worker science ship, because why not? And would still love to see a model using TNG nacelles or the the warp nacelles from the Andromeda. Not a huge fan of the pointy ones that Cryptic keeps putting on the ships. Seems contrary to what we have always seen on screen to me.
Since the Oberth was a part of a poll a while back along with three other ships then it's probably on their minds for an update and release at some point, because after all there's many more ships which don't yet have T6 versions which weren't even mentioned in that poll, and two ships from the poll so far have already been updated to T6.
Remind me what the other two ships were, please? I think that the Oberth is wonky-looking as hell, but I've been fascinated seeing how many people have lobbied for it to receive a T6 version. Honestly, I would probably give one a chance too.
Since the Oberth was a part of a poll a while back along with three other ships then it's probably on their minds for an update and release at some point, because after all there's many more ships which don't yet have T6 versions which weren't even mentioned in that poll, and two ships from the poll so far have already been updated to T6.
Remind me what the other two ships were, please?
The Ambassador support cruiser and the Vor'cha battlecruiser were the two ships of the four ship poll to get T6 treatment.
It's funny how they feel the need to update the skins of the existing in game TMP ships more than releasing the final TMP ship the Oberth in T6 form. It's the only one of the TMP ships which isn't cruiser and engi based.
Since the Oberth was a part of a poll a while back along with three other ships then it's probably on their minds for an update and release at some point, because after all there's many more ships which don't yet have T6 versions which weren't even mentioned in that poll, and two ships from the poll so far have already been updated to T6.
The ship that won by a 2% majority was (and remains) ignored; they combined the two next closest in votes and released those as a pack instead. They also ignored the Oberth entirely. And needless to say there've been numerous ships (including canon ones) since that time.
So it's entirely fair to say that since they ignored two of the ships we were asked to vote for (including the 'winner'), the poll was pointless.
Well, on the other hand, the Vor'Cha and Ambassador together are 57 %, and the Nova would only be 31 %.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Since the Oberth was a part of a poll a while back along with three other ships then it's probably on their minds for an update and release at some point, because after all there's many more ships which don't yet have T6 versions which weren't even mentioned in that poll, and two ships from the poll so far have already been updated to T6.
The ship that won by a 2% majority was (and remains) ignored; they combined the two next closest in votes and released those as a pack instead. They also ignored the Oberth entirely. And needless to say there've been numerous ships (including canon ones) since that time.
So it's entirely fair to say that since they ignored two of the ships we were asked to vote for (including the 'winner'), the poll was pointless.
Well, on the other hand, the Vor'Cha and Ambassador together are 57 %, and the Nova would only be 31 %.
Oh come on! No offense intended here, but you know as well as I do that putting two ships together was NOT presented as a choice! It was presented as a vote for ONE ship.
Heck, lets look at this another way - lets pretend for one moment that the Vor'Cha won that poll. But instead of working on, and releasing, a T6 Vor'Cha, they combined the Nova and Oberth's votes to make a Small Science Ship pack containing those ships. Do you honestly really think the Vor'Cha fans would've said "oh well, that's fair"?!
So far as I am concerned they didn't get the result they wanted and therefore moved the proverbial goalpost. And the fact that there is STILL no sign of the winning choice in that poll, 15 months after the poll ended, says it all.
Well, the question was
With the understanding that this does NOT constitute any sort of promise that it will happen, which ship do you most want to buy&fly in STO?
So there was no promise. NO promise. So it was basically "Just for fun".
But if any decisions were to be made on the poll ,and Cryptic still prefers to deliver pack, that poll gave great ammunition for a Vor'Cha and Ambassador pack. "Hey, this way we can ensure both faction ships will be popular!"
If they were looking for a stand alone release, the Nova would look better. But they don't do standalone C-Store releases most of the time.
Of course, if the poll had also included the Vo'Quv or the Hegh'ta or the Kamarag, maybe different options would have looked more attractive.
I guess that's why it's "no promise".
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Reading over some of the post. The original Oberth is 150m long. Later versions as pointed out put it in the 300m long range. If you split the difference here, a T6 Oberht would fall in the Nova(221m long) or Miranda(243m long) size.
With my three pack I put together. I shrank the Nova down, it would fall in with escorts now, it would be somewhere in the range of the Defiant(120m) to the T'Pau(170m) range. Unless you leave at is and define it as a heavy escort.
Give the estimated sizes of 250-300m that other have pointed it. This could be rounded off for the Oberth at 300-350. Roughly the same size as the Springfield(325m), Olympic(320m) and Constellation(310m) class ships.
Which works, since the Olympic is a science ship.
Also, looking at the Olympic. If you put the Oberth saucer between the nacelles and lower decks, it would look pretty good.
Ok, reyan (and others), this is the Oberth thread. Please take the Nova argument over to the Nova thread. Thanks.
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
Reading over some of the post. The original Oberth is 150m long. Later versions as pointed out put it in the 300m long range. If you split the difference here, a T6 Oberht would fall in the Nova(221m long) or Miranda(243m long) size.
With my three pack I put together. I shrank the Nova down, it would fall in with escorts now, it would be somewhere in the range of the Defiant(120m) to the T'Pau(170m) range. Unless you leave at is and define it as a heavy escort.
Give the estimated sizes of 250-300m that other have pointed it. This could be rounded off for the Oberth at 300-350. Roughly the same size as the Springfield(325m), Olympic(320m) and Constellation(310m) class ships.
Which works, since the Olympic is a science ship.
Also, looking at the Olympic. If you put the Oberth saucer between the nacelles and lower decks, it would look pretty good.
I would love to just see TNG era nacelles on her. or I've also seen some good TOS skin models floating around online. And I never understood why Cryptic never sprang for the licensing on all of Franks TOS models. His estate has been more than willing to cheaply sell the for every other game version of Star Trek that covered that period? Federation class, Destroyer class, etc?
Stop rolling out new made up ships until you give us T6 versions of Canon ships please and thank you.
I think the easiest explanation for the size increase was just that it was built larger for the later runs. The Pegasus from TNG was said to have top of the line tech that was being tested and was now used on the Galaxy class. So Perhaps the Pegasus varient was built larger to use an already known design, but just needed more space to test new tech?
I really just want an Oberth. Size issues aside, I'm only play canon ships (except for leveling to get ship traits) and for "canon" science vessels we currently have the Nebula and Pathfinder as T6. No Luna, Nova, Oberth, or Bubble ship (can't remember the name). Of the two T6 options, I prefer the Nebula in looks, but the Pathfinder in stats. But would still like options.
I really just want an Oberth. Size issues aside, I'm only play canon ships (except for leveling to get ship traits) and for "canon" science vessels we currently have the Nebula and Pathfinder as T6. No Luna, Nova, Oberth, or Bubble ship (can't remember the name). Of the two T6 options, I prefer the Nebula in looks, but the Pathfinder in stats. But would still like options.
Bubble ship? The Dauntless?
But, yeah. hopefully we we get these T6 upgrades. They're quickly becoming the last ships that haven't received it.
I am not so sure what spec they could give it. I mean surely it won't be intel again like the majority of sci ships, maybe not temporal either but then again a lot of the TOS/TMP ships had temporal, I don't think command would work with it either, maybe pilot could work but I don't really see it as a fast ship, would miracle worker even make sense on it?
If they do give the Oberth the phase cloak console like in the episode Pegasus of TNG then perhaps they will also make it compatible with the Galaxy class since it was also outfitted with the device in the same episode.
Comments
Canon is what's onscreen. That's MSDs, spoken dialogue, damaged ships with layouts visable, and comparisons. No printed material counts whatsoever. Not a single figure for size given in any book or magazine means anything. The only figure that ever count are onscreen ones and you do that by taking the most number of sources that agree.
The Conni is over 400m because the MSD shows it to be so. The Excelsior is over 600m because the deck layout in Generations, MSD, comparison with the Galaxy, and ESD all show it to be over 600m.
There is absolutely no onscreen evidence for the tiny Conni seen in fan fiction like the encyclopedias.
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!
Canon IS what's in CBS authorized manuals....But regardless. We HAVE seen the Connie (EntA anyway) directly compared to the Excelsior in Search for Spock and it is roughly 2/3 the length and 2/3 the width. Roughly. Again in TNG (with the exception of the pilot "encounter at fairpoint" all other instances of the Excelsior class fit true at appox 2/3 the size of the EntD) So the Connie would be give or take, not quite 1/2 the size of the Galaxy. So models, and the manuals agree.
We CANNOT use MSD as they are proven wrong in EVERY SINGLE EPISODE they are used practically. The MSD from Generations DOES make the EntB appear over 680 meters long, 40m longer than the ENT D in fact! WHAT?! But the hull breach on decks 13-15 according the um what they said, according to the magic MSD is actually decks 20-22....which don't even exist on that ship. Hmmm...So that can't be right?
Also look in TNG on the models of Enterprise on the wall or again in Voyager "In The Flesh"
The Excelsior cannot be longer than 500m, and the connie is barely longer than the nacelle on a galaxy.
Canon is only what is onscreen. That is CBS' position. Not a single word or picture off the screen counts in the slightest. CBS have never changed that, it's not new information.
Correct, and as we know from their MSDs that makes the Conni about 400m and the Excelsior about 600m.
Except that's not the case. Every instance of the Excelsior in TNG is about the same length as the Galaxy, not shorter. So the MSDs and shots agree.
The reason for this is the replacement from the Ambassador, as the TNG guest ship, to the Excelsior meant the Excelsior couldn't be dwarfed by the Galaxy.
Because deck numbers don't line up with numbers of decks. You know that so why act as though they do? Unless you think the Coni refit has 78 decks. You couldn't fit those on the 440m ship either.
And going by TNGs ship wall the aircraft carrier is the size of an Excelsior as well. Those are not representations of the ships relative to each other, only representations of the ships themselves.
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!
I would love to see the Oberth brought in as a Miracle worker science ship, because why not? And would still love to see a model using TNG nacelles or the the warp nacelles from the Andromeda. Not a huge fan of the pointy ones that Cryptic keeps putting on the ships. Seems contrary to what we have always seen on screen to me.
https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline/#/discussion/1247233/science-3-pack-proposal/p3
It does look pretty cool although I prefer the more wing-like nacelles of the original. It does look rather Kelvin like.
That's the one.
Remind me what the other two ships were, please? I think that the Oberth is wonky-looking as hell, but I've been fascinated seeing how many people have lobbied for it to receive a T6 version. Honestly, I would probably give one a chance too.
Well, on the other hand, the Vor'Cha and Ambassador together are 57 %, and the Nova would only be 31 %.
Well, the question was So there was no promise. NO promise. So it was basically "Just for fun".
But if any decisions were to be made on the poll ,and Cryptic still prefers to deliver pack, that poll gave great ammunition for a Vor'Cha and Ambassador pack. "Hey, this way we can ensure both faction ships will be popular!"
If they were looking for a stand alone release, the Nova would look better. But they don't do standalone C-Store releases most of the time.
Of course, if the poll had also included the Vo'Quv or the Hegh'ta or the Kamarag, maybe different options would have looked more attractive.
I guess that's why it's "no promise".
With my three pack I put together. I shrank the Nova down, it would fall in with escorts now, it would be somewhere in the range of the Defiant(120m) to the T'Pau(170m) range. Unless you leave at is and define it as a heavy escort.
Give the estimated sizes of 250-300m that other have pointed it. This could be rounded off for the Oberth at 300-350. Roughly the same size as the Springfield(325m), Olympic(320m) and Constellation(310m) class ships.
Which works, since the Olympic is a science ship.
Also, looking at the Olympic. If you put the Oberth saucer between the nacelles and lower decks, it would look pretty good.
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
I would love to just see TNG era nacelles on her. or I've also seen some good TOS skin models floating around online. And I never understood why Cryptic never sprang for the licensing on all of Franks TOS models. His estate has been more than willing to cheaply sell the for every other game version of Star Trek that covered that period? Federation class, Destroyer class, etc?
Stop rolling out new made up ships until you give us T6 versions of Canon ships please and thank you.
We have the conflicting 170m for the orignial, and the 250+m of the later mentioned TNG.
Bubble ship? The Dauntless?
But, yeah. hopefully we we get these T6 upgrades. They're quickly becoming the last ships that haven't received it.
Yes, the Olympic. Dr Crusher was a captain of one in the last TNG episode. (So briefly on screen-canon, but still)