test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Janeway Class (First 32nd Century Ship for STO) Incoming

2456721

Comments

  • redeyedravenredeyedraven Member Posts: 1,131 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    This looks like one of those buggy models where you lose ship parts until you refresh it at the tailor pig-2.gif​​

    I iz Captain Amazin from se USS Glitch!
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    I am sooo glad none of this is canon.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,403 Arc User
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    Something has gone wrong with that design. As silly as the nacelles are I thought the Voyager-J look reasonably nice in the TV Show and the detached nacelles while silly I can overlook and don't have a problem with that. The in game design on the other hand is absolutely hideous. The translation from screen to game has gone badly wrong.
    You are aware that Cryptic gets the ship model files for the new shows from CBS, and just shaves down polygons to make it fit in STO's engine limits?

    This is literally the exact same model they used in the TV show, with the same dimensions, everything.
    Yet it looked good on screen and looks absolutely hideous in game. It might be the same model but the translation from screen to game has clearly failed. From my point of view Cryptic have messed up the design in its translation to game both in the way it looks and its specs that make no sense.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 26
    But we have a ship from 700 years in the future. This thing needs to have the stats of a Tier 100 ship. It should by its very nature outclass every ship in the game with the 29th and 31st century ships maybe standing a chance to hold their own in comparrison. And we won't just see one of these... They'll be popping up all over the place.
    That isn't how technology works in Star Trek.

    Back in the Enterprise era the hull of the NX was made of Tritanium, in the DSC/TOS era ships were made of Tritanium and Rodinium, in the TNG/VOY era, ships were made of Tritanium, and Rodinium. Rodinium having the same strength as Tritanium. In 200+ years the Federation had found zero better materials to make starships from. Even in Discovery S3 ships are still using those same materials, with some neutroium fibers thrown in for better reinforcement.

    You also have to look at the Dominion. When the Federation encountered the Dominion the Federation was only around 250 years old, while the Dominion was 2,000+ years old. The age gap between the Federation and Dominion was 1750+ years, nearly twice the time gap Discovery jumped from into the future, and Dominion ships were only moderately better then federation ones. With Federation ships still able to hold their own against Dominion ones in terms of both weapons, and defensive power.

    Federation technology had reached a massive point of diminishing returns by the TNG era, that all other galactic civilizations also face.
  • westmetalswestmetals Member Posts: 5,269 Arc User
    ladymyajha wrote: »
    My concern isn't with the looks, it's with the BOff seating. It's stated right in the article that it concentrates more on hull then on shield, great, but then you give it a LCDR Tac instead of a LCDR engineering, which is kind of exactly opposite of what I'd want on a hull heavy sci. Add in the fact that it's a sci ship, and the chances of you needing a LCDR tac on it, when you're probably going to make it a space magic/torp boat anyway, is kind of meh. Which wouldn't be so bad, if it could mount aux cannons, which I don't see it being able to do.

    So now you've got a ship that's hull heavy, and no real great way to capitalize on it, a sci ship that's forcing you practically into a hybrid build to use those new beams, which means less energy to AUX, which takes away from the sci aspect of it.

    Just generally a badly designed ship.

    The LCDR Tac would allow for Torp Spread III
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,691 Arc User
    edited February 26
    So the Aeon timeship, and the Relativity, being in the game is fine, despite those not existing for another 466 years, but the Voyager-J isn't because....?

    So a ship from 700+ years into the future being in the game is fine, but we cannot have more content from the Enterprise era because it is "too far back in the timeline"? ;)
    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 26
    valoreah wrote: »
    So a ship from 700+ years into the future being in the game is fine, but we cannot have more content from the Enterprise era because it is "too far back in the timeline"? ;)
    Ships are not story content.

    I would give you a C for effort, but I have to bring it down to and F for using a straw man.
  • truewarpertruewarper Member Posts: 800 Arc User
    PASS!!!

    Next...
    SPACE---The Last and Great Frontier. A 10 year journey
    49158602353_d7aa42e67a_w.jpg


  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,691 Arc User
    Federation technology had reached a massive point of diminishing returns by the TNG era, that all other galactic civilizations also face.

    The Q did not seem to have this probelm. Or the Douwd. Or the Iconians. Neither did the Cytherians. There was also the Excalbians, the Nacene, Nagilum... just to name a few....

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,691 Arc User
    edited February 26
    Ships are not story content.

    I would give you a C for effort, but I have to bring it down to and F for using a straw man.

    So this ship from 700+ into the future is going to show up in the game just because without any kind of story content to explain why it is there? I find it utterly hilarious how whimsically standards are applied by some.

    I would give you an F, but I have to bring it down to an S for stupidity.

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • truewarpertruewarper Member Posts: 800 Arc User
    somtaawkhar wrote: »
    Federation technology had reached a massive point of diminishing returns by the TNG era, that all other galactic civilizations also face.

    *Ahem* Writers at the time, reach the point on the lack of creativity, to go forward.
    SPACE---The Last and Great Frontier. A 10 year journey
    49158602353_d7aa42e67a_w.jpg


  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 10,691 Arc User
    truewarper wrote: »
    *Ahem* Writers at the time, reach the point on the lack of creativity, to go forward.

    ^ Yep

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • duasynduasyn Member Posts: 458 Arc User
    edited February 26
    Meh. All I see is a model the show didn't have the budget/time/desire to make look good.

    The detached nacelles are goofy, imo. When doesn't a Starfleet ship lose power? I can imagine the crew having to send shuttles out to tow them back into place. :D Ditto for the missing neck too.

    But the end of the hull looks like it'd be good for opening bottles. So that's a plus. B)

    And... Why would/should Voyager be honored with getting a line of lettered ships like the Enterprise?
    (I know, the Discovery writers don't really care about such things. They just know that Voyager was a Trek ship and the Enterprise got to a "-J" so they just copied it like talent-less hacks. Gotta throw out those 'memberberries!) :| Sorry, rant's over. ;)
  • ladymyajhaladymyajha Member Posts: 1,411 Arc User
    westmetals wrote: »
    The LCDR Tac would allow for Torp Spread III

    That's all well and good, but I can do the same thing on the Sutherland class (T6 Neb) and still have a LCDR engineer slot to complement the tankiness.

    The problem here isn't the LCDR Tac, but the fact that you lower the shields (one of the things that sci could do well is boost their shields with their plethora of sci abilities) and go with lower hull heals.

    So basically you have a cruisers hull and shield lay out, with no way to capitalize on healing your strengths. A cruiser can build around hull heals, and still have engineering slots left over for weapon performance. Here you're hull heals are substandard, your shield heals will be fine, except you practically have no shields, and you can what fire Torp Spread III in return, or you can boost your weapons, at the expense of Aux, use Fire at Will 3 but not have the weapon boosting capabilities that makes it such a beast on cruisers.

    Besides while Torp Spread III is a nice to have, it's hardly necessary on a sci ship. Torp Spread II is more then sufficient, with all the space magic you're flinging about. I stand my statement, just a horribly built ship.

  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 26
    valoreah wrote: »
    The Q did not seem to have this probelm. Or the Douwd. Or the Iconians. Neither did the Cytherians. There was also the Excalbians, the Nacene, Nagilum... just to name a few....
    The fact that half your list is species that use powers other then technology to achieve their feats just shows how dishonest you are being... as typical. Can't go one post without lying through your teeth like a child I see.

    Q, Douwd, Excalbians, and Nagilum, are ascendant beings, of various levels, able to create/destory things with the power of thought, not technology.

    The others represent exotic "gimmick" technology. Non standard technology, in various specialized fields, that doesn't represent the overall level of technology in their species. A fine example is the Annorax. The Annorax itself is a very advanced piece of equipment, well beyond Federation levels, but its extremely specialized to one specific goal. The rest of Krenim technology is shown to be completely normal compared to other species in the galaxy. This is true of other gimmick technology species shown throughout Trek. They have one thing thats advanced, but the rest of their technology is generally at, or more often then not, blow, that of the Federation's. With the rest of their society living no better a life then a Federation citizen does.

    Not to mention you, one again, use a straw man here. I specifically used the term diminishing returns to point out that technological advanced has massively slowed, not completely stopped, as you seemingly try to argue here. There obviously is some improvement to be made(hence the new badges in DSC S3 that do everything, and programmable matter)
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,290 Arc User
    edited February 26
    This is beyond ridiculous.

    We have a ship that won't be in active service for 700 YEARS. This goes way beyond a ship that is rare. This is a ship that simply does not belong.

    Now... If Cryptic were to create a branch of the game set in the 32nd century that is isolated from the core game, in which our 32nd century character serves on the USS Janeway, and they treated it like an on-going series that gives us a reason to keep coming back to it, I would actually pay money to play that content.

    But hell... CBS doesn't care about Star Trek continuity... Why should Cryptic?
    So the Aeon timeship, and the Relativity, being in the game is fine, despite those not existing for another 466 years, but the Voyager-J isn't because....?
    Because the Temporal Accords banned time travel sometime after the Aeon and Relativity existed, erasing not only the technology but the knowledge behind that technology. Remember that the Federation didn't have time travel until NCC-1701 accidentally learned about the slingshot effect while escaping a black hole (a "dark star" in the parlance of the time, as the term "black hole" translates to something rather scatalogical in Russian and Russian astronomers were trying to get everyone else to adopt a term that didn't provoke giggles among students), so it's not like there's any danger of the Discovery's crew spilling the beans.

    By the time Voyager-J was built, nobody knew how to bring it backtime.

    As for the ship herself, she looks promising. I wonder what she'll look like when they finish the model? (I mean, that thing is clearly not yet done...)
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • delerouxdeleroux Member Posts: 475 Arc User
    Lmao... wt actual f is that
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 26
    jonsills wrote: »
    Because the Temporal Accords banned time travel sometime after the Aeon and Relativity existed, erasing not only the technology but the knowledge behind that technology. Remember that the Federation didn't have time travel until NCC-1701 accidentally learned about the slingshot effect while escaping a black hole (a "dark star" in the parlance of the time, as the term "black hole" translates to something rather scatalogical in Russian and Russian astronomers were trying to get everyone else to adopt a term that didn't provoke giggles among students), so it's not like there's any danger of the Discovery's crew spilling the beans.

    By the time Voyager-J was built, nobody knew how to bring it backtime.

    As for the ship herself, she looks promising. I wonder what she'll look like when they finish the model? (I mean, that thing is clearly not yet done...)
    Time travel was banned for people from after the Temporal Wars were over. It does not retroactively stop people from before the end of the Temporal Wars from time traveling(hence no time cops stopping the Discovery from jumping into the far future) Nor does it apply to people from before that era who jump into the future, then try to go back(hence no one stopping Burnham from sending the Red Angel suit back in time to send the final signal).

    Hell, no one has stopped the Discovery from using the spore drive in the far future, despite its ability to time travel under certain circumstances.
  • ladymyajhaladymyajha Member Posts: 1,411 Arc User
    On further introspective I kind of see how they want you to build this ship, and it'll be almost mandatory.

    They want you to use those fancy 32nd century phasers it comes with, meaning they want you in a drain build, to drain your enemies shield and weapon energy, giving you a boost in hull damage, and damage mitigation from them doing less damage to you via less energy weapon energy.

    Further damage mitigation will come from lesser engineering hull heals (the universal will almost have to be another engineering slot) and then using the recharge boost from the phasers to boost your recharge times on said heals. So less burst healing, but more overall healing from just spamming the heals.

    Finally the Tac 3 spot is indeed supposed to be from Fire at Will III to further increase the phaser spam and recharge time.

    Still not a great design as you'll practically be forced into this build, but its not as horrible as I once thought. I'll upgrade it from WTF horrible to just really bad.
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    Ships are not story content.

    I would give you a C for effort, but I have to bring it down to and F for using a straw man.

    So this ship from 700+ into the future is going to show up in the game just because without any kind of story content to explain why it is there? I find it utterly hilarious how whimsically standards are applied by some.

    I would give you an F, but I have to bring it down to an S for stupidity.

    Well, on the plus side at least we didn't get thrown a silly 'The Lobi Consortium just kinda found them floating around somewhere and blah blah' type excuse.


  • saurializardsaurializard Member Posts: 3,632 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    Federation technology had reached a massive point of diminishing returns by the TNG era, that all other galactic civilizations also face.

    The Q did not seem to have this probelm. Or the Douwd. Or the Iconians. Neither did the Cytherians. There was also the Excalbians, the Nacene, Nagilum... just to name a few....
    While the argument is true and not all civilizations had reached a point of stagnancy in their tech, the Douwd, Iconians, Cytherians and Excalbians did become stagnant or lacking in various ways.

    The Douwd (at least Kevin) seemed to suffer from creativity sterility, being unable to come up with solutions that didn't require stuff he learned from his life.
    The Iconians becoming stagnant was a big part of one of the Krenim scenarios where delaying their invasion by several hundreds of years would give the galaxy a much better chance at fighting back.
    The Cytherians used their powers to have a different kind of first contact, but focusing on this kind of approach could very well backfire on them (hello, Borg) and in fact, their probe was destroyed because its actions were seen as malicious by a peaceful and optimistic Federation crew, so they clearly didn't learn to do a harmless "probing".
    The Excalbians could create scenarios and simulacrums with ease, but from the memories and knowledge of existing people. In fact they were utterly powerless against their own simulacrums during the Measure of Morality when their "simulations" were derailed.
    #TASforSTO
    Iconian_Trio_sign.jpg?raw=1
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,179 Arc User
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    That is absolutely hideous. The detached nacelles are just appalling - what could *possibly* be the advantage to that design? It just looks like something some artist somewhere pulled out of their rear and was like "OOOOHHHHHHH, THIS IS AWESOME!" No, it's terrible - it's freaking terrible.
    Detached pieces allows for greater turning, and maneuverability, since there isn't as much sheer/resistance from different parts of the ships when making quick/fast movements.


    In other words, it works exactly the same way the chainmail bikini works: fantasy nonsense. The difference here is you can look good wearing a chainmail bikini.
  • ussvaliant2#1952 ussvaliant2 Member Posts: 227 Arc User
    Still waiting for a C-Store T6 Nova, Saber, Steamrunner and Norway Classes. Couldn't careless about these 32nd Century ships
    https://i.imgur.com/R28e0Mi.jpg

    “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re having Lag or Rubber-banding,” “then you ain’t playing Star Trek Online.”
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    Still waiting for a C-Store T6 Nova, Saber, Steamrunner and Norway Classes. Couldn't careless about these 32nd Century ships

    Seems unlikely any of those will receive attention this year. Again - the emphasis is clearly on the new ships from the new shows.

    I guess we could hope that the lead of the Prodigy series is one of those classes, but I sincerely doubt it.


  • doctorstegidoctorstegi Member Posts: 694 Arc User
    Like most Discovery Designs the ship in my eyes looks pretty crappy. Pair that with stats which really doesn't make it special for a Promo Box and I lost interest in this before it even came out.
    C-Store Inc. is still looking for active members on the fed side. If you don't have a fleet feel free to contact me in game @stegi.
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,419 Arc User
    lordmalak1 wrote: »
    thats about the ugliest ship I've ever seen in sto. Is it supposed to have invisible parts ?

    Did you watch S3 of Discovery?

    No.
    Detached nacelles logic are a thing in the 32nd century.

    Fixed. o:)

    ----
    Honestly, it's hard to blame the STO people for this. The stupidity is coming from the official shows, they just want/need/have to stick it into their game somehow.


    (as for how those ships work - well, they clearly studied the "bunch of floating parts" Iconian/Herald ships and reverse engineered the Silly Space Magic. Because reasons? No, it's just dumb.)

  • delerouxdeleroux Member Posts: 475 Arc User
    Discovery continues to prove itself the worst thing to ever befall ST
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 26
    In other words, it works exactly the same way the chainmail bikini works: fantasy nonsense. The difference here is you can look good wearing a chainmail bikini.
    You can never look good in a chainmail bikini.

    And no, it isn't fantasy nonsense. Tell me, which has more wind resistance? A 500 foot tall wall, or literally nothing? The answer is literally nothing.

    Having nothing offers the ultimate in terms of eliminating resistances to movement/turn speed, because there is nothing to be resisted against in the first place.
  • ladymyajhaladymyajha Member Posts: 1,411 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Still waiting for a C-Store T6 Nova, Saber, Steamrunner and Norway Classes. Couldn't careless about these 32nd Century ships

    Seems unlikely any of those will receive attention this year. ever .Again - the emphasis is clearly on the new ships from the new shows.

    I guess we could hope that the lead of the Prodigy series is one of those classes, but I sincerely doubt it.

    Fixed it for you. It its not new and shiny I wouldn't expect them to even bother with it, ever, no matter the clamor.

  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    edited February 26
    Taste is completely subjective, but I really really really don't like this design. And it's actually for that reason I'm happy it's the new promo ship, because it's absolutely no temptation to me! The less ships I actually like/want in promo packs the better IMO :D

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.