test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

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

1568101121

Comments

  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 27
    Is there a documentary or a source you can reference to reinforce that? Not being snarky, I'd just find that type of juxtaposed positioning fascinating, & if true a bit disheartening, my favorite used to be TNG since that's what I grew-up with but as I've grown older I really prefer DS9 too & that certainly could be a prime example of this point.
    There is the "Chaos on the Bridge" documentary that explains the absolute MESS that was TNG's first two seasons.... spoiler alert, it was Gene's fault.

  • vegeta50024vegeta50024 Member Posts: 2,178 Arc User
    payback99 wrote: »
    payback99 wrote: »
    This comes from a time when an X-Man can wipe out your high warp ships with a cry.
    Q could have done it with a finger snap.

    And what does that have to do with the Federation having magical power sources that can make your ship parts float and yet can't go fast in space(yes I know they can go fast they just have to worry about potential antimatter/matter reactions going uncontrolled)? Also if you can do so why wouldn't all your ship parts be mini ships in their own right?

    Q are also advanced god like beings. While Su'Kal is a dude stolen from Marvel/Disney and one of likely Trillions of babies that would have been around Dilithium and radiation over the course of the universes existence.

    Hopefully a Q retcons all of Picard and Discovery out of existence.

    Picard, Discovery, Lower Decks etc. are all part of Star Trek, whether or not you like them. They're not going to disappear.

    TSC_Signature_Gen_4_-_Vegeta_Small.png
  • dragon#2626 dragon Member Posts: 64 Arc User
    Is there a documentary or a source you can reference to reinforce that? Not being snarky, I'd just find that type of juxtaposed positioning fascinating, & if true a bit disheartening, my favorite used to be TNG since that's what I grew-up with but as I've grown older I really prefer DS9 too & that certainly could be a prime example of this point.
    There is the "Chaos on the Bridge" documentary that explains the absolute MESS that was TNG's first two seasons.... spoiler alert, it was Gene's fault.


    Not entirely; his unbelievably obnoxious lawyer also had a hand in things.
    I swim through a sea of stars. . . .
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    payback99 wrote: »
    payback99 wrote: »
    This comes from a time when an X-Man can wipe out your high warp ships with a cry.
    Q could have done it with a finger snap.

    And what does that have to do with the Federation having magical power sources that can make your ship parts float and yet can't go fast in space(yes I know they can go fast they just have to worry about potential antimatter/matter reactions going uncontrolled)? Also if you can do so why wouldn't all your ship parts be mini ships in their own right?

    Q are also advanced god like beings. While Su'Kal is a dude stolen from Marvel/Disney and one of likely Trillions of babies that would have been around Dilithium and radiation over the course of the universes existence.

    Hopefully a Q retcons all of Picard and Discovery out of existence.

    Picard, Discovery, Lower Decks etc. are all part of Star Trek, whether or not you like them. They're not going to disappear.

    Then you clearly do not comprehend the power of Q. ;P
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 27
    payback99 wrote: »
    And what does that have to do with the Federation having magical power sources that can make your ship parts float and yet can't go fast in space(yes I know they can go fast they just have to worry about potential antimatter/matter reactions going uncontrolled)? Also if you can do so why wouldn't all your ship parts be mini ships in their own right?

    Q are also advanced god like beings. While Su'Kal is a dude stolen from Marvel/Disney and one of likely Trillions of babies that would have been around Dilithium and radiation over the course of the universes existence.

    Hopefully a Q retcons all of Picard and Discovery out of existence.
    What about this is magic? The Federation had power sources in TOS/TNG that could break things down into atoms, and then recombine them into new objects of nearly any type(replicators), and had the energy output to break someone down into atoms, store, them, then reassemble them somewhere else(transporters). By comparison, having floating objects around your ship is the LEAST magical thing of the three, since keeping things suspended via magnetism is something we can do today.

    And no, not all your ship parts would be mini ships since all the ship parts don't have all the equipment needed to be a ship. A nacelle doesn't have the deflector, bridge, or other facilities, needed to be a functional ship on it own. None of the parts do. And you wouldn't make them all that way for the same reason not every federation ship in STO can break into three functional ships like the Prometheus can. Not all ships have the same mission, and you need larger/different ships for various missions.

    Su'Kal has nothing to do with Marvel or Disney. If anything, his story is a combination of the TOS episode "Charlie X" and the TNG episode "Future Imperfect". Also, again, it wasn't just normal radiation that mutated him, it was the specific subspace radiation in the nebula.
  • mikecobalt#1974 mikecobalt Member Posts: 23 Arc User
    edited February 27
    ??? Looks "Tholian"; not a ship I'll be buying. There are a number of ships that do represent "This time" or a lil earlier we could be piloting (Buy$$ing), let's get those first before this.... design.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 2,632 Arc User
    edited February 27
    Is there a documentary or a source you can reference to reinforce that? Not being snarky, I'd just find that type of juxtaposed positioning fascinating, & if true a bit disheartening, my favorite used to be TNG since that's what I grew-up with but as I've grown older I really prefer DS9 too & that certainly could be a prime example of this point.
    There is the "Chaos on the Bridge" documentary that explains the absolute MESS that was TNG's first two seasons.... spoiler alert, it was Gene's fault.


    Not entirely; his unbelievably obnoxious lawyer also had a hand in things.

    True, from what I have read Leonard Maizlish (the lawyer) unfortunately had more than just a hand in it. There was a writer that started digging into what happened in that first year and interviews with the people involved turned up a lot of interesting things about Maizlish's tampering. For one thing, the office cleared out into the corridor thing in that clip was a direct result of his trolling power games.

    To all accounts he was a nasty troll of a person who got off on creating strife and making everyone around him as miserable as possible in order to make himself feel superior.

    It also looks like Roddenberry was not in the best health even in the very early stages of putting TNG together. He was rather paranoid after getting pushed to the side so much with the movies (which is why he insisted on having his lawyer on the lot at all times), somewhat erratic, and unusually suggestable which Maizlish apparently used to his advantage in manipulating him and the series and making the writer's room as horrendously toxic an environment as it could get.

    Roddenberry had his guard up against anything too far out that Paramount pushed for but the same was not true about things coming from sources he trusted (which unfortunately included Maizlish). Also a lot of the things Maizlich supposedly passed directly from Roddenberry were actually things he himself came up with instead.

    He was constantly skulking around pawing though the writer's desks when they were out, and taking scripts "to Roddenberry for rewrite" when in fact he was rewriting parts of them himself (which was directly against Guild rules) and claiming it was Roddenberry doing it (and in a few cases that would have even been impossible for Roddenberry to have done the rewrite because he was doing something else with others there who saw that he was not rewriting it at the time) and other things he should not have been doing at all.

    While according to anecdotes and whatnot Rodenberry was not the easiest person to work with even back in the old days, and he seemed to get increasingly worse in the last decade before his death, not all of the problems with TNG can be laid at his feet like the cynics seem to delight in doing.
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,419 Arc User
    Couple random thoughts I had this morning
    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?

    Well, time travel solves everything. Its why we have 29th and 31st century ships in game, among others. Of course... time travel is banned where this thing comes from (though no one can stop it from happening, so who cares?)

    I don't like the inclusion of those ships either.

    We should have been given a choice of eras rather than just a mish mosh of everything just thrown together willy nilly with no meaning or purpose.

    Yes... "Time travel solves everything" It's one of the most done to death tropes in Star Trek. So far, Discovery is the first Trek show to not only strand the crew in a time period not of their own, but actually integrate them into that era with a clear implication that they are not going back. It works, because you can take an outdated ship, gut its systems and replace them with contemporary ones, refit the hull and upgrade offensive and defensive systems, thus making it viable for contemporary use.

    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.

    By that logic of what the Janeway class should be, The 26th, 29th, and 31st century ships should be higher tiers as well, because they come from farther into the future. Yet they are about on par with 25th century ships and even earlier ships because STO is about making things fair on the level of how ships compete at the same level competitively.

    I was being sarcastic. But you cannot tell me that ships from CENTURIES into the future would not be equipped with offensive and defensive tech that would trounce pretty much anything. They would not be on par with 25th century ships.

    In a movie, show, or novel? Sure.

    But this is a game. Worse, it's a game with levels. The kind of thing where you can have a Lv1 Super Giant Two Handed Sword of Doom, that does 5 damage, and a lv100 Dull Butter Knife that does 2000.
    So, sure - every lv65 T6 ship, whether it's a museum piece from the 22nd Century or a 32nd Century Supertech Deathfortress, will have roughly similar levels of performance. Because it's a game.
  • foppotee#4552 foppotee Member Posts: 1,689 Arc User
    Is there a documentary or a source you can reference to reinforce that? Not being snarky, I'd just find that type of juxtaposed positioning fascinating, & if true a bit disheartening, my favorite used to be TNG since that's what I grew-up with but as I've grown older I really prefer DS9 too & that certainly could be a prime example of this point.
    There is the "Chaos on the Bridge" documentary that explains the absolute MESS that was TNG's first two seasons.... spoiler alert, it was Gene's fault.


    Oh thanks. I appreciate & will view. I always like these type of things if I agree or disagree it adds context to whatever subject being addressed while learning & being entertained. Thanks again.
  • colonelmarikcolonelmarik Member Posts: 1,845 Arc User
    Wow, that thing looks dumb.

    I really wish they would avoid time travel stuff. Writing stories for time travel is HARD, even for good writers. The writers here just aren't good enough to do it well (and I mean no disparagement by this).

    The game isn't set in the 32nd Century. They should try to avoid including any stuff from that era. I mean, that's 700 years into the future. Consider that's like having modern warships fighting medieval ships (700 years ago was the 1300s). There should be NO contest.
    Once, I was simply called Mojo. Now, I'm forced into a new name, but don't be fooled, I'm the original STO Mojo!

    This game needs detailed crafting, exploration and interaction systems.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 28
    The game isn't set in the 32nd Century. They should try to avoid including any stuff from that era. I mean, that's 700 years into the future. Consider that's like having modern warships fighting medieval ships (700 years ago was the 1300s). There should be NO contest.
    Except we have seen that isn't how technology works in Star Trek.

    The Federation was 209 years old when they first encountered the Dominion in 2370. At that same time, the Dominion was over 2000 years old. Despite having 1800+ years of existence on the Federation, a time gap of nearly TWICE the time gap Discovery jumped from its original year of 2258, to the far future of 3188/89, Dominion ship weapons and shields were shown to be at pretty much the same level as Federation ones, only slightly better.

    This same is true of the materials ships are made out of. Back when making the NX-01 the Federation was using Tritanium as the primary material for starship hulls. 100+ years later, in the TOS era, they were still using Tritanium. And 100+ years after that, in the TNG/DS9/VOY era they were still using Tritanium. While we don't know the exact composition of Dominion ships, their ships showed no noticeably better material strength, suggesting they used the same, or equal, materials. This, again, despite being 1800+ years older then the Federation. The only known substance in Trek canon that is harder then Tritanium is Neutronium, and even the ships of the 32nd century aren't made entirely of Neutronium(though some have Neutronium alloy fiber reinforcements)

    The same would be true of warp speeds as well. The fastest one can go via conventional warp is warp 9.99. Anything higher and you hit warp 10, and turn into a salamander. This speed was achieved by the Prometheus class ship in 2374. Ships in 3188/3189 literally can't go faster then the 2374 Prometheus class due to the fundamental limits of warp travel.

    From everything we know, Federation ships of the 32nd century have the exact same weapon power, hull strength, and warp speeds, as ships from the TNG/DS9/VOY era. They are just more efficient at it, and have better gizmos like programmable matter.
  • valetharvalethar Member Posts: 140 Arc User
    edited February 28
    UGH.. More TRIBBLE

    I think STO needs a good regimen of antibiotics, this is getting ridiculous.
  • redeyedravenredeyedraven Member Posts: 1,131 Arc User
    edited February 28
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
  • nrobbiecnrobbiec Member Posts: 887 Arc User
    It looks so....squat like it should be longer. Also it just looks like a bottle opener with that gap in the back. An actual bottle opener based in the VoyJ would be so cool.

    A tiny gripe. It's Intrepid class not Janeway class. The (at least) 3rd time Starfleet named a class of ship Intrepid. But maybe the game needs to give it a new name just so it doesn't get confusing. We dont have the 22nd century Intrepid in game so that conflict hasn't really happened before.

    It's so ugly that I love it. But then my favourite Enterprise is the J so I'm hardly a popular aesthetic guru.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,290 Arc User
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 28
    jonsills wrote: »
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.
    This.

    Frakes himself has talked about how they used to get BAGS of hate mail weekly, including death threats, for daring to "ruin" Star Trek when TNG first started. There was massive vitriol toward TNG for its first three years, and people only started liking the show around the time Best of Both Worlds aired.

    Trek fans have hated every single show thats come out after TOS for its first few years. Hell, many still refuse to consider ENT canon.
  • livinlifejb90#4082 livinlifejb90 Member Posts: 83 Arc User
    edited February 28
    jonsills wrote: »
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.
    This.

    Frakes himself has talked about how they used to get BAGS of hate mail weekly, including death threats, for daring to "ruin" Star Trek when TNG first started. There was massive vitriol toward TNG for its first three years, and people only started liking the show around the time Best of Both Worlds aired.

    Trek fans have hated every single show thats come out after TOS for its first few years. Hell, many still refuse to consider ENT canon.

    I love ENT so much. I wish it had gotten its Season 5. Still is one of my favorite Trek shows to date. Whenever I meet new people and we start talking about Trek and they ask about the show, I tell them to absolutely not skip ENT.

    Note on the Janeway class: I don't think its hull material helps its case. But when I imagine it in say, the Alliance Shield in my mind, she actually be looking real pretty. so idk. I hated it at first, but now its grown on me.
    gQytlm7.jpg
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,068 Arc User
    edited February 28
    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.

    It's really amazing how much inaccuracy and pure ignorance you managed to cram into this short paragraph. An amazing mix of emotional bias, revisionist history and just complete and utter ignorance. Seriously fine work.
    Trek fans have hated every single show thats come out after TOS for its first few years. Hell, many still refuse to consider ENT canon.

    I think we both know it causes me physical pain to agree with you (kidding :lol: ) but for what it's worth, thanks for actually including factual information in your posts. Battling haters armed with nothing but pitch forks and their childish emotion is no easy task.
    I love ENT so much. I wish it had gotten its Season 5. Still is one of my favorite Trek shows to date. Whenever I meet new people and we start talking about Trek and they ask about the show, I tell them to absolutely not skip ENT.

    Completely agreed, sadly.. it's rare to find others who feel the same way.

    Now.. on topic.. this ship is hideous. :disappointed:
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • redeyedravenredeyedraven Member Posts: 1,131 Arc User
    BAGS of hate mail weekly

    Which proves that no mail is good mail.

  • keepcalmchiveonkeepcalmchiveon Member Posts: 1,964 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.
    This.

    Frakes himself has talked about how they used to get BAGS of hate mail weekly, including death threats, for daring to "ruin" Star Trek when TNG first started. There was massive vitriol toward TNG for its first three years, and people only started liking the show around the time Best of Both Worlds aired.

    Trek fans have hated every single show thats come out after TOS for its first few years. Hell, many still refuse to consider ENT canon.

    i would not say hate as far as i am concerned. i dont hate the other shows, i just dislike many things about them. and yet, i like some things about them.
    in actuality, it often boils down to what one is brought up with. this is also why i find discussions on canon and lore to be rather funny as a whole when comparing stuff in game to a series or story.

    meh

  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.

    It's really amazing how much inaccuracy and pure ignorance you managed to cram into this short paragraph. An amazing mix of emotional bias, revisionist history and just complete and utter ignorance. Seriously fine work.

    Amazing how quickly you delve in to insulting. I have always been fascinated by how brave people talk online and how differently it is in real life. It seems that people in real life conduct a bit more restraint and behave more civil when they are forced to be face to face with somebody...but on the internet...well, why not be a complete uncivil mind and say whatever you feel like saying...all because somebody disagrees with you. If disagreeing with you online gets me insults, it forces my mind to wonder, what are you capable of if I were to actually insult you in return?

    Also, think whatever you like, my opinion stands true as I experienced it throughout the many years I have been alive...which are a lot.
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    edited February 28
    jonsills wrote: »
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.

    Call it what you like, I was there too...champ.

    I seem to recall TNG getting over 12 million viewers. So out of those 12 million, there were what, a couple thousand who sent in hate mail? The animated series, hell, nobody even took that show seriously! DS9 had a bumpy start because yes, they were all stuck on a space station, but the show quickly fixed that, didn't they? No, the fans were split after Jar Jar...there was never a split like there was after Jar Jar. You can call it emotions if you like, I don't really have much of a dog in this fight other than the fact that the new ship is just ugly. The internet was barely even around back then, so the only way you knew how fans reacted to the shows was by word of mouth or conventions. There may have been hate mail, but they were by the minority few. The minority few are always the loudest. Now, it is very clear the fans are split right in half.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,290 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.

    Call it what you like, I was there too...champ.
    Then you may wish to consult with a competent neurologist, because your memory seems to be going.

    Anybody have an image of that article about the premiere of TNG?
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.

    Call it what you like, I was there too...champ.
    Then you may wish to consult with a competent neurologist, because your memory seems to be going.

    Anybody have an image of that article about the premiere of TNG?

    Read the edit. it may be you who needs to have your head checked. You are taking a fraction of information and coming up with conclusions (and calling them facts) based off that wee bit of information. me...well, I am simply stating myself as opinions from personal perspective. I am not calling anything facts.
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    I guess we can chop this up to some are more accepting of change than others. Some feel they have an understanding of what Star Trek was, others seem to be okay with almost any changes made in Star Trek as long as it's named Star Trek.

    Frankly, few people who get vocal about Trek actually understand it well.

    Roddenberry primarily wanted a cash-cow. That's why he always came up with new TV-show-ideas (making a pilot-movie to some sort of Buck Rogers-clone 3 times!). When Trek didn't go so well he even snuck some of those setups into the show itself, Gary 7 being one example. Those were backup-plans for the worst case.

    He kept changing things about the lore all the time and kinda tried to demonstrate that with the motion picture. Before the myriad of changes to script and visuals. After which he just hated the movie, not the least because it went over budget by a lot. Nimoy and ILM would have had more to say about the matter.

    And when time came for The Wrath of Khan... oh boy. He *really* hated this movie.

    Hated it or not, the fans were all on the same page with Star Trek and approved of the direction it was going and the type of show it was...an intellectual show with a bit of action. Look out, here comes Jar Jar Abrams, suddenly the fans are split in two and at war with one another. Maybe he hated them, but somebody knew what the fans wanted...until Jar Jar came aboard...and Star Trek has not been the same since then and the fans have not seen eye to eye since then. This hideous and grotesque ship is just the example to reflect on this.
    That is a completely ahistorical load of felgercarb. I was there, champ. I remember the hate for the animated series... and TNG... and DS9 ("boldly going nowhere!")... and VOY... and ENT... and DSC, and PIC, and Lower Decks, and SNW and Prodigy even though they haven't started yet, and...

    Basically, the only fans who hate their source material more than Trekkies are Star Wars fans.

    Call it what you like, I was there too...champ.
    Then you may wish to consult with a competent neurologist, because your memory seems to be going.

    Anybody have an image of that article about the premiere of TNG?

    This one?
    LFrmyEo.png


  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    edited February 28
    . The minority few are always the loudest. Now, it is very clear the fans are split right in half.
    That is most definitely NOT true of STO, where the vocal minority have been asking for something in particular for seven years and were, until recently*, completely ignored.

    * the CM made a rare appearance quite recently to explain that what the vocal minority was asking for isn't reflected in the in-game metrics as something that is wanted, and made me in particuar (one of the more vocal of the vocal minority in this particular case) look like an unreasonable, sarcastic, idiot. Did the trick though, as I have to think twice before I make reference to it now.


  • navar#3536 navar Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    edited February 28
    reyan01 wrote: »
    . The minority few are always the loudest. Now, it is very clear the fans are split right in half.
    That is most definitely NOT true of STO, where the vocal minority have been asking for something in particular for seven years and were, until recently*, completely ignored.

    * the CM made a rare appearance quite recently to explain that what the vocal minority was asking for isn't reflected in the in-game metrics as something that is wanted, and made me in particuar (one of the more vocal of the vocal minority in this particular case) look like an unreasonable, sarcastic, idiot. Did the trick though, as I have to think twice before I make reference to it now.

    I didn't say the vocal minority get what they want. I said they are the loudest. Also, the fans are quite clearly split in half these days...generally speaking.

    One thing I have learned of forums, is that people tend not to want to post in them. Posting in forums is worse than twitter. You say one wrong thing and you have the regulars ready to tear you apart. People have spoke on this time and time again in response to being asked to post an idea or opinion on the forums. A lot of folks will say, "No thanks, people who post forums are complete [insert dirty word here] and I want no part of them." I have heard many players say this over several different MMO's spanning all the way back to Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, Matrix Online, WoW, Age of Conan and pretty much every MMO I have ever had the pleasure to be a part of.

    So I take with a grain of salt the things people say on the forums. They may seem like the majority or minority on the forums, but the reality is often quite different from what you see on forums. This is why the average (if you talk to people) opinions in game are far different than the opinions in a forum. In any forum, forum posters have a way of chasing off unwanted opinions from others. Honestly, the nonstop battle the regulars must fight to keep unwanted opinions away must get extremely tiring. It's a never ending battle that they fight so valiantly, lol.

  • payback99payback99 Member Posts: 31 Arc User
    What about this is magic? The Federation had power sources in TOS/TNG that could break things down into atoms, and then recombine them into new objects of nearly any type(replicators), and had the energy output to break someone down into atoms, store, them, then reassemble them somewhere else(transporters). By comparison, having floating objects around your ship is the LEAST magical thing of the three, since keeping things suspended via magnetism is something we can do today.

    And no, not all your ship parts would be mini ships since all the ship parts don't have all the equipment needed to be a ship. A nacelle doesn't have the deflector, bridge, or other facilities, needed to be a functional ship on it own. None of the parts do. And you wouldn't make them all that way for the same reason not every federation ship in STO can break into three functional ships like the Prometheus can. Not all ships have the same mission, and you need larger/different ships for various missions.

    Su'Kal has nothing to do with Marvel or Disney. If anything, his story is a combination of the TOS episode "Charlie X" and the TNG episode "Future Imperfect". Also, again, it wasn't just normal radiation that mutated him, it was the specific subspace radiation in the nebula.

    Do you just continually spout nonsense and hope nobody calls you out on it until you get a "win"?

    First off the power sources don't break anyone down. Your battery isn't the part of your gameboy that creates sound. And you do know how magnetism works right? Have you ever seen a levitating toy before? It levitates because pushing it down while the magnetic fields push it up. If it gets knocked out of alignment it goes bye bye. A maglev train uses magnets in two ways one to keep it off the track and another to push it forward. How many different magnetic fields would you need to keep 4 different floating objects in alignment and prevent them from shifting from damage or anything?

    With the power requirements these ships would need it's a completely worthless design and ruins their own lore of not being able to find a better power source for high warp speeds. "Modern" Trek ships could achieve high warp speeds and yet lack the power and technology that would be needed to achieve such a feat. And I'm not even factoring in the power needed to transfer power between all four parts. Atleast if all 4 parts were viable as ships it might make sense to have em split apart.

    Su'Kal is an Xmen mutant get over it. It's not like its the first thing Discovery ripped off like a Giant Tardigrade that teleports you through space. Yes magical subspace radiation that exists nowhere else in the universe and only appeared for 10 years before vanishing so nobody else could have possibly interacted with it.......

    Please for the love of god stop responding to my posts unless you actually have thought it out and done research I'm done responding to you.
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    edited February 28
    reyan01 wrote: »
    . The minority few are always the loudest. Now, it is very clear the fans are split right in half.
    That is most definitely NOT true of STO, where the vocal minority have been asking for something in particular for seven years and were, until recently*, completely ignored.

    * the CM made a rare appearance quite recently to explain that what the vocal minority was asking for isn't reflected in the in-game metrics as something that is wanted, and made me in particuar (one of the more vocal of the vocal minority in this particular case) look like an unreasonable, sarcastic, idiot. Did the trick though, as I have to think twice before I make reference to it now.

    I didn't say the vocal minority get what they want. I said they are the loudest. Also, the fans are quite clearly split in half these days...generally speaking.

    One thing I have learned of forums, is that people tend not to want to post in them. Posting in forums is worse than twitter. You say one wrong thing and you have the regulars ready to tear you apart. People have spoke on this time and time again in response to being asked to post an idea or opinion on the forums. A lot of folks will say, "No thanks, people who post forums are complete [insert dirty word here] and I want no part of them." I have heard many players say this over several different MMO's spanning all the way back to Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, Matrix Online, WoW, Age of Conan and pretty much every MMO I have ever had the pleasure to be a part of. So I take with a grain of salt the things people say on the forums. They may seem like the majority or minority on the forums, but the reality is often quite different from what you see on forums. This is why the average (if you talk to people) opinions in game are far different than the opinions in a forum. In any forum, forum posters have a way of chasing off unwanted opinions from others.

    Whilst I will agree with you, to a point, I maintain the opinion that Facebook/Reddit are worse (and Twitter, although that platform seems more inclined to attract bootlickers in my experience) since it's not an 'offical' platform (i.e it isn't owned by the producers of *enter name of game here* ) and thus if strong/negative opinions are expressed on THOSE platforms there is often little, or nothing, to link the person making those comments to their in-game account.

    Anyway - I digress. This thread is going wildly off-topic, and this discussion would be better served by having it's own thread.


Sign In or Register to comment.