test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Let's talk Timey Wimey for a minute

nixie50nixie50 Member Posts: 1,347 Arc User
Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP
u7acy6aymfw7.gif
We Need BERETS in the tailor
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
«1

Comments

  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,689 Arc User
    edited November 5
    It's too bad Cryptic burned its bridges with Shatner many years ago when a long-gone person hounded him. We might have had him for the TOS expansion and something like this.

    A sound-alike wouldn't work for me, and no AI could be trained to speak...Like!...him ;)

    At least we'll always have Has Been ("Real" with Brad Paisley): https://youtu.be/hsKfZ3wvLkE?si=h77fX7ISwqBc87xC
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,879 Arc User
    edited November 5
    The devs have the perfect opportunity for a "have your cake and eat it too" situation right now if they don't wreck it with whatever the finale is for this multiverse arc.

    For example, they could add a new organization for crosstime situations, maybe some kind of guerilla cold war with some organization/empire/whatever, or some kind of police force going after criminals who try to exploit other timelines, or any number of other possibilities. All of those things are popular in science fiction novels, and a few TV series and movies have brushed the surface of them too.

    A key aspect of crosstime stories is the idea that not all of the universes are exactly in sync time-wise so not only is it possible to travel to one where, say, WWII ended differently, but also to one where it is the 1940s and WWII is in full swing. It would be a big help in getting SNW/DSC/Kelvin/"lost years"/etc. fans into the game without the difficulty of dealing with paradox for instance and would give Temporal agents more to do.

    And since the skip function works in the mission list, anyone who does not like anything having to do with time travel, either forward and back or side to side, can simply skip those missions. And since events with new missions also have old missions, TFOs, or patrols available to do for the events that is not a problem if they have those "timey wimey" missions either.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,689 Arc User
    edited November 5
    @phoenixc#0738 - I like the idea of more crosstime stories that are sideways instead of back and forth in the prime or prime Kelvin timelines. We already saw a little of that (in log entries) when the Sphere Builders appeared. I've been reading that kind of story most of my life with titles going back to at least 1958 (Andre Norton - The Time Traders).
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,471 Arc User
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP
    Two and a half years. Kirk was in Starfleet Ops, Spock was studying Kohlinar, and the Enterprise was in drydock being overhauled. Those years weren't all that "lost". Now, the apparent five-year mission the Enterprise was sent on after the V'ger Incident...
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,504 Arc User
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP

    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,504 Arc User
    edited November 5
    jonsills wrote: »
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP
    Two and a half years. Kirk was in Starfleet Ops, Spock was studying Kohlinar, and the Enterprise was in drydock being overhauled. Those years weren't all that "lost". Now, the apparent five-year mission the Enterprise was sent on after the V'ger Incident...

    Simples.....there was PEACE for an awfully long time.

    Why does something need to have happened that we need to explore? We're in 2411, let's just stick to the now, there's too much time travel as it is. The peace between TMP and TNG explains how Starfleet became complacent as Picard says in 'Q Who?'. 'Yesterday's Enterprise' probably highlights the only time of conflict beside the Fed/Cardi war that began just prior to TNG.

    We've had more wars in '2 years' than the entire lifetime of Starfleet......so guess what we REALLY should be doing!? :lol:
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • vanhyovanhyo Member Posts: 253 Arc User
    edited November 5
    its how they make money, you are either always on and collect or pay up if you want to be top

    it doesn't hurt to offer some middle ground budged catch ups' semi-alternatives for starting players too

    for example I had this starship trait (idea) in mind (exchange starship trait)

    name: one; two; five
    - when activating, aux to damp or A2Sif or any emergency power boff
    + 125 resists
    + 2,5secs too all firing modes
    + 25 weapons power

  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 11,007 Community Moderator
    Well, 👆🏻that seems very off topic. Let's not derail the thread, please.
    GrWzQke.png
    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
    ----> Contact Customer Support <----
    Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
    Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
    Want the latest information on Star Trek Online?
    Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP

    When I think of anything being "Lost"... I think of the "Lost Era" between ST6 and TNG. We had the adventures of TWO different Enterprises during that time, and we know next to NOTHING about them both other than ONE key event in canon each (Launch of Ent-B and the "death" of Kirk to the Nexus Ribbon, and the loss of Ent-C at Narendra III). Beta Canon says the Ent-B may have been involved in the Tomed Incident that sparked the Treaty of Algeron.

    So... that period of time is more interesting to explore than the time it took to refit the Enterprise for TMP. And we are going to get a bit of a glimpse into the Lost Era thanks to the upcoming Section 31 movie, as they have confirmed that a LIEUTENANT Rachel Garrett will be involved.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • nixie50nixie50 Member Posts: 1,347 Arc User
    so some episodes with Ent-B with Captain Cameron Fry?
    u7acy6aymfw7.gif
    We Need BERETS in the tailor
  • crm14916crm14916 Member Posts: 1,535 Arc User
    As long as he doesn't go berserk... 😉
    "Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure science." - Edwin Hubble
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,879 Arc User
    Enterprise B with Sulu would be a good option too, if they can get George Takei to do the voice work for it.

    TNG did hint plenty of times that almost nothing major like wars or the kind of "only one ship can save the Federation/quadrant/galaxy/whatever-ad-nauseum" stuff that the movies and DSC was so focused on happened. However, I agree with Rattler2 that it does not rule out lesser but still interesting one-off incidents, which things like the ribbon, the Kitomer battle, and the Tomed incident would all qualify for. And while exploration in of itself does not make for very interesting play within the capabilities of the STO engine, missions and patrols could use them as the backdrop for some of those less universe-shaking stories, and there is always the 'boring anti-pirate patrol/escort duty/other-routine-mission turned hot' style scenario that could be interesting for a single ship or small task group but nothing special for the rest of the galaxy (the kind of story most TOS episodes were).
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,896 Arc User
    I always wished we got some kind of movie period expansion, I always loved the blue and green aesthetics and wished we got some kind of bridge with it

    Makes me wonder if it would be against the rules for the devs to use assets from games like the academy games or starfleet command games
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    lianthelia wrote: »
    Makes me wonder if it would be against the rules for the devs to use assets from games like the academy games or starfleet command games

    Actual assets themselves? No. Things from a game as long as they rebuild the assets themselves from scratch? Yes.

    That's how we got the Typhon, Achilles, Premonition, and Assimilator after all. Also the Valkyrie, Valor, and Kodai fighters.

    Besides... pretty sure the SFC 1 and 2 assets are rather low poly.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • vetteguy904vetteguy904 Member Posts: 3,934 Arc User
    they are low poly. but as long as the TMP look is used, it would be very cool
    sig.jpg
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    And we do have some good TMP work in STO. I would LOVE to see an Ark Royal carrier rendered in STO.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,879 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    And we do have some good TMP work in STO. I would LOVE to see an Ark Royal carrier rendered in STO.

    It would be nice, and it would fit stylistically fairly well with the Typhoon. I especially like the upside-down flight deck on the underside of the aft spine.
  • This content has been removed.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    6h4zuufdqv82.png

    I don't know about underside, but she looks like the hangers are across the hull along the dorsal section. And her nacelles... it almost looks like she could have upwards of eight, four on each side in an over/under tandem configuration not unlike the Atlas class in STO with her combined double nacelles. Probably backup warp coils that are used in case the primaries fail. So in a way she is a quad like the Sagan and Constellation. Might even be capable of some EXTREME warp coasting, switching between the primary and secondary warp coils if we really wanna push it.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,879 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    6h4zuufdqv82.png

    I don't know about underside, but she looks like the hangers are across the hull along the dorsal section. And her nacelles... it almost looks like she could have upwards of eight, four on each side in an over/under tandem configuration not unlike the Atlas class in STO with her combined double nacelles. Probably backup warp coils that are used in case the primaries fail. So in a way she is a quad like the Sagan and Constellation. Might even be capable of some EXTREME warp coasting, switching between the primary and secondary warp coils if we really wanna push it.

    While looking at pictures to see what the Arc Royal class looked like I ran across one from a low angle, that is where I saw the upside-down "flight deck". Though they are probably just guide markings instead of anything like an actual landing spot for fighters, the idea that they may run some decks at reversed orientation (or just zero gee) was only ever used in a few novels and fanfic, afaik, but it is one I often use in my own (usually not Trek) stories so the possibility it might make its way into the game, sort of tickled my fancy, especially if a mission was eventually done on one of those somewhat Escher-esque decks (it is one of the reasons I like the Tholian ships too).
    6zajrvywk0bo.jpg

    Those two big doors could be used for frigates if the devs made the ship a full carrier (I have no idea what kind of carrier it is supposed to be in the source material) or they could be the recovery doors and the smaller top ones could be strictly launch cats or something of the sort. If STO cannot use Ark Royal for the class name for some reason, they could call it the Akagi or Kaga class, after the only realworld carriers (or at least as far as I know of) that actually had (early on at least) stacked flight decks and bay-launched aircraft from belowdecks, sort of like a Battlestar from BSG (though it lacked actual catapults).
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    If I remember correctly, it was just listed as a Carrier. And Starfleet came into the fighter game late compared to the Hydrans, who were luckily allies of the Federation. (Hydrans had carriers in SFC 1. Everyone got them in SFC 2.) The Carrier was about the same size, if not bigger, than the Battleship. So probably a full Fleet Carrier in size. While there were some smaller ship classes that also got some fighters, they were not classified as CV like the Ark Royal was.

    As for how she functions... probably similar to Star Wars or Wing Commander capital ships launching fighters. They got a hanger and the fighters just lift off and go. Works for shuttles, why not fighters? lol
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,497 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP

    When I think of anything being "Lost"... I think of the "Lost Era" between ST6 and TNG. We had the adventures of TWO different Enterprises during that time, and we know next to NOTHING about them both other than ONE key event in canon each (Launch of Ent-B and the "death" of Kirk to the Nexus Ribbon, and the loss of Ent-C at Narendra III). Beta Canon says the Ent-B may have been involved in the Tomed Incident that sparked the Treaty of Algeron.

    So... that period of time is more interesting to explore than the time it took to refit the Enterprise for TMP. And we are going to get a bit of a glimpse into the Lost Era thanks to the upcoming Section 31 movie, as they have confirmed that a LIEUTENANT Rachel Garrett will be involved.

    Some of the upcoming content in the Star Trek franchise is said to explore the lost era (young captain Garret).
    If that comes to fruition then STO can latch onto those stories.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    questerius wrote: »
    Some of the upcoming content in the Star Trek franchise is said to explore the lost era (young captain Garret).
    If that comes to fruition then STO can latch onto those stories.

    That is true. And from what I heard Garrett will be a rookie Lieutenant in Section 31, so it is early in her career, LONG before the Enterprise-C.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,896 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    Makes me wonder if it would be against the rules for the devs to use assets from games like the academy games or starfleet command games

    Actual assets themselves? No. Things from a game as long as they rebuild the assets themselves from scratch? Yes.

    That's how we got the Typhon, Achilles, Premonition, and Assimilator after all. Also the Valkyrie, Valor, and Kodai fighters.

    Besides... pretty sure the SFC 1 and 2 assets are rather low poly.

    Yeah sorry I worded that poorly, I mean make their own models after those ships

    I just know it's a especially gray area since starfleet command was based off starfleet battles but had to be significantly different which is why it's movie era ships when SFB was TOS era

    But now that I think of it the I guess since they added the lodai fighters more would be possible. They had some good designs like the arc royal you linked...I was a fan of the yamato battleship

    The romulan king condor was awesome and was some nice klingon dreadnoughts and battleships
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    Now if only we'd get playable Valkyries and Kodais. But shuttle missions aren't that popular...
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,504 Arc User
    questerius wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP

    When I think of anything being "Lost"... I think of the "Lost Era" between ST6 and TNG. We had the adventures of TWO different Enterprises during that time, and we know next to NOTHING about them both other than ONE key event in canon each (Launch of Ent-B and the "death" of Kirk to the Nexus Ribbon, and the loss of Ent-C at Narendra III). Beta Canon says the Ent-B may have been involved in the Tomed Incident that sparked the Treaty of Algeron.

    So... that period of time is more interesting to explore than the time it took to refit the Enterprise for TMP. And we are going to get a bit of a glimpse into the Lost Era thanks to the upcoming Section 31 movie, as they have confirmed that a LIEUTENANT Rachel Garrett will be involved.

    Some of the upcoming content in the Star Trek franchise is said to explore the lost era (young captain Garret).
    If that comes to fruition then STO can latch onto those stories.

    They could latch on to them stories, but I don't think they are allowed as it's there's an active series in that area. None of DSC's content here happened during the timeline of that show, they just covered some content that didn't get released in the show on top of rewriting some of it. It's probably also why they have done nothing from ST6 to TNG and let Cryptic have 2409 onwards because they didn't envision a series at the time so near. I mean, who knows what time periods Cryptic are allowed to cover, given that Paramount/CBS/Viacom, or whatever it's called, get the 'final' call on STO's stories.
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,471 Arc User
    leemwatson wrote: »
    questerius wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    nixie50 wrote: »
    Most players are tired of the go back in time to save the future thing. I get it. but there HAS to be a way to explore the "lost years" the time between th end of Kirk's five Year Mission and the events of TMP

    When I think of anything being "Lost"... I think of the "Lost Era" between ST6 and TNG. We had the adventures of TWO different Enterprises during that time, and we know next to NOTHING about them both other than ONE key event in canon each (Launch of Ent-B and the "death" of Kirk to the Nexus Ribbon, and the loss of Ent-C at Narendra III). Beta Canon says the Ent-B may have been involved in the Tomed Incident that sparked the Treaty of Algeron.

    So... that period of time is more interesting to explore than the time it took to refit the Enterprise for TMP. And we are going to get a bit of a glimpse into the Lost Era thanks to the upcoming Section 31 movie, as they have confirmed that a LIEUTENANT Rachel Garrett will be involved.

    Some of the upcoming content in the Star Trek franchise is said to explore the lost era (young captain Garret).
    If that comes to fruition then STO can latch onto those stories.

    They could latch on to them stories, but I don't think they are allowed as it's there's an active series in that area. None of DSC's content here happened during the timeline of that show, they just covered some content that didn't get released in the show on top of rewriting some of it. It's probably also why they have done nothing from ST6 to TNG and let Cryptic have 2409 onwards because they didn't envision a series at the time so near. I mean, who knows what time periods Cryptic are allowed to cover, given that Paramount/CBS/Viacom, or whatever it's called, get the 'final' call on STO's stories.
    On the third hand, it was officially decided (at least at Cryptic) that as of Picard season 3, STO is an alternate future timeline. Upcoming shows might draw from it, but are not obligated to because the timelines split when the Ent-F was decommissioned in the Prime timeline, while remaining in service for another nine years and then getting an upgrade in the STO timeline.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • rattler2rattler2 Member, Star Trek Online Moderator Posts: 58,666 Community Moderator
    jonsills wrote: »
    On the third hand, it was officially decided (at least at Cryptic) that as of Picard season 3, STO is an alternate future timeline. Upcoming shows might draw from it, but are not obligated to because the timelines split when the Ent-F was decommissioned in the Prime timeline, while remaining in service for another nine years and then getting an upgrade in the STO timeline.

    Well... TECHNICALLY speaking STO's Ent-F is still only a couple years old. The first time we ever see her is in the 2800 FE series. I believe in Boldly They Rode, when the Enterprise shows up under the command of Captain Shon to help fight off the time displaced Dominion Fleet. That set of missions, while not mainline anymore, still exist as side stories we can play, and shows Captain Shon losing the Belfast, then gaining command of Enterprise. It does add context to why we see Shon flying the Belfast in the Romulan arc, but then suddenly he's Captain of the Enterprise later on in the story. So... while the Prime Ent-F was decommissioned in 2402, STO's Ent-F was commissioned in 2409.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
    normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
    colored text = mod mode
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,471 Arc User
    edited November 11
    rattler2 wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    On the third hand, it was officially decided (at least at Cryptic) that as of Picard season 3, STO is an alternate future timeline. Upcoming shows might draw from it, but are not obligated to because the timelines split when the Ent-F was decommissioned in the Prime timeline, while remaining in service for another nine years and then getting an upgrade in the STO timeline.

    Well... TECHNICALLY speaking STO's Ent-F is still only a couple years old. The first time we ever see her is in the 2800 FE series. I believe in Boldly They Rode, when the Enterprise shows up under the command of Captain Shon to help fight off the time displaced Dominion Fleet. That set of missions, while not mainline anymore, still exist as side stories we can play, and shows Captain Shon losing the Belfast, then gaining command of Enterprise. It does add context to why we see Shon flying the Belfast in the Romulan arc, but then suddenly he's Captain of the Enterprise later on in the story. So... while the Prime Ent-F was decommissioned in 2402, STO's Ent-F was commissioned in 2409.
    We can, however, pull a little timey-wimey to claim that she was first commissioned in the late 24th century, and 2409 was a refit (preparatory to her upgrade to Yorktown-class in 2410). It's just that we can't reconcile her decommissioning in 2401 and the launch of Ent-G in 2402 with Ent-F relaunching in 2409. That was when the game devs said that they couldn't unite the timelines and we were now in a divergent universe.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • spiritbornspiritborn Member Posts: 4,393 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    rattler2 wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    On the third hand, it was officially decided (at least at Cryptic) that as of Picard season 3, STO is an alternate future timeline. Upcoming shows might draw from it, but are not obligated to because the timelines split when the Ent-F was decommissioned in the Prime timeline, while remaining in service for another nine years and then getting an upgrade in the STO timeline.

    Well... TECHNICALLY speaking STO's Ent-F is still only a couple years old. The first time we ever see her is in the 2800 FE series. I believe in Boldly They Rode, when the Enterprise shows up under the command of Captain Shon to help fight off the time displaced Dominion Fleet. That set of missions, while not mainline anymore, still exist as side stories we can play, and shows Captain Shon losing the Belfast, then gaining command of Enterprise. It does add context to why we see Shon flying the Belfast in the Romulan arc, but then suddenly he's Captain of the Enterprise later on in the story. So... while the Prime Ent-F was decommissioned in 2402, STO's Ent-F was commissioned in 2409.
    We can, however, pull a little timey-wimey to claim that she was first commissioned in the late 24th century, and 2409 was a refit (preparatory to her upgrade to Yorktown-class in 2410). It's just that we can't reconcile her decommissioning in 2401 and the launch of Ent-G in 2402 with Ent-F relaunching in 2409. That was when the game devs said that they couldn't unite the timelines and we were now in a divergent universe.

    Honestly the ENT-G isn't a total impossibility to harmonize, all we need is something happen to the G that demands that the ENT-F is pulled out of mothballs and the recommissioned, decommissioning doesn't mean "is destroyed", just "is taken out of service" and to use a real life example the Iowa class battleships were decommissioned and recommissioned several times before finally permanently taken out of service.
This discussion has been closed.