If it is built with modern tech on the inside, then theres no reason it shouldnt match a ship of the same proportions. Remember, these ARENT old ships. They are NEW ships that LOOK old. That has NOTHING to do with their power.
Then I take issue with the fact of why Starfleet feels they need rebuild old ship designs rather than innovate and build new ships. It would be like the Air Force building F-22's and WWII Spitfires and then having the Spitfires on equal footing with the F-22's. Makes no sense. Why even build the F-22's then if they could just reuse the Spitfires.
Biggest lie the devs have perpetuated. Most of the money goes to Atari corporate, and never makes it to Cryptic. Of the money that DOES make it to Cryptic, most of it is spent on administrative costs. What little finally trickles down to the development budget is used to "justify" the man-hours spent on developing the ships to begin with. People buying and flying these ships does nothing to benefit my gameplay.
And as an aside, I don't want to see OTHER players flying useless, outdated hulks. This is the "future" Trek, so let's see some new ships. We see it over and over again on the screen - Starfleet did not use older tech. They gave them away to civilians because they had much better ships to replace them with.
This has already been stated in this thred, but you have no right to say what other people can and cannot do with the money they spend on this game, regardless of who gets the money.
If Cryptic puts the ability to refit any ship to a T5 ship, and someone refits an NX Replica, or a Constitution replica to be a T5 ship, that is their right.
Biggest lie the devs have perpetuated. Most of the money goes to Atari corporate, and never makes it to Cryptic. Of the money that DOES make it to Cryptic, most of it is spent on administrative costs. What little finally trickles down to the development budget is used to "justify" the man-hours spent on developing the ships to begin with. People buying and flying these ships does nothing to benefit my gameplay.
You obviously have no idea how big business works. ALL the money that STO generates goes to Atari. It doesnt matter whether it comes from subs or the C-store, its all money. Then, Atari decides how much money they want to funnel back into STO to keep the game going and develop new content. The main factor that determines how much they will funnel back is how much the game is making, and the C-store sales increase that figure. So by increasing the total amount of money that the game is making, the C-store purchases increase the amount of money Atari funnels back into the game.
And as an aside, I don't want to see OTHER players flying useless, outdated hulks.
Tough stuff. You dont get to decide what kind of clothes people wear in life, or what kind of cars they drive. And when you log into an MMO, you dont get to decide what other people do with their characters. If you cant deal with that, then thats your problem.
Biggest lie the devs have perpetuated. Most of the money goes to Atari corporate, and never makes it to Cryptic. Of the money that DOES make it to Cryptic, most of it is spent on administrative costs. What little finally trickles down to the development budget is used to "justify" the man-hours spent on developing the ships to begin with. People buying and flying these ships does nothing to benefit my gameplay.
And as an aside, I don't want to see OTHER players flying useless, outdated hulks. This is the "future" Trek, so let's see some new ships. We see it over and over again on the screen - Starfleet did not use older tech. They gave them away to civilians because they had much better ships to replace them with.
That's a pretty big assumption on your part without facts to back it up....
What ever the amount is... it's still improving the game.... so it DOES BENEFIT Your Game Play.
...and what The Nagus said above... ...and Below... LoL
Then I take issue with the fact of why Starfleet feels they need rebuild old ship designs rather than innovate and build new ships.
Take issue all you want. Its not going to convice Cryptic to take away ships people have paid money for, or stop selling a prodct that they are making money with. Fortunately for you, the game is 99% instanced so you dont have to worry about running into ships you dont want to see except when your in social areas.
SO if they curved a couple lines, then you guys would be ok getting pawned by it in PVP? that makes absolutely no frackin sense.
I would hope everyone would be on board for new stuff as long as we aren't paying a couple hours wage in the C-store.
If they made new classes based on older designs, and perhaps upscaled them a bit? I'd have no problems with it.
At least they would have put more effort into it than changing a few numbers in a database and slapping a price on it. I do have problems with the C-Store in general and the sheer amount of stuff there compared to any supposed AAA MMO of this age. Charging for extra stuff in a game that still isn't up to par or even close is not cool. But that's a whole other argument.
As far as age, who gives a TRIBBLE anymore? The one thing you will never convince me of however, is that a relatively small ship like a Constitution is ever going to be able to take the pounding my Nomad class can. And to shoot down the inevitable Defiant comparison from the get go, remember the Defiant was designed for one task and one task only: battle. It doesn't really do anything else all that well, since its little more than an armored life support shell around engines and guns.
There has to be give and take to make these smaller...and inferior by design, regardless of what they look like...ships fit in to a tier system. After all, if these ships have the potential to be just as good as that Sovereign everyone like to bring up, and its a brand new ship...why isn't it like that to begin with?
Take issue all you want. Its not going to convice Cryptic to take away ships people have paid money for, or stop selling a prodct that they are making money with. Fortunately for you, the game is 99% instanced so you dont have to worry about running into ships you dont want to see except when your in social areas.
No need to get snarky. I could care less if they put all the old ships in the game and it doesn't matter to me which ship anybody wants to fly. My point is that they don't need to be on par with the new ships. Refer to my fighter airplane reference. Stick them in T1 and leave them there.
My point is that they don't need to be on par with the new ships. Refer to my fighter airplane reference. Stick them in T1 and leave them there.
Your fighter airplane example proves nothing because you still dont get it. Your comparing new planes and old planes, but we're NOT talking about "old" ships. We're talking about brand NEW ships built with state of the art tech that just LOOK like an old design. I'll repeat that as many times as you need me to until you finally understand.
I think one of the most fundamental issues with the debate is that one of the ships is bought from the c-store and the other one was supposed to be part of the natural level progression.
Your fighter airplane example proves nothing because you still dont get it. Your comparing new planes and old planes, but we're NOT talking about "old" ships. We're talking about brand NEW ships built with state of the art tech that just LOOK like an old design. I'll repeat that as many times as you need me to until you finally understand.
Alright, I want to build an SR-71, but I want it to look like a spitfire. So I'll build a spitfire frame out of titanium, slap a couple of ridiculously high-powered jet engines on it, and call it a brand new airplane.
It will be TRIBBLE.
Engineering specifications change for a reason, and that is to deal with new issues that old tech didn't have to conform to (because it was incapable of reaching whatever "barrier" that has to be overcome). By the same token, we can assume based on what little engineering knowledge we get from Trek, coupled with real-world science, that ship frames have the same problem. That problem is shape. You can't make a spitfire fly at Mach IV, just like an older ship design would have imperfections and flaws that would prevent its design from functioning at the same level of competence as a new design.
Alright, I want to build an SR-71, but I want it to look like a spitfire. So I'll build a spitfire frame out of titanium, slap a couple of ridiculously high-powered jet engines on it, and call it a brand new airplane.
It will be TRIBBLE.
Engineering specifications change for a reason, and that is to deal with new issues that old tech didn't have to conform to (because it was incapable of reaching whatever "barrier" that has to be overcome). By the same token, we can assume based on what little engineering knowledge we get from Trek, coupled with real-world science, that ship frames have the same problem. That problem is shape. You can't make a spitfire fly at Mach IV, just like an older ship design would have imperfections and flaws that would prevent its design from functioning at the same level of competence as a new design.
It's also kinda difficult to see how using a comparison between technology from the 20th century relates to 24th century tech.
It's also kinda difficult to see how using a comparison between technology from the 21st century relates to 24th century tech.
I was waiting for someone to say that. I was hoping for Nagus to say it, but what I'm about to say will hold up anyway.
I can throw out all sorts of technobabble reasons why the comparison works. Maybe it's the fact that matter/antimatter technology can't be miniaturized. Warp cores have to keep getting bigger to power the higher-powered shields and engines. Maybe the shield emitter placement on older ships is inefficient, so you can't get proper coverage using newer tech. Maybe the deflector geometry doesn't allow the ship to travel at full warp speed.
I could come up with all sorts of reasons such as the above, and you would be incapable of telling me I'm wrong, simply because Cryptic's copout for allowing antiquated tech does not even begin to explain away these arguments. The fact is they are only putting in older ships because a small percentage of fans want them. I'm fine with that, as long as their design age is taken into consideration, and they are NEVER tier 4 or 5 (or any theoretical higher tier).
EDIT: Oh, and it's 20th century tech, not 21st century tech. You got your centuries mixed up.
EDIT 2: By the way, our vision for the future is really just rose-colored glasses looking at societal improvements from the past, hoping the trend continues along expected paths. That means my 20th century vs 24th century comparison is quite valid, thanks.
I was waiting for someone to say that. I was hoping for Nagus to say it, but what I'm about to say will hold up anyway.
I can throw out all sorts of technobabble reasons why the comparison works. Maybe it's the fact that matter/antimatter technology can't be miniaturized. Warp cores have to keep getting bigger to power the higher-powered shields and engines. Maybe the shield emitter placement on older ships is inefficient, so you can't get proper coverage using newer tech. Maybe the deflector geometry doesn't allow the ship to travel at full warp speed.
I could come up with all sorts of reasons such as the above, and you would be incapable of telling me I'm wrong, simply because Cryptic's copout for allowing antiquated tech does not even begin to explain away these arguments. The fact is they are only putting in older ships because a small percentage of fans want them. I'm fine with that, as long as their design age is taken into consideration, and they are NEVER tier 4 or 5 (or any theoretical higher tier).
EDIT: Oh, and it's 20th century tech, not 21st century tech. You got your centuries mixed up.
Using that logic... how do you explain the devestating effect of the MVAM...?
All of it's tech is smaller than the larger vessels.
Also... they are NEWLY BUILT SHIPS.... they would not have Older Shield Emitter Placements...
Deflectors simply push things out of the way in reguards to Warp Travel... they don't regulate the speed.
So for every reason you come up with that precludes these ships from working, I and other's can counter...
And again, why do people assume that there are a Small Number of Players that want these ships...
(Thank you.... I corrected my century error )
Using that logic... how do you explain the devestating effect of the MVAM...?
All of it's tech is smaller than the larger vessels.
(Thank you.... I corrected my century error )
The MVAM ships essentially have to have 3 warp cores, to power three warp capable sections. So yes, miniaturization on warp cores has already happened.
Using that logic... how do you explain the devestating effect of the MVAM...?
All of it's tech is smaller than the larger vessels.
Better people than me could explain that. My understanding is that it doesn't have extra weapons, it just has a pair of extra warp cores used to power the individual sections, and it uses attack patterns to focus weapon power. By powering up the other 2 warp cores when the ship separates, it gains the ability to fire 2 more phaser beams (one per section).
Or something like that. As I said, better people than me could give you a much better explanation.
Kinda reminds me of the early days of WoW, and the 45,000 threads that would pop up about how Paladins shouldn't be allowed in game because they'd be too overpowered and would melt other players with lazer beams from their eyes and other non-sensical garbage.
Seriously people, I'm as big of a proponent of ship refits and seeing extended useage out of the lowered tier ships as anyone, but there has to be some limitations.
Many of the other threads on this topic have tons of great ideas and discussion on how this could be achieved in a manner that would make most people happy.
But I'll say it right now, a T5 TOS Connie or NX Class is simply not logical and frankly, I doubt we'll ever see it.
But a Tier 3.5, or Tier 4 or Tier 4.5 Connie / NX, might be something doable, and if the system were done right, could work for all the other lower tier ships as well, which would undoubtedly make alot of players happy.
Using that logic... how do you explain the devestating effect of the MVAM...?
All of it's tech is smaller than the larger vessels.
Starfleet spent the last (insert number of years between Message in a Bottle & 2409 here) years developing it.
In a test between my Eng/StarCruiser vs. my fleet leader's Tac/MVAM, my Star Cruiser won four kills to none. MVAM doesn't seem that good from this (very small) example.
I was waiting for someone to say that. I was hoping for Nagus to say it, but what I'm about to say will hold up anyway.
I can throw out all sorts of technobabble reasons why the comparison works. Maybe it's the fact that matter/antimatter technology can't be miniaturized. Warp cores have to keep getting bigger to power the higher-powered shields and engines. Maybe the shield emitter placement on older ships is inefficient, so you can't get proper coverage using newer tech. Maybe the deflector geometry doesn't allow the ship to travel at full warp speed.
I could come up with all sorts of reasons such as the above, and you would be incapable of telling me I'm wrong, simply because Cryptic's copout for allowing antiquated tech does not even begin to explain away these arguments. The fact is they are only putting in older ships because a small percentage of fans want them. I'm fine with that, as long as their design age is taken into consideration, and they are NEVER tier 4 or 5 (or any theoretical higher tier).
EDIT: Oh, and it's 20th century tech, not 21st century tech. You got your centuries mixed up.
EDIT 2: By the way, our vision for the future is really just rose-colored glasses looking at societal improvements from the past, hoping the trend continues along expected paths. That means my 20th century vs 24th century comparison is quite valid, thanks.
If that's the case, then the Akira would be Tier 4 or 5 and the Defiant would be Tier 2.
But, since the Defiant had a lead role in a series, and has more fans than the Akira, I guess the Devs just decided to ignore your logic, right?
Better people than me could explain that. My understanding is that it doesn't have extra weapons, it just has a pair of extra warp cores used to power the individual sections, and it uses attack patterns to focus weapon power. By powering up the other 2 warp cores when the ship separates, it gains the ability to fire 2 more phaser beams (one per section).
Or something like that. As I said, better people than me could give you a much better explanation.
when it splits, it does have more weapons.
even the enterprise D had more weapons available overall when the saucer seperated from the star drive
I haven't seen any decent or sensible argument from the three people that are vehemently opposed to allowing ships to tier up. It's all '_I_ don't want it, _my_ opinion is more important, blah, blah,blah'. Well there's more than three people on the forums and more than three people play the game. Discussion over.
If that's the case, then the Akira would be Tier 4 or 5 and the Defiant would be Tier 2.
But, since the Defiant had a lead role in a series, and has more fans than the Akira, I guess the Devs just decided to ignore your logic, right?
For the record, I have no problem with that logic, just the numbers. I feel the Defiant should remain tier 4, and the Akira should be tier 5, right up there with the Prometheus. I also feel the Akira should be a Federation carrier.
I haven't seen any decent or sensible argument from the three people that are vehemently opposed to allowing ships to tier up. It's all '_I_ don't want it, _my_ opinion is more important, blah, blah,blah'. Well there's more than three people on the forums and more than three people play the game. Discussion over.
No, discussion not over. You don't get to dictate opinion. The fact is we're bringing up some very logical reasons for our opinions and requests, and you're annoyed about it. Please find something constructive to add to the debate. More discussion is good. Muck-slinging is not.
You dont have to like it, but as far as the story of the game goes these arent old ships, they are NEW ships that LOOK like old ships. Canon argument = defeated.
I will restate this as my opinion on the matter.
The fact remains that they already made a Tier 5 B'rel Bird of Prey refit. If they're willing to do that, they're willing to do refits of other old designs.
The example I always bring up is the Nova. It's a tier 2 science vessel. Now watch the Voyager episode "Endgame." A Nova commanded by Harry Kim takes on 2 Negh'var warships.
Now watch the Enterprise episode "Azati Prime." A Nova and a Prometheus take on the sphere builders along with the Enterprise J...600 years from the STO timeline. Now come on, if ships can't be updated with better technology, I highly doubt those ships would still be around then.
even the enterprise D had more weapons available overall when the saucer seperated from the star drive
No, it didn't have *more* weapons, it just had the ability to fire more at once. Since the main warp core no longer had to power the entire saucer section (more than half the ship, including all the power-hungry science labs and such), they could channel a lot more power into the phaser banks.
For the record, I have no problem with that logic, just the numbers. I feel the Defiant should remain tier 4, and the Akira should be tier 5, right up there with the Prometheus. I also feel the Akira should be a Federation carrier.
So... it's OK for the Vessels that you like to be adjusted, but not anybody elses???
Comments
Exactly like that. Same body design, better tech.
Then I take issue with the fact of why Starfleet feels they need rebuild old ship designs rather than innovate and build new ships. It would be like the Air Force building F-22's and WWII Spitfires and then having the Spitfires on equal footing with the F-22's. Makes no sense. Why even build the F-22's then if they could just reuse the Spitfires.
This has already been stated in this thred, but you have no right to say what other people can and cannot do with the money they spend on this game, regardless of who gets the money.
If Cryptic puts the ability to refit any ship to a T5 ship, and someone refits an NX Replica, or a Constitution replica to be a T5 ship, that is their right.
You obviously have no idea how big business works. ALL the money that STO generates goes to Atari. It doesnt matter whether it comes from subs or the C-store, its all money. Then, Atari decides how much money they want to funnel back into STO to keep the game going and develop new content. The main factor that determines how much they will funnel back is how much the game is making, and the C-store sales increase that figure. So by increasing the total amount of money that the game is making, the C-store purchases increase the amount of money Atari funnels back into the game.
Tough stuff. You dont get to decide what kind of clothes people wear in life, or what kind of cars they drive. And when you log into an MMO, you dont get to decide what other people do with their characters. If you cant deal with that, then thats your problem.
That's a pretty big assumption on your part without facts to back it up....
What ever the amount is... it's still improving the game.... so it DOES BENEFIT Your Game Play.
...and what The Nagus said above... ...and Below... LoL
Take issue all you want. Its not going to convice Cryptic to take away ships people have paid money for, or stop selling a prodct that they are making money with. Fortunately for you, the game is 99% instanced so you dont have to worry about running into ships you dont want to see except when your in social areas.
Let people fly what they want.
If they made new classes based on older designs, and perhaps upscaled them a bit? I'd have no problems with it.
At least they would have put more effort into it than changing a few numbers in a database and slapping a price on it. I do have problems with the C-Store in general and the sheer amount of stuff there compared to any supposed AAA MMO of this age. Charging for extra stuff in a game that still isn't up to par or even close is not cool. But that's a whole other argument.
As far as age, who gives a TRIBBLE anymore? The one thing you will never convince me of however, is that a relatively small ship like a Constitution is ever going to be able to take the pounding my Nomad class can. And to shoot down the inevitable Defiant comparison from the get go, remember the Defiant was designed for one task and one task only: battle. It doesn't really do anything else all that well, since its little more than an armored life support shell around engines and guns.
There has to be give and take to make these smaller...and inferior by design, regardless of what they look like...ships fit in to a tier system. After all, if these ships have the potential to be just as good as that Sovereign everyone like to bring up, and its a brand new ship...why isn't it like that to begin with?
No need to get snarky. I could care less if they put all the old ships in the game and it doesn't matter to me which ship anybody wants to fly. My point is that they don't need to be on par with the new ships. Refer to my fighter airplane reference. Stick them in T1 and leave them there.
Actions speak louder than words, and the fact that you are posting in this thread proves otherwise.
Your fighter airplane example proves nothing because you still dont get it. Your comparing new planes and old planes, but we're NOT talking about "old" ships. We're talking about brand NEW ships built with state of the art tech that just LOOK like an old design. I'll repeat that as many times as you need me to until you finally understand.
Superchum lives! Good to see you
Every STO subscriber (who isn't banned) has the business to tell Cryptic what they do and do not want to see in STO.
Death to the T5 Connie.
your own argument works against you. some people do not want a T5 connie. some do
not your place to tell the other players what they can and cannot want
Cryptic will (hopefully) look at the feedback and act in their own judgment. But you have to give them that feedback for them to act on first.
Did you really interpret what I said in my previous post as what I thought everyone's opinion was? Surely not; this is an incredibly divisive topic.
i totally agree
intent is sometimes very hard to interpret online like this
Alright, I want to build an SR-71, but I want it to look like a spitfire. So I'll build a spitfire frame out of titanium, slap a couple of ridiculously high-powered jet engines on it, and call it a brand new airplane.
It will be TRIBBLE.
Engineering specifications change for a reason, and that is to deal with new issues that old tech didn't have to conform to (because it was incapable of reaching whatever "barrier" that has to be overcome). By the same token, we can assume based on what little engineering knowledge we get from Trek, coupled with real-world science, that ship frames have the same problem. That problem is shape. You can't make a spitfire fly at Mach IV, just like an older ship design would have imperfections and flaws that would prevent its design from functioning at the same level of competence as a new design.
It's also kinda difficult to see how using a comparison between technology from the 20th century relates to 24th century tech.
I was waiting for someone to say that. I was hoping for Nagus to say it, but what I'm about to say will hold up anyway.
I can throw out all sorts of technobabble reasons why the comparison works. Maybe it's the fact that matter/antimatter technology can't be miniaturized. Warp cores have to keep getting bigger to power the higher-powered shields and engines. Maybe the shield emitter placement on older ships is inefficient, so you can't get proper coverage using newer tech. Maybe the deflector geometry doesn't allow the ship to travel at full warp speed.
I could come up with all sorts of reasons such as the above, and you would be incapable of telling me I'm wrong, simply because Cryptic's copout for allowing antiquated tech does not even begin to explain away these arguments. The fact is they are only putting in older ships because a small percentage of fans want them. I'm fine with that, as long as their design age is taken into consideration, and they are NEVER tier 4 or 5 (or any theoretical higher tier).
EDIT: Oh, and it's 20th century tech, not 21st century tech. You got your centuries mixed up.
EDIT 2: By the way, our vision for the future is really just rose-colored glasses looking at societal improvements from the past, hoping the trend continues along expected paths. That means my 20th century vs 24th century comparison is quite valid, thanks.
Using that logic... how do you explain the devestating effect of the MVAM...?
All of it's tech is smaller than the larger vessels.
Also... they are NEWLY BUILT SHIPS.... they would not have Older Shield Emitter Placements...
Deflectors simply push things out of the way in reguards to Warp Travel... they don't regulate the speed.
So for every reason you come up with that precludes these ships from working, I and other's can counter...
And again, why do people assume that there are a Small Number of Players that want these ships...
(Thank you.... I corrected my century error
The MVAM ships essentially have to have 3 warp cores, to power three warp capable sections. So yes, miniaturization on warp cores has already happened.
Better people than me could explain that. My understanding is that it doesn't have extra weapons, it just has a pair of extra warp cores used to power the individual sections, and it uses attack patterns to focus weapon power. By powering up the other 2 warp cores when the ship separates, it gains the ability to fire 2 more phaser beams (one per section).
Or something like that. As I said, better people than me could give you a much better explanation.
Kinda reminds me of the early days of WoW, and the 45,000 threads that would pop up about how Paladins shouldn't be allowed in game because they'd be too overpowered and would melt other players with lazer beams from their eyes and other non-sensical garbage.
Seriously people, I'm as big of a proponent of ship refits and seeing extended useage out of the lowered tier ships as anyone, but there has to be some limitations.
Many of the other threads on this topic have tons of great ideas and discussion on how this could be achieved in a manner that would make most people happy.
But I'll say it right now, a T5 TOS Connie or NX Class is simply not logical and frankly, I doubt we'll ever see it.
But a Tier 3.5, or Tier 4 or Tier 4.5 Connie / NX, might be something doable, and if the system were done right, could work for all the other lower tier ships as well, which would undoubtedly make alot of players happy.
Starfleet spent the last (insert number of years between Message in a Bottle & 2409 here) years developing it.
In a test between my Eng/StarCruiser vs. my fleet leader's Tac/MVAM, my Star Cruiser won four kills to none. MVAM doesn't seem that good from this (very small) example.
I warned him not to buy it...
If that's the case, then the Akira would be Tier 4 or 5 and the Defiant would be Tier 2.
But, since the Defiant had a lead role in a series, and has more fans than the Akira, I guess the Devs just decided to ignore your logic, right?
when it splits, it does have more weapons.
even the enterprise D had more weapons available overall when the saucer seperated from the star drive
For the record, I have no problem with that logic, just the numbers. I feel the Defiant should remain tier 4, and the Akira should be tier 5, right up there with the Prometheus. I also feel the Akira should be a Federation carrier.
No, discussion not over. You don't get to dictate opinion. The fact is we're bringing up some very logical reasons for our opinions and requests, and you're annoyed about it. Please find something constructive to add to the debate. More discussion is good. Muck-slinging is not.
I will restate this as my opinion on the matter.
The fact remains that they already made a Tier 5 B'rel Bird of Prey refit. If they're willing to do that, they're willing to do refits of other old designs.
The example I always bring up is the Nova. It's a tier 2 science vessel. Now watch the Voyager episode "Endgame." A Nova commanded by Harry Kim takes on 2 Negh'var warships.
Now watch the Enterprise episode "Azati Prime." A Nova and a Prometheus take on the sphere builders along with the Enterprise J...600 years from the STO timeline. Now come on, if ships can't be updated with better technology, I highly doubt those ships would still be around then.
I guess what I'm saying is...GET OVER IT!
No, it didn't have *more* weapons, it just had the ability to fire more at once. Since the main warp core no longer had to power the entire saucer section (more than half the ship, including all the power-hungry science labs and such), they could channel a lot more power into the phaser banks.
So... it's OK for the Vessels that you like to be adjusted, but not anybody elses???